"He who practices righteousness is righteous" (1 John 3:7)

[Butterball1]

You've yet to explain the process of salvation from A-Z.

You have yet to repsond to what I posted.

---how can one boast about being unprofitable?

--did Noah's obedient work in building the ark earn the salvation of his household in Hebrews 11:7?

 

[Guojing]

Acts 2:38 is authentic scripture. We can both read the same words out loud and come away with two completely different and contradictory interpretations.

Mark 16:16 is much more direct. And just as authentic. The true believer will obey the command to be baptized. Good works necessarily follow true belief. The work is not a necessary cause of salvation, but rather the firstfruits that demonstrate geniune salvation.

Cart? Meet horse.

So your argument is basically

You are saved by faith alone apart from works.
But if not a single good work follows that salvation,
your salvation is not genuine and thus you are not truly saved/a believer?

 

[timothyu]

THe issue is Jesus is NOT Lord of those who will not obey Him.

Sure He is or they would be free to escape the consequences of their actions.

 

[John Mullally]

Baptism will always follow genuine repentance.

But baptism is not a contingent work that is required for the remission of sins. "For" can be translated "because of," "due to," or "having the thing mentioned as a purpose or function."

In the following verse (Acts 2:40) from Acts 2:38-39 I quoted we see "And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, 'Be saved from this perverse generation.'” So the meaning of "For" in verse 38 is "For" as Peter was imploring a positive response.

Otherwise, you have something to boast of and you contradict scripture. If you're okay with contradicting scripture 24/7, then Arminianism is totally for you.

My question was "Was Peter on the day of Pentecost promoting a works based salvation when he proclaimed Acts 2:38-39?" To be clear, your answer is "Yes" because you see taking any action (even repentance and baptism) as a work and as a work it offers an opportunity to boast. I see "repentance and baptism" as an act of faith vs a Work of the Law (the term used in Galatians). Faith is not a work.

I can well say of you, if you're okay with contradicting scripture 24/7, then Calvinism is totally for you.

 

[Paulomycin]

It's obvious you are avoiding the facts of Hebrews 11:7 where Noah did a work to receive God's free gift of salvation form the flood and his wok earned him nothing. You continue to avoid Hebrews 11 while nothing in Genesis 6 refutes the fact Noah had to do a work in order to receive the free gift of salvation.

It doesn't say anywhere that Noah did a work to earn salvation, and Genesis 6 (which comes first) clearly states that Noah did nothing to earn God's grace. Rather, Noah found grace in the sight of God. Noah didn't earn it.

 

[Paulomycin]

You have yet to repsond to what I posted.

I just did.

You've yet to explain the process of salvation from A-Z. Please stop stalling.

 

[Paulomycin]

So your argument is basically

You are saved by faith alone apart from works.
But if not a single good work follows that salvation,
your salvation is not genuine and thus you are not truly saved/a believer?

My argument is:

- You are saved by grace through faith alone; apart from works.
- Good works always follow genuine salvation. First salvation; then works. A regenerate heart grafted into Christ The Vine will always produce fruit of the Spirit (good works). Or simply, "Faith Works."
- If you are not producing fruit, then it's a big red flag that you might not have been truly saved to begin with.

 

[Guojing]

My argument is:

- You are saved by grace through faith alone; apart from works.
- Good works always follow genuine salvation. First salvation; then works. A regenerate heart grafted into Christ The Vine will always produce fruit of the Spirit (good works). Or simply, "Faith Works."
- If you are not producing fruit, then it's a big red flag that you might not have been truly saved to begin with.

Which is basically what I am saying right?

Works/fruit are necessary for salvation, but not sufficient.

That is your view? Its the same as saying oxygen is necessary for fire, but not sufficient.

 

[Paulomycin]

In the following verse (Acts 2:40) from Acts 2:38-39 I quoted we see "And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, 'Be saved from this perverse generation.'” So the meaning of "For" in verse 38 is "For" as Peter was imploring a positive response.

Yes. Repentance.

My question was "Was Peter on the day of Pentecost promoting a works based salvation when he proclaimed Acts 2:38-39?" To be clear, your answer is "Yes" because you see taking any action (even repentance and baptism) as a work and as a work it offers an opportunity to boast. I see "repentance and baptism" as an act of faith vs a Work of the Law (the term used in Galatians).

You're eisegetically assuming "repentance and baptism" is a package deal that earns salvation. It's not. It's, "First (a.) then (b.)." "(a.) remits sin, while (b.) is the testimony before men, your firstfruit of obedience, and the answer of a good conscience toward God (1 Peter 3:21).

I can well say of you, if you're okay with contradicting scripture 24/7, then Calvinism is totally for you.

Exegesis never contradicts.

 

[Paulomycin]

Works/fruit are necessary for salvation, but not sufficient.

That is your view? Its the same as saying oxygen is necessary for fire, but not sufficient.

Reading this, I'm not sure what necessarily comes first: B or A. I'm asking for a process here. Works/fruit are a necessary demonstration of previously existing faith.

 

[Guojing]

Reading this, I'm not sure what necessarily comes first: B or A. I'm asking for a process here. Works/fruit are a necessary demonstration of previously existing faith.

Just like a fire comes first.

But if you see a fire, you know there must be oxygen around it. No oxygen means the fire must be a fake one.

Likewise, you see salvation first, but you know there must be works around it.

No works means that salvation must also be a fake one.

 

[Danthemailman]

It doesn't say anywhere that Noah did a work to earn salvation, and Genesis 6 (which comes first) clearly states that Noah did nothing to earn God's grace. Rather, Noah found grace in the sight of God. Noah didn't earn it.

Amen! Noah had already "found grace" (Genesis 6:8), was "a preacher of righteousness" (2 Peter 2:5), and "walked with God" BEFORE he built the ark. Building the ark was a DEMONSTRATION of his faith and not the origin of it.

 

[John Mullally]

You're eisegetically assuming "repentance and baptism" is a package deal that earns salvation. It's not. It's, "First (a.) then (b.)." "(a.) remits sin, while (b.) is the testimony before men, your firstfruit of obedience, and the answer of a good conscience toward God (1 Peter 3:21).

Don't accuse others of eisegesis when the plain reading of scripture contradicts your theology. Peter was speaking to common people, many of whom did not have better than a third grade education. Knowing that what do you think Peter was trying to convey to the crowd that was panicking crying "what shall we do?"? The Holy Spirit speaking through Peter is not in the deception business.

Acts 2:36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.” 37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” 38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” 40 And with many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation.” 41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them​

 

[Paulomycin]

Just like a fire comes first.

But if you see a fire, you know there must be oxygen around it. No oxygen means the fire must be a fake one.

Likewise, you see salvation first, but you know there must be works around it.

No works means that salvation must also be a fake one.

You're deliberately framing the narrative for multiple causes of fire, and thus multiple synergistic causes of salvation. I get it.

 

[Paulomycin]

Don't accuse others of eisegesis when the plain reading of scripture contradicts your theology.

It's only contradicted due to your plain eisegesis and confirmation bias.

Peter was speaking to common people, many of whom did not have better than a third grade education. Knowing that what do you think Peter was trying to convey to the crowd that was panicking crying "what shall we do?"?

Peter was speaking to Jews who were thoroughly educated in Torah. "What shall we do," is by no means a works-based salvation, because they already realized they had crucified their own Messiah. There is nothing they could do to pay off the debt of such a sin.

They were "cut to the heart," the Holy Spirit having already regenerated and convicted them. You can't get around the necessary process. First regeneration, then works. Therefore, repentance and baptism are necessary expressions of that heart that was already transformed.

 

[Guojing]

You're deliberately framing the narrative for multiple causes of fire, and thus multiple synergistic causes of salvation. I get it.

But isn’t that what you are implying when you say that if you don’t have works after you are saved, then you are not truly saved?

 

[Guojing]

Amen! Noah had already "found grace" (Genesis 6:8), was "a preacher of righteousness" (2 Peter 2:5), and "walked with God" BEFORE he built the ark. Building the ark was a DEMONSTRATION of his faith and not the origin of it.

But had he not built an ark, you would say his faith would not have saved him?

 

[Paulomycin]

But isn’t that what you are implying when you say that if you don’t have works after you are saved, then you are not truly saved?

Works "after saved" ≠ "Works cause salvation"

Effect ≠ Cause

 

[Paulomycin]

But had he not built an ark, you would say his faith would not have saved him?

If Noah had not obeyed, then it would have been a false faith, which is no genuine faith at all.

This is why Paul and James do not contradict. They contradict only for Arminians. You people are one of the primary causes of atheism.

 

[Guojing]

Works "after saved" ≠ "Works cause salvation"

Effect ≠ Cause

I already stated that it is necessary but not sufficient.

Oxygen does not cause fire but without oxygen there can be no fire.

You understand the difference between a necessary and a sufficient condition?