Is the gospel more than 1 Corinthians 15:1-4?

Bible Highlighter said:

@setst777

Do you believe Ephesians 2:9 is referring exclusively only to the works of the Law of Moses?

While it is true Paul is indirectly condemning “Circumcision Salvationism” (The false belief that one must first be circumcised first as a part of the Old Law in order to be initially saved - Acts of the Apostle 15:1, Acts of the Apostles 15:5, Acts of the Apostles 15:24, Galatians 5:2), we have to understand that Paul relates how we are not save by works in verse 9 with how we are created unto Christ Jesus for good works in verse 10 (Ephesians 2:10). This means that ye are saved (PAST TENSE) by grace through faith, which is a gift of God (See: Ephesians 2:8). This simply shows that Paul is condemning works of any kind for salvation when we are being saved by God’s grace when we first accepted the Lord Jesus as our Savior. For being saved by God’s grace through faith is an ASPECT of salvation that is not works based but it is grace based. It’s based on His mercy and grace. This is how we are first saved and it is foundational to a believer’s life.

Granted, before you do admit that we are saved by faith before one work is done. So this is good you believe this because it supports God’s grace through faith like I believe. You also state we need works later to demonstrate our faith as a part of God saving us. This again is what I believe. But the difference between us is that I believe my words are not in contradicting each other. If works do not save, then they do not save period. No works of any kind whether they are hybrid “faith works” should save you. Yet, this contradicts your other statements you made to another poster in post #338.

Click to expand...

You still are not recognizing how the Scriptures throughout the Bible define faith. Once you yield to the authority of God's Word you will then understand.

An authentic Faith, of which Baptism represents (Romans 6; Colossians 3:1-17) in Lord Jesus, as the Scriptures define faith, can only produce good works, even before one work is done.

The faith is what counts. The works are the result.

We are not saved by works. Rather God judges the authenticity of our faith in Him by our works.

No two stage salvation.
No two types of salvation.

In Ephesians 2:8-9, the grace refers to salvation. We receive that grace by faith - the faith that can only result in good works (Ephesians 2:10).

Faith is not part of the grace of salvation that is received by faith.

Ephesians 2:8-9 (WEB) 8 for by grace you have been saved (neuter verbal concept - the subject) through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is (neuter pronoun referring back to the subject) the gift of God, 9 not of works, that no one would boast.

"grace" is a feminine noun acting as an indirect object for the subject "you have been saved."

"faith" is a feminine noun that modifies the subject "you have been saved."

"you have been saved" is a verbal concept, and so is neuter by default.

"it is" is a neuter pronoun, and so can only refer back to the neuter subject "you have been saved."

"the gift" is a neuter noun, and so refers back to what that gift is, which is the neuter subject "you have been saved."

Consequently, "you have been saved" is also the only subject in Ephesians 2:8-9. And a pronoun can only refer back the closest subject noun or verbal concept.

setst777 said:

An authentic Faith, of which Baptism represents (Romans 6; Colossians 3:1-17) in Lord Jesus, as the Scriptures define faith, can only produce good works, even before one work is done.

Click to expand...

FWIW, setting aside baptism for the moment, I agree with what you say about Faith + Works here as you're picking up from Ephesians 2 itself. Nice work.

I'd also add that Biblical Faith in the New Covenant Writings is clearly used in conjunction with obedience to God. At times Faith & Obedience are used interchangeably. In light of this, Biblical Faith has to produce Works as those with Biblical Faith in God Obey God, so Works must be produced. IOW, there are a few ways Scripture backs up what you say re: Faith produces Works.

setst777 said:

Ephesians 2:8-9 (WEB) 8 for by grace you have been saved (neuter verbal concept - the subject) through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is (neuter pronoun referring back to the subject) the gift of God, 9 not of works, that no one would boast.

Click to expand...

You're likely aware of the extensive debates about the grammar here in regard to Faith being a gift. I'm not sure where you're getting the "neuter verbal concept - the subject" but the argument does boil down to the neuter "and that not of yourselves" ("it is" is not in the Greek, so I wouldn't use that in the argument). The subject of the verb is masculine. Faith is feminine. The neuter in cases like this are often used to refer back to include all of what was said: the by grace salvation through faith = that not from yourselves. The central point being the salvation - which is by grace through faith - is the gift from God.

Plenty of grammatical work has been done to support the view that faith can be the gift here. I tend to agree with the neuter referring to the entire concept of salvation by grace through faith.

Bible Highlighter said:

I perfectly understand how the Bible defines faith. I provided a multiple point explanation on how faith is like a two sided coin where one side is a belief and the other said is faithfulness or works of faith.

Click to expand...

Bible Highlighter said:

But the kind of faith you describe sounds confusing.
Faith is what exactly? A belief alone? A belief that leads to works?
What exactly do you think faith is?

Click to expand...

The meaning of faith by which God grants eternal life was explained all along repeatedly by Scripture in messages I gave in response to you, and is represented in Baptism.

You say you know what faith is, but then you reject the Biblical teaching about that faith. I have know doubt you believe what you want to believe.

Bible Highlighter said:

You before said the thief on the cross was saved, though.

Now you are saying that faith can only produce works before even one work is done. So good works is produced before one work is done? That sounds like another contradiction.

Click to expand...

You are using deception by quoting out of context, rather than honestly discussing the issue.

I never said

"So good works is produced before one work is done?"

What I stated was - I quote:

"An authentic Faith, of which Baptism represents (Romans 6; Colossians 3:1-17) in Lord Jesus, as the Scriptures define faith, can only produce good works, even before one work is done."

The faith, which is represented in Baptism, means you have now committed your life to follow Lord Jesus. Good works can only follow such a faith. If you should die before living out your life as a follower of Christ, then your genuine faith in Lord Jesus would save you before one work was ever done.

It makes perfect sense, but you are not willing to receive it.

If you did not live long enough to live out your faith commitment, then what you prepared to do by faith in him will be accounted to you for salvation, just like the thief on the cross.

Luke 12:46-47 (WEB) 46 then the lord of that servant will come in a day when he isn’t expecting him, and in an hour that he doesn’t know, and will cut him in two, and place his portion with the unfaithful. 47 That servant, who knew his lord’s will, and didn’t prepare, nor do what he wanted, will be beaten with many stripes

Bible Highlighter said:

But the kind of faith you describe sounds confusing.
Faith is what exactly? A belief alone? A belief that leads to works?
What exactly do you think faith is?

Click to expand...

Many people are not meant to understand the faith of the Gospel. That is not the fault of Scripture, because the NT throughout explains the faith over and over repeatedly in every book, also giving examples, illustrations, warnings, rebukes, admonitions, etc.

Bible Highlighter said:

Your quote in Post #338 says otherwise.

Again, you said, I quote:

“That is why God judges us by our works. Not the works of the law, but the works of mercy, forgiveness, helping others... Acts of love that come from faith and demonstrate the authenticity of our faith.”

“Rather God judges the authenticity of our faith in Him by our works.”

Quote by Setst777
Source: Post #338​

Click to expand...

If we continue to live after putting our faith in Lord Jesus, then the result must be good works. If that is the case, then God judges the authenticity of our faith in Him by our works.

1 Peter 1:6-8 (WEB) 6 Wherein you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while, if need be, you have been grieved in various trials, 7 that the proof of your faith, which is more precious than gold that perishes even though it is tested by fire, may be found to result in praise, glory, and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ— 8 whom, not having known, you love.

1 Peter 1:14-17 (WEB) 14 As children of obedience, not conforming yourselves according to your former lusts as in your ignorance, 15 but just as he who called you is holy, you yourselves also be holy in all of your behavior; 16 because it is written, “You shall be holy; for I am holy.” [Leviticus 11:44-45] 17 If you call on him as Father, who without respect of persons judges according to each man’s work, pass the time of your living as foreigners here in reverent fear

Bible Highlighter said:

But you said the thief on the cross was saved and we both know he did not do any kind of works. You also said “Good works demonstrated an authentic Gospel Faith by which God saves us.”

Click to expand...

That is right. The Thief's confession of faith in Lord Jesus is what saved him. If the thief continued to live, his genuine confession of faith can only result in good works that prove the authenticity of his faith and continued faith until the end of his life.

If a believer in Lord Jesus confesses faith in him, but then continues to live a sinful life to serve his passions as part of this world, his faith was not genuine. . .

. . . His works reveal that his faith was not the kind God accepts. Sure, he may believe in God, and the Jesus is the Savior. He may believe the Gospel. The demons believe as well. But he has not taken the personal step to receive Jesus as His Lord by faith as the Gospel demands. His faith remains in his sinful passions.

Bible Highlighter said:

In other words, even your very own words describe the two aspects of salvation that I have pointed out in the Bible (Unless you want to retract something you said).

Click to expand...

There are not two aspects of salvation.
There are not two types of salvation.

There is one salvation that is by faith alone in Lord Jesus alone.

You want to add works to be saved, but no where in Scripture are we saved by works.

Romans 1:16-17 (WEB) 16 For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, because it is the power of God for salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first, and also for the Greek. 17 For in it is revealed God’s righteousness from faith to faith. As it is written, “But the righteous shall live by faith.” [Habakkuk 2:4]

Bible Highlighter said:

Sorry, this statement is exceptionally illogical in the highest order. You said faith is not a part of the grace of salvation that is received by faith. So faith is not a part of something you receive by faith? That's just silly. That's a completely contradictory statement.

Click to expand...

We are saved by faith in Lord Jesus (John 3:16).

Show me, by Scripture, we are saved so we can have faith to be saved?

Bible Highlighter said:

Ephesians 2:5 says, “Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved; )”

Click to expand...

When are "we" [the Christians], who were once dead in sin, made alive in Christ - before believing or by believing?

Ephesians 2:8 (WEB) 8 for by grace you have been saved through faith

Is a person made alive (quickened) by the Spirit before believing or by believing?

John 7:37-38 (WEB) 38 Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” 39 By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive.

Colossians 2:12 (WEB) having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God

Galatians 3:21-24 (WEB) 21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. 22 But Scripture has locked up everything under the control of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

John 5:24 (WEB) Very truly I tell you, whoever listens my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.

Bible Highlighter said:

This is referring back to one's Initial Salvation because Paul tells the Ephesian believers in verse 5 about how they were dead in trespasses and sins and then he talks about how God quickened them (made them alive) with Christ (i.e. by grace are you all saved). Ephesians 2:8-9 is is referring to Initial Salvation, and not the Secondary Aspect of Salvation (Which is Sanctification).

For you have yet to offer a commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14.

Click to expand...

You are misquoting Scripture out of context to twist it to mean whatever you want it to say.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 (WEB) 13 But we are bound to always give thanks to God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief in the truth

Paul is not teaching an order of how to be saved. Alll the Scriptures teach that we are saved by faith, and we receive the Spirit who sanctifies us by faith.

GDL said:

FWIW, setting aside baptism for the moment, I agree with what you say about Faith + Works here as you're picking up from Ephesians 2 itself. Nice work.

I'd also add that Biblical Faith in the New Covenant Writings is clearly used in conjunction with obedience to God. At times Faith & Obedience are used interchangeably. In light of this, Biblical Faith has to produce Works as those with Biblical Faith in God Obey God, so Works must be produced. IOW, there are a few ways Scripture backs up what you say re: Faith produces Works.

You're likely aware of the extensive debates about the grammar here in regard to Faith being a gift. I'm not sure where you're getting the "neuter verbal concept - the subject" but the argument does boil down to the neuter "and that not of yourselves" ("it is" is not in the Greek, so I wouldn't use that in the argument). The subject of the verb is masculine. Faith is feminine. The neuter in cases like this are often used to refer back to include all of what was said: the by grace salvation through faith = that not from yourselves. The central point being the salvation - which is by grace through faith - is the gift from God.

Plenty of grammatical work has been done to support the view that faith can be the gift here. I tend to agree with the neuter referring to the entire concept of salvation by grace through faith.

Click to expand...

GDL said:

The subject of the verb is masculine. Faith is feminine.

Click to expand...

A verbal concept, in classical Greek, the verb "saved" is masculine, but "saved" being a verb cannot replace a noun as a subject. Only a verbal concept can replace a noun. A verbal concept is always neuter - having no gender.

• The verbal concept "you have been saved" is the only subject in Ephesians 2:8-9. And it is neuter by default.
• "Grace" and "Faith" point to the subject; they are not part of the subject.
• The neuter pronoun "that" or "it is," depending on the Bible you are using, must refer back to the closest subject, and the subject must be neuter.
• The only subject in Ephesians 2:8-9 is the verbal concept "you have been saved."
• "Faith" is feminine, and "Gift" is neuter, so "Gift" cannot refer back to "Faith."
• There is no legitimate grammar that can be used to match "Gift" neuter, with "Faith" feminine. That is against grammar.
• The neuter pronoun cannot refer back to include all of what was said previously if a verbal concept exists. The verbal concept "you have been saved" is the subject, and is neuter, of which "grace" and "faith" point to and modify.

So, using classical Greek grammar, Ephesians 2:8-9 would be understood to read as follows:

Ephesians 2:8-9 (WEB) 8 for by grace you have been saved through faith, and that salvation (referring back to the subject neuter verbal concept) [is] not of yourselves; it is the gift {{neuter - the gift of salvation - which is by grace through faith}} of God, 9 not of works (faith is the opposite of works), that no one would boast.

setst777 said:

The verbal concept "you have been saved" is the only subject in Ephesians 2:8-9. And it is neuter by default.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the detail.

A few questions:

• This may or may not be meaningful, but is there a reason you're going back to Classical Greek with this verse and bypassing the analysis per the Common era?

• Is "you" neuter?

• Is the masculine participle in the perfect paraphrastic verbal construction not meaningful in informing us we're dealing with a masculine subject?

• Would you point me to some online reference material that substantiates what you say about a Classical Greek verbal concept being neuter by default? It might be most helpful if you'd point me to reference material that discusses this specific verse from the Classical Greek perspective you're using.

setst777 said:

The neuter pronoun "that" or "it is," depending on the Bible you are using, must refer back to the closest subject, and the subject must be neuter.

Click to expand...

I'm using the Greek text. "it is" is being inserted by translators. The Greek simply says "[of] God the gift." The YLT translation expresses this (YLT is also translating very literally the actual verbal construction):

• YLT Ephesians 2:8 for by grace ye are having been saved, through faith, and this not of you -- of God the gift, (Eph. 2:8 YLT)

I'll offer this notation regarding "that" (or "this") from Greek Beyond the Basics by Daniel Wallace in the chapter dealing with Demonstrative Pronouns:

Eph 2:8

τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι διὰ πίστεως· καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν, θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον

for by grace you are saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God

This is the most debated text in terms of the antecedent of the demonstrative pronoun, τοῦτο. The standard interpretations include: (1) “grace” as antecedent, (2) “faith” as antecedent, (3) the concept of a grace-by-faith salvation as antecedent, and (4) καὶ τοῦτο having an adverbial force with no antecedent (“and especially”).

The first and second options suffer from the fact that τοῦτο is neuter while χάριτι and πίστεως are feminine. Some have argued that the gender shift causes no problem because (a) there are other examples in Greek literature in which a neuter demonstrative refers back to a noun of a different gender,51 and (b) the τοῦτο has been attracted to the gender of δῶρον, the predicate nominative. These two arguments need to be examined together.

While it is true that on rare occasions there is a gender shift between antecedent and pronoun, the pronoun is almost always caught between two nouns of different gender. One is the antecedent; the other is the predicate nom. In Acts 8:10, for example (οὗτός ἐστιν ἡ δύναμις τοῦ θεοῦ), the pronoun is masculine because its antecedent is masculine, even though the predicate nom. is feminine. In Matt 13:38 inverse attraction takes place (the pronominal subject is attracted to the gender of the predicate nom.): τὸ δὲ καλὸν σπέρμα, οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ υἱοὶ τῆς βασιλείας (“the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom”).52 The construction in Eph 2:8, however, is not parallel because δῶρον is not the predicate nom. of τοῦτο, but of the implied “it” in the following clause. On a grammatical level, then, it is doubtful that either “faith” or “grace” is the antecedent of τοῦτο.

More plausible is the third view, viz., that τοῦτο refers to the concept of a grace-by-faith salvation. As we have seen, τοῦτο regularly takes a conceptual antecedent. Whether faith is seen as a gift here or anywhere else in the NT is not addressed by this.53

A fourth view is that καὶ τοῦτο is adverbial, though this view has surprisingly made little impact on the exegetical literature.54 If adverbial, καὶ τοῦτο is intensive, meaning “and at that, and especially,” without having any antecedent. It focuses on the verb rather than on any noun. In 3 John 5 we see this usage: πιστὸν ποιεῖς ὃ ἐὰν ἐργάσῃ εἰς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς καὶ τοῦτο ξένους55 (“you do a faithful [deed] whenever you render service for the brothers, and especially [when you do it] for strangers”). If this is the force in Eph 2:8, the text means “for by grace you are saved through faith, and [you are saved] especially not by your own doing; it is the gift of God.”

The issues here are complex and cannot be solved by grammar alone. Nevertheless, syntactical considerations do tend toward one of the latter two views.56


I have read some of the studied arguments and examples Wallace speaks of regarding what he's calling "the first and second options." As I recall, these arguments do provide examples to substantiate their expressed point of view.

At the end of the analysis, it seems we come to the same conclusion that "that" refers to salvation being expressed in the verb "saved." At this point I simply prefer the analysis from the Koine Greek instruction that points us to the neuter pronoun referring back to the more detailed concept stated by Paul: "and that (by grace you have been saved through faith) not from you - [of] God the gift. We could also get more precise in translating the "of" and elaborate that God is the source of the gift of that by grace salvation through faith.

I'm open to reading whatever reference material you can provide.

setst777 said:

There are not two aspects of salvation.
There are not two types of salvation.

Click to expand...

Have you not read soteriological studies that see salvation in the Text being discussed in phases that they detail in this quite common format: Justification; Sanctification; Glorification?

I don't particularly care for this breakdown terminology for various reasons, but I do see the point. There's an entrance into Salvation; a walk in Salvation; and a resurrection in Salvation, or a rebirth into infancy, a growth to maturity, and a resurrection, or...

I agree that it's one Salvation by grace through faith (faith/obedience) that produces good works. And I also agree that Salvation is discussed in terminology that instructs of a process that can be detailed in phases, aspects, facets, whatever terminology we might use to properly describe what the Text says.

I also think the "works" topic has room for a more accurate representation of what the Text says.

GDL said:

.

Click to expand...

setst777 said: ↑
The verbal concept "you have been saved" is the only subject in Ephesians 2:8-9. And it is neuter by default.

GDL said:

Thanks for the detail.

A few questions:

This may or may not be meaningful, but is there a reason you're going back to Classical Greek with this verse and bypassing the analysis per the Common era?

Click to expand...

I sometimes use the term Classical Greek in place of Koine Greek. I should stick to the term "Koine" Greek, since this would be the accurate term for the 1st Century Greek.

GDL said:

Is "you" neuter?

Click to expand...

Do you mean “you are” or “you have been” in Ephesians 2:8? This is a verb statement of being, and is masculine.

GDL said:

Is the masculine participle in the perfect paraphrastic verbal construction not meaningful in informing us we're dealing with a masculine subject?

Click to expand...

No. Only the verbal concept can be a subject that the pronoun “this” and the noun “gift” refers back to. If the subject were masculine, then the pronoun “this” and corresponding "gift" would be unmatched, and so, would not make sense. A pronoun cannot be left hanging in a sentence without referring back to anything.

GDL said:

Would you point me to some online reference material that substantiates what you say about a Classical Greek verbal concept being neuter by default? It might be most helpful if you'd point me to reference material that discusses this specific verse from the Classical Greek perspective you're using.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I am unable to point you to such a source, accept for other Scripture examples, because I do not remember what the grammatical source material is.

I also appeal to your rational mind. An idea or concept is abstract and so does not have gender, and so is neuter. That is just the way it is. You cannot assign gender to an idea. The Greek language understands this.

A verbal concept is a verbal idea that replaces a noun, and could be a complete sentence by itself – a sentence within a broader sentence. A verbal concept makes sense isolated from its context.

Scripture examples that parallel Ephesians 2:8-9 are as follows:

Matthew 19:25–26
When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?” (verbal concept) But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this (touto) is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

“This” can only refer back to the subject verbal concept (idea) “Who then can be saved?” The verbal concept is understood, in speech, as the noun “salvation” that “this” is referring to, but remains neuter because the neuter pronoun “this” is referring back to a verbal concept.

The rest of the grammar surrounding the verbal concept describe the circumstances surrounding the subject verbal concept, but are not the subject, just as “grace” and “faith” modify or explain “you are saved” but are not themselves the subject.

Ephesians 6:1
Children, “obey” your parents in the Lord, for this (touto) is right

Colossians 3:20 Children, “obey” your parents in all things, for this (touto) is well pleasing to the Lord.

In both Ephesians 6:1 and Colossians 3:20, “this” can only refer to the subject verbal concept (idea) “obey.” The verbal concept is understood, in speech, as referring to the noun “obedience” that “this” is referring to. Even so, being a verbal concept, “obey” is neuter, and so agrees with the neuter pronoun, this.”

The nouns “Children” and “Parents” modify or explain more about “obey,” just as “grace” and “faith” modify “you are saved” but are not themselves the subject.

1 Timothy 5:4 first "let them learn" to “show piety” at home and to repay their parents; for this (touto) is good and acceptable before God.

“This” refers back to the subject verbal concept “show piety.” The verbal concept "let them learn” is also possible.

The pronoun "this" refers to "show piety" as a noun "piety" [this piety], but remains neuter because the neuter pronoun “this” is referring back to a verbal concept.

There are many other examples in the NT of an idea or concept (not verbal) acting as subjects within a sentence that a pronoun refers to. The other examples are not an exact match in grammatical structure to Ephesians 2:8-9 as are the ones I just described; so, I will not list those examples.

setst777 said: ↑
The neuter pronoun "that" or "it is," depending on the Bible you are using, must refer back to the closest subject, and the subject must be neuter.

GDL said:

I'm using the Greek text. "it is" is being inserted by translators. The Greek simply says "[of] God the gift." The YLT translation expresses this (YLT is also translating very literally the actual verbal construction):

YLT Ephesians 2:8 for by grace ye are having been saved, through faith, and this not of you -- of God the gift, (Eph. 2:8 YLT)

Click to expand...

I agree that “it is” is not in the Greek text before “the gift of God,” rather, the pronoun is added for clarification to show that the neuter noun “gift” is referring back to the neuter subject verbal concept regarding salvation.

GDL said:

I'll offer this notation regarding "that" from Greek Beyond the Basics by Daniel Wallace in the chapter dealing with Demonstrative Pronouns:

Eph 2:8
τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι διὰ πίστεως· καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν, θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον

for by grace you are saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God

This is the most debated text in terms of the antecedent of the demonstrative pronoun, τοῦτο. The standard interpretations include: (1) “grace” as antecedent, (2) “faith” as antecedent, (3) the concept of a grace-by-faith salvation as antecedent, and (4) καὶ τοῦτο having an adverbial force with no antecedent (“and especially”).

The first and second options suffer from the fact that τοῦτο is neuter while χάριτι and πίστεως are feminine. Some have argued that the gender shift causes no problem because (a) there are other examples in Greek literature in which a neuter demonstrative refers back to a noun of a different gender,51 and (b) the τοῦτο has been attracted to the gender of δῶρον, the predicate nominative. These two arguments need to be examined together.

While it is true that on rare occasions there is a gender shift between antecedent and pronoun, the pronoun is almost always caught between two nouns of different gender. One is the antecedent; the other is the predicate nom. In Acts 8:10, for example (οὗτός ἐστιν ἡ δύναμις τοῦ θεοῦ), the pronoun is masculine because its antecedent is masculine, even though the predicate nom. is feminine. In Matt 13:38 inverse attraction takes place (the pronominal subject is attracted to the gender of the predicate nom.): τὸ δὲ καλὸν σπέρμα, οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ υἱοὶ τῆς βασιλείας (“the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom”).52 The construction in Eph 2:8, however, is not parallel because δῶρον is not the predicate nom. of τοῦτο, but of the implied “it” in the following clause. On a grammatical level, then, it is doubtful that either “faith” or “grace” is the antecedent of τοῦτο.

More plausible is the third view, viz., that τοῦτο refers to the concept of a grace-by-faith salvation. As we have seen, τοῦτο regularly takes a conceptual antecedent. Whether faith is seen as a gift here or anywhere else in the NT is not addressed by this.53

A fourth view is that καὶ τοῦτο is adverbial, though this view has surprisingly made little impact on the exegetical literature.54 If adverbial, καὶ τοῦτο is intensive, meaning “and at that, and especially,” without having any antecedent. It focuses on the verb rather than on any noun. In 3 John 5 we see this usage: πιστὸν ποιεῖς ὃ ἐὰν ἐργάσῃ εἰς τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς καὶ τοῦτο ξένους55 (“you do a faithful [deed] whenever you render service for the brothers, and especially [when you do it] for strangers”). If this is the force in Eph 2:8, the text means “for by grace you are saved through faith, and [you are saved] especially not by your own doing; it is the gift of God.”

The issues here are complex and cannot be solved by grammar alone. Nevertheless, syntactical considerations do tend toward one of the latter two views.56

53 On an exegetical level, I am inclined to agree with Lincoln that “in Paul’s thinking faith can never be viewed as a meritorious work because in connection with justification he always contrasts faith with works of the law (cf. Gal 2:16; 3:2-5, 9, 10; Rom 3:27, 28)” (A. T. Lincoln, Ephesians [WBC] 111). If faith is not meritorious, but is instead the reception of the gift of salvation, then it is not a gift per se. Such a view does not preclude the notion that for faith to save, the Spirit of God must initiate the conversion process.

56 For what it is worth, an examination of all 22 instances of καὶ τοῦτο in the NT (not including Eph 2:8) yielded the following results: 14 or 15 had a conceptual referent (e.g., Luke 3:20; 5:6; John 11:28; 18:38; John 20:20; Acts 7:60; 1 Cor 7:37; Phil 1:9; Heb 6:3 [Phil 1:28 was probable]); four were adverbial (Rom 13:11; 1 Cor 6:6, 8; 3 John 5 [Heb 11:12 is listed by BAGD as adverbial, but the plural is used (καὶ ταῦτα), following more closely the Attic idiom]); three involved the same gender (Luke 2:12; 13:8; 1 John 4:3); no clear examples involved different genders (though Phil 1:28 was possible).

I have read some of the studied arguments and examples Wallace speaks of regarding what he's calling "the first and second options." As I recall, these arguments do provide examples to substantiate their expressed point of view.

At the end of the analysis, it seems we come to the same conclusion that "that" refers to salvation being expressed in the verb "saved." At this point I simply prefer the analysis from the Koine Greek instruction that points us to the neuter pronoun referring back to the more detailed concept stated by Paul: "and that (by grace you have been saved through faith) not from you - [of] God the gift. We could also get more precise in translating the "of" and elaborate that God is the source of the gift of that by grace salvation through faith.

I'm open to reading whatever reference material you can provide.

Click to expand...

Yes, Wallace is subjectively enlisting Reformed Doctrine into his judgment that has nothing to do with the grammar itself, which he admits to, but without using the words "Reformed Doctrine." By doing so, Wallace is willing to knowingly commit grammatical error to hold his bias.

You appear to agree that Wallace is in error; in that, your conclusion is that the neuter pronoun “this” refers to "salvation" as expressed in the neuter subject verbal concept, “you are saved.”

GDL said:

.

Click to expand...

setst777 said: ↑
There are not two aspects of salvation.
There are not two types of salvation.

GDL said:

Have you not read soteriological studies that see salvation in the Text being discussed in phases that they detail in this quite common format: Justification; Sanctification; Glorification?

Click to expand...

Bare with me as a I briefly build up to my response. An authentic Gospel Faith encompasses the idea of loving Lord Jesus, and both terms are used synonymously.

John 14:15-17 (WEB). . . 15 If you love me, keep my commandments. 16 I will pray to the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, that he may be with you forever: 17 the Spirit of truth

John 14:23 (WEB) 23 Jesus answered him, “If a man loves me, he will keep my word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him.

1 Corinthians 16:22 (WEB) 22 If any man doesn’t love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be cursed. Come, Lord!

If we claim to have faith in Lord Jesus but do not love him, then such a faith is only a head knowledge about Christ, and so, does not result in a new life of following Him.

So, in answer to your question, Justification, Sanctification, and Glorification is God's doing for those who sanctify themselves to their Lord by that one and same faith – a faith in which we love our Lord enough to renounce the old master, and then to commit to follow Lord Jesus into a sanctified life of righteousness and love.

1 Thessalonians 4:1-8 (WEB) Finally then, brothers, we beg and exhort you in the Lord Jesus, that as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God, that you abound more and more. 2 For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus. 3 For this is the will of God: your sanctification, that you abstain from sexual immorality, 4 that each one of you know how to control his own body in sanctification and honor, 5 not in the passion of lust, even as the Gentiles who don’t know God, 6 that no one should take advantage of and wrong a brother or sister in this matter; because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as also we forewarned you and testified. 7 For God called us not for uncleanness, but in sanctification. 8 Therefore he who rejects this doesn’t reject man, but God, who has also given his Holy Spirit to you.

Only those whose faith is one which loves Lord Jesus does God justify. God sanctifies these believers by the indwelling Holy Spirit. The Spirit indwells to sanctify - to mark and separate such believers to God and give them life.

If we remain in that same faith to the end of our lives, through all the trials and temptations of this life, then we are glorified.

GDL said:

I don't particularly care for this breakdown terminology for various reasons, but I do see the point. There's an entrance into Salvation; a walk in Salvation; and a resurrection in Salvation, or a rebirth into infancy, a growth to maturity, and a resurrection, or...

I agree that it's one Salvation by grace through faith (faith/obedience) that produces good works. And I also agree that Salvation is discussed in terminology that instructs of a process that can be detailed in phases, aspects, facets, whatever terminology we might use to properly describe what the Text says.

I also think the "works" topic has room for a more accurate representation of what the Text says.

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree with you. When we start breaking down salvation into segments, then we lose sight of the fact that, from beginning to end, salvation is by faith no matter what stage one thinks he is on.

setst777 said:

Do you mean “you are” or “you have been” in Ephesians 2:8? This is a verb statement of being, and is masculine.

Click to expand...

setst777 said:

No. Only the verbal concept can be a subject that the pronoun “this” and the noun “gift” refers back to. If the subject were masculine, then the pronoun “this” and corresponding "gift" would be unmatched, and so, would not make sense.

Click to expand...

With the Classical vs. Koine issue straightened out, part of my questioning is resolved. There are differences between the 2 and I wanted to make certain you weren't seeing this grammar as Classical for some reason.

Now, I think I'm seeing another issue that is throwing my technical mind dealing with a technical language. Not having interacted with you before, I'm making sure I'm not misunderstanding you.

The way you speak of the "subject" is what I'm clarifying. "You" is the implied subject of the plural verb. The masculine plural participle shows us "you" is clearly masculine plural. "You are / have been saved" is a masculine subject + a verb and in this instance + a masculine verbal participle. Calling the subject + verb the subject confuses the matter. Then turning a masculine subject + verb into a neuter to match the neuter demonstrative pronoun confuses the matter even more. It's also unnecessary. This is the point of Wallace's instruction I referenced. The neuter demonstrative pronoun frequently points back to a concept - the concept here being saved by grace through faith. It's a common construction that does not require turning a masculine subject into a neuter subject+verb, which, frankly, I've never seen done, not that I recall.

setst777 said:

I also appeal to your rational mind. An idea or concept is abstract and so does not have gender, and so is neuter. That is just the way it is. You cannot assign gender to an idea. The Greek language understands this.

A verbal concept is a verbal idea that replaces a noun, and could be a complete sentence by itself – a sentence within a broader sentence. A verbal concept makes sense isolated from its context.

Click to expand...

Now you're taking me back and making me think too hard! Are ideas always without gender? A noun is a person, place or thing. An idea is a thing, and some expand person, place, thing to include idea. Nouns in Greek can be gendered or neuter.

So, my rational mind does not agree with you. My rational mind and training in Greek does see the phrase "by grace you [pl] have been saved through faith" as the antecedent concept that the neuter demonstrative pronoun is pointing to. I also include by grace and through faith in the concept because they add specificity to the salvation that God gifts to us, but I do not see faith as the specified gift here, because it's a feminine noun. There are better places to go in the Text to discuss faith as a gift. And if it is specifically or conceptually said to be a gift, then I don't think it's all that important to get too deep into debate about it in this area of Ephesians.

Thanks for the provided examples. This pronoun is used over 1600 times in the NT, not all neuter, and thus a lot of work to determine how it is used in all instances.

setst777 said:

Yes, Wallace is subjectively enlisting Reformed Doctrine into his judgment that has nothing to do with the grammar itself, which he admits to, but without using the words "Reformed Doctrine."

You appear to agree that Wallace is in error; in that, your conclusion is that the neuter pronoun “this” refers to "salvation" as expressed in the neuter subject verbal concept, “you are saved.”

Click to expand...

Although theology is frequently inserted into instructional material where it should not be, I'm typically a bit hesitant when I read of one's theological leanings used to minimize the value of his or her instruction on such things as grammar. I think Wallace's instruction on the Eph2 matter was pretty well done and objective. He pointed out the 4 main takes on the pronoun. He gave some deference to the grace and faith takes because there are examples that can be used to substantiate them. He explained in some technical detail why he disagrees with those views. He explained the view of the neuter pointing to the concept and said there are many examples (as you also provided references to). He explained the 4th view and why he thought the 3rd & 4th views had the most merit. It seems pretty objective to me.

I don't disagree with Wallace. I think his view of the neuter and concept view has the most merit. I'm even willing to look at his discussion of the 4th view, because it really doesn't deny the 3rd, but serves to intensify it.

My shorthand of "salvation" you're quoting I had previously explained as "by grace you have been saved through faith." I don't agree with you that we have to insert a neuter subject when it's clear that a neuter pronoun can point back to a concept where different genders can be found. So, there's no need to strip out grace and faith from the concept. They serve to modify and elaborate the "saved" Paul speaks of.

Again, if you can provide reference material to substantiate your view, I've said I would review it. If not, then I have to disregard your view, but I'm comfortable we're close enough. We both see God saving us as the gift. I see God saving us as His gift by His grace through faith. As I said, close enough for me.

Thanks for your detailed response.

setst777 said:

Yes, I agree with you. When we start breaking down salvation into segments, then we lose sight of the fact that, from beginning to end, salvation is by faith no matter what stage one thinks he is on.

Click to expand...

You misunderstand me. I think it's very instructional and important to elaborate on the phases of salvation. I've studied the topic intensely and have taught it in detail. I just don't care for the way it's referred to in the 3 words terminology I mentioned.

Firstly, because of some views and teachings of soteriology, it can be a very confused and hotly debated topic as can be clearly seen in some of the threads on this forum.

I'm sure you know that "saved" and the different forms of the word are used many times in the NT and can be discussing different things. This includes being saved from something like drowning, to saying we have been saved, we are saved, we are being saved, we will be saved. This alone should tell us that salvation is a process and a process that speaks in past tense, present status, present continuous tense, and future tense.

Also, as I stated before, it's clear that we begin anew in a spiritual infancy, we are to grow to a maturity, we are actually to continue to grow past maturity, and we will ultimately be glorified in Christ Jesus. There is also clearly an entrance through the narrow gate, then a walk along the narrow way to a destination, and then the resurrection into eternity. These are all salvation concepts, and salvation is explained in our Text in such ways.

You bring up love. Love is commanded. Obedience is love. We increase in love and become perfected in love, which denotes a growth process to completion, just like the walk and the growth to maturity.

Salvation is indeed one, but it is described in phases, aspects, facets, as I said before, pick a descriptor that conveys this accurately. And, yes, it is all through faith from beginning to end. But our responsive work in the process collaborating with God is thrown out by many for several reasons even though it's quite clear that we were created for good works, and we are clearly commanded to accomplish our salvation by working with God in the process. Furthermore, contrary to popular teaching, Jesus Christ had no problem commanding unbelievers to work to recieve the gift He gives that lasts into eternal life. IMO all we're typically taught about "works" is not well harmonized in our understanding.

I'm reading some of your views. I've redeemed years studying faith and salvation, including repeatedly going through every use of these words and conceptual discussions of them in our Text translating in context. I'm seeing you make some interesting points. I don't see BH speaking of 2 or more salvations as I think I recall you saying. There are clearly different tenses of salvation in the Text. These parts or phases of salvation are not novel teachings.

Thank you for your good messages.

setst777 said: ↑
Do you mean “you are” or “you have been” in Ephesians 2:8? This is a verb statement of being, and is masculine.

setst777 said: ↑
No. Only the verbal concept can be a subject that the pronoun “this” and the noun “gift” refers back to. If the subject were masculine, then the pronoun “this” and corresponding "gift" would be unmatched, and so, would not make sense.

GDL said:

The way you speak of the "subject" is what I'm clarifying. "You" is the implied subject of the plural verb. The masculine plural participle shows us "you" is clearly masculine plural. "You are / have been saved" is a masculine subject + a verb and in this instance + a masculine verbal participle. Calling the subject + verb the subject confuses the matter. Then turning a masculine subject + verb into a neuter to match the neuter demonstrative pronoun confuses the matter even more. It's also unnecessary

Click to expand...

Regarding the verbal concept

I gave other examples of what a verbal concept is so you could see this is reality in Greek. A verbal concept, or any concept, although they may possess various gender words, is not a person, place, or thing, and its not usually just one word, but if it one word, then the concept is a one word idea, it would be neuter as a concept. A concept is abstract, an idea, and so has no gender. This is my understanding, of which I gave other examples for.

The subject of Ephesians 2:8-9 is “salvation,” but is expressed in the verbal concept “you have been saved,” and so is neuter (having no gender), of which the neuter pronoun “this” refers back to.

As well, “gift” also is neuter, and so cannot refer back to anything other than the verbal concept regarding that subjective concept for salvation, which is neuter; otherwise “gift” has no reference to identify it, it is left hanging.

Regarding “you”

The singular subjective pronoun “this” does not refer back to the plural verb “you” for the following reasons:

• “You are” is a verb in Ephesians 2:8. Only nouns can be subjective, or a verbal concept.
• The singular “this” and the plural “you” is a mismatch.
• “You are” is masculine while “this” is neuter.
• To say that pronoun “this” is referring to “you” does not even make sense in a sentence.

Since “saved” is a verb, then “saved” cannot be subjective. Therefore, the pronoun “this” cannot refer to the verb “saved” or to the verb "you are" by itself.

The Greek allows for a nominative neuter pronoun to refer back to the subjective verbal concept in place of what would be the nominative noun. I gave the other examples to show this is actually the case.

What is confusing is to leave the nominative (subjective) neuter pronoun “this” and the neuter noun “gift” unmatched, and so without meaning.

Thankfully, that is not what we see happening. You can’t say “this” is referring to “by grace you are saved by faith” when a clear subject is in view, which is the verbal concept, “you are saved.” The author put that subjective key phrase there for a reason. The key point of Paul's teaching here regards the subject of salvation, not certainly not the verb "you."

GDL said:

This is the point of Wallace's instruction I referenced. The neuter demonstrative pronoun frequently points back to a concept - the concept here being saved by grace through faith.

Click to expand...

The reason a neuter pronoun can point back to a concept is because a concept has no gender.

GDL said:

It's a common construction that does not require turning a masculine subject into a neuter subject+verb, which, frankly, I've never seen done, not that I recall.

Click to expand...

A concept has no gender. That is why a neuter pronoun can point to a concept that contains different gendered words. Even though different genders are used in a verbal concept, the concept remains without gender, because it is abstract - an idea. For instance: Matthew 19:25

Show me examples in the NT where a neuter demonstrative pronoun points back to all that precedes it when a subjective verbal concept is included. A verbal concept replaces what would have been a nominative noun within the sentence, and of which the nominative pronoun refers back to. That is what pronouns do; that is their function. Grammar has to have meaning and rules to make it work.

setst777 said: ↑
I also appeal to your rational mind. An idea or concept is abstract and so does not have gender, and so is neuter. That is just the way it is. You cannot assign gender to an idea. The Greek language understands this.

A verbal concept is a verbal idea that replaces a noun, and could be a complete sentence by itself – a sentence within a broader sentence. A verbal concept makes sense isolated from its context.

GDL said:

Now you're taking me back and making me think too hard! Are ideas always without gender? A noun is a person, place or thing. An idea is a thing, and some expand person, place, thing to include idea. Nouns in Greek can be gendered or neuter. So, my rational mind does not agree with you.

Click to expand...

The verbal concept “you are saved” is not a thing; rather, it is an abstract idea. A verbal concept has no gender.

GDL said:

My rational mind and training in Greek does see the phrase "by grace you [pl] have been saved through faith" as the antecedent concept that the neuter demonstrative pronoun is pointing to.

Click to expand...

The demonstrative pronoun “touto” is also nominative, so is meant to refer back to a subject. You appear to be choosing to believe something that contradicts the grammar within the context.

GDL said:

I also include by grace and through faith in the concept because they add specificity to the salvation that God gifts to us, but I do not see faith as the specified gift here, because it's a feminine noun.

Click to expand...

The phrases ”by grace” and “through faith” do add specificity, but that does not justify including them as part of the subject. The subject stands by itself. If a subject is present, then the nominative pronoun must refer back to the subject, that is, if grammar has any meaning.

GDL said:

There are better places to go in the Text to discuss faith as a gift. And if it is specifically or conceptually said to be a gift, then I don't think it's all that important to get too deep into debate about it in this area of Ephesians.

Click to expand...

Wallace does not believe that faith is a gift, per se, when explaining Ephesians 2:8.

I quote (Bolding mine):

GDL said:

If faith is not meritorious, but is instead the reception of the gift of salvation, then it is not a gift per se.

Click to expand...

Faith onto salvation is never explained in Scripture to be a gift, and how would that be possible, since we receive the gift of justification and salvation by faith? “Salvation” and “justification” are gifts of God given to those who believe in Lord Jesus.

The fruits of the Spirit are for believers - to those who have already put their faith in Lord Jesus.

The special gifts of the Spirit are given to believers in the Body of Christ to function in their calling within the body of Christ – one body but many gifts.

GDL said:

Thanks for the provided examples. This pronoun is used over 1600 times in the NT, not all neuter, and thus a lot of work to determine how it is used in all instances.

Click to expand...

”Touto” is a neuter form of the pronoun and so refers to a neuter noun or a concept.

setst777 said: ↑
Yes, Wallace is subjectively enlisting Reformed Doctrine into his judgment that has nothing to do with the grammar itself, which he admits to, but without using the words "Reformed Doctrine."

setst777 said: ↑
You appear to agree that Wallace is in error; in that, your conclusion is that the neuter pronoun “this” refers to "salvation" as expressed in the neuter subject verbal concept, “you are saved.”

GDL said:

Although theology is frequently inserted into instructional material where it should not be, I'm typically a bit hesitant when I read of one's theological leanings used to minimize the value of his or her instruction on such things as grammar. I think Wallace's instruction on the Eph2 matter was pretty well done and objective.

Click to expand...

I am not denying that Wallace’s instruction on Ephesians 2 is well done and objective. He even shows why, in rare cases in Greek literature, a neuter pronoun may at first glance appear to be referring to another gender noun. Wallace objectively shows why this is not actually accurate when viewing the grammatical construction. He is correct.

My disagreement is Wallace’s conclusion:

I quote:

GDL said:

More plausible is the third view, viz., that τοῦτο refers to the concept of a grace-by-faith salvation.

Click to expand...

From what you wrote, and of which I responded to, this appeared to be what you disagreed with when you wrote that “salvation” is the subject of the pronoun “this” without qualification.

GDL said:

I don't disagree with Wallace. I think his view of the neuter and concept view has the most merit. I'm even willing to look at his discussion of the 4th view, because it really doesn't deny the 3rd, but serves to intensify it.

My shorthand of "salvation" you're quoting I had previously explained as "by grace you have been saved through faith."

Click to expand...

Yes, I was referring to your shorthand of “salvation” which is the noun form of the verbal concept “you have been saved.” You are now saying that the “salvation” you were referring to is “by grace you have been saved through faith.”

However, the context itself clarifies that “you have been saved” is the subject that stands by itself as that “salvation,” which is by grace and through faith.

Therefore, “by grace” and “through faith” cannot be part of the salvation that they point to and modify. That is what the text actually states.

GDL said:

I don't agree with you that we have to insert a neuter subject when it's clear that a neuter pronoun can point back to a concept where different genders can be found. So, there's no need to strip out grace and faith from the concept. They serve to modify and elaborate the "saved" Paul speaks of.

Click to expand...

Nothing is being stripped away. Modifiers and elaborations are not the subject.

• “by grace” and “through faith” are not subjects.
• “Salvation” is the subject.

Paul explains how salvation (the subject) comes about, but salvation remains the subject of which the modifiers point to and explain.

If grammar and context have any meaning, then this should be obvious. If not, show me evidence that modifiers and elaborations are grammatically part of the subject.

GDL said:

Again, if you can provide reference material to substantiate your view, I've said I would review it. If not, then I have to disregard your view, but I'm comfortable we're close enough. We both see God saving us as the gift. I see God saving us as His gift by His grace through faith. As I said, close enough for me.

Click to expand...

There remains no need to review any further evidence, since you already agree that a neuter pronoun can refer back to a concept, which you have already stated several times.

However, a concept remains without gender, which is why a neuter pronoun can refer to a concept. "Touto/This" is neuter.

I also gave other examples in Scripture regarding verbal concepts that match the grammar in Ephesians 2:8. Are you suggesting we disregard what we do not agree with?

I agree with your conclusion as follows:

GDL said:

“I see God saving us as His gift by His grace through faith.”

Click to expand...

God surely is merciful and gracious and saves all who believe without partiality, desiring all to come to repentance: Isaiah 1:16-22; Isaiah 45:22; Isaiah 49:6; Psalms 81:13-14; Luke 19:41; John 6:40; John 12:32; Acts 10:34-35; Acts 13:47; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Matthew 28:19-20; John 12:32; John 12:47; Romans 11:32; 2 Corinthians 5:19; Titus 2:11; Ezekiel 18:23; Ezekiel 18:30-32

Many will refuse God’s gracious invitation for salvation and so be lost (Matthew 22:3; John 3:18; John 5:39-40; Acts 14:2; Acts 19:9; Acts 50-51; Romans 10:21; 2 Thessalonians 2:10; Hebrews 12:25; Revelation 16:9; Revelation 16:11).

Those who humble themselves (2 Chronicles 7:14; 2 Chronicles 12:6-7; 2 Chronicles 12:12; 2 Chronicles 30:11; 2 Chronicles 33:12-19; Luke 18:9-24), God will teach his ways (Psalms 25:8-10; Isaiah 66:12).

The humble will listen (Acts 28:28) to the Gospel Word (Romans 10:17), but the obstinate will refuse to listen (Romans 10:21; Ezekiel 3:7).

The humble will not resist the drawing (John 12:32) and conviction of the Spirit (John 16:7-8) but the obstinate will resist the Spirit (Acts 7:51).

Since the humble will listen to and be taught by God, then the humble will put their faith in Jesus as their Lord.

Those who believe are the ones God grants to come to the Son (John 6:35-40). Those who believe, evidenced by listening to and following him, are the ones (them) whom the Father gives to the Son as his sheep (John 10:26-30), for the will of the Father is to save all those who believe, whether they be Jews or Gentiles (Isaiah 49:6).

God has mercy on all and saves by His grace without partiality, but that salvation is only for those who believe in His Son, according to the Scriptures (John 3:16).

setst777 said: ↑
Yes, I agree with you. When we start breaking down salvation into segments, then we lose sight of the fact that, from beginning to end, salvation is by faith no matter what stage one thinks he is on.

GDL said:

You misunderstand me. I think it's very instructional and important to elaborate on the phases of salvation. I've studied the topic intensely and have taught it in detail. I just don't care for the way it's referred to in the 3 words terminology I mentioned.

Click to expand...

Okay, thanks for explaining because what you previously wrote appeared to indicate otherwise.

My experience dealing with others is that, while instruction on “phases,” or “parts,” of salvation is intended to be beneficial, such teaching only adds to the errors that occur in thought regarding those phases of salvation, as if broken into parts.

If "phases" might be applied to anything, then it should be to "faith," not salvation. We grow in faith to maturity, but salvation remains the same.

Therefore, this teaching on phases or parts of salvation creates confusion as to what salvation is, what is meant by faith, and how works fit in, as if being partitioned into parts of salvation. This makes such terminology more troublesome than it is worth. The Scripture describe one salvation, and the narrow way on that path of salvation is by a continuous Gospel Faith.

I would rather just use the Scriptural terminology, and let the Scriptures themselves, in context, explain what salvation is, and how faith and works relate to salvation. While this too can be confusing, since many will take verses out of context, I see no reason to heap more confusion upon confusion.

There is very little alien terminology I will accept, or use, but only because the Scriptures portray a clear and easy to understand teaching on those things.

One of those terms I can think of right now is “The Passion of Christ.” The definition of this term is clear enough, and easy to verify in the Passion accounts of Christ in the Gospel accounts. So that term is shorthand for that whole event, even though some things are included or excluded from the account by some depending on how broad or narrow their definition of the Passion of Christ is.

GDL said:

Firstly, because of some views and teachings of soteriology, it can be a very confused and hotly debated topic as can be clearly seen in some of the threads on this forum.

Click to expand...

I don’t see how teaching about salvation being in phases or parts helps alleviate the debate. Either one is saved, or they are not. Salvation is by faith in Lord Jesus. I see a journey of faith in that salvation that eventually leads to eternal life in God's eternal kingdom if one remains in the faith to the end of his life.

If that faith is a genuine authentic faith in Lord Jesus, then salvation is secure from the moment one believes, and remains secure as we remain in the faith.

If that faith is genuine, then the Christian will grow in wisdom, understanding, and maturity through all the temptations, trials, sufferings, and deception that the believer will experience throughout his life. If the true believer dies very early on in his/her walk, then he is still saved because he possessed an authentic Gospel Faith in Lord Jesus.

In my view, after studying the Scriptures, I understand that there is only one salvation, and salvation cannot be partitioned or put in phases.

And there is only one faith by which God saves us, of which the Scriptures explain, instruct, and illustrate along with many warnings, admonishment, and encouragement as the Christian continues in that one faith to the end.

GDL said:

I'm sure you know that "saved" and the different forms of the word are used many times in the NT and can be discussing different things. This includes being saved from something like drowning, to saying we have been saved, we are saved, we are being saved, we will be saved. This alone should tell us that salvation is a process and a process that speaks in past tense, present status, present continuous tense, and future tense.

Click to expand...

I would rather let the context of Scripture define what is meant in each situation. I think that is the best policy. I have found that adding new terminology to explain what the NT teaches has already revealed (Romans 16:25-27) and fully explained (2 Corinthians 1:13), and meant to be plain to understand (Ephesians 3:4-11), and to give us complete understanding (Colossians 1:25-27; Colossians 2:1-4), which we are to defend and uphold (Jude 1:3-4; Colossians 2:8) creates a situation in which more division results in most instances. Consider how many hundreds of denominations exist, and the various alien terms they use to justify these differences. I could list many of these terms, but I believe you have the experience to understand these things.

That confusion is not the result of Scripture, which is plain to understand; rather, the confusion lies with those who do not allow the context of Scripture to explain what it means. People inherently like to skip the context and supply their own opinions to selected verses. I see that as very dangerous.

GDL said:

Also, as I stated before, it's clear that we begin anew in a spiritual infancy, we are to grow to a maturity, we are actually to continue to grow past maturity, and we will ultimately be glorified in Christ Jesus. There is also clearly an entrance through the narrow gate, then a walk along the narrow way to a destination, and then the resurrection into eternity. These are all salvation concepts, and salvation is explained in our Text in such ways.

Click to expand...

Good, but let the Scriptures define for us what salvation is, what infancy is, and what maturity is, as regards salvation. Once we add words like “parts” of salvation or “phases” of salvation, then that is where more problems can occur. There exists one salvation, and the Scriptures explain to us what that means in simple enough language, and is repeated over and over in almost every book of the NT.

I don't see the Gospel Revelation teaching us that salvation has parts or phases. One might say that "faith" has phases onto maturity, but not salvation.

GDL said:

You bring up love. Love is commanded. Obedience is love. We increase in love and become perfected in love, which denotes a growth process to completion, just like the walk and the growth to maturity.

Click to expand...

Yes, we grow in love and maturity as we walk in that Gospel Faith. Why add terms like phases of salvation or parts of salvation? That only adds confusion.

GDL said:

Salvation is indeed one, but it is described in phases, aspects, facets, as I said before, pick a descriptor that conveys this accurately. And, yes, it is all through faith from beginning to end. But our responsive work in the process collaborating with God is thrown out by many for several reasons even though it's quite clear that we were created for good works, and we are clearly commanded to accomplish our salvation by working with God in the process. Furthermore, contrary to popular teaching, Jesus Christ had no problem commanding unbelievers to work to recieve the gift He gives that lasts into eternal life. IMO all we're typically taught about "works" is not well harmonized in our understanding.

Click to expand...

I perceive from what you write about faith, that you have spiritual wisdom about faith and salvation. You, no doubt, have done your best to objectively and sincerely study the Scriptures, and with prayer, regarding that Gospel Faith. However, you will not convince me to accept terms such as phases or parts of salvation, or any other man-made concept. I have experienced firsthand the confusion such terms incite.

GDL said:

I'm reading some of your views. I've redeemed years studying faith and salvation, including repeatedly going through every use of these words and conceptual discussions of them in our Text translating in context. I'm seeing you make some interesting points. I don't see BH speaking of 2 or more salvations as I think I recall you saying. There are clearly different tenses of salvation in the Text. These parts or phases of salvation are not novel teachings.

Click to expand...

Here is what BH wrote (Msg. 369), of which I referred to as “two salvations:”

I quote (bolding is mine, except for the word “Summary”):

Bible Highlighter said:

If you can offer a word for word commentary on Ephesians 2:8-9, and then offer me a word for word commentary on 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14, I would greatly appreciate it. For me: These two passages are not describing the same type of salvation. They are each describing two different aspects of salvation by the very words being used.

Here is a quick summary:
Ephesians 2:8-9 -

Summary: By Grace are ye saved through faith without works.

2 Thessalonians 2:13-14 -
Summary: God has chosen you to salvation through Sanctification of the Spirit and a belief of the truth (Which is a call of the gospel).

How do you see these two passages as talking about the same type of salvation? They sound like they are describing two different types of salvation to me. If you disagree, please provide an explanation of these passages and how they are talking about the same exact form of salvation. Please use Bible verses to support your viewpoint or commentary on these verses here.

Click to expand...

While BH does also writes “aspects of salvation,” it seems clear to me that BH views “aspects” of salvation as two types or two forms of salvation, since he is using those terms to define what he meant. That is the context in which I responded with “two salvations.”

I am a student of God’s Word. I will consult other sources of material to see what others teach about various doctrines of Scripture, but no matter how well established the teachings are about any doctrine from any of those sources, my allegiance is only to God’s Word.

BH’s views appear to change on various doctrines over time, so it’s hard to pinpoint what he presently understands. I have an issue with BH’s view that works are an addition to faith, which plainly appears to be the result of his understanding of those “parts” or “forms” of salvation. So, you can witness for yourself how such alien terms can cause confusion.

As well, BH writes that repentance is feeling sorry for your sins. That is all there is to repentance, according to BH. BH holds firmly to this definition no matter how many Scriptural examples I give him to the contrary.

If one gets the definition of repentance wrong, then such person will never understand what the Gospel Faith is as presented and taught and illustrated throughout the Scriptures repeatedly.

Sure BH may quote sources that explain what faith means, but his actual words betray his true understanding when communicating with him.

I have had many opportunities to message with BH, and I do love him as a brother. But I get impatient with him because it seems after a few years he is actually going backwards rather than forward in his understanding of God's Word.

Now I understand from a recent message of his that he does not believe in the eternal punishment of the unsaved, despite all the Passages regarding eternal punishment, eternal torment, weeping and gnashing of teeth, in the eternal fire or darkness. So, I feel depressed about all this.

Blessings

Bible Highlighter said:

Yes. There is one salvation. I agree, brother. It is one salvation with different aspects, steps, or phases. The Lord our God is at the heart of all aspects of salvation. Our obedience to His Words will help us to get there if we are diligent in seeking His way of escape.

I also like how you basically said that salvation is spoke in different tenses in the Bible. This is a highly missed fact by many. Somehow folks think that by going to the original languages somehow undoes all that, but the Bible I am reading is taken from these original languages. So I have to trust that God is speaking to me in my language (involving the Bible). Sure, I look at the original words every now and then, but this should be a last resort in my humble opinion. Some folks just don't read a verse or passage in context to the chapter or the book itself and they focus a laser beam on a word or particular set of words in how they want to see them. I am looking to just read what the Bible says plainly in its most simplistic form (as much as humanly possible). I am not looking to fit in with a church and it's creeds or what other men say. I am not looking to force what I want to be true. What does the text really say? This should be the question we should always be asking ourselves constantly on all verses. I have changed on 18 things theologically over the years. It is my hope that God keeps me sharp to what His Word says. So I pray and ask Him constantly as I compare Scripture with Scripture. Then I may need to still pray again, and again until I get it right.

Click to expand...

Dear Brother,

Thank you for your thoughtful and sincere response. I believe you are genuinely expressing your feelings, and so I admire you for that.

I agree that focusing on grammar to the almost exclusion of the context is a serious error. Context (immediate and broader context) of what the Scripture actually states is the most important thing, and we cannot go wrong on that.

I like comparing one translation of the Scriptures to other translations if a particular verse, or verses, seems unclear to me the way it is translated.

The grammar is helpful to understand the context as well, but should not be focused on to the exclusion of the context. Ephesians 2:8-10 is one of the most confusing passages of Scripture for many, and so requires a thoughtful study of both the immediate and broader context surrounding that verse. A study of the grammar is also helpful in combination with the contextual study.

Another example of how the Greek grammar can be helpful:

Knowing that a present tense in Greek is almost always continuously present onto infinity, unless the context restricts the timeframe or circumstance, is highly beneficial regarding the doctrine of Faith. The terms "faith" and "believes" are present tense, and so is to be recognized as an ongoing present state of mind as one lives his life. That understanding can completely change how one perceives the meaning of faith.

Blessings

Bible Highlighter said:

Yes. There is one salvation. I agree, brother. It is one salvation with different aspects, steps, or phases. The Lord our God is at the heart of all aspects of salvation. Our obedience to His Words will help us to get there if we are diligent in seeking His way of escape.

I also like how you basically said that salvation is spoke in different tenses in the Bible. This is a highly missed fact by many.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the response. Yes, it's very clear that salvation is clarified for us in tenses and in what takes place when we enter, progress, and come to the end. I don't see how this can be argued against, but I'll read what setst777 has to say.

With respect, I've said a couple times that I would review whatever reference material you could provide that substantiates the way you're explaining your grammatical work. So, I'm going to leave it at that and not read closely how you explain your neuter subject concept again. Frankly, the way you play at will with different word forms (nouns and verbs) and make verbs into subjects, you can make a text say about whatever you want.

Again, I disagree with your explanation and the way you handle the grammar. I also find it beyond difficult to accept, after reading so many arguments over the years about these verses put forth by several authors very versed in Greek exegesis, that not one of them that I recall has put forth what you have. I'd like to leave it at that, please.

I will say this about the structure of this area of the Text: I went back and pulled out some diagrams that I subscribed to some time ago after finding the work and getting weary of doing my own. Now I simply refer to them and analyze them at times even though the author is way beyond me in diagramming.

Here's what I see. I'm focusing mainly on the subject and verbs in context:

Ephesians 2:

• God - rich in mercy:
  • Made us alive (by grace you have been saved)
  • Raised us
  • Seated us
  • [did all of this] to show the extreme riches of His grace...in Christ Jesus
• Clarification - Self-Evident Conclusion ("For") by [God's] grace you have been saved [by God] through/by means of faith
  • this is not from you - of God the gift (2:8)

I'm sure the above can be presented better, but here are some paraphrased points:

• To pick up all of what's being said, we at minimum need to go back to 2:4 where the subject of the verbs - God - is stated in the Greek.
• 2:7 is a purpose clause tying back to the 3 things God did (verbs) for us (2:5-6):
  • God made us alive to show His extremely rich grace in Christ (by grace you have been saved).
  • God raised us to show His extremely rich grace in Christ
  • God seated us to show His extremely rich grace in Christ
• 2:8 Conclusion:
  • God has saved us by grace through faith to show His extremely rich grace in Christ (belief in Christ upon hearing the gospel was stated already in 1:13)
  • [none of] this (being made alive, being raised, being seated (saved is either all 3 of these things or having actually been made alive and positionally raised & seated - there's a reason for the parenthesis back in in 2:5 re: saved) came from us
  • [all of this is] God's gift

We expend too much energy narrowing things down too much. Having been saved by grace through faith here is God having made us alive, God having raised us and God having seated us in Christ. THIS is God's gift. Looking at this diagrammatically the neuter pronoun ("this") in 2:8 ties back to both "by grace you have been saved through faith" (2:8) and to "show" (demonstrate) (2:7), which ties back to God making us alive, raising us, and seating us (2:4-6). It's a big concept with much detail. We shouldn't limit it.

When we heard the Good News of Jesus Christ & believed in Jesus Christ:

• God made us alive together with the Christ (God saved us by grace)
• God raised us together
• God seated us together in the Heavens in Christ Jesus
• God did these things to show His extremely rich grace toward us in Christ Jesus
• The obvious conclusion is that God saved us when He made us alive, raised us, and seated us by grace through faith to show His extremely rich grace and THIS gift is from God (BTW, both "this" and "gift" are nominative neuter singular)

If you disagree, then you disagree.