There is no harmony in this kind of belief. To say that works do not save and yet a saving faith will always have works is contradictory. If a true faith will always have works then we must conclude that works play a part in our salvation because we cannot have a saving faith without works.
I saw a good quote in my reading of John Flavell, a very well known Puritan divine, especially well known for his powerful evangelistic ministry. He said that teaching duty (that is, doing what God requires of us) through admonition is one things, but teaching duty by doing it is quite another. What I get from that is that many teach how we should do the things that improve holiness without actually following their own teaching; and there are others who teach holiness by example in their own lives. The latter is genuine, while the former is a hypocrite.I understood your point, all I'm saying is though some would treat them like you say, there are some that genuinely treat them like they would anyone else.
Jesus taught things that were really impossible to perfectly obey in our own strength. He said that our righteousness needs to exceed that of the Pharisees, who were to all intents and purposes perfect in their obedience to the Law. Paul, while he was a Pharisee, and the Rich Young Ruler are two examples, and Jesus said of the latter when he told Jesus that he had followed the Law perfectly from his youth up, Jesus told him that he did well, though there was just one more thing he had to do to become a disciple, which was something that the Law did not require him to do. It was not against the Law to be rich. Jesus, told him to do something which he could not do.And I would have to disagree that Jesus's sole reason for telling us to obey is to show us we cannot. We are to obey just as he says. There's just no biblical backing to not sincerely trying to obey. That was my point about forgiveness if we fall short, but don't do as many around here do and go with the thought "we all sin, so we might as well just sin and not worry about it". Those that do that are just fooling themselves out of heaven, and all so they can do as they wish and still make it to heaven.
The problem is that many who have come into Christianity through the "easy believerism" way (which is not through the narrow gate, but over the wall), have not experienced conviction of sin in the way that is needed for a person to have total faith in Christ for salvation. How can a person see the gospel as good news and to be totally reliant on Christ unless he clearly sees the bad news about himself in relation to the standards of God? The basic message of the Bible is to show us how absolutely sinful and deserving of hell we really are. Unless we see that and are deeply affected by it that we start crying out to God from our hearts for mercy and forgiveness, we will never know what real Christianity is. All we would have is just some religious hobby with a Christian flavour to it. All we would have is a "take it or leave it" religion that has not really go through to our hearts.That may conveniently "come to mind" in order to serve your purpose, but saying those who say we must be in compliance to the law and follow Jesus commands in order to be saved is firstly, the way you put it, probably doesn't ever get said as you claim. What they really say is what we all know to be true...follow Jesus's commands but we will make mistakes and that's covered if we simply sincerely ask. I'll make my point by asking you to show me where anyone who said we must flat out keep Jesus's commands/comply to the law in order to be saved, precisely what you said they say. See it's those little parts you/OSAS leaves out in order to create a problem that isn't there, and to falsely make us the bad guy. That type thing happens all too often here, I'm always stating OSAS doesn't play fair, and that fact shows their heart. It's all about making OSAS ok no matter what we have to do.
While I believe in eternal security for the genuine believer, I don't hold to the idea that anyone who just decides to put on a Christian badge is eternally secure. Many can adopt Christianity through their minds and emotions, and appear to be committed Christians, but their hearts may be unchanged, and remaining as evil as they ever were. This is because they want to have some kind of Christian profession and their favourite lusts as well. It is like the Rich Young Ruler. He wanted to be a disciple of Jesus but hold on to his riches as well. While there is nothing wrong with having wealth as long as one's heart is not in it, Jesus could see that wealth was his heart's treasure, and in his case, while his heart is in his wealth, he could not be a true disciple of Jesus as well. That's what was the downfall of Judas. He was an outward disciple, but in his heart he was a thief and a hypocrite. But all of the other 11 disciples never saw his hypocrisy, only Jesus saw right into Judas' heart and saw what he really was.And don't get me wrong, I'm not singling you out, many here do that. Another point is, since OSAS doesn't have to be good they won't, I see it all the time here by the way they carry themselves in argument, and the things they will do to try to do away with the truth.
No one is saying that we should do just as we like. The unconverted person cannot do what he wants because he is in bondage to his sinful lusts. He thinks he is free to do what he wants, but he will always involve himself in one sin or another, and will always choose to rebel against God and His standards, because he has no other choice. He is a slave to sin.Jesus made a huge effort by doing as God said he must in order to find out if we were sincere enough to live with them in paradise for ever. Point being, he didn't just say "do what you like, it's not going to hurt you a bit", and he didn't say it because he doesn't want a bunch of insincere heathens in heaven, and that fact, if it actually were a fact is what makes people into insincere heathens, they think it won't hurt their salvation, at least in their minds. Believing we can do as we like, does nothing but hinder our chances. And no, I'm not being a Pharisee there, it should go without saying, if I do those things I'll be in the same boat as anyone else.
The Pharisees were the most committed Bible believers and teachers of their time. Not all of them were bad people. Some were good, upright, honest, and sincere. I think that Paul sincerely followed what he believed was God's way as he saw it in the Scriptures he had. He was not a hypocrite. He lived what he believed.Here is another of those twists...You say we are like the Pharisees, but why? What exactly did we, or whoever your accusing, do? You'd like to think those who teach something you may not like, we're like the Pharisees, when you have no idea who here is doing what, that's another creation. It's just another ploy to try to make us look bad in your own minds and to others, and in turn make it appear what we teach is wrong since we are a Pharisee. How do you know they don't make an effort, and actually comply where you indicate they do not? What was the tip off, because you want to believe it or because we actually do something to make you believe we are? Maybe you can show us who and why they meet the criteria the be a Pharisee? Sure there are people like that, else Christ would not have said it, but seems to me your trying to make is seem a general rule here, as in, anyone who simply tries to convey what they believe is true, is now a Pharisee, meaning they are bad, and what we teach is bad, when in reality there zero basis for the claim...just as there was zero basis for saying anyone here says we have to be compliant to the law while they actually say something quite differently.
I think we need to be blunt when dealing with hypocrisy, because such people are self-deceived and will experience the horrors of hell in eternity. Paul says that knowing the terror of the Lord we persuade men. This means that because we know what will happen to a hypocrite, then when we face up to someone whom we believe is leading a hypocritical life and probably get rejected and even a punch in the nose for it, then we can know that we have set the right way before them in the same way that the Holy Spirit is doing the same every day of their lives, and every day a hypocrite rejects the true path to holiness and tries to maintain an outward appearance of religion, the wrath of God is mounting up against him day by day, until it will be poured out on him on the day of judgment. This is why we should be honest and open in describing hypocrisy and warning others, because we will never know that we might be making the difference between heaven and hell for someone.You didn't seem to mind being blunt accusing people of being a Pharisee and such, and FWIW, I'm not the least bit offended, but I hope you can deal with my simply being blunt.
Concrete and logical.How about a little CONTEXT:
In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims he has faith but has no resulting evidential works (to validate his claim). That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith. *So James does not teach that we are saved/accounted as righteous "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine. Simple!
In James 2:20, "faith without works is dead" does not mean that faith is dead until it produces works and then it becomes a living faith (which is like saying that a tree is dead until it produces fruit and then it becomes a living tree) or that works are the source of life in faith or that we are saved by works. James is simply saying faith that is not accompanied by evidential works is dead. So if someone says-claims he has faith but lacks resulting evidential works, then he has an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith.
Man is saved through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9); yet genuine faith is vindicated, substantiated, evidenced by works (James 2:14-24).
*Christ saves us through faith based on the merits of His finished work of redemption "alone" and not based on the merits of our works.*
It is through faith "in Christ alone" (and not by the merits of our works) that we are justified on account of Christ (Romans 3:24; 5:1; 5:9); yet the faith that justifies is never alone (solitary, unfruitful, barren) if it is genuine (James 2:14-24). *Perfect Harmony*
We must remember that Paul's ministry is to the gentiles who had no background in Judaism and the ten commandments. His view was that those who had faith in Christ, had the Holy Spirit working in them to produce the type of works that God ordained that they would have. He contrasted he works of the flesh, and the fruit of the Spirit. The works that Paul spoke that should follow true faith are those in harmony with the fruit of the Spirit. The Apostle John made it more straightforward and simple: works motivated by love for God and for others.Its more of a circular argument to me, which is common whenever anyone tries to reconcile Paul with James.
He would totally have agreed with Paul in that the good works do not arise out of self-righteous effort. But his view contradicts easy believerism which limits faith to mere religious talk. He said that it is not enough to talk the talk, but he has to walk the walk as well. This is totally in harmony with Paul who said that if we live in the Spirit, we need to walk in the Spirit. The Apostle John called it walking in the light as Jesus is in the light.
The Scripture says that there is no longer any Jew or Gentile, but all are under Christ. Therefore anyone, including a Jew who combines keeping the Law with faith in Christ has no interest in Christ at all, but is bound to keep the whole Law without fault, otherwise he is under a curse.I don't see how anyone can conclude what you have stated above, once they have read Acts 21.
James clearly disagreed with Paul when it comes to how Jews are to be justified before God. He is fine with Gentiles being free from the Law though. The book of James was written before the events in Acts 21.
18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.
19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.
20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.
22 What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come.
23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law.
25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.
The Scripture says that there is no longer any Jew or Gentile, but all are under Christ. Therefore anyone, including a Jew who combines keeping the Law with faith in Christ has no interest in Christ at all, but is bound to keep the whole Law without fault, otherwise he is under a curse.
It's not a problem, as I already explained in post #127. Your problem is you teach salvation by works. Your arguments sound very similar to Roman Catholicism. Where do you attend church?First, again, that does not undo the problem of the word "justified" being used in two different ways to support your belief here.
I certainly am being consistent after considering the CONTEXT of James 2:24 and properly harmonizing scripture with scripture in order to reach the proper conclusion on doctrine. You conveniently ignored the CONTEXT of James 2:24 and the end result is salvation by works in contradiction to (Romans 4:2-6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5 2 Timothy 1:9 etc..).You believe the word "justified" in relation to faith is dealing with salvation, but you conveniently do not believe this is the case with the same word used in the same sentence involving works. So you are not being consistent here with the word "justified."
You must not confuse descriptive passages of scripture with prescriptive passages of scripture. Genuine believers endure trials, pains, heartaches, and temptations always looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith and receive the crown of life. There are multiple crowns mentioned in scripture. The Imperishable Crown (1 Corinthians 9:24-25), The Crown of Rejoicing (1 Thessalonians 2:19), The Crown of Righteousness (2 Timothy 4:8), The Crown of Glory (1 Peter 5:4). Notice that James said the Lord has promised the crown of life to them that love Him. 1 John 4:7 - Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. Believers love Him because He first loved us (1 John 4:19). The love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us. (Romans 5:5)Second, James says in the first chapter this:
"Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him." (James 1:12).
So you have to endure temptation to receive the crown of life.
You are reading this verse through the lens of salvation by works. Your best efforts to clean up your act (in of itself) apart from saving faith in Christ is not going to save you. Your logic would then call for sinless perfection as the basis or means of becoming saved. Putting away filthiness and wickedness pictures the stripping off of dirty clothes and receiving the implanted word that must take root in our heart. The AMPC explains it well - So get rid of all uncleanness and the rampant outgrowth of wickedness, and in a humble (gentle, modest) spirit receive and welcome the Word which implanted and rooted [in your hearts] contains the power to save your souls.James also says,
"Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls."
(James 1:21).
James says we need to do two things that is able to save our souls.
#1. Lay apart all filthiness, superfluity of naughtiness (Which is no doubt sinful things).
#2. Receive with meekness the engrafted Word (The Living Word).
There certainly is harmony in this kind of belief as I already explained in post #127. Faith is the root of salvation and works are the fruit. No fruit at all would demonstrate that there is no root. Nothing contradictory about that at all. You have the tail wagging the dog, the cart before the horse. We cannot have works without a saving faith. Faith produces works and not the other way around. Works are the fruit, by product and demonstrative evidence of true saving faith, but not the essence of true saving faith and not the means of our salvation.There is no harmony in this kind of belief. To say that works do not save and yet a saving faith will always have works is contradictory. If a true faith will always have works then we must conclude that works play a part in our salvation because we cannot have a saving faith without works.
In James 2:21, notice closely that James does not say that Abraham's work of offering up Isaac resulted in God's accounting Abraham as righteous. The accounting of Abraham's faith as righteousness was made in Genesis 15:6, many years before his work of offering up Isaac recorded in Genesis 22. The work of Abraham in Genesis 22 did not have some kind of intrinsic merit to account him as righteous, but it showed or manifested the genuineness of his faith. This is the "sense" in which Abraham was "justified by works." He was shown to be righteous. *Abraham was accounted as righteous based on his faith (Genesis 15:6) not his works (Romans 4:2-3) long before he offered up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22.James makes a point how we are justified by works before God because he uses Abraham sacrificing his son Isaac as an example. There were no men present to be justified before men when Abraham offered his son Isaac. By Abraham's obedience, God blessed Abraham in a great way. Just read again the story in Genesis and you will be able to check these facts for yourself. So this means that Abraham was justified by works before GOD and not men. This means his works had merit before GOD.
In James 2:19, we see that the demons believe "mental assent" that "there is one God," but they do not believe/have faith/trust in/reliance in Jesus Christ for salvation. In other words, they do not believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31) and are not saved. Their trust and reliance is in Satan, as demonstrated by their rebellion in heaven and continuous evil works.For even the demons believe and tremble (James 2:19). That is what James compares a belief alone to.
As I already explained, faith that has no works is an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith, as we see from James 2:14 - "says/claims" (key word) to have faith but has no works. We are not saved by an empty profession of faith/dead faith that produces no works. We are saved by faith that trusts in Christ alone for salvation and this kind of faith results in producing works, yet we are still saved through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:5-10). Not hard to understand. Just hard for works-salvationists to ACCEPT.He says faith is dead if it has no works (James 2:17). A faith that has no works is like that of the faith of demons, and it is dead. That is the kind of faith that James condemns. So how can this kind of faith that has no works save? It cannot.
As I already explained, man is saved through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9); yet genuine faith is vindicated, substantiated, evidenced by works (James 2:14-24).So you are saying that "justified" is not related to salvation or it is related to salvation? Either way, it does not help you. If you say that "justified" is not related to salvation, you will then have to admit that "being justified by faith" does not deal with salvation (Which contradicts other Scripture verses that suggests this; For example Romans 5:1 says, "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ"). If you say that the word "justified" is related to salvation, then you must conclude that this one word is referring to faith AND works. Either way, you are faced with a conundrum.
It's not a problem, as I already explained in post #127.
You said:Your problem is you teach salvation by works.
You said:Your arguments sound very similar to Roman Catholicism.
You said:Where do you attend church?
You said:I certainly am being consistent after considering the CONTEXT of James 2:24 and properly harmonizing scripture with scripture in order to reach the proper conclusion on doctrine. You conveniently ignored the CONTEXT of James 2:24
You said:and the end result is salvation by works in contradiction to (Romans 4:2-6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5 2 Timothy 1:9 etc..).
As I already explained, man is saved through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9); yet genuine faith is vindicated, substantiated, evidenced by works (James 2:14-24).
*Christ saves us through faith based on the merits of His finished work of redemption "alone" and not based on the merits of our works.*
It is through faith "in Christ alone" (and not by the merits of our works) that we are justified on account of Christ (Romans 3:24; 5:1; 5:9); yet the faith that justifies is never alone (solitary, unfruitful, barren) if it is genuine (James 2:14-24). *Perfect Harmony*
When Paul uses the term "justified" he is referring to the legal (judicial) act of God by which He accounts the believer's faith as righteousness. (Romans 3:22-28; 4:2-6; 5:1) James, however is using the term to describe those who would show the genuineness of their faith by the works that they do. (James 2:21,24).
Romans 4:2 - For if Abraham was justified by works, (accounted as righteous) he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it (faith, not works) was accounted to him for righteousness.
*Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, the Greek word for justified "dikaioo" #1344
1. to render righteous or such he ought to be.
James 2:21 - Was not Abraham our father justified (shown to be righteous) by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
*Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, the Greek word for justified "dikaioo" #1344
2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered.
If "justified by works" in James 2:21,24 means "saved by works/accounted as righteous," then we have a CONTRADICTION in scripture and there are no contradictions in scripture. Those who teach salvation by faith AND works are faced with a conundrum.
James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God (Romans 4:2-3). Works bear out the justification that already came by faith.
I saw a good quote in my reading of John Flavell, a very well known Puritan divine, especially well known for his powerful evangelistic ministry. He said that teaching duty (that is, doing what God requires of us) through admonition is one things, but teaching duty by doing it is quite another. What I get from that is that many teach how we should do the things that improve holiness without actually following their own teaching; and there are others who teach holiness by example in their own lives. The latter is genuine, while the former is a hypocrite.
Jesus taught things that were really impossible to perfectly obey in our own strength.
So, if the Pharisees, followed the Law more perfectly than we could ever do, then it would be impossible for us to exceed their righteousness regardless of all our efforts to be holier than them. That's the whole point. If the personal righteousness of the Pharisees was not good enough, then ours would be absolutely nowhere near it! So, the righteousness that pleases God has to on a different basis.
Many can adopt Christianity through their minds and emotions, and appear to be committed Christians, but their hearts may be unchanged, and remaining as evil as they ever were.
My view is when a person has experienced true and deep conviction of his personal sinfulness and ruined state, when he falls on Christ through faith and receives mercy and grace, the last thing he would want to do is to return to his former state. He will keep holding fast to Christ by faith all his life. Such a person will have eternal security, because his sole security will be in Christ alone and that will never change.
No one is saying that we should do just as we like.
The Pharisees were the most committed Bible believers and teachers of their time. Not all of them were bad people. Some were good, upright, honest, and sincere. I think that Paul sincerely followed what he believed was God's way as he saw it in the Scriptures he had. He was not a hypocrite. He lived what he believed.
My definition of a hypocrite is one who teaches others to be holy, but does not intend to apply what he teaches in his own life. It is like a preacher who teaches against alcohol and domestic violence, and then goes home, gets drunk and beats up his wife and children. He is an angel at church but a devil at home.
I don't teach holiness when I have opportunity to preach, because I know I am not a holy person. I would be a hypocrite if I taught that people needed to be perfect in their compliance with the commands of Jesus, because I have difficulties complying with them myself. But I will teach total faith, dependence and confidence in Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit to develop sanctification in us day by day, because I depend totally on Christ to do His workmanship in me.
In James 2:21, notice closely that James does not say that Abraham's work of offering up Isaac resulted in God's accounting Abraham as righteous. The accounting of Abraham's faith as righteousness was made in Genesis 15:6, many years before his work of offering up Isaac recorded in Genesis 22. The work of Abraham in Genesis 22 did not have some kind of intrinsic merit to account him as righteous, but it showed or manifested the genuineness of his faith. This is the "sense" in which Abraham was "justified by works." He was shown to be righteous. *Abraham was accounted as righteous based on his faith (Genesis 15:6) not his works (Romans 4:2-3) long before he offered up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22.
In James 2:19, we see that the demons believe "mental assent" that "there is one God," but they do not believe/have faith/trust in/reliance in Jesus Christ for salvation. In other words, they do not believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31) and are not saved. Their trust and reliance is in Satan, as demonstrated by their rebellion in heaven and continuous evil works.
As I already explained, faith that has no works is an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith, as we see from James 2:14 - "says/claims" (key word) to have faith but has no works. We are not saved by an empty profession of faith/dead faith that produces no works. We are saved by faith that trusts in Christ alone for salvation and this kind of faith results in producing works, yet we are still saved through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:5-10). Not hard to understand. Just hard for works-salvationists to ACCEPT.
I can only think, I wish you'd a gotten more "from that"...like the whole picture.
Did you stop to think, the John you mention, was admonishing his readers when he told them that? Of course he was. He was doing exactly as you are now accusing me of, but it's OK for him, and he's not the hypocrite you are accusing me of being, because he gave you something to help shush those speaking the truth, while my doing exactly the same thing as he does, makes me a hypocrite? And you still have no idea what he does in his private life. Funny how we miss so much of the picture when it's not to our advantage to see it. Oh, and that's not to mention you have no idea what I do in my private life to be called a Pharisee, yet you are still pushing the idea. What is all that??
You said to "admonish" was to be a hypocrite, and while I can give you several reasons why that is dead wrong, I'll just leave it with the following. Not only does Christ/God admonish, and even threaten us with hell if we don't act as we should...but if anyone has a preacher/friend that doesn't admonish those who he feels is teaching a false doctrine that could not only damage others/themselves, but hurt them for eternity, then they need to change teachers/preachers, and get some new friends, some that care enough to get real with things.
Several questions:
Aren't you admonishing me? So that begs the question, is that OK for you, or are you also the hypocrite you accused me of being? Please tell me who exactly is the hypocrite you base your claims on, and why, because it is fast becoming very confusing who is who..
Do you and your admonishing John have rights some of us do not? If so, why? To me, it's clear we do not have right so speak up when our doctrine disagrees. Funny how that works, ain't it?
We should go by Jesus example, admonish/defend the word of God, AND live right. When the word of God reads differently than what is being taught, we need to not sit on our hands and do/say nothing.
To me, that's a given, yet you say, if we do so, we are hypocrites? Is not the real reason for calling others that, to discredit them because they don't teach the same as you? while you have never proven your way is correct, and never will even attempt it in a question answer debate, because you know better? That's the idea I get.
Who here ever claimed we had to perfectly obey in order to get to heaven?
No, it does not have to be on "a different basis", you are making that up, and if not, prove it's a fact...fair enough? It's on the basis we sincerely try to be good, and he's working with, and forgiving us when we mess up because we are sincerely trying, just as a good parent would treat their child...so easy to understand. It's much simpler than deceitful twists and turns designed to make a way seem right when it is not right. You want to "please God"? Then listen:
John 14:15 "If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.". Seems to me, if reasonable effort to keep the commandments pleases Jesus, and he feels that's what shows we truly love him, then that's what we should do. Am I correct, or not, if not, why?
And as much as one may try to reject it "minds, emotions" AND actions are along the lines of what is expected. Action/works are what shows if we are sincere or not. Our mind can pretend, and our emotions can be no more than a show, or all that nothing but talk, while works prove their heart has changed. As many as may fight that fact, I think they know perfecly well that is true. Faith without works is dead, how many times do we have to say it? It really is in the bible, and it doesn't need a half page of talk to make it something else, it's already just what it is...simply.
And there it is, another cornerstone for the "Always saved" argument. as in:
"We must be saved because we are presently, and there is just no way anyone would turn away from salvation, hence we remain saved" when there is nothing further from the truth. Yet many just on CF alone makes the same exact claim...why? It's not because they got it from the bible, but because so many have chosen to believe what they are taught by men, here and elsewhere.
Again, I will prove my point..show me why that is your view, and using scripture to do so, please?
The temptations of the world take people from God all the time, the same reason some just don't bother with salvation to begin with. It's like saying, "Well, Ill give it a try", and they later decide it's not for them, as in:
Mathew 13:18
20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and with joy receiveth it;
21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.
or
1 Timothy 4:1
Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
If that doesn't convince you, can you please show me the scripture that says the opposite of those verses, and that we can't actually fall away/lose salvation? Should be a simple as answering any question where you are correct.
Except for the following comment, I'm not going to answer this and your few paragraphs following it, and simply because you did the same as people do so often here. Hidden somewhere in a comment is something that is assumed truth, when it was never proven true.
See, no one anywhere accused anyone of saying we "should" do as we like, they only say we can do what we like and still go to heaven/can't lose salvation. That may seem like only a small twist of the truth to some, but it's what all that follows in your comment rides upon, meaning none of it's going to be viable because, as I say, no one made the claim.
Sigh*
Yet, once again, you didn't answer my questions. Do as you wish, but if you want a debate, that has to happen. IOW if you can't show me where I'm wrong and you are right, the debate is useless, and all we have is what you call your view, an no proof the view is valid.
Oh, and I should add, who here teaches what you claim, in that they need "to be perfect in their compliance with the commands of Jesus" ... will you please show us, and more importantly, if you cannot show us, why do you make the claim?
QUOTE="Oscarr, post: 74209151, member: 105812"]I think we need to be blunt when dealing with hypocrisy,
I don't understand why you are relating an objective discussion about whether or not faith alone in Christ is sufficient for justification subjectively to yourself, as if I am speaking directly about your standing with Christ.Yet we still don't know who here are the hypocrites because you make the claims, which is fine, but when asked to show scripture or proof you are correct with such accusations, the replies/answers to the questioning are no where to be found. Again either prove what you claim, or not, but until then there is no way I'm going try to debate what I think are empty, unproven claims/accusations...it would be fruitless to do so.
Firstly, to get around any misunderstanding about predestination and election, I think these are mysteries and any real attempt to give hard and fast explanations of them falls short. Either we say that God has deliberately created people to eternally suffer in hell, which is monstrous and right against His nature; or we say that election is based solely on a person choosing to become a Christian without any other influences, which is the other extreme, and is unsatisfactory. Either way, a person might not have assurance of salvation because in the first instance he might not be elected and his Christian profession is in vain because as an unelected person he is going to hell anyway. And if everything depends on his choice alone, then having the idea that he could be saved today and lost tomorrow takes away his assurance.Hi Oscar.
I agree with some of your understandings, could you tell me how you see saving Faith fulfilled at the start of the salvation journey?
Firstly, to get around any misunderstanding about predestination and election, I think these are mysteries and any real attempt to give hard and fast explanations of them falls short. Either we say that God has deliberately created people to eternally suffer in hell, which is monstrous and right against His nature; or we say that election is based solely on a person choosing to become a Christian without any other influences, which is the other extreme, and is unsatisfactory. Either way, a person might not have assurance of salvation because in the first instance he might not be elected and his Christian profession is in vain because as an unelected person he is going to hell anyway. And if everything depends on his choice alone, then having the idea that he could be saved today and lost tomorrow takes away his assurance.
As we have seen in many threads about this topic. predestination and election is a contentious issue, and, if possible, I want to scrub around it in my attempted answer to you. So this is what I know:
1. The invitation to come to Christ is open to all. This is clearly set out in many salvation verses. We know them and I won't bore you by quoting them.
2. When a person reads the Bible, it tells him about God, His nature, His ways, and the invitation to believe and receive the gospel. Hearing the Word through a preacher does basically the same thing.
3. The Holy Spirit uses the written and preached Word to cause the person to realise his lost state and that he is a woeful and miserable sinner. I believe that a full appreciation of this can come only through the influence of the Holy Spirit. It is interesting that Christian, in Pilgrims Progress, before he was directed to the narrow gate by Evangelist, read out of a book that made him desperately unhappy and made him sigh and cry, "What shall I do?"
This is why an evangelist needs to preach the moral law and the hopelessness of being able to keep it, and the eternal consequences of not being able to keep it. Paul says that it was the Law that made him realise that he was a slave to sin. When as a young man I worked in our local coffee bar ministry and quite a few unconverted folk said when encouraged to be saved, asked, "What am I to be saved from?" This shows me that the Holy Spirit needs to show such a person what they really do need to be saved from. The problem that leads to easy believerism is evangelists make the mistake of presenting the goodies of receiving Christ without seeking the power of the Holy Spirit to bring conviction of sin to the seeker first. If there is no convicting work of the Holy Spirit in the seeker, he is likely to say, "So this bloke Jesus died on the cross and rose again, so what?" Or he might sign the decision card just to get rid of the evangelist bugging him about the need to become a Christian.
This is why I am so adamant about a person being convicted of his sinfulness and his deserving of hell before he can really see the gospel as good news for him and make a heart-felt commitment to Christ. Without conviction of sin, it is impossible for a person to become a genuine convert to Christ. All he will get is religion. Conviction of sin will make the sinner know that his heart of hearts has to change and only the Holy Spirit can do that.
4. Once having got to this stage, he must then put his whole trust in the salvation promises in God's Word and start praying and seeking God for a true conversion work of the Holy Spirit, resulting in assurance of salvation. It is not enough to just pray a sinner's prayer, start to attend church, and become involved in Christian activities. He must press in on a personal basis with God and wait on Him in prayer and the Word until the assurance comes, and the Holy Spirit will give that assurance only when that person is seeking God with all his heart and is not to rest content until he knows that he is really converted and his heart of hearts is genuinely changed to love God and to surrender to the Holy Spirit to work holiness in him.
When a person has got to that point, he has just passed through the narrow entrance gate. He has just got into the ball-park. He has started to live in the Spirit, because the Spirit is living in him. Now, he has to start walking in the Spirit, and the rest of his life-journey with the Lord is in front of him.
It is difficult. That is why the Scripture says that the way to eternal life is narrow and few there be who find it.You make salvation so difficult for the unbeliever.
How do you think the prodigal son returned to the Father, did he went thru as complicated a process as what you have explained? How did the Father respond to his attempt to return?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?