On Salvation

danceforjoy said:

Wonderful reply Ken!
I too like the quote by Spurgeon very much on baptism and faith, but why are we hung up on the question of works? Is it because James says that faith w/o works is dead?
We all must know about big John, a slave that was set free. Even during the auction big John would interupt and shout: " I won't work for anybody." He repeated the same to the kind old man that was successful in bidding for him.
You don't have to John, I came to set you free. John was so smitten because no one ever showed him such love and kindness. No one ever done so much for him and paid such a high price for his freedom. So he said, I will work for you the rest of my life.
We too have been bought with the highest price, the blood of God, and set free from the slavery of sin. Like big John, we too respond the same way. but there are some of us who talk all day, yet refuse to be yoked together with Christ, to those of us, James is saying that this kind of faith is not living faith at all, it must be a working faith. Not in order to be saved, but because we already have been and laying up treasures in the bank of heaven.

Click to expand...

Dance,

I had never heard the story of big John. But I have heard the story that there is a sense in which which are all slaves. "Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, whether sin to death, or of obedience to righteousness? But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness." Romans 6:16-18. Verses 3-11 of this same chapter tells us how this freedom from sin occurs.

I think the discussion about works is necessary because everyone doesn't understand that faith in the Lord includes more than just saying, "Lord, Lord," or saying that you love Christ. Those who say, "Lord, Lord," are also required to do God's will (Matt. 7:21). Those who say that they love Christ need to keep his commandments (Jn. 14:15). Jesus is the author of eternal salvation to all who obey him (Heb. 5:9). There are those who talk about faith, and there are those who demonstrate faith. What should faith prompt one to do when they read Mark 16:16? What should faith prompt one to do when they read Acts 2:38? What should faith prompt one to do when they read Acts 8:12? What should faith prompt one to do when they read Acts 8:35-39? What should faith prompt one to do when they read Acts 17:30? What should faith prompt one to do when they read Acts 22:16? Most people forget that their understanding of Eph. 2:8-9, Rom. 4:2, Gal.3:2-6, etc. must agree with all other passages that all relevant to salvation under the gospel of Christ. I do not see any agreement between these passages and the "faith only" plan of salvation. Many who profess salvation by "faith only" will concede that repentance and confession are also necessary. Somehow, in their mind, baptism becomes a work. Baptism is a necessary requirement for salvation just like faith . . . and repentance . . . and confession. I have yet to see any scriptural reasoning for saying that faith is any more of a work than is faith, repentance, or confession. All are commands, all are required, and all are necessary for salvation under the gospel of Christ.

FC

Ken said:

Paul does not specifically state that it is just “the law of Moses” that he is referring to, though it is surely at least this. Rather, Paul is going to great lengths to prove that it is not works of any kind that saves. How could the following passage be any clearer? (Gal 2:16 NASB) nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified.”

Click to expand...

Ken,

Two quick points.

The law being discussed in the book of Galatians is described in 3:16-17 as being given 430 years after the LORD made the promise to Abraham in Gen. 12:3 (the blessing or the seed). What law could that be? That law is the one being discussed in 2:16 - - "a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ."

If Paul is going to great lengths in the book of Galatians to prove that it is not of works of any kind that saves, where are the verses that discuss other works other than those under the law of Moses?

FC

QUOTE=Florida College Ken (not my cousin Ken),

Your quote above is part of post #90 on page 9. (I previously responded to some the other parts of the post previously.)

All scriptural quotes are from the NKJV

Romans 4:2 and James 2:21 present a challenge for the bible student. Romans 4:2 reads, “ For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something of which to boast, but not before God.” I suggest that this verse presents a challenge because James 2:21 says, “Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?” James 2:24 concludes the discussion about Abraham’s works by saying, “You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.” Taken at face value, these verses seem to stand opposed to each other.

james 2:18 yea a man may say, thou hast faith and I have works .................

2 Timothy 3:16 begins with these words, “All scripture is given by the inspiration of God.” In the remainder of that verse and in the following verse, God, through the apostle Paul, tells us what “all scripture” does for us - - it equips us with all that we need to be complete. Realizing this, I conclude that not only is Roman 4:2 teaching what is true, but James 2:21-24 is also teaching what is true. Since both scriptures are inspired of God, they must agree, or harmonize. I am not at liberty to just accept what I think one verse teaches and ignore the other, but must accept what both passages teach. If my understanding of one verse does not harmonize with the understanding of the other verse, and does not harmonize with other scriptures, I can rest assured that I have messed up somewhere.

The issue at hand is how we resolve the perceived opposition of one verse against another. If works does not “justify” in Romans 4:2, but does “justify” in James 2:21, I can’t just quote or stress one of the passages to suit my way of thinking, and not have an understanding of the other verse. I must believe that both passages come from God and teach truth. I must accept this as a starting point. I once read a commentary on James 2:14-26 where the writer didn’t like to read in James 2 that “faith and works” must be coupled. He reasoned that Paul taught that works weren’t required for salvation i.e. Rom. 4:2 & Eph. 2:8-9, and since Paul was greater (or of more importance) than James, then Paul’s teachings had precedence over James’ teachings. Such reasoning is not valid when the bible student considers that “all scripture is given by the inspiration of God.” God authored the book of Romans, Ephesians, James, and all others that combine to give us the Bible. Realizing this, I must approach both Romans 4:2 and James 2:21 with the realization that both passages are true, and I cannot accept one passage while rejecting the other. Given the wording of these particular verses, I am compelled to accept that there is a sense in which we are not justified by works, but there is also a sense in which we are justified by works. It will take studying each passage in its context, deriving an understanding from each passage, and assuring that the understanding of these verses agrees with each other, and that the understanding of the verses also agrees with other passages that are relevant to salvation.

among men or God is the question

Concerning Romans 4:2:
Paul sets the tone for the early chapters of Romans in 1:5, “Through whom [Christ] we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for his name.” The focus is on obedience to the faith. The gospel is the power of God to salvation to all who believe - - both Jews and Greeks (1:16). God holds all accountable who do not obey the truth - - both Jews and Greeks (2:8-11). The Jews had a tendency to boast in the law (of Moses – 2:17-20), even though they did not do a good job of following the law (of Moses – 2:21-24). The true Jew is not one who is circumcised in the flesh, but one who is circumcised in the heart (2:25-29). The Jews did have one advantage (3:1-2). Both Jews and Greeks were charged with sin (3:9-18). By the deeds of the law (of Moses), no flesh shall be justified (3:20). “But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed . . . even the righteousness of God which is through faith in Jesus Christ to all on all who believe. For there is no difference [between Jews and Greeks]; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:21-23). Justification comes by grace through redemption in Christ Jesus (3:24). Jesus’ blood is a propitiation for sins (3:25). Jesus justifies those who have faith in him. (3:26). Man is not justified by boasting. The law of faith excludes” boasting (3:27). “Therefore we conclude a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law [of Moses]” (3:28). God is God to both the Jews and Gentiles (3:29-31). To prove his reasoning thus far, Paul appeals to Abraham (4:1). Abraham was not justified by his works, but by his faith in God (Gen. 15:6 & Rom. 4:2-3). Faith is accounted for righteousness, not works (4:4-5). Paul quotes from one of David’s Psalms to show that God imputes righteous apart from works (Ps. 32:1-2 & Rom. 4:6-8). Abraham’s faith was accounted for righteousness. When? Before he was circumcised, or after he was circumcised. Abraham faith was accounted to him for righteousness in Gen. 15:6, but he wasn’t circumcised until the latter part of Gen. 17:23-27. Paul’s point? Abraham was considered righteous before he was circumcised (4:9-11). The true descendent of Abraham is the one who demonstrates the faith that Abraham had (4:12-25).

true faith once mature will produce works ....

who does this maturing ????
it by the grace of God

From the context, I will let each reader decide what works were being addressed in Romans 4:2. The context tells me that the focus is on circumcision and works associated with the law of Moses. Justification comes by grace and redemption though Jesus’ blood (3:24-25). Righteousness comes by faith in God (4:3). What does it mean to have faith in the God? James 2:14- 26 tells us.

Concerning James 2:14-26:
James, in writing to the twelve tribes (1:1), emphasizes that the implanted word was able to save their souls (1:21). James is admonishing Christians to not only hear God’s word, but to do what the word says (1:22-25). His discussion focuses on faith starting in 2:14. He begins by asking two questions, then uses a practical illustration that is easily discerned to demonstrate that the faith that God requires is more than just talk (2:15-16). His conclusion from that illustration is, “Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead” (2:17). James uses a sobering illustration to show the value of faith alone (2:18-19). His conclusion from this illustration is, “But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?” (2:20). Then James shifts his discussion to the example of Abraham - - the father of the twelve tribes (2:21-23). Abraham’s was justified when he offered Isaac - - as God commanded in Gen. 22:1-18. Notice the last part of Gen. 22:18, “Because you have obeyed My voice.” Abraham’s obedience fulfilled what God said about him in Gen. 15:6, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness” (2:23). James’ conclusion from this scriptural example is, “You see then a man is justified by works, and not by faith only” (2:24). James finishes his discussion of faith with the example of Rahab (2:25) - - she coupled her faith with action (or works). James concludes his discussion of faith and works with the thought, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works works is dead also” (2:26). From these verses, I conclude that it is necessary to act upon my faith - - it is one thing to say that I believe God, it is quite another to have the faith that Abraham had (Heb. 11:17-19) when he obeyed what God commanded him.

Now, let’s see if the understanding that I’ve derived from both passages agrees. In Rom. 4:2-3, works did not justify Abraham, rather he believed God. His faith prompted him to obey God (James 2:21-23). This understanding leads me to conclude that my faith should drive me to obey God. This agrees with Matt. 7:21 and Heb. 5:9, “He [Jesus] became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.”

What is necessary to obey the Lord to have our sins taken away today?
- One must hear the word (Rom. 10:14, 17)
- Believe in Jesus (John 3:16 ; Mark 16:16 ; Acts 10:43 ; Acts 16:30-33)
- Repent of sins (Lk. 13: 3,5 ; Acts 2: Acts 8:35-39 38 ; Acts 17:30
- Confess Jesus (Matt. 10:32-33 ;; Rom. 10:9-10)
- Be baptized (Mark 16:16 ; Acts 2:38 ; Acts 22:16 ; 1 Peter 3:20:21)
- Remain faithful to the Lord (1 Cor. 9:27 ; Rev. 2:10)

What is the Christian’s attitude that has obeyed these commands of God that are necessary for salvation? Has the Christian earned salvation? Can the Christian boast of obedience? The answers to these questions can be found in one passage of scripture - - Luke 17:10, “So likewise you, when you have done all those things which are commanded, say, ‘We are unprofitable servants. We have done what was our duty to do.’”

Amen.

FC

twisted the scripture again

danceforjoy said:

Wow FC
congratulation for post # 100 and probably the longest!

Click to expand...

Dance,

Post #100 wasn't the longest for very long. Ken's post #102 seems to be much longer. Actually, I prefer to use much shorter posts. FreeinChrist had posted a lot of material that I didn't have the time to respond to. I tried to focus on her major points in one post. While I don't agree with many posts that are made, I believe it is necessary to focus on the scriptural arguments and let folks decide for themselves whether or not God finds their reasoning acceptable. Ultimately, everyone will get an opportunity to do that very thing (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).
I was charged with "blasphemy" by FreeinChrist. Since there was no scriptural basis for the charge, Free was just expressing her opinion. In the realm of pleasing God, our own opinions just don't carry any weight. The real test for what we do is if we have authority for it from the Lord (Col. 3:17).

FC

p.s. I recall a comment earlier about Florida College. I think it was you. You wondered if you had were dealing with an institution. Actually, I never attended FC, nor do I work for FC. I don't even live in Florida. I inherited the name from my youngest son. He attended FC for two years, but has since transferred to another school. I took over his posts several months ago.

The Holy Spirit is given to those who obey God (Acts 5:32). Only born again Christians can obey from the heart compared to grudging.
If God was to ask why should I let you into my Heaven, the average person would reply that they never killed any one and that they helped others etc., and therefore have a right to go upwards and not down.

The Kingdom of heaven, however, is explained in Matthew 25:14 as a man delivering his goods to his servants and multiplying their talents. They are actively engaged in the business of the master which is actually their King and Lord.

When He returns (second Advent), and He recommends them for their good works, they are not even aware of them and question Him about it. In contrast to the group above, they do not claim any works or goodness of their own to commend them to heaven. No self-justification here at all!

They had simply fallen in love and followed the inclination of their new heart and spirit that multiplied their telents for their master. They invested every cent and minute of their time. They were not distructed by worldly amusments and other detours.

Florida College,
may be Free in Christ misunderstood you and wants to aplogize for any misunderstanding.

Jesus was charged wrongly for claiming to be God and the power to forgive sin, which was not blasphemy at all. The man of sin [2.Thess.2] in rome claims to be Chists replacement on earth, which of course is great blasphemy.

If we can't forgive others, God cannot forgive us either. So please make up!!!!!!

Hey Guys, it's so easy to misunderstand each other in a play of words. Especially the english language is not as acurate as others.

I am sure that Free in Christ meant you no harm.

Florida College,
yes, it was me that thought you were a Institution. You are fortunately as me to have a son that loves the Lord Jesus.

My Phil went out and experimented with drugs and boose through Peer pressure, but found it all garbage and returned with so much love and fire for His lord.

Why don,t you click on 'profile' under your last post and fill it out. It would make it interresting for everybody to know more about you instaed of remaining in mystery unless reading everyone of your past posts.

I also must learn to make myself actual notes rather than mental ones, cause when one reply's, cannot see the last post one is replying to.
it is sunday today here in Australia and I must go and do my gardening shores. See ya

Ken said:

And the real issue here is not what we ought to do as a response to Christ, i.e. obedience to this or that commandment, baptism being just one of those commands. The issue is, at bottom, what is it that constitutes saving faith? And clearly the Scriptures quoted above indicate that salvation is by grace through faith alone, period. Baptism does not save, and faith + baptism does not constitute the salvific formula as understood by the NT writers. Rather, this formula would be rejected as another gospel, just as the Judaizers attempt to include circumcision was rejected. Paul warned of those who would add to the gospel of grace; (Gal 2:4-5 NASB) But it was because of the false brethren who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. {5} But we did not yield in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.”

Click to expand...

Ken,

Your post above is from the post #102 on page 11.

In Matt 2, three O.T. prophesies are brought to our attention. First, the Christ was to be born in Bethlehem according to Micah 5:2 (Matt. 2:4-6). Second, the Christ was to be called out of Egypt according to Hosea 11:1 (Matt. 2:15). Third, the Christ was to be called a Nazarene, probably according to Isaiah 53:3 (Matt. 2:23). Which of these prophecies is true concerning the Christ . . . was he born in Bethlehem, called out of Egypt, or called a Nararene? Obviously, the correct answer is that all three prophecies are correct. Think about this as you examine the scriptures that discuss salvation under the gospel of Christ.

Likewise, we should consider Mark 16:16 as being relevant to salvation today. I have absolutely no reason to conclude that the gospel plan of salvation is wrapped up in Eph. 2:8-9. I do not deny God's grace, nor do I deny the necessity of faith (Heb. 11:6). But I do reject the reasoning that leads us to conclude that we don't have to obey the commands that are necessary for salvation. The apostles were given the charge to preach the gospel to, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (person), He who believes and is baptized will be saved" . . . (vs. 15-16). The structure of verse 16 is relatively simple - - belief + baptism = salvation. Before you are so quick to reject this verse as belonging to another gospel, ask yourself who spoke these words, and ask yourself who is ultimately behind all scripture (2 Tim. 3:16). Mark 16:16 harmonizes with Col. 2:12 and Acts 8:35-39. Likewise, the structure of Acts 2:38 is not hard - - repentance + baptism = remission of sins. I will comment more on this verse later.

The real issue at hand is what it means to have faith in the Lord. We either believe him and obey him, or we don't. The Lord accepts those who obey him (Heb. 5:9 ; Matt. 7:21 ; 2 Thess. 1:8). By doing so, they have not earned their salvation in any way (Lk. 17:7-10). I see and hear a lot of folks who talk about their faith in the Lord, but do not obey him.

FC

A Brethren IN CHRIST said:

QUOTE=Florida College Ken (not my cousin Ken),

Your quote above is part of post #90 on page 9. (I previously responded to some the other parts of the post previously.)

All scriptural quotes are from the NKJV

Romans 4:2 and James 2:21 present a challenge for the bible student. Romans 4:2 reads, “ For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something of which to boast, but not before God.” I suggest that this verse presents a challenge because James 2:21 says, “Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?” James 2:24 concludes the discussion about Abraham’s works by saying, “You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.” Taken at face value, these verses seem to stand opposed to each other.

james 2:18 yea a man may say, thou hast faith and I have works .................

2 Timothy 3:16 begins with these words, “All scripture is given by the inspiration of God.” In the remainder of that verse and in the following verse, God, through the apostle Paul, tells us what “all scripture” does for us - - it equips us with all that we need to be complete. Realizing this, I conclude that not only is Roman 4:2 teaching what is true, but James 2:21-24 is also teaching what is true. Since both scriptures are inspired of God, they must agree, or harmonize. I am not at liberty to just accept what I think one verse teaches and ignore the other, but must accept what both passages teach. If my understanding of one verse does not harmonize with the understanding of the other verse, and does not harmonize with other scriptures, I can rest assured that I have messed up somewhere.

The issue at hand is how we resolve the perceived opposition of one verse against another. If works does not “justify” in Romans 4:2, but does “justify” in James 2:21, I can’t just quote or stress one of the passages to suit my way of thinking, and not have an understanding of the other verse. I must believe that both passages come from God and teach truth. I must accept this as a starting point. I once read a commentary on James 2:14-26 where the writer didn’t like to read in James 2 that “faith and works” must be coupled. He reasoned that Paul taught that works weren’t required for salvation i.e. Rom. 4:2 & Eph. 2:8-9, and since Paul was greater (or of more importance) than James, then Paul’s teachings had precedence over James’ teachings. Such reasoning is not valid when the bible student considers that “all scripture is given by the inspiration of God.” God authored the book of Romans, Ephesians, James, and all others that combine to give us the Bible. Realizing this, I must approach both Romans 4:2 and James 2:21 with the realization that both passages are true, and I cannot accept one passage while rejecting the other. Given the wording of these particular verses, I am compelled to accept that there is a sense in which we are not justified by works, but there is also a sense in which we are justified by works. It will take studying each passage in its context, deriving an understanding from each passage, and assuring that the understanding of these verses agrees with each other, and that the understanding of the verses also agrees with other passages that are relevant to salvation.

among men or God is the question

Concerning Romans 4:2:
Paul sets the tone for the early chapters of Romans in 1:5, “Through whom [Christ] we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for his name.” The focus is on obedience to the faith. The gospel is the power of God to salvation to all who believe - - both Jews and Greeks (1:16). God holds all accountable who do not obey the truth - - both Jews and Greeks (2:8-11). The Jews had a tendency to boast in the law (of Moses – 2:17-20), even though they did not do a good job of following the law (of Moses – 2:21-24). The true Jew is not one who is circumcised in the flesh, but one who is circumcised in the heart (2:25-29). The Jews did have one advantage (3:1-2). Both Jews and Greeks were charged with sin (3:9-18). By the deeds of the law (of Moses), no flesh shall be justified (3:20). “But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed . . . even the righteousness of God which is through faith in Jesus Christ to all on all who believe. For there is no difference [between Jews and Greeks]; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:21-23). Justification comes by grace through redemption in Christ Jesus (3:24). Jesus’ blood is a propitiation for sins (3:25). Jesus justifies those who have faith in him. (3:26). Man is not justified by boasting. The law of faith excludes” boasting (3:27). “Therefore we conclude a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law [of Moses]” (3:28). God is God to both the Jews and Gentiles (3:29-31). To prove his reasoning thus far, Paul appeals to Abraham (4:1). Abraham was not justified by his works, but by his faith in God (Gen. 15:6 & Rom. 4:2-3). Faith is accounted for righteousness, not works (4:4-5). Paul quotes from one of David’s Psalms to show that God imputes righteous apart from works (Ps. 32:1-2 & Rom. 4:6-8). Abraham’s faith was accounted for righteousness. When? Before he was circumcised, or after he was circumcised. Abraham faith was accounted to him for righteousness in Gen. 15:6, but he wasn’t circumcised until the latter part of Gen. 17:23-27. Paul’s point? Abraham was considered righteous before he was circumcised (4:9-11). The true descendent of Abraham is the one who demonstrates the faith that Abraham had (4:12-25).

true faith once mature will produce works ....

who does this maturing ????
it by the grace of God

From the context, I will let each reader decide what works were being addressed in Romans 4:2. The context tells me that the focus is on circumcision and works associated with the law of Moses. Justification comes by grace and redemption though Jesus’ blood (3:24-25). Righteousness comes by faith in God (4:3). What does it mean to have faith in the God? James 2:14- 26 tells us.

Concerning James 2:14-26:
James, in writing to the twelve tribes (1:1), emphasizes that the implanted word was able to save their souls (1:21). James is admonishing Christians to not only hear God’s word, but to do what the word says (1:22-25). His discussion focuses on faith starting in 2:14. He begins by asking two questions, then uses a practical illustration that is easily discerned to demonstrate that the faith that God requires is more than just talk (2:15-16). His conclusion from that illustration is, “Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead” (2:17). James uses a sobering illustration to show the value of faith alone (2:18-19). His conclusion from this illustration is, “But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?” (2:20). Then James shifts his discussion to the example of Abraham - - the father of the twelve tribes (2:21-23). Abraham’s was justified when he offered Isaac - - as God commanded in Gen. 22:1-18. Notice the last part of Gen. 22:18, “Because you have obeyed My voice.” Abraham’s obedience fulfilled what God said about him in Gen. 15:6, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness” (2:23). James’ conclusion from this scriptural example is, “You see then a man is justified by works, and not by faith only” (2:24). James finishes his discussion of faith with the example of Rahab (2:25) - - she coupled her faith with action (or works). James concludes his discussion of faith and works with the thought, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works works is dead also” (2:26). From these verses, I conclude that it is necessary to act upon my faith - - it is one thing to say that I believe God, it is quite another to have the faith that Abraham had (Heb. 11:17-19) when he obeyed what God commanded him.

Now, let’s see if the understanding that I’ve derived from both passages agrees. In Rom. 4:2-3, works did not justify Abraham, rather he believed God. His faith prompted him to obey God (James 2:21-23). This understanding leads me to conclude that my faith should drive me to obey God. This agrees with Matt. 7:21 and Heb. 5:9, “He [Jesus] became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.”

What is necessary to obey the Lord to have our sins taken away today?
- One must hear the word (Rom. 10:14, 17)
- Believe in Jesus (John 3:16 ; Mark 16:16 ; Acts 10:43 ; Acts 16:30-33)
- Repent of sins (Lk. 13: 3,5 ; Acts 2: Acts 8:35-39 38 ; Acts 17:30
- Confess Jesus (Matt. 10:32-33 ;; Rom. 10:9-10)
- Be baptized (Mark 16:16 ; Acts 2:38 ; Acts 22:16 ; 1 Peter 3:20:21)
- Remain faithful to the Lord (1 Cor. 9:27 ; Rev. 2:10)

What is the Christian’s attitude that has obeyed these commands of God that are necessary for salvation? Has the Christian earned salvation? Can the Christian boast of obedience? The answers to these questions can be found in one passage of scripture - - Luke 17:10, “So likewise you, when you have done all those things which are commanded, say, ‘We are unprofitable servants. We have done what was our duty to do.’”

Amen.

FC

twisted the scripture again

Click to expand...

no response...
cat got your tongue

Florida College said:

Ken,

Your post above is from the post #102 on page 11.

In Matt 2, three O.T. prophesies are brought to our attention. First, the Christ was to be born in Bethlehem according to Micah 5:2 (Matt. 2:4-6). Second, the Christ was to be called out of Egypt according to Hosea 11:1 (Matt. 2:15). Third, the Christ was to be called a Nazarene, probably according to Isaiah 53:3 (Matt. 2:23). Which of these prophecies is true concerning the Christ . . . was he born in Bethlehem, called out of Egypt, or called a Nararene? Obviously, the correct answer is that all three prophecies are correct. Think about this as you examine the scriptures that discuss salvation under the gospel of Christ.

Likewise, we should consider Mark 16:16

believe by romans 4:5 baptized by 1 cor 12:13

just harmonizing

as being relevant to salvation today. I have absolutely no reason to conclude that the gospel plan of salvation is wrapped up in Eph. 2:8-9. I do not deny God's grace, nor do I deny the necessity of faith (Heb. 11:6). But I do reject the reasoning that leads us to conclude that we don't have to obey the commands that are necessary for salvation.

I do not either but God promises punishment if one of his sheep/sons continue sinning according to hebrews 10:27 then hebrews 12:5-11 but one can alway confess according to 1 John 1:9.

The apostles were given the charge to preach the gospel to, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (person), He who believes and is baptized will be saved" . . . (vs. 15-16). The structure of verse 16 is relatively simple - - belief + baptism = salvation.

If it is a gift from God eph 2:8 how can man give himself/work for salvation when God gives it ????

Before you are so quick to reject this verse as belonging to another gospel, ask yourself who spoke these words, and ask yourself who is ultimately behind all scripture (2 Tim. 3:16). Mark 16:16 harmonizes with Col. 2:12 and Acts 8:35-39. Likewise, the structure of Acts 2:38 is not hard - - repentance + baptism = remission of sins. I will comment more on this verse later.

The real issue at hand is what it means to have faith in the Lord. We either believe him and obey him, or we don't. The Lord accepts those who obey him (Heb. 5:9 ; Matt. 7:21 ; 2 Thess. 1:8). By doing so, they have not earned their salvation in any way (Lk. 17:7-10). I see and hear a lot of folks who talk about their faith in the Lord, but do not obey him.

FC

Click to expand...

Romans 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God

Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to the mercy He saved us.............................


you talk about harmonizing so do it with these verses

you have not done it once

We have dealt with your verses many times but you ignore these key ...key verses


take your advise harmonize

Hey Guys,
Can I but in? Law keeping, faith alone, baptism, worrks etc. do not save us! Only Jesus is our Saviour [Savior] from sin. We cannot be saved by Lawkeeping, but we cannot be saved without it, i.e. living in lawlessness.
God saved us on the cross without us. The thief on the cross and the publican repented from sin and was saved. But it is our previledge and duty to continue in repentance, works, faith, love, baptism and moral Law keeping to obey Christ and the gospel as long as probation lasts!
We can accept Peters assertion that we are saved without works, and we can accept James, unlike Luther.
James could see the problem that Paul,s high - falutin theology was leading to. He must have found many sitting on the fence or just warming the pews and talk faith all day instead of being yoked with Christ.
"But only the doers of the word are justified before God". We are to follow Christ only into the narrow way of obedience and to observe whatsoever He commanded us.

danceforjoy said:

Hey Guys,
Can I but in? Law keeping, faith alone, baptism, worrks etc. do not save us! Only Jesus is our Saviour [Savior] from sin. We cannot be saved by Lawkeeping, but we cannot be saved without it, i.e. living in lawlessness.
God saved us on the cross without us. The thief on the cross and the publican repented from sin and was saved. But it is our previledge and duty to continue in repentance, works, faith, love, baptism and moral Law keeping to obey Christ and the gospel as long as probation lasts!
We can accept Peters assertion that we are saved without works, and we can accept James, unlike Luther.
James could see the problem that Paul,s high - falutin theology was leading to. He must have found many sitting on the fence or just warming the pews and talk faith all day instead of being yoked with Christ.
"But only the doers of the word are justified before God". We are to follow Christ only into the narrow way of obedience and to observe whatsoever He commanded us.

Click to expand...

so your saying that we have to work to keep are salvation?

Lotar said:

Luke 23:39
One of the criminals who were hanged there was hurling abuse at Him, saying, "Are You not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!"

[size=-1]Luke 23:40
But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation?

[size=-1]Luke 23:41
"And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong."

[size=-1]Luke 23:42
And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!"

[size=-1]Luke 23:43
And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."
[/size][/size][/size][/size]

Click to expand...

Was Jesus dead in any of verses? I don't think so. and if not these people were saved under the old covenant.

Brethren in Christ,
Are we coming any closer into the unity of faith?
If loving obedience and following Jesus Christ, our General, is called works, than I say Yes! It is keeping our salvation alive and dragging others with us.
Paul compared the christian race one of fittness and struggle, and he had not yet attained.

Lotar,
The saved Christian has his/her flabber gusted when they ask Jesus personally, when did we see You imprisoned etc.
Do you think people under the sacrificial Law were saved by works that entitled them to heaven or faith in that little innocent bleeding Lamb?

Ken said:

The following is from an excellent article by theologian James White;

“Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will call" (Acts 2:38-39, NIV).

A tremendously large number of interpretations have been set forth on this passage over the years. We believe the simplest and most consistent manner of approach is to ask a question that is frequently not asked at all: we here have a short snippet of what was obviously a longer sermon by Peter. Does Peter elsewhere tell us, in plain language, how our sins are remitted, how we are cleansed from our burden of guilt? Certainly! We began our article with the quotation of 1 Peter 1:18-19, where Peter directly teaches that we are cleansed by the blood of the spotless Lamb of God, Jesus Christ. Do we then have sufficient basis to identify the waters of baptism with the blood of Christ? Surely not. Sins are remitted through our participation in the death of Jesus Christ--it is by the "one time offering" of Jesus Christ that we are made whole (Hebrews 10:10-14). What of baptism then? It is the symbol, the outward representation before men of what the Spirit of God has done in our hearts (Titus 3:5-7). Unless we have first had our sins remitted in the blood of Christ, the symbol of baptism is meaningless. But doesn't this passage say that baptism is for the remission of sins? Yes, but what does "for" mean? We feel that Dr. A. T. Robertson's comments from earlier this century are very meaningful:

Click to expand...

1 Peter 1:18-19 stresses that God’s people were redeemed with the precious blood of Christ. James Whites does not see the connection with the “waters of baptism” and the blood of Christ. Perhaps, what Mr. White overlooked, we can point out from the scriptures. Consider:
- All spiritual blessings are “in Christ” (Ephesians 1:3)
- “In Him [Christ]” we have redemption through his blood (Ephesians 1:7)
- Baptism puts us “into Christ” (Galatians 3:26-27)
See, the connection should not be hard to make. Baptism puts one into Christ where all spiritual blessings are, including redemption through Jesus’ blood. Once we make this connection, we will appreciate what Peter also taught in 1 Peter 3:20-21, “Who formerly were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), though the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

Mr. Robertson concludes the above quote with this thought, “So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.” One thing is for sure as I consider Mr. Robertson’s conclusions, we have to do some rearranging of the words in Acts 2: 38 to get the understanding that he wants us to see. I don’t know about you, but the NKJV that I use does not read, “Repent for the remission of sins, and then let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” Ken, does the bible translation you use read like that? I don’t think it does? Now, ask yourself why it doesn’t. Look at all the credible translations that are available for use today. See if you can find one that reads like Mr. Robertson wants it to. I don’t think you will. There is probably a reason that you won’t find the reading that Mr. Robertson suggests.

Ken said:

This phrase is the subject of endless controversy as men look at it from the standpoint of sacramental or of evangelical theology. In themselves the words can express aim or purpose for that use of "eis" does exist as in 1 Cor. 2:7....But then another usage exists which is just as good Greek as the use of "eis" for aim or purpose. It is seen in Matt. 10:41 in three examples "eis onoma prophetou, diakaiou, mathetou" where it cannot be purpose or aim, but rather the basis or ground, on the basis of the name of prophet, righteous man, disciple, because one is, etc. It is seen again in Matt. 12:41 about the preaching of Jonah....They repented because of (or at) the preaching of Jonah. The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koine generally (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received (A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, III:35-36).

Click to expand...

A.T. Roberston attempts to undermine the meaning of the Greek preposition “eis” that appears in Acts 2:38, “Repent, and let everyone one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for (eis) the remission of sins.” Two particular points are worth noting. First, Mr. Robertson points out that “eis” is used in Matthew 12:41, “The men of Nineveh will rise in judgement with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and indeed a greater than Jonah is here.” He says that the word “eis” is translated “because” in this verse. There is only one small problem in Mr. Robertson’s reasoning - - the Greek word for “because” is not “eis” in Matthew 12:41 - - the Greek word is “hoti.” Therefore, Mr. Robertson’s reasoning is invalid, or void. Ken, may I make a suggestion? Read, and study the commentaries before posting and consenting to the comments made by someone else. This is the second obvious blunder that I’ve discovered thus far in your comments on post #102. The first one was your statement about the book of Galatians saying nothing about baptism - - but it does in 3:27. Now, back to Mr. Robertson’s reasoning. The second point that I want to point out is that it should be obvious that he did not study the Greek preposition “eis” very well. “Eis” appears also in Matthew 26:28, “For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for (eis) the remission of sins.” It also appears in Romans 4:5, “But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for (eis) righteousness.” I couldn’t help but notice that Mr. Robertson did not refer to these verses and how the word “eis” is used. Ask yourself why he didn’t. He wants us to conclude that the remission of sins preceded baptism in Acts 2:38, but is not willing to be consistent with his reasoning in other passages where the word “eis” appears. Ken, since you posted Mr. Robertson’s comments, do you really consent to this thinking? Would you contend from Matthew 26:28 that the remission of sins precedes the shedding of Jesus’ blood? Would you also contend from Romans 4:5 that righteousness precedes faith? If not, why not? The same Greek word (eis) appears in Acts 2:38, Matt. 26:28, and Rom. 4:5?

danceforjoy said:

If you equate water baptism [Mk.16:16] with the baptism of the Holy Spirit [1.Cor.12:13], I could go along with that for the following reason: Rom.6 central theme of baptism is the power of the H.S. to follow Christ, as I stated in an earlier post. The dying to sin and self and to walk in newness of life. Seeing it from this perspective, shouldn't baptism be absolutely necessary for salvation just as the new birth?
Sprinkling however is not even partially submersing into the watery grave and should therfore not constitute the same. We know that in the past great men and Protestant churches have followed the Roman Catholic practice and had not known better. In the past God winked at it, but now ask men everywhere to repent [Acts 17:30].

Click to expand...

Dance,

In reviewing your post #108 on page 11, I would like to comment on the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Unless I’m mistaken, I only read of two occasions where the baptism of the Holy Spirit occurred: on the apostles in Acts 2:1-18, and on Cornelius and his household in Acts 10:44-46 (note Peter’s account of the events of Acts 10 – Acts 11:15-17). The other method of giving the Holy Spirit is described in Acts 8:14-18 - - by the apostles laying hands on them.

1 Corinthians 12:13 says, “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body – whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free – and thave all been made to drink into one Spirit.” The question becomes, “In what way did the Holy Spirit baptize the Corinthians into one body (or one church – Eph. 1:22-23). Were the Corinthians baptized into the church by the baptism of the Holy Spirit, or by the baptism that the Holy Spirit led them to follow? What Ephesians 4:5 says that there is one baptism - - or one in effect today. Which baptism is that? Would it not be the baptism that the Lord required for salvation (Mark 16:16)? Would it not be the baptism that Peter (under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit) commanded in Acts 2:38? Would it not be the baptism that Philip (also under direct influence of the Holy Spirit) preached in Acts 8:35-39 - - clearly a baptism in water? Would it not be the baptism that Peter (still under direct influence of the Holy Spirit) commanded in Acts 10:47-48? Would it not be the baptism in water that saves us (1 Peter 3:20-21)? I recognize from scriptures that the Corinthians were baptized “by one Spirit” as they were led by the word that the Spirit inspired (John 14:26 & Acts 18:8 ). I cannot scripturally support the position that all the Corinthians were baptized in the Holy Spirit. Nor can I support the position that Holy Spirit baptism is necessary to be saved or for the new birth - - that teaching simply will not harmonize with Eph. 4:5, Acts 2:38, Acts 8:35-39, Acts 10:47-48, and 1 Peter 3:20-21.

FC

Lotar said:

Really? He didn't make any sacrifices. Christ forgave him of his sins, which is how one is saved in the new covenant.

Click to expand...

Hebrews 9:15-17 clearly shows that Jesus' testament (or will) could not go into effect until his death. Therefore, the thief on the cross clearly lived under the law of Moses.

What did the apostle Peter tell those Jews to do who realized their guilt in the crucifixion of God's Son (Acts 2:38)?

What message did Jesus commission his apostles to take to every creature (Mk. 16:16)?

What did the eunuch desire to do after Philip preached Jesus to him (Acts 8:35-39)?

danceforjoy said:

Hey Guys,
Can I but in? Law keeping, faith alone, baptism, worrks etc. do not save us! Only Jesus is our Saviour [Savior] from sin. We cannot be saved by Lawkeeping, but we cannot be saved without it, i.e. living in lawlessness.
God saved us on the cross without us. The thief on the cross and the publican repented from sin and was saved. But it is our previledge and duty to continue in repentance, works, faith, love, baptism and moral Law keeping to obey Christ and the gospel as long as probation lasts!
We can accept Peters assertion that we are saved without works, and we can accept James, unlike Luther.
James could see the problem that Paul,s high - falutin theology was leading to. He must have found many sitting on the fence or just warming the pews and talk faith all day instead of being yoked with Christ.
"But only the doers of the word are justified before God". We are to follow Christ only into the narrow way of obedience and to observe whatsoever He commanded us.

Click to expand...

Dance,

I bolded the section of your post that I am commenting on. According to 2 Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." Therefore, I would think twice before making comments about "Paul's high-falutin [sic] theology."
Paul's teaching came from the Lord Jesus (Galatians 1:12)! Just thought you should know.

FC

danceforjoy said:

Florida College,
may be Free in Christ misunderstood you and wants to aplogize for any misunderstanding.

Jesus was charged wrongly for claiming to be God and the power to forgive sin, which was not blasphemy at all. The man of sin [2.Thess.2] in rome claims to be Chists replacement on earth, which of course is great blasphemy.

If we can't forgive others, God cannot forgive us either. So please make up!!!!!!

Hey Guys, it's so easy to misunderstand each other in a play of words. Especially the english language is not as acurate as others.

I am sure that Free in Christ meant you no harm.

Click to expand...

Dance,

While I can appreciate what you are trying to do, FreeinChrist will have to speak for herself. As you probably have imagined, I am not injured at all by Free's charge. I am not angry, and I am not running away. She is reading the posts. She may respond if she chooses.

I am not as confident as you that Free meant no harm. I believe she fully intended to discredit my teaching and stand for Christ. Her approach is called a red herring. Instead of dealing with the reasoning, she launched a personal attack. This is not a new approach. The Pharisees used it against Jesus in Matthew 12:22-24. Her use of scripture shows a certain degree of knowledge, but her actions also show a certain degree of spiritual immaturity. I was disappointed that she bowed out so fast. I gained much from our study. I will review her points in bible classes and sermons as I have opportunity.

FC