Scriptural Christianity

[ForAllTruth]

Romans 8:4-8 says that only the lost soul "does not submit to the Law of God neither indeed CAN it".

Romans 6 makes the case that as a born again Christian we are freed from slavery to sin

1 Cor 10 makes the case that NO temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man AND GOD IS FAITHFUL who will not ALLOW you to be tempted beyond that which YOU ARE able.

But at the same time it does not say "if we sin that is the sign that we are not born again, or that we are lost".

So the popular idea that Christians are enslaved to sinning is wrong.
But so also is the idea that if a born-again Christian sins that person must not be saved.

Salvation is a multi-step process. It would seem a believer isn't freed from the possibility of sin until they are regenerated according to 1 John 5:18.

 

[BobRyan]

Salvation is a multi-step process. It would seem a believer isn't freed from the possibility of sin until they are regenerated according to 1 John 5:18.

It is possible to sin once one is born again -- and fully forgiven as Paul points out in 1 Cor 9.

Matt 18 "I forgave you ALL That debt!" is followed by the command to cast the unforgiving servant into torment and that servant must "repay ALL that was owed". Only the born again are "Fully forgiven" yet they can make choices later in life that cause all the former debt to be returned.

1 Cor 9:
24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it. 25 And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown. 26 Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. 27 But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.

 

[ForAllTruth]

It is possible to sin once one is born again -- and fully forgiven as Paul points out in 1 Cor 9.

Matt 18 "I forgave you ALL That debt!" is followed by the command to cast the unforgiving servant into torment and that servant must "repay ALL that was owed". Only the born again are "Fully forgiven" yet they can make choices later in life that cause all the former debt to be returned.

1 Cor 9:
24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it. 25 And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown. 26 Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty. Thus I fight: not as one who beats the air. 27 But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.

Matthew 18 doesn't even have the phrase born-again. So, we will have to depend on 1 John 5:18.

 

[St_Worm2]

All you have demonstrated is that a true-believer might still sin. I do NOT disagree. They don't have to sin on any given occasion where temptation might present itself, however. In order to have anything that would seem to be contrary to 1 John 5:18 it would need to be a statement that someone who is regenerate still might sin.

I think you are assuming that all true believers are regenerate. I know of no passage that would lead us to believe that. It is a theological assumption. But after diligent study I think that the Bible only makes sense in total when we admit that followers of Jesus can really and truly believe the gospel and the Holy Spirit can do much in the area of grace and favor toward a person (giving light) but stop short of actual regeneration (as the Holy Writ defines it). This would help us see why the Bible talks about people believing for a season and then falling away with only the elect finishing the race as it is ordained/predestined for only them to achieve final salvation.

Hello again ForAllTruth, the issue that I mentioned (that of getting on the same page in our understanding of the terminology that we use) is, at the very least, what we need to address right now (before continuing any farther with the principal topic).

I would also love to hear a more thorough explanation of what you mean by a "true-believer" (who is ~not~ regenerate somehow), in contrast with "true-believer" (who ~is~ regenerate) Is the former indwelt by the Holy Spirit, for instance, or not? Please elaborate further about all of this

A thought (or two) that comes immediately to mind for me about this is, if a person is NOT regenerate/NOT "born again" prior to coming to saving faith, into what, exactly, is such a person (who cannot even "see" the Kingdom of God) placing their faith .. e.g. John 3:3; 1 Corinthians 2:14?

Finally, would you classify demons as "true-believers" who are simply NOT regenerate? .. e.g. James 2:19; cf Luke 8:26-31. Why/why not?

Thank you!

--David

 

[fhansen]

So the popular idea that Christians are enslaved to sinning is wrong.
But so also is the idea that if a born-again Christian sins that person must not be saved.

And so the truth must be somewhere in between, as the church has always acknowledged. Christians must not be enslaved to sin, to the kind of grave. love-opposing sin named in Scripture as being capable of excluding us from heaven. And yet, while in this life and in these bodies, it's not expected that absolute sinless perfection in every thought, word, and deed at every moment of every day would be the rule as well. That kind of perfection will occur, but presumably not until the next life when we meet the absolute Object of all human desire "face to face".

Eph 4, for example, exhorts and warns about what we should resolve to do, because of the ever-present temptation to do otherwise. It's not like it's a total slam-dunk even though we must be solidly on that road of righteousness, towards the perfection that God ultimately created us for, or back on if we should slip off.

 

[fhansen]

Those verses and many more highly suggest that!

To put it another way that would mean that we'd love God with our whole heart, soul, mind, and strength and our neighbor as ourselves, fully and always. A tall order, I think. Anyway, post #45 is pretty well in line with teachings I'm familiar with, and agree with at this point. I see overcoming as a process and a struggle, a good and worthy one, with our own testing, learning, growing, and being refined as part of the deal. My experience, anyway.

 

[ForAllTruth]

Hello again ForAllTruth, the issue that I mentioned (that of understanding terminology) is, at the very least, what we need to address (before continuing any farther with the principal topic).

I would also love to hear a more thorough explanation of what you mean by a "true-believer" (who is ~not~ regenerate somehow), in contrast with "true-believer" (who ~is~ regenerate) Is the former indwelt by the Holy Spirit, for instance, or not? Please elaborate further about all of this

A thought (or two) that comes immediately to mind for me about this is, if a person is NOT regenerate/NOT "born again" prior to coming to saving faith, into what, exactly, is such a person placing their faith .. e.g. John 3:3; 1 Corinthians 2:14?

Finally, would you classify demons as "true-believers" who are simply NOT regenerate? .. e.g. James 2:19; cf Luke 8:26-31. Why/why not?

Thank you!

--David

There's all kinds of belief across the spectrum. And it is all real in a sense (true belief).

1. One could believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in the sense that demons do and not be a disciple.
2. One could even to an extent trust Jesus Christ but only so far and be a disciple (one in training trying to trust more). I think this would account for the vast majority of those professing the faith. 1 Corinthians 2:14 might be operative here in sanctification.
3. One could truly believe that the only way to the Father is through the Lord Jesus Christ and have the Holy Spirit in such measure as to cast out demons and preach truthfully in His Name like in Matthew 7:21 and not be of the elect. 1 Corinthians 2:14 might be operative here externally but not internally. Paul might have feared this at times methinks. 1 Corinthians 9:27
4. One could be quite a ways along in sanctification (i.e. being regenerated) but incomplete. Evidence for this is 1 John 4:18.
5. And beyond all these then we get to total sanctification/regeneration/perfect love (1 John 4:18, 1 Peter 4:1, James 3:2, John 3:3).

If a person is NOT regenerate/NOT "born again" prior to coming to saving faith, into what, exactly, is such a person placing their faith? Jesus (but only so far).

You, I believe, are familiar with A.W. Pink???
Didn't he say, "It is impossible to say how far a non-saving faith may go..."?

This may explain why Jesus goes way out there in Luke 14:26 just to make it really clear the high-standard of really following Him.

 

[St_Worm2]

If a person is NOT regenerate/NOT "born again" prior to coming to saving faith, into what, exactly, is such a person placing their faith? Jesus (but only so far).

That is true (in a sense). However, I believe that I would say instead, "but not far enough".

You, I believe, are familiar with A.W. Pink???
Didn't he say, "It is impossible to say how far a non-saving faith may go..."

Yes, I am. I, in fact, own Dr. Pink's book that that particular quote is taken from. However, I (and I believe Dr. Pink as well), would not refer to any of the lesser (if you will) kinds of faith (ones that are not surrendered to Him as BOTH Savior and Lord and/or ones that do not express themselves in true affection towards Him) as a "true", "saving" faith (so here we come to it, ~my~ specific definition or understanding of what a "true-believer" actually is, IOW, he/she is someone who has been regenerated/caused to be born again, justified and saved by God, and is therefore, now being sanctified by God as well (in league w/Him, in point of fact, our sanctification being synergistic, as much as possible anyway .. Philippians 1:6, 2:12-13).

This may explain why Jesus goes way out there in Luke 14:26 just to make it really clear the high-standard of really following Him.

True. However, v26 cannot TRULY be taken at first blush/out-of-context, apart from any knowledge of other Divine teachings, like the 5th Commandment of the Decalogue.

I agree with you that this verse does indeed present a necessary understanding of just how high God's "standard" for us really is, as long as it is always understood in the light of the other things that the Bible teaches us about love/honor/family (I do not believe that Matthew 10:37 can be understood properly apart from Luke 14:26 either, IOW, I believe that each verse gives us insight into the other and helps us understand/get to the heart and the fullness of God's intended meaning ).

I've gotta go, but I will return (Dv). You do have some very interesting observations/make some very interesting, thought-provoking points! Thank you for that

God bless you!!

--David
p.s. - finally, here is a quote of Dr. Pink's that I have posted fairly often around here (and elsewhere), something of his that I agree with, of course (actually, there is little from him that I have read that I do not agree with).

 

[Soyeong]

Isn't it actually the way to avoid all sin is to be born again? 1 John 3:9 1 John 5:18

In Philippians 1:6, he who began a good work in us will be faithful to complete it on the day of Christ Jesus. If we can reach a state in this life where we avoid all sin, then what is left to complete on that day?

In Titus 2:11-14, our salvation is described as being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good and to renounce doing what is ungodly. What is the purpose of being trained by grace to renounce doing what is ungodly if we are already avoiding all sin when we became born again?

In 1 John 2:1, he is writing these things so that we may not sin, but if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteousness. If being born again means that we avoid all sin, then why leave upon the possibility that we might still sin? Clearly the goal is to aim to be sinless and to practice obedience, and if we sin, then to practice repentance, but when we are born again, our practice is no longer one of living in sin.

In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him His way that he might know Him and Israel too, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, in 1 John 2:4, those who say that the know Jesus, but don't obey His commands are liars and the truth is not in them, and in 1 John 3:4-6, those who continue to practice sin in transgression of God's law have neither seen nor known him, so knowing God and Jesus through expressing His nature is the goal of the law, which is eternal life (John 17:3). Obedience to the law is not about the need for sinless perfection, but about the experience of knowing God, or in other words, having a relationship with Him. If someone has the goal of expressing God's nature in obeying His law, but they still sin, but repent when they do, then there is still an extent to which they know God, so it would be inaccurate to say that they have never seen nor known Him, so I don't think it is correct to interpret those verses as speaking about avoiding all sin, especially in light 1 John 1:8, where if we say that we have no sin, then we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

 

[ForAllTruth]

In Philippians 1:6, he who began a good work in us will be faithful to complete it on the day of Christ Jesus. If we can reach a state in this life where we avoid all sin, then what is left to complete on that day?

In Titus 2:11-14, our salvation is described as being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good and to renounce doing what is ungodly. What is the purpose of being trained by grace to renounce doing what is ungodly if we are already avoiding all sin when we became born again?

In 1 John 2:1, he is writing these things so that we may not sin, but if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteousness. If being born again means that we avoid all sin, then why leave upon the possibility that we might still sin? Clearly the goal is to aim to be sinless and to practice obedience, and if we sin, then to practice repentance, but when we are born again, our practice is no longer one of living in sin.

In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him His way that he might know Him and Israel too, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, in 1 John 2:4, those who say that the know Jesus, but don't obey His commands are liars and the truth is not in them, and in 1 John 3:4-6, those who continue to practice sin in transgression of God's law have neither seen nor known him, so knowing God and Jesus through expressing His nature is the goal of the law, which is eternal life (John 17:3). Obedience to the law is not about the need for sinless perfection, but about the experience of knowing God, or in other words, having a relationship with Him. If someone has the goal of expressing God's nature in obeying His law, but they still sin, but repent when they do, then there is still an extent to which they know God, so it would be inaccurate to say that they have never seen nor known Him, so I don't think it is correct to interpret those verses as speaking about avoiding all sin, especially in light 1 John 1:8, where if we say that we have no sin, then we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

If we can reach a state in this life where we avoid all sin, then what is left to complete on that day?
In a word, "glorification".

What is the purpose of being trained by grace to renounce doing what is ungodly if we are already avoiding all sin when we became born again?
You still have to avoid sin if you are born-again. All being born-again done is assure you that you won't fail in your effort by the power of God.

If being born again means that we avoid all sin, then why leave upon the possibility that we might still sin?
Not everyone that the letter is addressed to are born-again, possibly. Or, this is just FYI for us reading it years later. God knows...

Please refer to post #16 in regard to 1 John 1:8

 

[ForAllTruth]

That is true (in a sense). However, I believe that I would say instead, "but not far enough".

Yes, I am. I, in fact, own Dr. Pink's book that that particular quote is taken from. However, I (and I believe Dr. Pink as well), would not refer to any of the lesser (if you will) kinds of faith (ones that are not surrendered to Him as BOTH Savior and Lord and/or ones that do not express themselves in true affection towards Him) as a "true", "saving" faith (so here we come to it, ~my~ specific definition or understanding of what a "true-believer" actually is, IOW, he/she is someone who has been regenerated/caused to be born again, justified and saved by God, and is therefore, now being sanctified by God as well (in league w/Him, in point of fact, our sanctification being synergistic, as much as possible anyway .. Philippians 1:6, 2:12-13).

True. However, v26 cannot TRULY be taken at first blush/out-of-context, apart from any knowledge of other Divine teachings, like the 5th Commandment of the Decalogue.

I agree with you that this verse does indeed present a necessary understanding of just how high God's "standard" for us really is, as long as it is always understood in the light of the other things that the Bible teaches us about love/honor/family (I do not believe that Matthew 10:37 can be understood properly apart from Luke 14:26 either, IOW, I believe that each verse gives us insight into the other and helps us understand/get to the heart and the fullness of God's intended meaning ).

I've gotta go, but I will return (Dv). You do have some very interesting observations/make some very interesting, thought-provoking points! Thank you for that

God bless you!!

--David
p.s. - finally, here is a quote of Dr. Pink's that I have posted fairly often around here (and elsewhere), something of his that I agree with, of course (actually, there is little from him that I have read that I do not agree with).

View attachment 319772​

Savior from hell instead of a savior from sin. That resonates with the distinction I am making, for sure.

It is also possible that the idea of regeneration can be understood in two senses. One immediate at justification and one continual during sanctification. That would clear up some issues as well, perhaps.

 

[ForAllTruth]

At this point I want to stress that I am grateful to God for each of you who are commenting.

I started this thread to help us think through what the text is really communicating for the Glory of God hoping that He would be pleased to by His power in the Spirit to enlighten us all for the purpose of good works. I am asking the Lord to bestow upon us what we really need and not what we think we need so that we may truly love the brethren and fulfill all righteousness.

 

[timothyu]

All a matter of allegiance. Either to the will of man or to the will of God. His will be done, His Kingdom come. Ours aren't doing so well.

 

[fhansen]

Savior from hell instead of a savior from sin. That resonates with the distinction I am making, for sure.

It is also possible that the idea of regeneration can be understood in two senses. One immediate at justification and one continual during sanctification. That would clear up some issues as well, perhaps.

For the record, the church has historically taught that, at justification, the seeds of righteousness are given to and implanted in man, not only imputed to or declared of him. So sanctification is a continuation of the same process that began at justification. We're justified and saved unto righteousness, not only despite our own unrighteousness. From there we are expected to walk in and nurture and grow in that righteousness as we continue to "invest" and live by God's grace.

"But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life." Rom 6:22

 

[Cockcrow]

That is true (in a sense). However, I believe that I would say instead, "but not far enough".

Yes, I am. I, in fact, own Dr. Pink's book that that particular quote is taken from. However, I (and I believe Dr. Pink as well), would not refer to any of the lesser (if you will) kinds of faith (ones that are not surrendered to Him as BOTH Savior and Lord and/or ones that do not express themselves in true affection towards Him) as a "true", "saving" faith (so here we come to it, ~my~ specific definition or understanding of what a "true-believer" actually is, IOW, he/she is someone who has been regenerated/caused to be born again, justified and saved by God, and is therefore, now being sanctified by God as well (in league w/Him, in point of fact, our sanctification being synergistic, as much as possible anyway .. Philippians 1:6, 2:12-13).

True. However, v26 cannot TRULY be taken at first blush/out-of-context, apart from any knowledge of other Divine teachings, like the 5th Commandment of the Decalogue.

I agree with you that this verse does indeed present a necessary understanding of just how high God's "standard" for us really is, as long as it is always understood in the light of the other things that the Bible teaches us about love/honor/family (I do not believe that Matthew 10:37 can be understood properly apart from Luke 14:26 either, IOW, I believe that each verse gives us insight into the other and helps us understand/get to the heart and the fullness of God's intended meaning ).

I've gotta go, but I will return (Dv). You do have some very interesting observations/make some very interesting, thought-provoking points! Thank you for that

God bless you!!

--David
p.s. - finally, here is a quote of Dr. Pink's that I have posted fairly often around here (and elsewhere), something of his that I agree with, of course (actually, there is little from him that I have read that I do not agree with).

View attachment 319772​

if salvation were dependent on us and not God, then nobody is saved because Bible says none are without sin, none are righteous no not one

 

[Soyeong]

if salvation were dependent on us and not God, then nobody is saved because Bible says none are without sin, none are righteous no not one

The content of a gift can itself be the experience of doing something, such as giving someone the opportunity to drive a Ferrari for an hour, where it still involves 100% of their participation in doing the work of driving it even though it was 100% made available by someone else. In a similar manner, the content of God's gift of eternal life is the experience of knowing Him and Jesus (John 17:3), and the gift of God's law is His instructions for how experience that gift, which involves 100% of our participation. In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he might know Him and Israel too, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so knowing God and Jesus is the goal of the law, which is eternal life.

In Titus 2:11-14, our salvation is described as being trained by grace to do what is godly, righteous, and good, and to renounce doing what is ungodly, so God graciously teaching us to obey His law for how to do these works is itself the content of His gift of saving us from not doing those works. Our salvation is from sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of God's law (1 John 3:4), so while we do not earn our salvation as a wage by obeying God's law, living in obedience to it is intrinsically the content of the gift of Jesus saving us from not living in obedience to it, and being trained by grace 100% involves our participation.

There are many people who are described by the Bible as being righteous, such as Noah (Genesis 6:8-9) and Zechariah and Elizabeth (Luke 1:5-6), and many others, so it is false that there is no one who is righteous, but rather Romans 3:10 is referencing Psalms 14:1-3, where it says that no one is righteous among those who say that there is no God. In any case, being sinless was never the requirement for salvation, and even if someone did manage to have perfect obedience, they still wouldn't earn their salvation as a wage (Romans 4:4-5), so that was never the goal of the law. In Romans 3:21-22, it does not say that the Law and the Prophets testify that the righteousness of God comes through perfect obedience, but rather the only way to become righteous that is testified about in the Law and the Prophets is through faith in Christ for all who believe.

 

[ForAllTruth]

I am going to take a break from commenting on this thread. I will watch to see (Lord willing) if someone can find any verse/passage in the Bible that teaches that someone can't quit sinning by the power of God. Considering...

Matthew 6:9-13

John 14:13

And then the many times the Bible instructs us to be holy and righteous.

I believe that the source of most people insisting that it is not possible to avoid sin by the grace of God (power of God) is not that they found a teaching in the Bible, but rather it comes from personal experience, by observation of those they see in the world and in their church gatherings, and the teachings of church leaders.

I will comment (Lord willing) if someone finds anything that can be seriously considered a challenge to this very biblical concept.

 

[Soyeong]

Savior from hell instead of a savior from sin. That resonates with the distinction I am making, for sure.

It is also possible that the idea of regeneration can be understood in two senses. One immediate at justification and one continual during sanctification. That would clear up some issues as well, perhaps.

The issue us that salvation, justification, and sanctification all have past, present, and future aspects, so we have been saved from the penalty of our sins (Ephesians 2:5), we are being saved from continuing to live in sin (Philippians 2:12), and we will be saved from God's wrath on the day of the Lord (Romans 5:9-10). Abraham was justified by faith when he obeyed the call to go to the land where he would receive his inheritance (Genesis 12:1-3, Hebrews 11:8), when he believed God (Genesis 15:6, Romans 4:5), and when he offered Isaac (Genesis 22, Hebrews 11:17, James 2:21-24). We have been sanctified (Hebrews 10:10), we are being sanctified (Hebrews 10:14), and when he who began a good work in us is faithful to complete it on the day of Christ Jesus, we will be sanctified (Philippians 1:6).

So in regard to quote, some want to just be saved from the penalty of our sins, but don't want to be saved from continuing to live in sin.

If we can reach a state in this life where we avoid all sin, then what is left to complete on that day?
In a word, "glorification".

Glorification is God's final removal of sin from our lives, but you seem to think that has already happened. If someone is living in a way that expresses God's nature through living in sinless obedience to His law, then everything they are doing is giving glory to God, so how is that significantly different from glorification and what of significance is left to complete on that day?

What is the purpose of being trained by grace to renounce doing what is ungodly if we are already avoiding all sin when we became born again?
You still have to avoid sin if you are born-again. All being born-again done is assure you that you won't fail in your effort by the power of God.

If we already have assurance that we won't fail in our effort to avoid all sin, then we would already be experts and renouncing sin and wouldn't need ongoing training by grace to do that, so saying that we still have to avoid sin does not answer the question. In other words, if what you are saying is correct, then our salvation would involve continuing to renounce sin, but it is not something that we would need to be trained by grace to do.

If being born again means that we avoid all sin, then why leave upon the possibility that we might still sin?
Not everyone that the letter is addressed to are born-again, possibly. Or, this is just FYI for us reading it years later. God knows...

If the narrow way is just for those who have stopped sinning, then why do those who still sin still have Jesus as an advocate?

Please refer to post #16 in regard to 1 John 1:8

Do you you think that someone who claims to have no sin is claiming to have no appetite for sin or that they are claiming to have no guilt for having sinned?

1 John 4:17

It even has the word perfect in it. How appropriate is that.

The word "perfect" refers to being whole or complete, not to the concept of having sinless obedience. For example, in Matthew 5:43-48, when Jesus said to be perfect as the heavenly Father is perfect, is he was referring to having a love that is full or complete, where we don't just love those who love us, but also love our enemies, not referring to someone who have never sinned.

The law itself came with instructions for what to do when the people sinned, so perfect obedience was never the requirement or the expectation. Repentance doesn't change the fact that we have already sinned, so either repentance has value and we don't need to have perfect obedience or we need to have perfect obedience and repentance has no value, and the consistent message of the prophets was the call for repentance, not for perfect obedience. In Deuteronomy 30:11-20, God said that His law is not too difficult to obey and that obedience brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So it was presented as a possibility and as a choice, not as the need for perfect obedience. Likewise, in 1 John 5:3, to love God is to keep His commandments, which are not burdensome, they are not a call for perfect obedience. Furthermore, there are examples of people who kept God's commandments even though all of sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, such as in Joshua 25:1-3 and Luke 1:5-6.
---

Romans 7:17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

Is it possible that the above verse can resolve this issue where someone can seek to live in obedience to God's law, still sin, repent when they do, though it is not actually them who does it, but sin that dwells within them, so they have ceased to sin in accordance with 1 John 5:18?

 

[Clare73]

If we sin we don’t know God; we are dead. If we fail to love we are dead.

And love fulfills the law because sin and love are mutually exclusive. A teaching I’m familiar with puts it concisely:
“At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love.”

And we’re exhorted to love and to refrain from sin because love is both a gift, of God’s life in us, and a choice, a daily one.

And those who have loved well and reject Jesus (as in Orthodox Jews) will find that love of no avail to them.

 

[Soyeong]

And those who have loved well and reject Jesus (as in Orthodox Jews) will find that love of no avail to them.

Why should those who love well in accordance with what God has commanded be considered to have rejected Jesus, who is the embodiment of that love? Did God lead those Jews astray?