Which is full of the words grace, works and law and dueling proof text.
Actually, I was asking Sidon to explain his/her ideas about these things, not so much "duelling" with him/her. And
my OP was very much focused only on the dangerous effects of sin, not on the Law versus Grace debate.
There's nothing ironic about it. You're misconstruing my saying tossing out select verses can be misleading, as me saying "we don't need scripture" which is not what I'm saying at all.
Well, it seems ironic to me.
I am getting...stuck on your phrasing, I think. It does sound at points like you're saying "we don't need Scripture" or that Scripture takes a back seat to...well, I'm not sure, actually. You seem peeved at the use of Scripture in support of a particular view, but this seems to me exactly what one should supply if one is making assertions about the faith.
That's what I'm saying. The truth isn't necessarily established by a string of proof text.
If one is arguing for a doctrine of the Christian faith - which is what the Grace versus Law debate essentially is - by what other better means should doctrine be established?
I'm saying proof texts could be used for or against someone's behavior in regard to whether they're saved or not, but what really matters is what God sees and judges as He examines that person. Even if a person's behavior is exemplary, it's what God sees in their mind and heart that matters.
Okay. Hmmm...When I read your words here, immediately I thought of Christ's observation: "by their fruit you shall know them." (
Matthew 7:17-18) How do you reconcile what you're saying with this principle? It sounds like Christ is saying that one's "fruit" exposes the true nature of one's spiritual condition.
Paul the apostle wrote,
2 Corinthians 13:5
5 Examine yourselves, to see whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Or do you not realize this about yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you fail to meet the test!
It seems here that Paul thought there was an objective criteria by which a person could assess their claim to be "in the faith." If they didn't meet that criteria, they weren't in the faith. Doesn't this thinking stand in contradiction, though, to the idea that ultimately only God knows if a person is saved?
Paul also wrote,
2 Corinthians 11:12-15
12 But what I am doing I will continue to do, so that I may cut off opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the matter about which they are boasting.
13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ.
14 No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their deeds.
It looks here as though Paul has discerned the presence of "servants of Satan" within the Church, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. He doesn't hesitate to describe them as false and deceitful. But isn't this to make an assessment of a person's spiritual state that you believe only God can know?
In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul wrote,
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
Paul comes off as very unequivocal here, flatly declaring that the sinful behaviors he listed necessarily exclude a person from God's kingdom. Isn't this to judge from externals, though?
The apostle John wrote,
1 John 3:14
14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers. Whoever does not love abides in death.
This sounds pretty cut-and-dried, doesn't it? If we love the brethren, we have "passed from death into life" - we've been saved. And if we don't love the brethren, we reveal we aren't saved, but "abide in death." This seems straightforward and simple. John has presented a clear, objective standard by which we all can judge our claim to be saved. But, being objective, this standard allows us to stack up the claim of
another person against it, too, and "test" their claim. Do they love the brethren in the manner Scripture enjoins? If there is no brother-loving "fruit" bearing out that they do, John says flatly that they haven't been saved.
In light of these instances - and many others - it's hard for me to see that what you're saying about only God knowing the true state of affairs in a person's heart is entirely true. It seems, from what Scripture indicates, that people give the game away regarding their salvation by the fruit of their living.
On this head, I heard an interesting story the other day about Christian believers in Iran who must be extremely careful about who they accept into their circle as a fellow brother or sister in Christ. Often, apparently, "false brethren" will try to infiltrate cells of Christians and expose them to the Islamic authorities. Imprisonment and worse awaits believers who are caught out by these Muslim spies. And so, there is a very careful vetting process that the Iranian Christians enact upon any new prospective addition to their cell church. They seem to think it is possible to make some assessment as to the truth of a person's claim to salvation. And they
must make such an assessment or they'll end up in jail or dead. I wonder what the western Church would look like under the same circumstances... It may not be long until the Church finds out.
