Weep Over Jerusalem?

[Arcoe]

You're the one who is muddling regeneration and justification with sanctification. It isn't me.

Read post 675 and tell me where it's muddled.

 

[guuila]

You might want to write more carefully. You said -

'No good works = no saving faith = no regeneration'

This is the negative of 'good works = saving faith = regeneration'.

No it's not. You might want to study logic. Particularly the fallacy of denying the antecedent.

At any rate, you've been corrected. I do not believe good works = regeneration. If you believe I said or implied it, whatever. I don't believe that. So, will you continue attacking straw men, or will you take correction? Here's a good opportunity to show us your good works. Do the right thing.

 

[cygnusx1]

I don't think Moses and David were mentioned in 1 John either. You keep ignoring the fact repentance is available to all you have godly sorrow. Genuine repentance is the remittance, therefore pardon of sin.

You still haven't mentioned what I was talking about , keep at it

 

[guuila]

And all you do is sit back and do nothing while eating popcorn? Good works will never be a part of your life, unless you actually do them. It's nice to think you will do them or that you have what it takes to do them, but that won't get them done. You actually have to do it. This is called synergism, man cooperating with God.

Jesus called the servant who did nothing, wicked and lazy (Matt. 25:26).

You are a master straw man builder you know it? How in the world do you know what kind of works I have? You know nothing about me. You have a lot of nerve judging me like this. Ad hominems don't work by the way. Might wanna study that fallacy too.

 

[cygnusx1]

You are a master straw man builder you know it? How in the world do you know what kind of works I have? You know nothing about me. You have a lot of nerve judging me like this.

I agree bro , but it's just an old tactic to attempt to discredit a person instead of grasping the argument , seen it a hundred times on these forums , it's smoke screens like that which prevent serious discussion

 

[guuila]

I agree bro , but it's just an old tactic to attempt to discredit a person instead of grasping the argument , seen it a hundred times on these forums , it's smoke screens like that which prevent serious discussion

I honestly don't know why he's arguing with me about works. I never once denied the necessity of them, nor did I justify a lifestyle of sinning.

 

[cygnusx1]

I honestly don't know why he's arguing with me about works. I never once denied the necessity of them, nor did I justify a lifestyle of sinning.

I agree , mention Gods sovereignty and a box of false accusations will fly


Declaration
Good works are essential , they are necessary , they don't save anymore than faith itself saves us , it is Christ all the way .

 

[Arcoe]

You still haven't mentioned what I was talking about , keep at it

You must be referring to 'hate' and 'murder', which I have mentioned.

 

[Arcoe]

You are a master straw man builder you know it? How in the world do you know what kind of works I have? You know nothing about me. You have a lot of nerve judging me like this. Ad hominems don't work by the way. Might wanna study that fallacy too.

I said nothing of your actual works; it was a scenario I presented. Are you looking for Oz? Follow the yellow brick road.

 

[Arcoe]

I agree bro , but it's just an old tactic to attempt to discredit a person instead of grasping the argument , seen it a hundred times on these forums , it's smoke screens like that which prevent serious discussion

Whatever!

 

[Arcoe]

I agree , mention Gods sovereignty and a box of false accusations will fly

Declaration
Good works are essential , they are necessary , they don't save anymore than faith itself saves us , it is Christ all the way .

Good works are essential for what?

 

[cygnusx1]

You must be referring to 'hate' and 'murder', which I have mentioned.

Did moses and David murder ?

Then are they saved , has a person who commits murder been forgiven do they have eternal life ?

Then why didn't John say if they repent its fine ?

 

[cygnusx1]

Good works are essential for what?

For declaring a person saved , obviously .

 

[DArceri]

Of course I believe in sanctification and justification. I just showed you both are needed for salvation. Without sanctification, no one will see God. Pretty clear, don't you think?

Paul says in Romans 12:1 to 'present your bodies a living sacrifice, HOLY, acceptable to God, WHICH IS YOUR REASONABLE SERVICE'. We see here, sanctification is the reasonable service of man himself. This is a service man performs.

Without justification, man is still in his sins. Repentance is the remedy for pardoning of sins, as I have shown. Again, pretty clear.

Jesus said those who do good will attain to the resurrection of life. Which category would you put 'doing good' in order to attain this resurrection?

But the question still remains, would we (or could) we present our bodies as living sacrifices acceptable to God if we didn't have the fruit of the Holy Spirit? If we are united to Christ and being fed by the 'vine', would that not be considered God's work? Is it God who is doing a good work in us and conforming us to Christ-likeness or are we left trying to conform ourselves to His likeness by obediance to His law? If God is love and we are being conformed to His image, which is love, is not God moving us to act in love? Does not scripture say we are His workmanship? You see the arguement here?

Also, if you collapse the roles of justification & sanctification and law & gospel too much, would you not end up with a form of legalism, ie. having a situation where the law conforms us in our sanctification (and not the power of the Gospel working its own power in both justification and sanctification - ie. we love because He loved us first). Thus, if one continues to collapse the roles into themselves, would we not have to basically be justified twice, ie. once at conversion and then a final justification rendered according to our own works. Isn't that what the RCC does? Isn't that works righteousness?

 

[guuila]

I said nothing of your actual works; it was a scenario I presented. Are you looking for Oz? Follow the yellow brick road.

Ah ok. My apologies. You were responding to a hypothetical situation nobody here has ever argued for. Gotcha.

 

[Arcoe]

Did moses and David murder ?

Then are they saved , has a person who commits murder been forgiven do they have eternal life ?

Then why didn't John say if they repent its fine ?

Yes, Moses and David murdered, but who hasn't had hate in their heart?

Yes, a forgiven person has eternal life through remittance.

John did say that.

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

 

[Arcoe]

For declaring a person saved , obviously .

So, if good works are missing, is the person saved? If good works are missing, would this declare him lost?

 

[Hammster]

So, if good works are missing, is the person saved? If good works are missing, would this declare him lost?

I would say that if good works are missing, they are not saved. You can tell a tree by it's fruit. No fruit equals dead tree.

 

[Arcoe]

But the question still remains, would we (or could) we present our bodies as living sacrifices acceptable to God if we didn't have the fruit of the Holy Spirit? If we are united to Christ and being fed by the 'vine', would that not be considered God's work?

Why is it Calvinists continue to persist we do not have God working in and with us? I have never said anything I do, I do on my own. This is pretty much a Calvinist myth perpetuated to put synergism in a bad light.

Not all branches in the vine produce fruit as Jesus declared in John 15. These are cut off and thrown into the fire. So how is it you believe all branches in the vine will produce fruit?

Is it God who is doing a good work in us and conforming us to Christ-likeness or are we left trying to conform ourselves to His likeness by obediance to His law? If God is love and we are being conformed to His image, which is love, is not God moving us to act in love? Does not scripture say we are His workmanship? You see the arguement here?

Here again, you make reference to man doing it all himself. Correct your view on this and this discussion will go a lot farther. Even if God 'moves' you to love, you must still actually love one another. You must act and actually do good works.

Also, if you collapse the roles of justification & sanctification and law & gospel too much, would you not end up with a form of legalism, ie. having a situation where the law conforms us in our sanctification (and not the power of the Gospel working its own power in both justification and sanctification - ie. we love because He loved us first).

Are not all roles for the purpose of salvation for the sinner? I don't think I've mentioned the OT law as having anything to do with sanctification or justification. I've mentioned a service on our part and forgiveness. Obedience and repentance are very much a part of the Gospel.

Thus, if one continues to collapse the roles into themselves, would we not have to basically be justified twice, ie. once at conversion and then a final justification rendered according to our own works. Isn't that what the RCC does? Isn't that works righteousness?

If you believe a person only needs to repent once, then yes, you would be correct in only one instance of justification. But we are admonished to repent even after conversion (see the churches in Revelation). If you consider repentance a work of righteousness, then Jesus consider it needful to the churches.

Repentance, and turning to God, is for the remission (pardon, forgiveness, and payment) of our sins. This remission is the justification, or the declaration of not guilty for all who genuinely repent.

This is where fruit comes into the picture also. John the Baptist said in Luke 3:8, "Therefore bear fruits in keeping with repentance", and Paul said in Act 26:20, "...that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds appropriate to repentance".

What would you consider fruits or deeds appropriate to repentance? And if you notice, it is the person himself who is active in performing deeds, or bearing fruit, and not acted upon passively.

 

[Arcoe]

I would say that if good works are missing, they are not saved. You can tell a tree by it's fruit. No fruit equals dead tree.

Then how can you say good works are not essential to salvation? Even you say, if they are missing, they are not saved.