Inherint contradictions teaching Faith Alone

[Jethro Bodine]

Surely you don’t believe a righteous person is someone who believes they are righteous because Jesus Christ paid the price for their righteousness, but they don’t practice righteousness?

If they really did believe, they wouldn't be one who doesn't practice righteousness. The fact that they don't practice righteousness shows they are not a true believer and belongs to the devil:

10 Anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God John 3:10

 

[Jethro Bodine]

First of all My point has been to show the principal of faith; the obedience of faith.

Obedience comes from faith. We all get that.

Where there is no faith...that is where there is no obedience.

Faith must have the “work” of obedience for faith to be “alive” or activated to produce the intended divine result.

Well, there's more than one 'divine result' of faith. You seem to think there's only the divine result of outward, active obedience.

I don’t an to argue about good works or works of righteousness or the works of the law.

You really kind of have to, because that's what faith produces, once a person has had the 'divine result' of justification by that same faith.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I would just like to show that faith by itself is dead and will not work or function.

Yes. That is the fake faith of the unbeliever - dead faith that doesn't work. It doesn't work because it's not real faith. If it was, it would work. It has to because the seed of God resides in that person.

9Anyone born of God refuses to practice sin, because God’s seed abides in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. 1 John 3:9

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I have shown several instances from the Bible about this.

The woman with the issue of blood is faith for healing.

The woman obeyed the word of faith and pressed through the crowds to touch the hem of His garment.

When she actually touched the hem of His garment as she was inspired to do by God, her faith was no longer the substance of the healing she had hoped for , but became the reality of the healing that was unseen.

I don't think anyone disagrees with this.

In the case of the woman, the 'divine result' of her faith (healing) could not happen until she did what faith was directing her to do. No argument here.

It's when you start relating faith to the 'divine result' of justification, that is where the disagreement comes in. No works of righteousness are required to be justified in Christ. Just faith. But that faith will then, invariably, produce the works that people made righteous in Christ do. It has to, because God's seed resides in that person (ref. 1 John 3:9 above). If it doesn't produce works of righteousness then we know the faith that makes those works happen doesn't reside in that person. They show that they belong to the devil.

8The one who practices sin is of the devil 1 John 3:8

 

[Jethro Bodine]

A person who does not respond in obedience to the Gospel command repent, remains unsaved, because the faith they received by hearing is dead; dormant, inactive.

The person who does not respond in obedience to the command to repent does not have the faith that comes by hearing. If it did abide/remain in him he would respond in obedience to the command to repent.

 

[GodsGrace]

I agree that he doesn't understand, and you'll see that in my responses to him. Yet, "obey the commandments" is actually what Jesus taught. The whole controversy is around salvation cause and effect. Reformed theology teaches that obeying the commandments (namely to love one's neighbor) is the effect of salvation, but the Remonstrants (in conjunction with the RCC) teach that obeying the commandments (in addition to faith) is the cause of salvation.

Paul taught that we are justified by faith alone, which is what the reformers taught, but they had to add to the statement "but not by a faith that is alone," because of those people who confused the definition of the faith that justifies. It's no different than the controversies of the 1st Century that prompted NT writings like James and Galatians. James wrote "faith without works is dead," because of people who were misusing the term "faith" and claiming they were Christians although they had no commitment (or possibly intention) to obey Christ's commands.

Isn't it true that "saving faith" as many in Reformed Theology put it, actually does include acknowledging Jesus as Lord, and being submissive to His will? So then, when Jesus (and the NT writers) command people to do right, to obey the 10 commandments, to be gracious to others, etc., aren't they trying to motivate people to exercising genuine faith in Christ? When Jesus commanded "love your neighbor," isn't it implied that one who has genuine faith in Christ can do so (and wants to do so) because they have the Holy Spirit, as John teaches in 1 Jn. 3:9?

We are saved by grace through faith, which is all (including faith) the gift of God. Grace is the enablement by God to believe the gospel and live according to Christ's commands, is it not?

What do you think of the simple idea that Jesus did not speak too much about being saved or having faith in Him.
He said I AM THE WAY.
He said LOVE GOD.
LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.

It seems to me that Jesus taught something simple that we make too complicated today.
We must be born again....once physically and once spiritually.

We must be aware of God and be in alignment with His will.
Jesus is our Savior...our teacher, since we are disciples.

So our life should be
TO BELIEVE IN JESUS (to love God)
TO OBEY JESUS

Why complicate matters, as many on these forums do?

 

[mailmandan]

No such thing as “faith alone” in the Bible.

Faith (rightly understood) in Jesus Christ alone.

Romans 5:1 - Therefore, having been justified by faith, (faith plus what? Faith plus nothing. Hence, faith alone) we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Ephesians 2:8 - For by grace you have been saved through faith, (faith plus what? Faith plus nothing. Hence, faith alone) and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.

Faith must have the corresponding action of obedience in order for faith to be complete and therefore activated to produce the intended divine result.

So, when Abraham believed the Lord in Genesis 15:6 and was accounted as righteous, (also see Romans 4:2-3) there was no divine result? In James 2:22, faith made perfect or complete by works means bring to maturity, to complete like love in 1 John 4:18. It doesn't mean that Abraham's faith was finally activated producing the divine result of being accounted as righteous when he offered up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22 many years after he believed God in Genesis 15:6.

The work of Abraham did not have some kind of intrinsic merit to account him as righteous, but it showed or manifested the genuineness of his faith. (James 2:18) That is the "sense" in which Abraham was "justified by works." (James 2:21) He was shown to be righteous. When Abraham performed the good work in Genesis 22; he fulfilled the expectations created by the pronouncement of his faith in Genesis 15:6.

And then there is grace…

Grace is God's part and faith is our part. Grace does not negate salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Judas became lost.

If you mean he was saved and then got lost, probably not. If you look at the passage below, Jesus is saying he is not clean like the others are. Yet he's getting ready to wash their feet, which they all need. So we know he's talking about Judas not being clean in regard to the bath, not the feet:

10Jesus told him, “Whoever has already bathed needs only to wash his feet, and he will be completely clean. And you are clean, though not all of you.” 11For He knew who would betray Him. That is why He said, “Not all of you are clean.” John 13:10-11

But, really, I don't think whether or not he was saved and then lost is relevant. He's lost. It doesn't matter how and when he got there. He's lost. And I think that's the view all of us should take regarding this curious, but largely inconsequential matter of if saved people can become lost. I personally swing back and forth on the issue, and I'm presently leaning toward the real believer with real faith can not go back to unbelief. That's what a believer would have to do to become lost after being saved. It seems once a person has genuine faith deeply imbedded in them, they ain't going back to unbelief. Though there might be a struggle. But it seems the warning to not go back to unbelief is sufficient to keep the true believer believing. For me this a doctrinal hill I'm not willing to die on. Each of us is free to think what we want about it.

 

[Rodger]

It seems to me that you are the one being argumentative. Most times when I see someone pointing their finger at me with a false accusation, it is actually their issue.

But my initial point was that your statement saying you (or "we") can't keep the commandments is an erroneous statement, and appears to be something you are now denying in this post. So then do you agree that inability to keep the commandments was at least unclear, if not a false statement?

You challenge me with proving that loving a neighbor "somehow" keeps ALL of the law of Christ - Paul declared, "the whole law is fulfilled in this one word - love your neighbor": do you believe his statement or not?

Are you able to love your neighbor in all the ways that Jesus commanded?

I have no desire or need to do this back and forth on who did this or who said that. This is a totally unprofitable discussion with you.

I am withdrawing and I wish you a great day and blessings!

 

[Rodger]

Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” John 6:70

Here is the strongs definition of the word devil in this verse.

1. metaph. applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be said to act the part of the devil or to side with him

How does this differ from your explanation of why Jesus called Peter …. Satan?


View attachment 21257

In Judas, we have a clear example of how a person can be religious, hear the Word of God taught, witness genuine miracles, and for all appearances seem to be saved, and yet not be born again.

He is the perfect example of Matthew 7......"Many will say Lord, Lord........."

The word "Devil" in the Scripture you posted is a referrence to BETRAYAL.

 

[Rodger]

Jesus turned to Peter and said directly to Peter these words -

But He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me…

Bro, I don’t feel one bit convicted or offended.

It’s God’s word.

My point is Jesus spoke to Peter just as He did about Judas.


I’m sorry that upsets you.

It upsets me because you should know better.

 

[mailmandan]

In Judas, we have a clear example of how a person can be religious, hear the Word of God taught, witness genuine miracles, and for all appearances seem to be saved, and yet not be born again.

He is the perfect example of Matthew 7......"Many will say Lord, Lord........."

The word "Devil" in the Scripture you posted is a referrence to BETRAYAL.

I call that "religious, but not right with God." To the remaining 11 disciples, Judas may have looked like the real deal but Jesus knew his heart and clearly stated, "he is a devil!" (John 6:70)

1. Judas was an unbeliever and is a devil.....John 6:64-71
2. Judas was spiritually unclean......John 13:11
3. Judas is lost and is the son of perdition.........John 17:12
4. Judas was not kept by Jesus........John 17:12; 18:9
5. Judas was a traitor.....Luke 6:16
6. Judas was a betrayer.....Multiple verses.
7. Judas was a thief and did not care for the poor........John 12:6
8. Judas was guilty of a greater sin.......John 19:11
9. Judas was influenced by Satan to betray Jesus.......John 13:2
10. Judas was entered by Satan.......Luke 22:3
11. Judas kills himself......Matthew 27:5
12. Judas' habitation to be desolate......Acts 1:20, Psalm 69:25

 

[tdidymas]

What do you think of the simple idea that Jesus did not speak too much about being saved or having faith in Him.
He said I AM THE WAY.
He said LOVE GOD.
LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.

It seems to me that Jesus taught something simple that we make too complicated today.
We must be born again....once physically and once spiritually.

We must be aware of God and be in alignment with His will.
Jesus is our Savior...our teacher, since we are disciples.

So our life should be
TO BELIEVE IN JESUS (to love God)
TO OBEY JESUS

Why complicate matters, as many on these forums do?

Your complaint is directed toward the apostle Paul, John, and sometimes other writers of the NT, since they are the ones who wrote about what we are debating about.

On the other hand, Jesus was primarily an evangelist to Israel, and the reason why he didn't get into deeper spiritual explanations like Paul did. People in Israel should already have known about being born of God as is explained in John 3, and they should have already known about faith as explained in Heb. 11. Paul declares this by saying they had the oracles of God. If they had known about these basics, they would have known about God being sovereign over their salvation, which would have induced the faith (i.e. trust) in Christ that Jesus' preaching should have induced.

So Paul's teaching on justification and other "hard things to understand" (so says Peter) was written mainly for gentile disciples for their assurance and comfort. It takes time and effort to think through such things, which the only consistent conclusion one can come to is that God is sovereign over our salvation.

So when you gripe about justification by faith being something "we make too complicated," you are revealing that you really don't understand what Paul wrote about it. All this debate is about the distinction (but not separation) between justification and personal deeds. When someone doesn't understand this distinction, and keeps trying to claim that works in addition to faith is the cause of salvation, then that distinction becomes "too complicated" to understand, which was the error of Trent. The error is assuming that James' definition of 'faith' in Ja. 2:24 is exactly the same as Paul's definition in Rom. 3:28, and such an error is catastrophic.

 

[JLB]

Strawman argument! "satan" means "adversary." Jesus was not calling Peter "Satan" as if Peter was the satanic entity fit only for lake of fire judgment.

Of course. Jesus was indicating Peter was being an adversary by his behavior… maybe even being influenced by Satan.

That I believe is what Jesus was saying to Peter.

IOW’s not being mindful of the things of God.

 

[JLB]

confused with spiritually following Jesus (which Judas never did). Did Judas hear Jesus' voice in his spirit? Emphatically NO!! You can't interpret scripture because you don't understand it.

Ok. I see now.

Could you share the scriptures that teach us that Judas didn’t “spiritually” hear Jesus and therefore didn’t “spiritually” follow Jesus?

 

[JLB]

If they really did believe, they wouldn't be one who doesn't practice righteousness. The fact that they don't practice righteousness shows they are not a true believer and belongs to the devil:

10 Anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God John 3:10

So you agree that believing alone is worthless if it doesn’t have the work of obedience; the work of doing the word?

 

[JLB]

Obedience comes from faith. We all get that.

No obedience doesn’t come from faith.

Faith must have the corresponding action of obedience by the person God spoke, other wise faith is dead.

The ability to obey is grace; the Spirit of grace, the power of God unto salvation for all who believe.

Each person has a choice to believe and therefore obey or not.

 

[JLB]

That is the fake faith of the unbeliever - dead faith that doesn't work.

No such thing as fake faith.

They only faith there is comes from God.

Once a person has faith from hearing God speak to them, they must obey what they heard, otherwise their faith that they received from God remains dormant, dead, inactive…
Unable to accomplish what God intended for them, to bless them, justify them, heal them, or save them.

 

[JLB]

The person who does not respond in obedience to the command to repent does not have the faith that comes by hearing.

Totally false.

They have faith when they hear God.

If they don’t obey what they heard then their faith remains inactive (dead).

For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”

How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written:
“How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace,
Who bring glad tidings of good things!”
But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “LORD, who has believed our report?” Romans 10:13-17

As you can see calling on or confessing Jesus as Lord is how we obey the Gospel.

• with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Romans 10:10

 

[JLB]

Romans 5:1 - Therefore, having been justified by faith, (faith plus what? Faith plus nothing. Hence, faith alone) we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Yes faith.

However, Faith without the action of obedience is dead.

If you understood that the entire book of Romans is contextually framed in the principle of the obedience of faith then you would be trying promote the unbiblical concept of faith alone.

Last chapter of Romans

But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
Romans 16:26


First chapter of Romans

By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
Romans 1:5


Obedience of faith is what God commands to all nations, and what the apostles were sent to the nations for.