Essential vs Nonessential

[JLB]

Few can accept that this was Paul's end sight of himself:

1 Timothy 1:15
This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

Paul considered himself at the top of the list of sinners, whom Christ came to save.

Do you believe Paul was saved?


JLB

 

[smaller]

Paul considered himself at the top of the list of sinners, whom Christ came to save.

Do you believe Paul was saved?

JLB

Kind of an aside. Paul was on the top of the list of sinners, AFTER salvation. There are many who seek sinlessness. There are also many who claim it as true, either temporarily or permanently. None of this is on the table for anyone nor is any of it true/truthful. Willfully or unwillfully, we remain sinners, saved by Grace. And Paul, claiming the chief of sinners seat, shows us what is TRUE.

I might think it is willingly, nearly impossible, to take the same seat Paul did in 1 Tim. 1:15. Yet there it is, sat in and taken by the Apostle.

And we say if we sin "willfully" we have problems? There is not a man of us who is sinless, and THIS is true. There was never a person who left the seat of being a sinner to start with.

Sinning willfully or unwillfully didn't change the equation of being a sinner, one iota.

 

[JLB]

Kind of an aside. Paul was on the top of the list of sinners, AFTER salvation.

Utter nonsense.

Paul plainly stated that Christ came [past tense] to save sinners, of whom I am chief... of those whom Christ came to save.

Kind of an aside. Paul was on the top of the list of sinners, AFTER salvation. There are many who seek sinlessness. There are also many who claim it as true, either temporarily or permanently. None of this is on the table for anyone nor is any of it true/truthful. Willfully or unwillfully, we remain sinners, saved by Grace. And Paul, claiming the chief of sinners seat, shows us what is TRUE.

I might think it is willingly, nearly impossible, to take the same seat Paul did in 1 Tim. 1:15. Yet there it is, sat in and taken by the Apostle.

And we say if we sin "willfully" we have problems? There is not a man of us who is sinless, and THIS is true. There was never a person who left the seat of being a sinner to start with.

Sinning willfully or unwillfully didn't change the equation of being a sinner, one iota.

4 Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.5 And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin. 6 Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him.
7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.
1 John 3:4-9


Paul was a sinner, and then turned to God and was saved... meaning his sins were taken away.

For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”
Romans 11:27


What sins remain if God has taken them away?


JLB

 

[netchaplain]

If I understand Catholic doctrine, Parker will agree with this but will say the 'salvation' part has only truly occurred, and continues to occur, if there are indeed works following.

That's pretty close, in that the following of works manifests faith (as you've mentioned below), not produces it, which is the only possible order, considering there can be no true works until there is faith (salvation). "Apart from Me you can do nothing" (John 15:5).[/QUOTE]

But we Protestants say the 'salvation' part has only truly occurred if the initial offering of faith was genuine.

This is the only way I believe because, again, if there is no true faith there is no true works. Grace, faith and salvation are inseparable thus simultaneous, which are all for the purpose of glorifying God in them being manifest in our lifestyle (works).

But most Protestants think faith, whether or not it produces works, invariably and without exception saves.

I believe this is just a misunderstanding, in that there are no true believers who think works will not follow. The confusion is misunderstanding that when faith is initially entered into, there are no works, because they eventually "follow," as the Spirit whom we now "live in" teaches us to "walk in" Him (Gal 5:25).

I think where the rub will come in is in the matter of 'justification' and where it fits in the equation you presented. I would order the equation like this: grace, faith, justification, then salvation/works.

Grace, faith, salvation, justification, holiness, righteousness etc. are also inseparable and simultaneous, because at rebirth the believer is given "all things that pertain unto life and godliness" (2Pet 1:3). Works are a standalone element concerning the effecting and retaining of salvation!

Blessings Brother

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Works are a standalone element concerning the effecting and retaining of salvation!

Maybe the simplest way to put their argument is 'faith is not faith until it works', faith being composed of, both, faith and works. And so in that sense works plays it's essential, non-meritorious role in salvation. Not that works are the agent which earns salvation, but works being the completion and essential component of the faith that secures salvation.

So to say you have faith, but no works, is to them to not really have faith at all. Which we Protestants would agree with at first, except that we would then turn right around and argue that God won't be looking at our works to discern whether we are saved or not, just our faith, alone, and on that basis a person could actually arrive at the Judgment without works in hand, only a genuine faith, and still be saved. There's only one scenario that would be true, but we Protestants have made it a hard and fast rule that applies to ALL people.

The only scenario in which a person can legitimately claim 'faith alone' on the Day of Judgment is if they simply arrived there at the Judgment before they had a chance to grow up into any works of righteousness. Which I agree with, but which is hardly a justification for an official doctrine that God won't be looking at your works on the day of Judgment to discern whether or not you love him in a born again experience. That Protestant argument, based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the faith vs. works argument, goes completely and totally against Jesus' own teaching in Matthew 25:31-46 NASB.

I guess what we Protestants don't seem to be able to grasp (because of the misunderstanding of the faith vs. works teaching) is that just because Jesus will be looking at our works to separate the sheep from the goats doesn't mean salvation is earned by doing good works. The Catholics get it. The reason they get it (faith is not faith until it works) may not be entirely sound, but it does do a good job at explaining how works really are an essential part of salvation, but which count nothing toward the goodness of the person himself to earn that salvation.

 

[turnorburn]

Maybe the simplest way to put their argument is 'faith is not faith until it works', faith being composed of, both, faith and works. And so in that sense works plays it's essential, non-meritorious role in salvation. Not that works are the agent which earns salvation, but works being the completion and essential component of the faith that secures salvation.

So to say you have faith, but no works, is to them to not really have faith at all. Which we Protestants would agree with at first, except that we would then turn right around and argue that God won't be looking at our works to discern whether we are saved or not, just our faith, alone, and on that basis a person could actually arrive at the Judgment without works in hand, only a genuine faith, and still be saved. There's only one scenario that would be true, but we Protestants have made it a hard and fast rule that applies to ALL people.

The only scenario in which a person can legitimately claim 'faith alone' on the Day of Judgment is if they simply arrived there at the Judgment before they had a chance to grow up into any works of righteousness. Which I agree with, but which is hardly a justification for an official doctrine that God won't be looking at your works on the day of Judgment to discern whether or not you love him in a born again experience. That Protestant argument, based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the faith vs. works argument, goes completely and totally against Jesus' own teaching in Matthew 25:31-46 NASB.

I guess what we Protestants don't seem to be able to grasp (because of the misunderstanding of the faith vs. works teaching) is that just because Jesus will be looking at our works to separate the sheep from the goats doesn't mean salvation is earned by doing good works. The Catholics get it. The reason they get it (faith is not faith until it works) may not be entirely sound, but it does do a good job at explaining how works really are an essential part of salvation, but which count nothing toward the goodness of the person himself to earn that salvation.

Why are you saying Catholics get it and Protestants don't?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Why are you saying Catholics get it and Protestants don't?

Catholics get how works are a necessary part of salvation, Protestants, in general, do not. That's all.
Don't misunderstand, I have little love for the Catholic religion.

IMO, where they go wrong is on the matter of justification.

 

[netchaplain]

Maybe the simplest way to put their argument is 'faith is not faith until it works', faith being composed of, both, faith and works. And so in that sense works plays it's essential, non-meritorious role in salvation. Not that works are the agent which earns salvation, but works being the completion and essential component of the faith that secures salvation.

I believe I agree here if I'm understanding you correctly. But just for clarification on "faith that secures salvation," I see it that faith only secures manifesting salvation, not securing salvation itself.

So to say you have faith, but no works, is to them to not really have faith at all.

True, if no works follow. James wrote that if one cannot show faith by evidence of works, this faith is "dead," e.g.
nonexistent; no faith at all (Jam 2:20). "A man may say" (2:18), e.g. one may falsely claim he has faith, but if he doesn't it will manifest itself to be absent by the absence of works.

Which we Protestants would agree with at first, except that we would then turn right around and argue that God won't be looking at our works to discern whether we are saved or not, just our faith, alone, and on that basis a person could actually arrive at the Judgment without works in hand, only a genuine faith, and still be saved.

I agree, but generally this is not the usual situation, only in special situations, i.e. the thief on the cross.

That Protestant argument, based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the faith vs. works argument, goes completely and totally against Jesus' own teaching in Matthew 25:31-46 NASB.

Not understanding this.

 

[JLB]

one may falsely claim he has faith,

A person may claim to have faith, and it may be true as well, but the faith they do have could in fact be dead, or "inactive", unable to produce a divine result, if they do not have the corresponding action of obedience, that makes their faith alive... active and able to produce the divine result, that God intended.

James explains:

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? James 2:21-22

When God spoke to Abraham, and commanded him to offer his son Isaac, on the altar as a sacrifice... at that point Abraham had faith from God.

Now it came to pass after these things that God tested Abraham, and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.”
2 Then He said, “Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.” Genesis 22:1-2

It wasn't until Abraham, obeyed the word of faith, that he was justified, and his faith was made complete, or whole and able to satisfy or please God, in which He continued to declare Abraham to be right with Him.

12 And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”
Genesis 22:12

and again


“By Myself I have sworn, says the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son—17 blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies.18 In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice.” Genesis 22:16-18



JLB

 

[netchaplain]

A person may claim to have faith, and it may be true as well, but the faith they do have could in fact be dead, or "inactive", unable to produce a divine result,

It's my understanding that the primary sense of James indicating "death faith" designs the intention of no faith, e.g. believers cannot have faith without God eventually causing (working) it in them to have works. He "works" (Phl 2:13) in everyone born again, not just some.

Blessings!

 

[JLB]

It's my understanding that the primary sense of James indicating "death faith" designs the intention of no faith, e.g. believers cannot have faith without God eventually causing (working) it in them to have works. He "works" (Phl 2:13) in everyone born again, not just some.

Blessings!

When God speaks to a person and they hear Him, they have faith.

It is by the corresponding act of obedience that their faith becomes activated, or alive.


JLB

 

[netchaplain]

When God speaks to a person and they hear Him, they have faith.

It is by the corresponding act of obedience that their faith becomes activated, or alive.

JLB

I agree, if what you mean by "hear" intends understand and believe, because their are many who will hear the Word and not understand it nor believe it. Matthews account of the sower's parable indicates all heard but only one understood (Mat 13:19-23).

You might be referring to "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." I believe the second "hearing" may intend understanding the word, as in "My sheep hear My voice."

 

[Jim Parker]

And you know the NT expresses that it is not good works alone that determines salvation:

It very certainly does express that truth.
But that is not the whole truth.

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast' (Eph 2:8-9 ESV).

It is a source of consternation to me that so many Christians take that piece out of it's context and completely ignore the very next verse:v For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." (Eph 2:10 ESV)

(an excursus) It is evident that most Christians are unaware that the chapter and verse numbers weren't added until the 1500's and then for the express purpose of making it easier to find a passage or that the original letter was written as if it were one long sentence without any punctuation whatsoever and that it was meant to be read aloud. The result is that the average Bible reader assumes that the numbers mark real, rather than imaginary, divisions in the flow of the writer's thought and that assumption tends to lend validity to the practice of "proof-texting." That process is fatally flawed in that it lends a facade of reasonableness to lifting a verse out of its context in order to use it as "proof" of some doctrine of which, in context, it says absolutely nothing. (here ends the excursus)

Eph 2:1-10 ESV (sans capitals and punctuation) and you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked following the course of this world following the prince of the power of the air the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience — among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh carrying out the desires of the body and the mind and were by nature children of wrath like the rest of mankind but God being rich in mercy because of the great love with which he loved us even when we were dead in our trespasses made us alive together with Christ — by grace you have been saved — and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus for by grace you have been saved through faith and this is not your own doing it is the gift of God not a result of works so that no one may boast for we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them

Paul's comment about not being saved by works is a refutation of the current teachings of several branches of Greek philosophy which proposed that a man can be deified (become a god, immortal) through his own efforts. Paul's response is that we are saved (deified, made immortal, be conformed to the image of his Son) by the grace of God and that, rather than making one worthy of deification, good works are what we were created to do. It's our job. (Luke 17:10 RSV So you also, when you have done all that is commanded you, say, "We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty.")
Therefore, it is my personal opinion that, when the 8th and 9th verses of Ephesians 2 are cited in exclusion of verse 10 (at least), damage is done specifically to Paul's teaching and, in general, to the Gospel.

jim

 

[OzSpen]

Utter nonsense.

Paul plainly stated that Christ came [past tense] to save sinners, of whom I am chief... of those whom Christ came to save.

4 Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.5 And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin. 6 Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him.
7 Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 8 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. 9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.
1 John 3:4-9

Paul was a sinner, and then turned to God and was saved... meaning his sins were taken away.

For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”
Romans 11:27

What sins remain if God has taken them away?

JLB

To whom are you responding. Please learn to quote (back-quote) the one to whom you reply so that I know the content of the one who causes you this reply.

 

[OzSpen]

It very certainly does express that truth.
But that is not the whole truth.

It is a source of consternation to me that so many Christians take that piece out of it's context and completely ignore the very next verse:v For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." (Eph 2:10 ESV)

(an excursus) It is evident that most Christians are unaware that the chapter and verse numbers weren't added until the 1500's and then for the express purpose of making it easier to find a passage or that the original letter was written as if it were one long sentence without any punctuation whatsoever and that it was meant to be read aloud. The result is that the average Bible reader assumes that the numbers mark real, rather than imaginary, divisions in the flow of the writer's thought and that assumption tends to lend validity to the practice of "proof-texting." That process is fatally flawed in that it lends a facade of reasonableness to lifting a verse out of its context in order to use it as "proof" of some doctrine of which, in context, it says absolutely nothing. (here ends the excursus)

Eph 2:1-10 ESV (sans capitals and punctuation) and you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked following the course of this world following the prince of the power of the air the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience — among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh carrying out the desires of the body and the mind and were by nature children of wrath like the rest of mankind but God being rich in mercy because of the great love with which he loved us even when we were dead in our trespasses made us alive together with Christ — by grace you have been saved — and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus for by grace you have been saved through faith and this is not your own doing it is the gift of God not a result of works so that no one may boast for we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus for good works which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them

Paul's comment about not being saved by works is a refutation of the current teachings of several branches of Greek philosophy which proposed that a man can be deified (become a god, immortal) through his own efforts. Paul's response is that we are saved (deified, made immortal, be conformed to the image of his Son) by the grace of God and that, rather than making one worthy of deification, good works are what we were created to do. It's our job. (Luke 17:10 RSV So you also, when you have done all that is commanded you, say, "We are unworthy servants; we have only done what was our duty.")
Therefore, it is my personal opinion that, when the 8th and 9th verses of Ephesians 2 are cited in exclusion of verse 10 (at least), damage is done specifically to Paul's teaching and, in general, to the Gospel.

jim

Agreed. Somebody has already pointed out to me the need for verse 10 and I agree.

The quote you give from Eph 2:1-10 (ESV) also should eliminate the punctuation of hyphens. And as you know, there were no spaces between words either.

 

[Jim Parker]

This is hardly liturgical worship. It is every-member ministry when the church 'comes together'.

Neither is it a definitive description of normal worship in the early church. The Bible does not provide an accurate description of the form of worship practiced by the early church.
However, we know that the original church was Jewish and that their form of worship came from the forms of the synagogue and the Temple. There is no evidence that they simply abandoned the forms of worship to which they were accusto0med and adopted a form strikingly similar to the average Protestant, charismatic service of the 20th century.
Rather, by the beginning of the 2nd century, the following definitive description of normal worship is reported:
(I have added the numbers for the cause of clarity)

Justin Martyr: (AD 100-165) The First Apology of Justin
Chapter LXVII.—Weekly Worship of the Christians.
…… (1) And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and
(2) the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits;
(3) then, when the reader has ceased, the president1 verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.
(4) Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended,
(5) bread and wine and water are brought, and the president1 in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and
(6) the people assent, saying Amen;
(7) and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, (the Eucharist) and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons………….

Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples,

(8) He (Jesus) taught them (the apostles & disciples) these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

Justin described a gathering
(a) of the entire local church,
(b) at a place which would accommodate them,
(c) on Sunday.

He then described the process of the meeting which are easily identified as standard liturgical worship:
A. the Liturgy of the word
(1) The reading of the Gospels or Prophets
(2) The sermon
(3) The prayers of the people
B. The Liturgy of the Eucharist
(4) The consecration of the bread and wine (by the presider, AKA: "priest")
(5) The “great Amen”
(6) The people receive the Eucharist

The source of this form of liturgy: Justin stated that it was Jesus who taught this form of worship. Thus, Justin refuted the notion that the Mass was a later development.

What Justin describes is the basic format of the liturgy that is followed to this day in all Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Coptic and Assyrian Churches. It was the form of worship in common usage from Britain to India by the beginning of the 2nd century. For example, when Portuguese traders, who sailed around Africa, arrived in India in the 1400's, they were astonished to find a thriving Christian church which celebrated the liturgy according to the above form, and which was the fruit of the evangelism of the apostle Thomas who arrived there in 52AD.

jim

 

[turnorburn]

Neither is it a definitive description of normal worship in the early church. The Bible does not provide an accurate description of the form of worship practiced by the early church.
However, we know that the original church was Jewish and that their form of worship came from the forms of the synagogue and the Temple. There is no evidence that they simply abandoned the forms of worship to which they were accusto0med and adopted a form strikingly similar to the average Protestant, charismatic service of the 20th century.
Rather, by the beginning of the 2nd century, the following definitive description of normal worship is reported:
(I have added the numbers for the cause of clarity)

Justin Martyr: (AD 100-165) The First Apology of Justin
Chapter LXVII.—Weekly Worship of the Christians.
…… (1) And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and
(2) the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits;
(3) then, when the reader has ceased, the president1 verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things.
(4) Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended,
(5) bread and wine and water are brought, and the president1 in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and
(6) the people assent, saying Amen;
(7) and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, (the Eucharist) and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons………….

Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples,

(8) He (Jesus) taught them (the apostles & disciples) these things, which we have submitted to you also for your consideration.

Justin described a gathering
(a) of the entire local church,
(b) at a place which would accommodate them,
(c) on Sunday.

He then described the process of the meeting which are easily identified as standard liturgical worship:
A. the Liturgy of the word
(1) The reading of the Gospels or Prophets
(2) The sermon
(3) The prayers of the people
B. The Liturgy of the Eucharist
(4) The consecration of the bread and wine (by the presider, AKA: "priest")
(5) The “great Amen”
(6) The people receive the Eucharist

The source of this form of liturgy: Justin stated that it was Jesus who taught this form of worship. Thus, Justin refuted the notion that the Mass was a later development.

What Justin describes is the basic format of the liturgy that is followed to this day in all Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican, Coptic and Assyrian Churches. It was the form of worship in common usage from Britain to India by the beginning of the 2nd century. For example, when Portuguese traders, who sailed around Africa, arrived in India in the 1400's, they were astonished to find a thriving Christian church which celebrated the liturgy according to the above form, and which was the fruit of the evangelism of the apostle Thomas who arrived there in 52AD.

jim

Where are the Protestants in all of this?

 

[Jim Parker]

Where are the Protestants in all of this?

You question is unclear.
What do you mean by "where are the Protestants?"

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Not understanding this.

Jesus plainly teaches that goats and sheep (the unrighteous and the righteous) get separated on the basis of their works, yet most Protestants vehemently decry the notion that salvation will be doled out on the evidence of one's works....claiming that would be a gospel based on meritorious works, which it is not. That is still a faith based gospel. It is for the Catholics because your faith in Christ IS your manifest works, and for the few Protestants like me it's not a works gospel because works are merely the evidence by which Christ will identify the person who has the faith that justifies apart from works. Just as evil deeds are the evidence Christ will use to identify those who do not have the faith that justifies all by itself.

31“But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne. 32“All the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; 33and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left.

34“Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35‘For I was hungry, and you gave Me something to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me something to drink; I was a stranger, and you invited Me in; 36naked, and you clothed Me; I was sick, and you visited Me; I was in prison, and you came to Me.’ 37“Then the righteous will answer Him, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, and feed You, or thirsty, and give Yousomething to drink? 38‘And when did we see You a stranger, and invite You in, or naked, and clothe You?39‘When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40“The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’

41“Then He will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels; 42for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; 43I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’ 44“Then they themselves also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?’ 45“Then He will answer them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46“These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” (Matthew 25:31-46 NASB bold mine)

Like in any just court of law, condemnation or acquittal is based on the evidence presented. In God's court of law, that hardly means he's using righteous works as that which meritoriously buys us our salvation. No. It only means he's using the expected and obligatory evidence that invariably follows the one who claims to love God because they have been justified by faith in the blood of Christ to rescue them from the damnation of the unjust.

 

[smaller]

Utter nonsense.

Paul plainly stated that Christ came [past tense] to save sinners, of whom I am chief... of those whom Christ came to save.

I pointed to the obvious. Paul's statement was after salvation, present tense, "I am." 1 Tim. 1:15.

When believers get notions they are at any time, sinless, it's simply not true to scriptural discourses. That's why we have "imputed" righteousness in Christ for example, Romans 4:22-24, but it is not by the fact that we, in the flesh, are sinless at any time because that's never the case.

Paul was a sinner, and then turned to God and was saved... meaning his sins were taken away.

And I strongly disagree with any sight that attempts to make Paul sinless as there is a mountain of contrary statements directly from Paul himself showing the exact opposite to be the case. Romans 7:7-13, Romans 7:17-21, Romans 7:25, 2 Cor. 12:7, etc. None of these point or direct us to conclude that either Paul or ourselves are sinless.

The fact is and remains that the flesh is contrary to and against the Spirit, and vice versa. Gal. 5:17. Paul even considered, quite rightfully, that the body is VILE because of indwelling sin and evil present. Phil. 3:21. This is the basis of HOPE for a NEW BODY that doesn't have these "issues." Romans 8:23, 1 Cor. 15 from vs. 42 on.

For this is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”
Romans 11:27

What sins remain if God has taken them away?

JLB

Just as righteousness is "imputed" by faith in Christ, so sins are not counted against mankind in general. BUT this does not mean they are not imputed. Man is not alone in any sin. Every sin, in thought, word and deed is also connected to the devil. Mark 4:15, 1 John 3:8.

When all the parties are on the table for view, then the theological discourses must change to encompass the whole equation.

We are forgiven. The tempter isn't. We have imputed righteousness. The tempter doesn't. We have faith in Christ. The tempter doesn't. Etc etc. These are never theological accountings of "just man" or "just believers." There are two edges to the Sword.