Faith without works........is Faith.

[dadof10]

Respectfully, I don't think you're getting this. Vanity isn't something we can refuse to act on, even because it's a vain measure of righteousness through works. To think we don't have vanity, is vanity. To think we can have it, and not act out of it, is vanity. Our vanity is God's source of finding for us a pure humility as He reveals Himself.




On the contrary, a corrupt image of God is the greatest sin upon which all other sin exists.

First off, I'm not saying Christ is my concept or anyone else's concept of God. Christ is the Image God sent by God Himself for us to believe in. His ways are Holy and True. Yes we all do have a carnal pride, but that won't matter as we become convinced that the greatest is the one who serves the rest. Philippians 2:5, Philippians 2: 6-7.

You're right, I'm not getting it. Maybe an example would help. If I come across a person who is in need, God's grace moves me to help. You said "I don't think that God's grace is rejected as you suggest" OK, if I FREELY CHOOSE not to help this person, is this FREEWILL ACT rejecting Grace? You said "vanity isn't something we can refuse to act on", yet if I choose God over self, humbling myself to serve that man, that's exactly what I'm doing, refusing to act on vanity (pride). What am I missing?

 

[Seabass]

My apologies. I meant to cite in my last post, 1 John 1:8, Romans 6:1, Romans 6:12, Romans 7:13, Romans 7:21 etc.

I do not consider it a sin, to admit that I am a sinner, saved by Grace. To me this is "truthful discourse" amongst us.

I do find it somewhat strange to have to make and prove this case with other believers. It is probably the easiest scriptural ground to prove to any of us, and firmly establishes that we are saved by Grace Alone, through Christ Jesus.

But none of the verses you cited say salvation is by "grace alone".

Two points:

1) the word "alone' is an exclusionary word therefore if salvation is by "grace alone" then that EXCLUDES everything else from salvation as faith, (Eph 2:8) the engrafted word (James 1:21), blood of Christ (Rev 1:5; 1 Pet 1:18,19), hope (Rom 8:24) repentance (Lk 13:3,5) confession Rom 10:9,10 baptism (1 Pet 3:21) all of which the bible says DOES save. Therefore 'grace alone' creates a contradiction among bible verses.

2) Titus 2:11 "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,"

If 'grace alone' unconditionally saves, then ALL MEN will be saved yet the bible does not teach Universalism but in fact teaches most men will be lost, (Matt 7:13)

 

[Seabass]

....because they hold fast to their erroneous understanding of what it means for justification to be based on faith in Christ apart from works.

And here is the rub; apart from what works?
Some ASSUME Paul is saying "apart from ALL works" but Paul NEVER said this.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

But none of the verses you cited say salvation is by "grace alone".

Two points:

1) the word "alone' is an exclusionary word therefore if salvation is by "grace alone" then that EXCLUDES everything else from salvation as faith, (Eph 2:8) the engrafted word (James 1:21), blood of Christ (Rev 1:5; 1 Pet 1:18,19), hope (Rom 8:24) repentance (Lk 13:3,5) confession Rom 10:9,10 baptism (1 Pet 3:21) all of which the bible says DOES save. Therefore 'grace alone' creates a contradiction among bible verses.

2) Titus 2:11 "For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,"

If 'grace alone' unconditionally saves, then ALL MEN will be saved yet the bible does not teach Universalism but in fact teaches most men will be lost, (Matt 7:13)

This is why I'm careful to say what the scriptures actually say: "righteousness apart from works" (Romans 4:6 NASB).

 

[Jethro Bodine]

And here is the rub; apart from what works?
Some ASSUME Paul is saying "apart from ALL works" but Paul NEVER said this.

He's talking about justification, not salvation on the Day of Wrath.

We are justified (declared legally righteous) by faith in God to forgive us, all by itself, apart from and without consideration of what we've done (Philippians 3:9 NASB). We are saved on the Day of Wrath because we keep having faith in the forgiveness of God as evidenced by our righteous behavior (not perfect behavior, smaller). A cessation of works by the time we get to the Day of Wrath means we stopped having the faith that secures God's forgiveness (the faith that justifies) somewhere along the line and we will be lost in the Judgement. Not because works have power to make us righteous, but because works are the proof that we have been made righteous in Christ through the forgiveness of our sins.

I try to point this difference in terms out to people but it's hard to swallow because we've conditioned ourselves to assume 'justification' and 'salvation' are always and categorically interchangeable and have the exact same meaning and application.

We are justified by faith all by itself apart from works (Romans 4:6 NASB).
We are saved by our works, but ONLY in that they are the evidence God uses to determine if we love God, having had our sins forgiven (Matthew 25:31-46 NASB).

 

[smaller]

I don't know if you mean to say this, but all I really get out of your posts is that it's okay to not have good works.

It is my view, which I consider to be honest, that no believer always at all times does only "sheep works." An honest believer will recognize that when they do NOT do sheep works, they are in fact doing "goat works." Of course equally sure is that few believers will honestly admit it.

We're all painfully aware of how sin is always lurking, waiting to pounce and make us do something that we don't want to do.

Well of course that is TRUE! Why is it then that we try to justify ourselves? It is theological folly to try to justify ourselves in the light of fact above. We are in fact precisely called to divide ourselves from that working, NOT to deny that it's a reality or try to justify it.

There is no justification of ourselves, because of this fact.

Contrary to your experience, I meet few Christians who can't acknowledge this fact. What I meet are plenty of Christians who use this fact to rationalize not having a lifestyle of good works operating in their lives in addition to their failed battles with sin.

I hate to break it to you, but we all lost the battle with sin before we ever got started. The notions that any believer has made themselves sinless is a theological fallacy. Paul denies such fallacies by claiming himself the chief of sinners, post salvation. Paul had no personal justifications to stand on in that sight of himself. 1 Tim. 1:15

There is a very certain spiritual paradox that Paul delivers us in these matters, that being this: We can not make the presence of indwelling sin (Romans 7:14-20, which Paul termed "NOT I" and evil present, Romans 7:21) be anything other than what it factually IS.

Yet, by that same man, we are commanded to SIN NOT! (1 Cor. 15:34)

This is called REIGNING over the sin we factually have. (Romans 6:12) To deny we have it to reign over makes us liars. To try to justify it, fools.

Paul provides us more than ample truthful honest grounds upon which to view these matters from, when we recognize it is NOT US.

Paul lays out quite precisely, in many places, exactly HOW God has made us. Romans 9: 20-23 is my personal favorite example of the construction of "me" as Paul shows it. We can not by any measures justify the "vessel" of dishonor in our own lump. This same example is provided again in Galatians 4:29, and AGAIN this is a "personal" example of the same things that Paul taught. It is show yet again, in 2 Tim. 2:20-21 that it is WE who have a "vessel of dishonor" to DIVIDE OURSELVES from, even while still having same.

I submit therefore to Paul's depictions of HOW GOD MADE US ALL. Trying to justify the vessel of dishonor, the child of the flesh, the allegorical Ishmael that ALL of us drag around with us, is a worthless engagement.

We Protestants seem to interpret Jesus' teaching about the inside and the outside of the cup as, "well, since Jesus said it's wrong to have the external righteousness of the Pharisees it's okay to have no righteousness at all", and forgetting that he said that we are to have the righteousness that comes from a cup that is clean on the inside, because that would then make the outside of the cup clean (Matthew 23:26 NASB). But as it is, Protestant Christians seem to be content with unclean cups in and out as if that's the answer to Jesus' disdain for the righteousness of the Pharisees.

I take the statements from Jesus to the Pharisee's, which THEY DENIED, to be a personal fact for me.

This is "how" every disciple of Jesus is "sent forth:"

Matthew 10:16
Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

These are not stories about "you and I" as opposed to "the other people," but about "us," individually.

A wise believer knows that he HAS to engage the TEMPTER within and to thereby FIGHT to divide. I have no interests in trying to justify that working or worker. But I am AWARE of the reality.

 

[dadof10]

'No' to both questions. The signature of legal justification is the new nature--the new nature that does righteous things. But so many in the Protestant church say justified people don't have to do anything righteous. That's like saying a person who goes swimming doesn't have to be wet. Or like saying Abraham didn't have to offer up Isaac on the altar. Which is the point of James' discourse about faith and works: You're kidding yourself if you claim to have faith but you have no corresponding work to validate the presence of that faith.

"(S)how me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works." (James 2:18 NASB)

But, the person who has "new nature that does righteous things", who is legally justified, can lose salvation, right? So, unless he can also lose legal justification, there are legally justified souls in Hell.

I'm of the opinion that God knows exactly why a person turns their back on the salvation they have received in Christ. I think even that can be done in ignorance and weakness, not just willfully with the express intent of knowingly not wanting to be a part of the kingdom anymore. I knew a woman who in weakness left the faith to marry an unbeliever. She was accepted back by God, her Spirit-filled life being the evidence of that.

We can only hope everyone who rejects God does it out of ignorance or weakness.

 

[Seabass]

This is why I'm careful to say what the scriptures actually say: "righteousness apart from works" (Romans 4:6 NASB).

I agree that salvation is by righeousness apart from works.

The issue is what "works" is Paul talking about that salvation does not require.

Some lift "apart from works" from the context, isolate it from all other verses then make the claim Paul is referring to ALL works when in the context Paul is referring to works of merit in flawless law keeping. Paul in Rom 6:16-18 REQUIRED works (obeying from the heart) to being saved. Paul would not contradict himself by excluding ALL works in Rom 4 then require works in Rom 6. Paul is EXCLUDING works of merit in Rom 4 and INCLUDING obedient works in Rom 6. Grace does not exclude obedience but requires it for God made obedience a condition to receive His free gift of grace and the obedience does not/cannot earn the grace.

 

[Seabass]

He's talking about justification, not salvation on the Day of Wrath.

We are justified (declared legally righteous) by faith in God to forgive us, all by itself, apart from and without consideration of what we've done (Philippians 3:9 NASB). We are saved on the Day of Wrath because we keep having faith in the forgiveness of God as evidenced by our righteous behavior (not perfect behavior, smaller). A cessation of works by the time we get to the Day of Wrath means we stopped having the faith that secures God's forgiveness (the faith that justifies) somewhere along the line and we will be lost in the Judgement. Not because works have power to make us righteous, but because works are the proof that we have been made righteous in Christ through the forgiveness of our sins.

I try to point this difference in terms out to people but it's hard to swallow because we've conditioned ourselves to assume 'justification' and 'salvation' are always and categorically interchangeable and have the exact same meaning and application.

We are justified by faith all by itself apart from works (Romans 4:6 NASB).
We are saved by our works, but ONLY in that they are the evidence God uses to determine if we love God, having had our sins forgiven (Matthew 25:31-46 NASB).

Again, no verse says we are justified "apart from and without consideration of what we've done"

James quickly refutes that by showing how both Abraham and Rahab were justified by their works.

Paul in Rom 6:17,18 put it this way:
1) servants of sin
2) obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine
3) then freed from sin>justified.

Both James and Paul put justification by obedient works. In Rom 4 Paul says justification is not by works of merit in flawless law keeping:
Obedient works>>>>>justify
works of merit>>>>>>do not justify

Everybody is doing one of two things, they are either doing righteousness or unrighteousness, no inbetween. So how can one ever be justified while he continues to do unrighteousness which is the very thing making him Unjustified? He must first do righteousness before he can be justified for the unrighteous can NEVER be justified while they continue in their unrighteousness...impossible

 

[childeye]

You're right, I'm not getting it. Maybe an example would help. If I come across a person who is in need, God's grace moves me to help. You said "I don't think that God's grace is rejected as you suggest" OK, if I FREELY CHOOSE not to help this person, is this FREEWILL ACT rejecting Grace? You said "vanity isn't something we can refuse to act on", yet if I choose God over self, humbling myself to serve that man, that's exactly what I'm doing, refusing to act on vanity (pride). What am I missing?

The way you use the term grace in the above example is problematic. I think that what you mean to say is empathy moves you to help someone. So you ask, If I freely choose not to help this person, is this FREEWILL ACT rejecting empathy? My answer is that when we reject empathy, it is the carnal will and the carnal reasoning that rejects empathy. Romans 8:7.

You will probably then ask if it is freewill to choose between God's will and our carnal will. This is conflating choice/decision with choice/option. In other words, just because a moral choice must be made, does not mean freewill exists.

 

[dadof10]

The way you use the term grace in the above example is problematic. I think that what you mean to say is empathy moves you to help someone. So you ask, If I freely choose not to help this person, is this FREEWILL ACT rejecting empathy? My answer is that when we reject empathy, it is the carnal will and the carnal reasoning that rejects empathy. Romans 8:7.

You will probably then ask if it is freewill to choose between God's will and our carnal will. This is conflating choice/decision with choice/option. In other words, just because a moral choice must be made, does not mean freewill exists.

Ahhh...got it. There's no such thing as free will, then?

 

[childeye]

Ahhh...got it. There's no such thing as free will, then?

Freewill means voluntary. There are voluntary actions. I don't see them happening in the moral purview. These decisions are either spiritually or carnally motivated.

 

[dadof10]

Freewill means voluntary. There are voluntary actions. I don't see them happening in the moral purview. These decisions are either spiritually or carnally motivated.

A spiritually motivated decision? In the above example (from James 2) that's what I'm discribing, a decision motivated by God or Grace, that can be rejected. Unless you believe that this Grace is irresistible.

 

[childeye]

A spiritually motivated decision? In the above example (from James 2) that's what I'm discribing, a decision motivated by God or Grace, that can be rejected. Unless you believe that this Grace is irresistible.

I'm not sure what your point is. James is talking about showing carnal favoritism and how that is not of Christ. The carnal motivated mind can't help but resist God. Romans 8:7.

 

[dadof10]

I'm not sure what your point is. James is talking about showing carnal favoritism and how that is not of Christ. The carnal motivated mind can't help but resist God. Romans 8:7.

I'm not really trying to make a point here, just understand where you're coming from...

 

[dadof10]

I'm not sure what your point is. James is talking about showing carnal favoritism and how that is not of Christ. The carnal motivated mind can't help but resist God. Romans 8:7.

However you want to couch it, James is talking about a spiritual decision. That's obvious from the text.

 

[childeye]

However you want to couch it, James is talking about a spiritual decision. That's obvious from the text.

I don't think James is talking about a spiritual decision. He's talking about how the carnal mind thinks and acts and how the mind of Christ thinks and acts.

 

[dadof10]

I don't think James is talking about a spiritual decision. He's talking about how the carnal mind thinks and acts and how the mind of Christ thinks and acts.

And we are to CHOOSE to act with the mind of Christ, right? How is this not a decision?

 

[childeye]

And we are to CHOOSE to act with the mind of Christ, right?

The mind of Christ acts apart from our choice. As scripture says, I do as I have learned of my Father. John 8:29. As far as I know, Christ can't contemplate a choice contrary to his Father with any viable consideration.

How is this not a decision?

Morally speaking, Christ lives in us. He is our wisdom and our righteousness. His Spirit is greater than he that is in the world. 1 John 4:4. Are you suggesting that Christ lives in us only as we decide he does?

 

[childeye]

And we are to CHOOSE to act with the mind of Christ, right? How is this not a decision?

Perhaps I should say this. 1 Jon 4, 13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. Where is the choice here? Most anything can be construed as a decision. But God giving me His Spirit is hard to see as my decision.