If you believe you can lose your salvation, you are not saved!(explanation)

[Drew]

We're certainly not on the same page. Here is what you stated in #262: "That begs the question, since the term “works” is not qualified by the term “good” or anything else that would rule out the possibility that the “works” of the Law of Moses is the subject."

That statement sounds to me as though your argument is that the word "works" in Eph 2:9 rules out the possibility that it refers to works of the law.

If that's not the case, then please rephrase the statement.

I think the statement is perfectly clear. Let me try again:

1. Paul does indeed say we are not saved by works.
2. You appear to assume that he must mean "good works";
3. But he does not say "good works" he say "works";
4. So while he could mean good works, he might also mean "works of the Law".

Is that clear?

In my post 262, I argue that he must mean "works of the Law of Moses".

Now, consider this from Galatians:

15"We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; 16nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified. [Galatians 2:15-16, NASB]

Now, here are three respected theologians, two of whom comment directly on Galatians 2, who all believe that by "works of the Law", Paul does not mean "good works" but rather those things the law prescribes that mark the Jew as distinct from the Gentile:

“The ‘works of the law’ by which one cannot be ‘justified’”, contended Wright, as he read and interpret Paul into Sanders’ understanding of Judaism, “are the “living like a Jew” of Galatians 2:14, the separation from “Gentile sinners” of Galatians 2:15.” He continued,

They are not, in other words, the moral “good works” which the Reformation tradition loves to hate. They are the things that divide Jew from Gentile: specifically, in the context of [Galatians 2:15-16 …] the “works of the law” which specify, however different Jewish groups might have put it at the time, that “Jews do not eat with Gentiles.”(Wright 2009: 116-117)

Dunn, like Wright, took a similar approach. He wrote,

The phrase “works of the law” in Gal. 2.16 is, in fact, a fairly restricted one: it refers precisely to these same identity markers described above, covenant works – those regulations prescribed by the law which any good Jew would simply take for granted to describe what a good Jew did. To be a good Jew, was to be a member of the covenant, was to observe circumcision, food laws and Sabbath.(Dunn 2008: 111)

“We may justifiably deduce, therefore [from the context of Gal 2:15-16]” concluded Dunn, “that by ‘works of the laws’ Paul intended his readers to think of particular observances of the law like circumcision and food laws” (Dunn 1999: 191 emp. original)

R. B. Hays, as cited by D. Garlington, also interpreted “‘works of the law’ [as] refer[ring] primarily to practices commanded by the law (circumcision, dietary laws, sabbath observance) that distinctively mark Jewish ethnic identity; these symbolize comprehensive obedience to the law’s covenant obligations.”(D. Garlington 2005: 39 cite Hays 1993: 2185)

Now, to be fair, it is not valid to simply invoke "experts" as if that makes the case. So I will try to argue the point later. But, for now at least, it should be clear that if these three accomplished scholars agree about "works of the Law", their view at least merits consideration.

 

[Drew]

What does Paul mean by "works of the law" as in this text?:

28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.... [Romans 3:28, NASB]

Does he mean:

1. Human acts of righteousness performed in order to gain credit before God; or
2. Elements of Jewish law that accentuate Jewish privilege and mark out Israel from other nations.

Well, it could either. Or perhaps something else. But let's restrict ourselves to these two options for now. What would we expect Paul to say about God's position with respect to Jews and Gentiles after he has dictated verse 28 if he believed position 1? Position 2?

If Paul believed position 1,he might make some statement about how neither Jew nor Gentile can ever do enough good works to get justified.

If Paul believed position 2, he would say something about how God does not justify on the basis of ethnicity.

What does Paul write next?

Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. [Romans 3:29-30, NASB]

I rest my case......

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Is dead faith approved by God?

By James' definition, Abraham's faith in Genesis 15:6 NASB is "dead, being by itself", yet his faith, all by itself, is commendable in God's eyes at this moment in Genesis 15:6 NASB. The problem is if faith by itself stays that way. Faith that remains alone was either never a genuine justifying faith in the first place, or, that justifying faith has ceased in that person. The latter argument being what the Protestant church fails to understand.

Is dead faith obedient to God?

Some will be, some will not be (remember the definition of 'dead' faith). In Abraham's case we know his 'dead' faith (faith being by itself) did in fact obey when he offered Isaac up on the altar. The moment faith is obedient it is no longer by definition 'dead' and gets exposed as the faith that can save a person.

Does dead faith trust God?

It can. Abraham's did. We know that because of the obedience it produced. But, as I say, it ceased to be 'dead' when it produced obedience.

Does dead faith solicit obedient works?

It can. The moment faith acts obediently as expected it by definition ceases to be 'dead' and is able to save the person who has that faith. Again, I cite Abraham's example.

If the answer is "yes" to these questions what makes it different from faith that justifies?

What makes dead faith different from the faith that justifies, you ask? It doesn't remain that way. That's the difference.

ALL faith, by strict definition, starts out as 'dead', "being by itself"--James 2:17 NASB. What matters is if it stays that way or not. A faith that is then obedient validates that faith as being genuine. A faith that remains dead signifies either a cessation of that faith, or, it was not a genuine faith to begin with:

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

The great deceit presently gripping the Protestant church is that the faith that remains dead (that is, being by itself having no works attached) can still save a person, not knowing that it being dead signifies it is a faith that can not justify.

 

[FreeGrace]

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G96&t=KJV
According to BlueLetterBible (above link) the word adokimos is found 8 times and in the KJV it is translated "reprobate" 6 of the 8 times.
The word means reprobate and no good reason for it being translated any other way:

"The word "reprobate" here rendered "a castaway" (KJV) is a metaphor derived from the testing of metals, and the casting aside of those which are spurious. That Paul should see the necessity for such serious and unceasing effort shows how little he believed in saintly works of "supererogation, over and above what is commanded." "When the cedar of Lebanon trembles, what shall the reed by the brookside do?"
F. W. Farrar, The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), Vol. 19, p. 291.

All that said, eternal life is a gift from God (Rom 6:23) that is irrevocable (Ro 11:29).

The word in 1 Cor 9:27 is the negative of "dokimos", which means approved, as in 2 Tim 2:15. Paul's point is that he wanted to be approved rather than disapproved.

 

[FreeGrace]

Already posted many times one needs to obey by believing, repenting confessing and submitting to baptism in order to reveive the promise of salvation.

So this is the list, huh? I've already refuted it.

Then one must do good works Eph 2:10 and remain faithful unto death Rev 2:10 to maintain this promise of salvation.

So, one maintains their own salvation, huh? That is not taught in the Bible, nor does Eph 2:10 say that.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

There is plenty of other Biblical evidence for the process of justification

For through the Spirit, by faith, we wait for the hope of righteousness. (Gal. 5: 5 RSV) Paul doesn't OWN righteousness, but is still hoping for it.

For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified… on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Jesus Christ. (Rom. 2:13, 16 RSV) Actions come BEFORE future justification.

Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience which leads to righteousness? (Rom. 6:16) Obedience LEADS TO righteousness.

You have the legal declaration of righteousness (justification) confused with the process of living up to that legal declaration of righteousness in actual righteous behavior (sanctification). Our legal standing is firmly established for us by the finished work of Christ always interceding for us in heaven and fully applied to us through our faith. Our behavior is what is in the process of development, not our legal standing with God in heaven through Christ.

This verse illustrates the difference:

"Clean out the old leaven so that you may be a new lump, just as you are in fact unleavened." (1 Corinthians 5:7 NASB italics in orig.)

Legally speaking we stand blameless and without fault before God in heaven because of the forgiveness of Christ that washes away any and all sin guilt that would otherwise be held to our account. That's the unleavened lump Paul is speaking about above. On the other hand, we all know all too well that we have the leaven of sin in these earthly bodies. That is what needs to go. That is what is in the process of changing. That is the process that began the moment we were justified, not our legal declaration of right standing with God. Legal justification was completed the moment we believed. We will spend the rest of our lives cleansing the household of our bodies of leaven, growing up into the stature of Christ, all in the hope and expectation that we will one day possess the righteousness behavior of Christ when we receive our new glorified bodies. That is the righteousness for which we wait and hope for:

"For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness." (Galatians 5:5 NASB)

But because of the forgiveness of Christ we have a legal declaration of righteousness already--fully and completely. That is not the righteousness that is growing and progressing.

 

[JLB]

You posted this in response to my post 116 in which I cited a number of texts that I believe comprise compelling evidence that the Law of Moses was given to Jews only. This response really does not address those texts - you provide another, different text and argue that it supports the notion that the Law of Moses applies to Gentiles. I believe you need to provide an argument that squarely addresses the texts I provided in post 116 and shows how these texts could be read in a manner consistent with the assertion that the Law of Moses was given to all humanity.

Your post 125 also quotes my post 116 but, again, while you provide arguments in response, you do not, I politely suggest give an account of how the verse I provided in post 116 could be read in a manner consistent with the assertion that the Law of Moses was given to all humanity.

Drew, here is a New Testament verse that shows us that there were those of other nations (ethnic groups), that were called children of God or people of God, which were clearly not of the nation of Israel.

49 And one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, 50 nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish.” 51 Now this he did not say on his own authority; but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad. John 11:49-52

Gentiles, like Abraham were always meant to be a part of the Abrahamic Covenant, as the promise of God to him says, you shall be a father of many nations...

King Cyrus a Gentile king was spoken of this way by God himself, through the mouth of Isaiah.

24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer, And He who formed you from the womb: "I am the Lord, who makes all things, Who stretches out the heavens all alone, Who spreads abroad the earth by Myself;
25 Who frustrates the signs of the babblers, And drives diviners mad; Who turns wise men backward, And makes their knowledge foolishness;
26 Who confirms the word of His servant, And performs the counsel of His messengers; Who says to Jerusalem, 'You shall be inhabited,' To the cities of Judah, 'You shall be built,' And I will raise up her waste places;
27 Who says to the deep, 'Be dry! And I will dry up your rivers';
28 Who says of Cyrus, 'He is My shepherd, And he shall perform all My pleasure, Saying to Jerusalem, "You shall be built," And to the temple, "Your foundation shall be laid..."
1 "Thus says the Lord to His anointed, To Cyrus, whose right hand I have held-- To subdue nations before him And loose the armor of kings, To open before him the double doors, So that the gates will not be shut:
2 'I will go before you And make the crooked places straight; I will break in pieces the gates of bronze And cut the bars of iron.
3 I will give you the treasures of darkness And hidden riches of secret places, That you may know that I, the Lord, Who call you by your name, Am the God of Israel.

13 I have raised him up in righteousness, And I will direct all his ways; He shall build My city And let My exiles go free, Not for price nor reward," Says the Lord of hosts. Isaiah 44:24-45:3,13


JLB

 

[Seabass]

All that said, eternal life is a gift from God (Rom 6:23) that is irrevocable (Ro 11:29).

The word in 1 Cor 9:27 is the negative of "dokimos", which means approved, as in 2 Tim 2:15. Paul's point is that he wanted to be approved rather than disapproved.

When kept in context, Rom 11:29 is about the fleshly Jews, that God will not repent of His calling and election of the Jews. God will still allow the Jews to be of His elect through Christ. They can still be grafted in (v23) and God will not permanently cast them off making salvation impossible for them.

No verse anywhere says the promise of salvation is received unconditionally and kept unconditionally.

1 Cor 9:27 the word means a reprobate, one not standing the test as metals are tested and those that do not pass the test are rejected.

 

[Seabass]

So this is the list, huh? I've already refuted it.


So, one maintains their own salvation, huh? That is not taught in the Bible, nor does Eph 2:10 say that.

The bible still requires repentance confession and baptism to be saved. You have not yet shown how an impenitent one will be saved anyway, or how one that denies Christ and will not confess Him yet be saved anyway, or how one can reject the gospel by rejecting baptism yet be saved anyway.

Eph 2:10 makes it impossible for one to be a Christian yet have no good works.
If one has no good works then he is not a Christian for God before ordained Christians walk in good works.

 

[Drew]

Drew, here is a New Testament verse that shows us that there were those of other nations (ethnic groups), that were called children of God or people of God, which were clearly not of the nation of Israel.

But the Law of Moses - the 613 commandments from the first 5 books of the Old Testament - were given to the Jews and only to the Jews. I do not dispute anything you wrote in your post, but I will continue to assert what I think is obvious from the broad compass of scripture: The Law of Moses was specific to the Jew.

 

[reba]

The Law was given to the Children of Israel and those who left Egypt with them...

 

[Drew]

The point is this: God has given everyone a conscience. Everyone has a sense of right and wrong.

Agree.

Whether one wants to distinguish between "works of the Law" and simply good deeds, I don't care. It makes no difference

.

Disagree. As per my earlier post, it is at least possible that when Paul writes of "works", he could be referring to works of the Law of Moses in particular - and based on the argument in post 262 which you have not responded to - he clearly is referring to the Law of Moses. Why haven't you addressed that argument?

Now, given that Paul uses "works" to refer to the works of the Law of Moses, what does he really mean when he refers to someone doing such works? Again, and per a recent post of mine, he could be referring to these works not in terms of the good deeds they sometimes entail, but rather in terms of their functions as an ethnic marker.

You appear, repeat appear, to be unable to consider the possibility that "works" is not about "doing moral acts", whether from the Law of Moses or not. Well, there is another possibility, as I have shown.

Remember: much of the Law of Moses is a not really about what we could call good works. Much of it has to do with how to sacrifice, what foods the Jew can eat, and what festivals he can celebrate.

These function as ethnic identifiers, and I believe it is otherwise clear from a range of scriptures that when Paul gets his shorts in a knot over "works", he is not rejecting the salvific power of good works, which he actually affirms here:

6God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. [Romans 2:6-7, NIV}

Instead, when says "you are not justified by works", he is simply saying "God does not only justify Jews".

 

[Drew]

The Law was given to the Children of Israel and those who left Egypt with them...

I agree, and in earlier posts I have been clear that for those Gentiles who were integrated into the community of Israel, the Law of Moses indeed applies to them. But not to the broader Gentile world.

 

[reba]

given the Law to the Jews v. the Children of Israel and those who went with them... seems a small thought but in reality it is not small... IT very strongly shows the Grace of God...

 

[FreeGrace]

When kept in context, Rom 11:29 is about the fleshly Jews, that God will not repent of His calling and election of the Jews.

incorrrect. There is NOTHING in the context that defines any gift of God as being election. The ONLY THING that Paul defined as a gift of God is justification and eternal life.

No verse anywhere says the promise of salvation is received unconditionally and kept unconditionally.

God's gifts (justification and eternal life) are irrevocable.

 

[FreeGrace]

The bible still requires repentance confession and baptism to be saved.

I've given a long list of verses that mention ONLY faith in Christ for salvation/eternal life.

You have not yet shown how an impenitent one will be saved anyway

Not sure what you mean by "impenitent". Also, when ever did I say that impenitent ones will be saved?

or how one that denies Christ and will not confess Him yet be saved anyway

If one never believed in Christ, they will NOT be saved. Anyone who believes in Christ has eternal life, which is irrevocable.

or how one can reject the gospel by rejecting baptism yet be saved anyway.

The gospel isn't about baptism, unless one means the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which isn't about water. Only those who have been baptised with the Holy Spirit are saved. Water baptism is a ritual only. No saving power.

Eph 2:10 makes it impossible for one to be a Christian yet have no good works.

Interesting opinion, but the verse does NOT teach this idea. It says those who God saves were created FOR good works. It says nothing of any guarantee that all believers will have good works.

If one has no good works then he is not a Christian for God before ordained Christians walk in good works.

Eph 2:10 doesn't say anything about being ordained. What verse is being cited here?

 

[Drew]

Hello Free Grace. I realize you are having to deal with lots of posts, but I believe you have not dealt with the following question:

Please explain what was going through Paul's mind when he wrote these words, yes these particular words:

God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. [Romans 2:6-7, NASB]

Please do not talk about other texts to the exclusion of this text. I think you have to say that Paul is saying something here he knows to be false. Why would Paul do that? Do you typically say things you know to be false?

 

[dadof10]

I understand that would be your opinion.

It's a fact. The verse below does not even address my point, which was: "works" in Paul's faith vs. works passages, doesn't mean "every effort a believer can do".

"make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love." (2Pt. 1)

Because PETER tells us to add good qualities to our faith, does not mean PAUL is making the parallel between "works" and "every effort..."

This is all irrelevant, since Paul also wrote this about Gentiles, who do not have the Mosaic Law:

"14For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves,15in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them," Rom 2:14,15

The point is this: God has given everyone a conscience. Everyone has a sense of right and wrong. Whether one wants to distinguish between "works of the Law" and simply good deeds, I don't care. It makes no difference. Those who do the works of the Law are doing good deeds, obviously. So your argument is moot.

Obeying the conscience is being differentiated from "the law" here, not compared to it. The Gentiles have "the work of the law written on their hearts" (conscience), and the Jews have the Law. What "accuses or defends" is their consciences, not PERFORMING WORKS OF THE LAW, like the Jews. The Gentiles "who do not have the Law..." are being contrasted to the Jews who do. Where does Paul compare "works" with "good deeds" here?

Apparently my post was either not read at all, or only given a very cursory glance. Please go back and read it. I never said anything to lead to such a question.


And it was given in my previous post, which wasn't read or read very carefully.

Here is your quote: "Actually, there is such thing as a "disobedient faith", it is faith that saves."
And my response: "Huh? Where does Scripture teach that "disobedient" faith saves?"

It's not me who is not reading carefully, it's you who aren't writing carefully.

 

[FreeGrace]

Agree.

Disagree. As per my earlier post, it is at least possible that when Paul writes of "works", he could be referring to works of the Law of Moses in particular - and based on the argument in post 262 which you have not responded to - he clearly is referring to the Law of Moses. Why haven't you addressed that argument?

As I have said, it makes no difference.

You appear, repeat appear, to be unable to consider the possibility that "works" is not about "doing moral acts", whether from the Law of Moses or not. Well, there is another possibility, as I have shown.

I see no difference.

Remember: much of the Law of Moses is a not really about what we could call good works. Much of it has to do with how to sacrifice, what foods the Jew can eat, and what festivals he can celebrate.

Paul never preached any of this in his ministry. His focus was on faith in Christ, not keeping the Law.

These function as ethnic identifiers, and I believe it is otherwise clear from a range of scriptures that when Paul gets his shorts in a knot over "works", he is not rejecting the salvific power of good works, which he actually affirms here:

6God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. [Romans 2:6-7, NIV}

Then he must have lied to the jailer who asked him what he MUST DO to be saved, and Paul said to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and he WILL BE saved.

Your view has Scripture conradicting itself. [Trolling. Vilolation of ToS 2.4. Not interested in what another poster writes then just quietly bow out of the conversation. WIP]

 

[Drew]

As I have said, it makes no difference.

Fair enough - I will get to this objection of yours, but let's deal with one thing at a time. First: Do you agree that the "works" in Ephesians 2"9 are the works of the Law of Moses (post 262 makes a detailed argument to that effect). Note that if you are going to deny that these "works" are the works of the Law of Moses, you need to actually address the argument presented in post 262 - if you do not address it, it will almost be certainly seen by readers as tacit admission that the argument is correct, and that the "works" are those prescribed specifically by the Law of Moses.

Once we get past this, if we do, I will address your "it makes no difference" statement.