Is faith or works necessary for Salvation ?

[francisdesales]

The obvious answer is:

They weren't!

{39} "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these that testify about Me; John 5:39 (NASB)

Correct - which leads us to the fact that God's mercy doesn't depend upon a perfect Law Follower, but upon His own desire to ease the sufferings of His Beloved Israel when they turn to Him in repentance.

God went well beyond what the Jews expected. But nevertheless, the Jews KNEW that God was merciful, even WITHOUT knowing about God becoming man.

Regards

 

[glorydaz]

Your missing and or twisting my point. This is the Apologetics and "THEOLOGY" section.

In this area people discuss theology; doctrines of thoughts related to the Christian faith.

No one is saying you can't be a Christian and not have studied history or great writings of theology, but if your going to come here and belittle John Calvin, then maybe you should know what your talking about. otherwise it's pointless. And when others who've studied these doctrines try to come in here and educate others on them, rather tan keep comparing these great thoughts against your own, you should try to first understand these thoughts rather than simply assume others are blindly lead by the feeding of a dead preacher or organised religion; because when you compare your thoughts of the bible to some of these well established theologies as if to argue them, you're not disproving anything, or countering anything Just saying what you think.

No one has argued, that I've seen, your "beliefs". No one thinks, that I've seen, that your not a Christian or that you don't love the lord. I have no doubt you do.

What's being argued are cognitive logical thoughts as such thoughts relate to theology. So much so, that it's difficult to pin-point what the theology is you are expressing to have a conversation. Then it deteriorates into no discussion on "THEOLOGY":...which is what this section is for.

This thread started out OK, but it sounded like a thread to argue works or faith, which is juicy because we can get into various types of known theology and doctrines and go from there, but when it becomes obvious that someone does not have a grasp of well established theological thoughts, yet they want to argue well established theological thought with their love of God, it's pointless to say we are discussing "theology".

I'm glad your a Christian Glory. I think your spot on in your faith and love of Jesus Christ and there is nothing in your core belief that I can say I disagree with. I'm not arguing your belief. You believe in Jesus Christ, that he died for you sins and you place your faith, hope and trust in him. You are my brother in Christ, but if your going to come to a bar fight, bring a weapon, or wait outside....it's a figure of speech my friend. I know you would not be in a bar fight.

If I've been too harsh please accept my apology. I don't come to the A&T section to have a friendly discussion, and I don't come to the A&T section to talk about my personal love for Jesus Christ. I come here to defend certain theologies, or the faith itself.

All this mess in here on this thread and in the end, everyone agrees that faith is the key to salvation, well how about that. That's what we've accomplished. No one brought up any theologies. GM, me tried to discuss Calvin, and a few others, but most of it was all about how others are linking their own logic to the scriptures, and not to theology. That's it. What a disappointment don't you think?

Honestly there aren't too many people on this forum that have a very well established understanding of theology. There is one I've seen, and he's not a protestant. There are others who lean a little one way or another and know it, but the vast majority of reads in here are not really digging into theology much at all.

I've seen atheist in here with a better knowledge of theology then many Christians, who inevitably end up just making up their own straw-men argument .

Usually either someone states what they believe and if they are not clear they open themselves up for questions until it is clear, then a discussion takes place that can lead into a real debate with each party clearly knowing where they and the other stand. This thread was a "poser". It started off looking like something it was not, then when it was fully investigated it turned out to be empty and not prepared to present anything, other than "I Love Jesus"....great! So do I.

I say more than "I love Jesus". In fact, I don't think I have said actually that, although I do. If you're putting limits on what can be discussed in this section of the forum, I'm afraid you've even excluded yourself. You aren't just discussing the different theologies, you're pushing your personal doctrines.

Apologetics is the defence and the communication of the Christian faith. Its what Peter was writing about when he wrote: "always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have" (1 Peter 3:15).

If you want to shut me up, you'll have to do better than that.

 

[glorydaz]

Please point to me from the OT about any mention of the "Atonement" - no negative remark implied with the quotes.

You want your cake and eat it, too. How is it the Jews knew God was merciful in YOUR paradigm? If you were correct, wouldn't we see SOMETHING about God forgiving the jews based upon a future perfect person????

Please. I am asking you, explain to me about God forgiving sins in the OT - and the Jews understanding of it. Do we see anywhere that God is doing things as you state?

I realize you have been taught this, but has it occured to you that you were taught wrong???

Think about it. Open your mind to common sense and truth. How did the Jews know about God's mercy if they were totally unaware of the "Atonement" by the Perfect Man?

Regards

Gosh, Joe, the atonement is mentioned 70 in the KJV. All but one are in the Old Testament. Which one would you like?

Here, I'll just grab some out of the hat. Atonement for your souls...atonement for your sins.

Exodus 30:15The rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less than half a shekel, when they give an offering unto the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls.

Exodus 30:16 - And thou shalt take the atonement money of the children of Israel, and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation; that it may be a memorial unto the children of Israel before the LORD, to make an atonement for your souls.

Exodus 32:30 - And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses said unto the people, Ye have sinned a great sin: and now I will go up unto the LORD; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin.

There are hundreds of mentions of the messiah in the OT. Do you want me to list some of them for you?

Here's just one.

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

This is really getting old. For some reason you will not accept that the Perfect Lamb of God had to come.

 

[glorydaz]

I agree. They did know. Even the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament) reveals much about the coming Messiah. One can find Christ throughout the Old Testament, and expressly within the Messianic Prophecies. God said even the heavens declare it, and that they know just from studying the sky.

What a relief...someone who has read the OT. Amen.

 

[glorydaz]

But nevertheless, the Jews KNEW that God was merciful, even WITHOUT knowing about God becoming man.

Regards

They did know....

Here we see the child...his name...The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father.

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

This is his name whereby he shall be called...The Lord Our Righteousness (Jehovah)

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

A virgin shall conceive.....Shall call his name, Immanuel (God With Us)

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

 

[glorydaz]

What I have found immensely helpful is to read their biographies (maybe a few of them) and see where they were at, with what they were contending etc and that allows me to evaluate what they were saying in their light. Sometimes it's more like the gossip game instead. Plus, I really, really believe that we are in the age of the "increase in knowledge" and are seeing things in a light that no other generation had before... but no, we can't put anyone on a pedestal that way. But wow, what great men of faith and real fortitude in what they did believe, how they backed it with their very lives!

We see the same things on the mission fields today. I have some friends in some very scary parts of the world risking their lives to spread the Gospel of Christ.

The Holy Spirit didn't give the men of old any more than He gives us today.

 

[Stormcrow]

God's mercy doesn't depend upon a perfect Law Follower

If it did, none could receive God's mercy.

 

[Danus]

It's fine to look back in history and see what these guys had to say. However,we must use our good sense, and not turn "everything they said into "Gospel." Or, dabble in "hero worship" by placing them on a
" Pedestal" and deeming them as a "spiritual icon" in which we cannot question their doctrine...These were "mere" men, and therefore, susceptible to error...

....Which requires knowing what they did in fact say. I've tried to explain a little of what Calvin said, and you still think he says man does not have free will. I even posted a direct quote from Calvin himself, but that did not matter to you.

 

[Danus]

I say more than "I love Jesus". In fact, I don't think I have said actually that, although I do. If you're putting limits on what can be discussed in this section of the forum, I'm afraid you've even excluded yourself. You aren't just discussing the different theologies, you're pushing your personal doctrines.

Apologetics is the defence and the communication of the Christian faith. Its what Peter was writing about when he wrote: "always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have" (1 Peter 3:15).

If you want to shut me up, you'll have to do better than that.

..... I'm not in charge of this section. Your free to say pretty much what you want.

 

[Danus]

What I have found immensely helpful is to read their biographies (maybe a few of them) and see where they were at, with what they were contending etc and that allows me to evaluate what they were saying in their light. Sometimes it's more like the gossip game instead. Plus, I really, really believe that we are in the age of the "increase in knowledge" and are seeing things in a light that no other generation had before... but no, we can't put anyone on a pedestal that way. But wow, what great men of faith and real fortitude in what they did believe, how they backed it with their very lives!

You eluded to this in another post in pointing out how intertwined Christianity was in the culture then. I think it does make a huge difference for them in forming their views.

Today our culture does not treat Christianity like it did then. Back then it was the culture.

When we study some of their stories we see glimpses of our own self as far as the questions many have of the bible. These people where hungry for the word in their time, just as we are. They had to wrestle with the same core issues we do.

 

[glorydaz]

God's mercy doesn't depend upon a perfect Law Follower

If it did, none could receive God's mercy.

Mercy is punishment withheld.
Had the Spotless Lamb not come, all men would be receiving God's wrath.

 

[Grubal Muruch]

....Which requires knowing what they did in fact say. I've tried to explain a little of what Calvin said, and you still think he says man does not have free will. I even posted a direct quote from Calvin himself, but that did not matter to you.

Here's the thing,today in this modern computer age, "everyone" has "immediate" access to historical information. In times past, people had to go to the library or stand around a bookstore in order to gain info about yesteryear and who did and said whatever... So back "then" it was more difficult to find facts, without having to go out of your way...Today we merely type someone's name in and "presto" we have instant access to pretty much ALL that person ever said, and did, according to themselves and in accordance with what others said they did and said...So it's "extremely" difficult (unless a person has access to "secret" letters or documents) to "argue" an excuse like, "you misstated or misunderstood what, (fill in the name yourself) said, when "everybody" has access to the same historical facts...Unless you want to "rationalize" that everyone you come into contact with is "intellectually" not up to your standards...But, that takes a huge amount of "presumptuousness" on your part...The men of which you speak were indeed, "mere" human and not particularly "endowed" with any "special" spiritual gifts.. They were "thinkers" We must not make them out to be, the Apostle Paul or Peter, etc... They were "thinkers" who held onto certain beliefs and doctrines and diffidently have their share of followers...But, obviously, not everyone gives "credence" to what these man had to say. What they said, cannot be taken as "Gospel" either...You happen to "admire" the doctrines of John Calvin, and that's fine. But, you have "opposition" because not ALL of the "populace" shares your admiration...We all choose who we listen to and, "discard" what we don't except...Now I've accessed and gathered information about Calvin and I'm not a fan. Does that make me, "Intellectually" retarded or somehow lacking common sense, I don't believe so...Have I choose to "disregard" the teachings of Calvin, "out of ignorance," no. I can read and study just as you. I just don't except "Calvin's" doctrines...That's my "choice."

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Mercy is punishment withheld.
Had the Spotless Lamb not come, all men would be receiving God's wrath.

TRUE!!!

 

[glorydaz]

Here's the thing,today in this modern computer age, "everyone" has "immediate" access to historical information. In times past, people had to go to the library or stand around a bookstore in order to gain info about yesteryear and who did and said whatever... So back "then" it was more difficult to find facts, without having to go out of your way...Today we merely type someone's name in and "presto" we have instant access to pretty much ALL that person ever said, and did, according to themselves and in accordance with what others said they did and said...So it's "extremely" difficult (unless a person has access to "secret" letters or documents) to "argue" an excuse like, "you misstated or misunderstood what, (fill in the name yourself) said, when "everybody" has access to the same historical facts...Unless you want to "rationalize" that everyone you come into contact with is "intellectually" not up to your standards...But, that takes a huge amount of "presumptuousness" on your part...The men of which you speak were indeed, "mere" human and not particularly "endowed" with any "special" spiritual gifts.. They were "thinkers" We must not make them out to be, the Apostle Paul or Peter, etc... They were "thinkers" who held onto certain beliefs and doctrines and diffidently have their share of followers...But, obviously, not everyone gives "credence" to what these man had to say. What they said, cannot be taken as "Gospel" either...You happen to "admire" the doctrines of John Calvin, and that's fine. But, you have "opposition" because not ALL of the "populace" shares your admiration...We all choose who we listen to and, "discard" what we don't except...Now I've accessed and gathered information about Calvin and I'm not a fan. Does that make me, "Intellectually" retarded or somehow lacking common sense, I don't believe so...Have I choose to "disregard" the teachings of Calvin, "out of ignorance," no. I can read and study just as you. I just don't except "Calvin's" doctrines...That's my "choice."

Excellent words, Grubal.

It all comes back to what the Bible says because it, alone, is the inspired Word of God.

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Excellent words, Grubal.

It all comes back to what the Bible says because it, alone, is the inspired Word of God.

So true...

 

[francisdesales]

Gosh, Joe, the atonement is mentioned 70 in the KJV. All but one are in the Old Testament. Which one would you like?

Here, I'll just grab some out of the hat. Atonement for your souls...atonement for your sins.

Get real. A self-proclaimed bible expert like yourself knows that it speaks of Yom Kippur, not THE ATONEMENT - the work of Jesus Christ.

Apparently, you have no ability to point to me from Scriptures about how the Jews knew that God was merciful WITHOUT the need for a perfect law follower...

When are you just going to admit that?

There are hundreds of mentions of the messiah in the OT. Do you want me to list some of them for you?

And where does ONE of them mention that the Messiah would be the uniquely perfect law follower which would allow God to have mercy on everyone, even retroactively???

Since that is what you CLAIM with precious little (none) Scriptural backing...

This is really getting old. For some reason you will not accept that the Perfect Lamb of God had to come.

Agree, you obstinancy is getting old.

For some reason, you cannot offer me any Scriptures that state that a Perfect Lamb of God would have to be sacrificed to satisfy God's Justice...

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Get real. A self-proclaimed bible expert like yourself knows that it speaks of Yom Kippur, not THE ATONEMENT - the work of Jesus Christ.

Apparently, you have no ability to point to me from Scriptures about how the Jews knew that God was merciful WITHOUT the need for a perfect law follower...

When are you just going to admit that?



And where does ONE of them mention that the Messiah would be the uniquely perfect law follower which would allow God to have mercy on everyone, even retroactively???

Since that is what you CLAIM with precious little (none) Scriptural backing...



Agree, you obstinancy is getting old.

For some reason, you cannot offer me any Scriptures that state that a Perfect Lamb of God would have to be sacrificed to satisfy God's Justice...

Here's a "foreshadowing" of what was to come, Leviticus 23:12--"'Now on the day when you wave the sheaf, you shall offer a male lamb one year old without defect for a burnt offering to the LORD." You won't except this but, I thought I might throw it in...

 

[francisdesales]

Mercy is punishment withheld.
Had the Spotless Lamb not come, all men would be receiving God's wrath.

Mercy is not punishment withheld. That is just foolishness repeated again.

If I see a man homeless on the street, am I withholding punishment due him by giving him a dollar for food? My merciful act has NOTHING to do with punishment withheld!

This is just plain common sense. Your focus on the law as some power that requires perfect fulfillment is keeping you from seeing the true meaning of Christ's coming...

As to the Spotless Lamb coming - who or what exactly was preventing God from granting mercy until the "law" was fulfilled? Who was binding God to prevent Him from granting mercy???

WHERE OH WHERE is this found in Scriptures????

Again, this idea is based upon human justice - that a perfect God REQUIRES absolute perfect apologies... Even humans do not require "an eye for an eye", as I have explained and you have ignored (again) on the broken window... This is where you "theology" fails. It is based upon human presumptions of what God requires for justice to be served...

Perhaps you should read the parable of the wicked servant. It is a parable that is analogous to the Father's mercy. In the parable, notice, there is no indication of the "king" requiring another to make payment in place of the slave. The debt was forgiven based upon the king's benevolence.

Interesting how this king had more power than God, since the king in the parable was not required to await a perfect servant... No "ambiguous idea of justice" needed to be fulfilled that tied the king's hands. No demand for a perfect law follower or a payment of what the servant owed.

God was not bound by some external NEED (justice demanding from God!!!) to send His Son to die on the cross. That is the entire POINT of LOVE! It is done freely, not out of sense of "justice" or "the law requires it".

Regards

 

[Danus]

Here's the thing,today in this modern computer age, "everyone" has "immediate" access to historical information. In times past, people had to go to the library or stand around a bookstore in order to gain info about yesteryear and who did and said whatever... So back "then" it was more difficult to find facts, without having to go out of your way...Today we merely type someone's name in and "presto" we have instant access to pretty much ALL that person ever said, and did, according to themselves and in accordance with what others said they did and said...So it's "extremely" difficult (unless a person has access to "secret" letters or documents) to "argue" an excuse like, "you misstated or misunderstood what, (fill in the name yourself) said, when "everybody" has access to the same historical facts...Unless you want to "rationalize" that everyone you come into contact with is "intellectually" not up to your standards...But, that takes a huge amount of "presumptuousness" on your part...The men of which you speak were indeed, "mere" human and not particularly "endowed" with any "special" spiritual gifts.. They were "thinkers" We must not make them out to be, the Apostle Paul or Peter, etc... They were "thinkers" who held onto certain beliefs and doctrines and diffidently have their share of followers...But, obviously, not everyone gives "credence" to what these man had to say. What they said, cannot be taken as "Gospel" either...You happen to "admire" the doctrines of John Calvin, and that's fine. But, you have "opposition" because not ALL of the "populace" shares your admiration...We all choose who we listen to and, "discard" what we don't except...Now I've accessed and gathered information about Calvin and I'm not a fan. Does that make me, "Intellectually" retarded or somehow lacking common sense, I don't believe so...Have I choose to "disregard" the teachings of Calvin, "out of ignorance," no. I can read and study just as you. I just don't except "Calvin's" doctrines...That's my "choice."

You make my point. You have misstated Calvin's understandings and yet you have a library of information.

 

[Grubal Muruch]

You make my point. You have misstated Calvin's understandings and yet you have a library of information.

Well, all I can say is, you must have "special" insight and how can I fight that "phantom" logic...