Is faith or works necessary for Salvation ?

[Grubal Muruch]

Having a faith because only for salvation is a no,no for me. Faith is a heartily felt by someone, because if you say faith is only necessary because you need to be save then you don't have faith you just force yourself on having them without really understanding it.

Could you reword that please I didn't quite get what you were saying??

 

[francisdesales]

Six out of seven isn't too bad, Joe. I never said the demands of the Mosaic Law.

Yea, you did.

You said God could only forgive sins if blood was offered.
That's a dictate of the Mosaic Law, isn't it?

And the Blood of a Perfect Law Follower, at that.

THAT'S not even part of the MOSAIC LAW! But yet, it is a REQUIREMENT. Not found anywhere in Scriptures, but it is a "REQUIREMENT"

and I've posted scripture til I'm blue in the face

i"m holding out for 'red in the face'.

And not a SINGLE one points verifies what you are saying. I have dismantled your position and you don't even realize it...

, but you don't have any spiritual understanding.

:biglol

You are hilarious, with your ideas that God must follow the Mosaic Law and talk to me about spiritual understanding. I posted numerous citations from Jesus Christ on what God expects before Forgiveness is granted. TOTALLY ignored by you, even after posting them multiple times. I wonder why...

If you are too obstinante to figure it out from there, you should stop talking about someone else lacking spiritual understanding...

Jesus didn't say He came to offer His blood as a requirement foisted upon the Father.

Beside which...you're slandering God by denying the Blood of Jesus Christ.

YOU are slandering the blood of Christ by saying God demanded it out of necessity, rather than saying that Jesus GAVE IT FREELY. The same God Who doesn't need the blood of goats and bulls needs the blood of a perfect human?

Pray tell, WHY exactly? What does God do with this blood? Have you considered this? Probably not. Too busy repeating silly ideas without Scriptural backing.

 

[francisdesales]

Let me get this straight Joe. This is what Catholics are supposed to believe? So how is it culpability can be placed upon those who can't believe, through any subjective perspective as in freewill? This is a purely objective point of view you are presenting here giving all impetus to Godliness.

You are separating an act between either God doing it or man doing it.

The Scriptures speak of a certain synergy when a man does an meritorious act. It cannot be entirely attributed to man, since God moves the will and desire to do good. Without that, we could NOT do a meritorious act. On the other hand, God does expect some response based upon a grace-filled ability, since we abide in Christ and He in us. It becomes "our" act, though not an act we do without Christ.

Thus, yes, we are culpable and responsible for each act, even the act of non-belief, since God has told us that we have the rational ability to at least move our minds to the possibility of God's existence through nature and the examination of the self.

In addition, there is a subjective AND objective perspective in grace and nature. This is because of the idea of synergy.

Regards

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Yea, you did.

You said God could only forgive sins if blood was offered.
That's a dictate of the Mosaic Law, isn't it?

And the Blood of a Perfect Law Follower, at that.

THAT'S not even part of the MOSAIC LAW! But yet, it is a REQUIREMENT. Not found anywhere in Scriptures, but it is a "REQUIREMENT"




:biglol

You are hilarious, with your ideas that God must follow the Mosaic Law and talk to me about spiritual understanding. I posted numerous citations from Jesus Christ on what God expects before Forgiveness is granted. TOTALLY ignored by you, even after posting them multiple times. I wonder why...

If you are too obstinante to figure it out from there, you should stop talking about someone else lacking spiritual understanding...

Jesus didn't say He came to offer His blood as a requirement foisted upon the Father.



YOU are slandering the blood of Christ by saying God demanded it out of necessity, rather than saying that Jesus GAVE IT FREELY. The same God Who doesn't need the blood of goats and bulls needs the blood of a perfect human?

Pray tell, WHY exactly? What does God do with this blood? Have you considered this? Probably not. Too busy repeating silly ideas without Scriptural backing.

Dear Fran, Salvation comes through the shed blood of Christ on the cross, and the "only" requirement for us is faith. Many a Scholar and men with extremely high IQ's have glanced over the "simplicity" in that message without seeing it. You "cannot" be, "born again" by simply getting water baptized or belonging to a church, (that don't cut it) You must be "born again" and that's a work of the Holy Spirit. While your wasting time trying to espouse different theory's and such, your ignoring the truths of Scripture...Your making the message of salvation, far to difficult. A Christian needs to make the Gospel so simple that even a child can understand it. It does not take a "genius" to find the truth...

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Yea, you did.

You said God could only forgive sins if blood was offered.
That's a dictate of the Mosaic Law, isn't it?

And the Blood of a Perfect Law Follower, at that.

THAT'S not even part of the MOSAIC LAW! But yet, it is a REQUIREMENT. Not found anywhere in Scriptures, but it is a "REQUIREMENT"





i"m holding out for 'red in the face'.

And not a SINGLE one points verifies what you are saying. I have dismantled your position and you don't even realize it...



:biglol

You are hilarious, with your ideas that God must follow the Mosaic Law and talk to me about spiritual understanding. I posted numerous citations from Jesus Christ on what God expects before Forgiveness is granted. TOTALLY ignored by you, even after posting them multiple times. I wonder why...

If you are too obstinante to figure it out from there, you should stop talking about someone else lacking spiritual understanding...

Jesus didn't say He came to offer His blood as a requirement foisted upon the Father.



YOU are slandering the blood of Christ by saying God demanded it out of necessity, rather than saying that Jesus GAVE IT FREELY. The same God Who doesn't need the blood of goats and bulls needs the blood of a perfect human?

Pray tell, WHY exactly? What does God do with this blood? Have you considered this? Probably not. Too busy repeating silly ideas without Scriptural backing.

Sorry Fran, but the shedding of blood is necessary for the salvation of a man... Hebrews 9:22--"And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission." Christ's blood "needed" to be shed or there would not be any salvation...

 

[reba]

Rom 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

Gal 6:14 But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.

Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

 

[glorydaz]

YOU are slandering the blood of Christ by saying God demanded it out of necessity, rather than saying that Jesus GAVE IT FREELY. The same God Who doesn't need the blood of goats and bulls needs the blood of a perfect human?

Pray tell, WHY exactly? What does God do with this blood? Have you considered this? Probably not. Too busy repeating silly ideas without Scriptural backing.

Jesus came to do the will of the Father. It was obviously God's will.

God accepted the BLOOD of the Spotless lamb as an OFFERING for the sins of mankind.

Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

 

[francisdesales]

Dear Fran, Salvation comes through the shed blood of Christ on the cross, and the "only" requirement for us is faith.

It does, but not as a requirement put upon God. That is the contention of you and Glorydaz. The idea that God had to be provided with the blood of a perfect human being. "Faith" is a gift, as well, given by God.

Many a Scholar and men with extremely high IQ's have glanced over the "simplicity" in that message without seeing it.

And many a simple men have stated what you have without providing Scriptural evidence to back it up... It is those men you hold in disdain who have considered that there is something more to salvation than "satisfying a blood-thirsty God".

You "cannot" be, "born again" by simply getting water baptized or belonging to a church, (that don't cut it) You must be "born again" and that's a work of the Holy Spirit.

Baptism is a work of the Holy Spirit. HOW ELSE are we buried in Christ through baptism, if it is not a work of the Spirit. (Romans 6:1-5)

While your wasting time trying to espouse different theory's and such, your ignoring the truths of Scripture

I was thinking the same for you. I have provided ample Scriptures on what Christ said. Rather than you. I have asked for Scriptures that prove your "theory" that God demands blood so that HE can forgive sins - or that God demands a perfect law follower before He forgives.

.....

Nothing... Just more babbling that merely restates the past post. Yea, something a child could do, alright...

My patience only goes so far with these requests. Can you provide them or not?

 

[Destructus86]

Dear Fran, Salvation comes through the shed blood of Christ on the cross, and the "only" requirement for us is faith. Many a Scholar and men with extremely high IQ's have glanced over the "simplicity" in that message without seeing it. You "cannot" be, "born again" by simply getting water baptized or belonging to a church, (that don't cut it) You must be "born again" and that's a work of the Holy Spirit. While your wasting time trying to espouse different theory's and such, your ignoring the truths of Scripture...Your making the message of salvation, far to difficult. A Christian needs to make the Gospel so simple that even a child can understand it. It does not take a "genius" to find the truth...

There is a reason why so many fall away from God who once claimed Him their Lord. I've seen it time and again....they fall away from God because after they got saved they didn't do ANYTHING with their faith besides praying here and there...they took no action with their faith. And so it faded.

 

[Grubal Muruch]

It does, but not as a requirement put upon God. That is the contention of you and Glorydaz. The idea that God had to be provided with the blood of a perfect human being. "Faith" is a gift, as well, given by God.



And many a simple men have stated what you have without providing Scriptural evidence to back it up... It is those men you hold in disdain who have considered that there is something more to salvation than "satisfying a blood-thirsty God".



Baptism is a work of the Holy Spirit. HOW ELSE are we buried in Christ through baptism, if it is not a work of the Spirit. (Romans 6:1-5)



I was thinking the same for you. I have provided ample Scriptures on what Christ said. Rather than you. I have asked for Scriptures that prove your "theory" that God demands blood so that HE can forgive sins - or that God demands a perfect law follower before He forgives.

.....

Nothing... Just more babbling that merely restates the past post. Yea, something a child could do, alright...

My patience only goes so far with these requests. Can you provide them or not?

Fran----It does, but not as a requirement put upon God. That is the contention of you and Glorydaz. The idea that God had to be provided with the blood of a perfect human being. "Faith" is a gift, as well, given by God.

Grubal----That is "God's" requirement, if you have a problem with that speak to Him...

Fran----And many a simple men have stated what you have without providing Scriptural evidence to back it up... It is those men you hold in disdain who have considered that there is something more to salvation than "satisfying a blood-thirsty God".

Grubal-----God has set things up in accordance with His will. I'm sure He didn't take "offending Fran" into consideration when He decided what needed to be done...

Fran----Baptism is a work of the Holy Spirit. HOW ELSE are we buried in Christ through baptism, if it is not a work of the Spirit. (Romans 6:1-5)

Grubal----Spirit baptism is what is necessary in becoming "born-again" not water Baptism. Water Baptism does not wash away the sins of man...That took the shedding of Christ's blood. That was God's requirement. Sorry Fran if that "offends" your selectivity's...

Fran----I was thinking the same for you. I have provided ample Scriptures on what Christ said. Rather than you. I have asked for Scriptures that prove your "theory" that God demands blood so that HE can forgive sins - or that God demands a perfect law follower before He forgives.

Grubal----Yes, you provide plenty of words, the problem is, your "lengthy diatribes" do not present the truth. The truth can be presented in a few, well chosen words...

Fran---My patience only goes so far with these requests. Can you provide them or not?

Grubal-----All the answers you need have already been provided, you just can't or won't hear them...

 

[childeye]

=francisdesales;587749]You are separating an act between either God doing it or man doing it.

First of all I want to thank you for addressing the issue at the point. Obviously there is a piece of God in each man that is our life. I cannot speak for all men but I have a Godly Love that cries and suffers when it sees others suffer. I have been taught that this Love is God in me and it is not mine to glory in. It is this same Love that recognizes God that recognizes the Christ. As much as I take for my own glory is vanity. That's how I see it.

The Scriptures speak of a certain synergy when a man does an meritorious act. It cannot be entirely attributed to man, since God moves the will and desire to do good. Without that, we could NOT do a meritorious act.

Yes that is essentially what I said above although you are applying a subjective view of merit to the man and an objective view of merit to God. Hence the term merit is given two seperate meanings for one could merit the man since he is seen doing it, but deeper and more truthfully it is God in him who deserves the merit.

On the other hand, God does expect some response based upon a grace-filled ability, since we abide in Christ and He in us. It becomes "our" act, though not an act we do without Christ.

Okay Joe, it makes perfect sense that God would expect a response from His Word in us. So it also makes sense that God would not expect anything from a stone. So it is John the baptist said to the Pharisees, God can make children unto Himself out of these stones. I gather that John felt the Pharisees were in need of hearing that.

Thus, yes, we are culpable and responsible for each act, even the act of non-belief, since God has told us that we have the rational ability to at least move our minds to the possibility of God's existence through nature and the examination of the self.

I can't see how you come to that conclusion especially using the definitive term culpability tied to each act. Is this not why John said what he said to the Pharisees? Did not Jesus say the sick need a doctor refering to sinners? Jesus seems to be mitigating the culpability here not solidifying it. By the way Jesus said this to the Pharisees also.

since God has told us that we have the rational ability to at least move our minds to the possibility of God's existence through nature and the examination of the self.

I agree that we have a rational ability and often times an irrational disability. The only thing God has told me was not to trust to my wisdom which ironically is wisdom. So it is I believe God who told me this: I have been taught that this Love is God in me and it is not mine to glory in. It is this same Love that recognizes God that recognizes the Christ. As much as I take for my own glory is vanity. That's how I see it.

Look Joe, we can get back to this some other time. It is clear to me you have your hands full on this thread frying much bigger fish.

 

[francisdesales]

I can't see how you come to that conclusion especially using the definitive term culpability tied to each act. Is this not why John said what he said to the Pharisees? Did not Jesus say the sick need a doctor refering to sinners? Jesus seems to be mitigating the culpability here not solidifying it. By the way Jesus said this to the Pharisees also.

I have a difficult time thinking that "God desires all men to be saved" but only has granted grace to some men. At some level, God aids all men. Doesn't Paul say this in Romans 1? We can know God exists by looking around us. Do these people at least seek Him out? We presume that God grants something of a "sufficient desire" within each person. But some choose not to. We cannot blame God. Either man is culpable or God is culpable for not all men being saved.

Look Joe, we can get back to this some other time. It is clear to me you have your hands full on this thread frying much bigger fish.

I know this subject is near to your heart. It is a mystery to me, I cannot fully comprehend the interaction of grace and nature. I realize that God adds to nature with grace. I realize God desires us to be saved - and so God would give all men ample opportunity of grace added to that nature. I realize God doesn't send people to eternal damnation based upon a whim or on ignorance of men.

But you are correct, I have bigger fish to fry! They just keep jumping out of the pan, they don't know when they've been cooked!!!

Regards

 

[childeye]

=francisdesales;587914] Either man is culpable or God is culpable for not all men being saved.

Perhaps there is a vanity that must be destroyed and God is doing it in the flesh of men. For we know vanity was in Satan who desired more than the station appointed to him. As I understand vanity, it is taking God for granted and not being thankful. We have all done this I believe. I think this is what probably every child does with their parents unless of course they have rotten parents. But being longsuffering we trust our children will come full circle when they have children and this is faith to faith. I believe Satan fomented doubt between man and God and in one another. The iniquity I see is when someone draws lines they themselves don't keep. Hence iniquity was found in Satan because he was a hardliner who himself had crossed the line because of vanity. I don't think anyone is to blame therefore except those who blame.

I know this subject is near to your heart. It is a mystery to me, I cannot fully comprehend the interaction of grace and nature.

Thanks Joe for your time and your empathy.

But you are correct, I have bigger fish to fry! They just keep jumping out of the pan, they don't know when they've been cooked!!!

I've always liked your cooking Joe. Make sure you wear an apron...

 

[francisdesales]

Perhaps there is a vanity that must be destroyed and God is doing it in the flesh of men.

I am not sure exactly how this addresses how God is to blame for contradicting Himself in stating that 'God desires all men to be saved', but yet, God does not grant grace to seek Him out at ANY level for man to do indeed begin to seek Him out and be saved. While I agree that hypocrisy is not a good thing, trying to place the blame elsewhere does not remove culpability and responsibility.

Thanks Joe for your time and your empathy.

I've always liked your cooking Joe. Make sure you wear an apron...

Thanks and take care ;)

 

[childeye]

I am not sure exactly how this addresses how God is to blame for contradicting Himself in stating that 'God desires all men to be saved', but yet, God does not grant grace to seek Him out at ANY level for man to do indeed begin to seek Him out and be saved. While I agree that hypocrisy is not a good thing, trying to place the blame elsewhere does not remove culpability and responsibility.



Thanks and take care ;)

God would not contradict Himself. Of that we can be sure.
I am submitting that there has been presented a scenario in scripture; wherein nothing was wrong but a suggestion that something might be wrong was made to the innocent. In the fabric of faith a tiny unraveling through doubt began to take place. One subtle lie considered, became a corruption that was exponetially self-fulfilling.

But as this all was because of a lie, so there exists the real possibility that not everyone need be blamed and yet both guilt and mercy be justified. Where Jesus not only died so that sins may be forgiven but also so that all accusation be silenced. However there might still remain those who would rather accuse and not forgive, not receiving the knowledge of God that is in the Christ. Regarding culpability, it is at the heart of Christianity that Jesus who was innocent and without blame took the blame. So I don't blame but rather suffer and let it go as a mistake.

If Satan is playing both ends against the middle, then to blame either way will serve his ends.

 

[glorydaz]

God would not contradict Himself. Of that we can be sure.
I am submitting that there has been presented a scenario in scripture; wherein nothing was wrong but a suggestion that something might be wrong was made to the innocent. In the fabric of faith a tiny unraveling through doubt began to take place. One subtle lie considered, became a corruption that was exponetially self-fulfilling.

But as this all was because of a lie, so there exists the real possibility that not everyone need be blamed and yet both guilt and mercy be justified. Where Jesus not only died so that sins may be forgiven but also so that all accusation be silenced. However there might still remain those who would rather accuse and not forgive, not receiving the knowledge of God that is in the Christ. Regarding culpability, it is at the heart of Christianity that Jesus who was innocent and without blame took the blame. So I don't blame but rather suffer and let it go as a mistake.

If Satan is playing both ends against the middle, then to blame either way will serve his ends.

I see now that you are contemplating universal salvation.

You've made excuses for everyone when God says man is without excuse.

Just "let it go as a mistake?"

 

[francisdesales]

God would not contradict Himself. Of that we can be sure.
I am submitting that there has been presented a scenario in scripture; wherein nothing was wrong but a suggestion that something might be wrong was made to the innocent. In the fabric of faith a tiny unraveling through doubt began to take place. One subtle lie considered, became a corruption that was exponetially self-fulfilling.

This still doesn't answer my question on "God desires all men to be saved", and then, according to some, God does not grant any grace whatsoever to certain men so as to even seek God out in a remote manner.

But as this all was because of a lie, so there exists the real possibility that not everyone need be blamed and yet both guilt and mercy be justified. Where Jesus not only died so that sins may be forgiven but also so that all accusation be silenced. However there might still remain those who would rather accuse and not forgive, not receiving the knowledge of God that is in the Christ. Regarding culpability, it is at the heart of Christianity that Jesus who was innocent and without blame took the blame. So I don't blame but rather suffer and let it go as a mistake.

If Satan is playing both ends against the middle, then to blame either way will serve his ends.

Will God judge man or not?

Regards

 

[childeye]

=francisdesales;591180]This still doesn't answer my question on "God desires all men to be saved", and then, according to some, God does not grant any grace whatsoever to certain men so as to even seek God out in a remote manner.

Who can know for certain? I only know it is not wrong to pray that all men might be saved and come unto the knowledge of the Truth wherein there is life. I do not wish to put limits on God's grace or mercy, nor do I want to erase guilt. But rather I want the guilt to be for the right reasons since I cannot truly say I'm sorry and not know what it is I did wrong.


He shall have mercy where He will have mercy, and he will harden whom He will harden, otherwise it is not mercy and it is not hardening. I hope we have the same definitions for the terms. Therefore I can only bring forth conjecture which perhaps is left that way for the purpose of God's sifting. For I believe God could be disposing of Vanity in vessels of flesh which would be the equivalent of refining gold wherein the dross is a byproduct. Scripture in favor of this would be of course the vessels prepared unto glory and those fit for destruction as well as, he that hath, more will be given but he that hath not, even what little he hath will be taken away.

Will God judge man or not?

This question has manifold answers to be true. Of course God judges. For there are judgments happening all the time and men even judge themselves according to how they judge others. There is a seperate judgment for those under the law and those under Christ indicating different criteria. Men's works on the temple will be tried by fire revealing their worth. And yet Christ says if you wish to escape judgment do not judge. Nonetheless a man that does not judge is judged worthy of escaping judgment. What flavor of Jello do you Like?

 

[childeye]

=glorydaz;591163]I see now that you are contemplating universal salvation.

What? No, we are discussing where scripture says God desires that none perish and I do as well. Is God a Universalist?

You've made excuses for everyone when God says man is without excuse.

Then He has mercy where He has mercy us included, and I intercede seeking his mercy for others. Hope is a good thing.

Just "let it go as a mistake?"

No. Come to understand my position, then I will accept your critique as forthright.

 

[francisdesales]

Who can know for certain? I only know it is not wrong to pray that all men might be saved and come unto the knowledge of the Truth wherein there is life. I do not wish to put limits on God's grace or mercy, nor do I want to erase guilt. But rather I want the guilt to be for the right reasons since I cannot truly say I'm sorry and not know what it is I did wrong.

I am not putting limits on God's mercy by saying that He will judge others as unworthy and lacking in love to enter the Kingdom. The Gospels are full of such examples of people cast out into the night, with chattering of teeth and full of regret. This is not "human judgment", it is simply accepting what God has said to us.

There is nothing wrong with praying that "all men will be saved", but it is clear that all men don't WANT to be saved - or even think they NEED to be saved...

This question has manifold answers to be true. Of course God judges. For there are judgments happening all the time and men even judge themselves according to how they judge others. There is a seperate judgment for those under the law and those under Christ indicating different criteria. Men's works on the temple will be tried by fire revealing their worth. And yet Christ says if you wish to escape judgment do not judge. Nonetheless a man that does not judge is judged worthy of escaping judgment. What flavor of Jello do you Like?

I think a simple "yes" would have been sufficient... We aren't talking about men judging, so there is no need to confuse the issues with bringing that up.

Regards