James 2 And OSAS - Part 2

[francisdesales]

Re: James 2 And OSAS

So in order for your understanding of this passage to be true, one must ignore other scripture?

No, George. Why would I suggest that?

Even that which is written in the same epistle? And of course Paul is speaking of gentile christians and saying that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in and through them by the Spirit of God, thus judging them who by the letter trangress the law.

Romans 2 speaks of an UNWRITTEN Law. Clearly, that is not the Mosaic Law. They follow this unwritten law AS IF they had a law given to them. Gentiles who have converted were well aware of the WRITTEN Law, George. This is quite obvious.

No, I am afraid that this is not speaking of Christians of the community. Furthermore, we BOTH agree that God will judge men who did not know the Christ (perhaps some native Americans from before 1500?) but received the gift of the Spirit so as to love others as Christ loved? Paul is clearly comparing Gentiles WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE of the Law to Jews WITH the Law. How can this be refering to "saved and baptized Christians"?

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Re: James 2 And OSAS

If you had such a neighbor, would you feel comfortable considering them a Christian? I think we could. They would consider themselves Muslim and pray to Allah. They would be wrong on a number of there ideas about who God is and not taking the final step on who Jesus is. Perhaps we could evangelize such people carefully. But at the end of the day, is knowledge or love more important?

This sounds to me like you are indeed suggesting that a muslim need not accept Christ, but that they just need to be nice to others.

Nope.

Well, I cannot see how anyone could read your post on this issue and not understand your post to read that faith in Christ is not really needed for some muslims to be saved?

Again, you must read my posts before firing off a reply.

I said that the exception defines the rule or the norm. The NORM is that the Muslim convert to Christianity and accept Christ. However, God is not bound by any such absolute defined by any man here on earth. Even George... God is sovereign, George. He CAN save whomever He wills, to include a Muslim, as an exception, for His own divine purposes. We may be seeing such an exception if we see a Muslim in action loving others as Christ would love, offering forgiveness to others, etc... Such actions are NOT the work of the unaided man, but the work of participation in Christ and His Spirit.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Re: James 2 And OSAS

Who, or what, saved Noah? Who was he listening to when he heeded the warning and responded in faith? Who did those who were lost hear, but not respond to?

What is interesting is that George has ALREADY stated that God will be merciful for those who never heard of Jesus. Yet, George continues with the absolute requirement of making an altar call to enter heaven. Doesn't George see the contradiction of his position?

The norm is to have faith in Christ.
God grants merciful exceptions when a person was ignorant of the Gospel.
Let us remember that God is just AND merciful.

Regards

 

[smaller]

Re: James 2 And OSAS

The norm is to have faith in Christ.
God grants merciful exceptions when a person was ignorant of the Gospel.
Let us remember that God is just AND merciful.

Regards

In your world that's only IF they deserve it.

 

[smaller]

Believers who have had a real experience with God in Christ probably don't appreciate how rare those kinds of events are. They don't call it a remnant without reason.

The number of people who have a sincere interest in the Word are likewise rare.

Unfortunately the number who agree are even rarer. Over my own life in faith I have grown to dislike denominationalism of any sort because in the final analysis they all seek a basis to eternally kill or torture other believers who don't believe like them.

What a detestable activity.

I think the majority of such believers will be greatly ashamed at that kind of life in faith.

Such think they are doing other believers a favor for some odd reason, just to top it off. The internal pretzel. And once a believer gets wrapped up in that line of reasoning they seem to have a hard time ever getting out of it.

I no longer welcome such so called 'believers' into my own home or my life and I have to continually warn my family over them as well, as they are constantly trying to snag my children, and have, and I have had to deal with them and pray to God to deprogram them and unwind that hatred from their hearts.

Deception is an awful thing. In our lives we have enough people and systems threatening us to 'do this or else.' The churches in this way are no different than the world, only worse.

s

 

[Deborah13]

Re: James 2 And OSAS

Aka, soil #2 in the parable of the sower.

Marriage has doesn't have anything to do with types of soil.

Marriage is a commitment, and the believing spouse does not leave the unbelieving spouse.
One spouse does not leave because they just don't like their marriage anymore.

I've go to go now. But I have a few more things to say about this.

Blessings, have a good day.

 

[smaller]

Re: James 2 And OSAS

George, where does the Bible state that? Where does Romans 2 suggest any "born again" idea?

25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.
26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?
27 And shall notuncircumcision which is if it fulfil by nature, The law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost
transgress the law?
28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Surely you can see that "uncircumcision" is speaking of the gentiles, who are circumcised in heart, by the Spirit? How do you think this happened? They where born-again of the Spirit.

Surely they received the Spirit of God. "Born again"?? They were totally unaware of such designation.

Regards

Yeah, well, unfortunately that is what some 'traditions' falsely teach, even when their own 'so called' standard bearers taught differently:

1 Peter 1:23
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Men change. WHOM we received into our hearts does not.

The 'Seed' has His Way in any final analysis.

s

 

[dadof10]

As opposed to sinning while dead or what? What’s the difference in committing one sin, two sins or three sins and "living in sin"? The number of sins? Or the chruch you go to for their forgiveness?

Person A lives his Christian faith but occasionally gives into gossip at work.

Person B has no Christian faith, lives with a woman not his wife, does drugs and steals for a living.

Is there no difference in the BEHAVIOR of these two sinners? They are both sinners, right?

Paul was the “chief among all sinnersâ€, so Scripture defeats your “argument†here since He was "chief" among "backsliders" yet still saved.

That's twice you have "mischaracterized" my view, which wouldn't really be so bad if you hadn't had a fit when I did it to you earlier and I hadn't just clarified what I meant above.

Here is my CLARIFIED point:

It means returning to a previously sinful life, the way a person lived before conversion. It means if there is belief, it's rudimentary at best, it's belief in Jesus, but not to the point of living any different than before. I'm not married to the term "backslide". You can use whatever term you want. Maybe "apostatize" is more accurate.

So, your sentence above SHOULD read: Paul was the “chief among all sinnersâ€, so Scripture defeats your “argument†here since He was "chief" among "APOSTOSIZERS" yet still saved."

Now, does this still accurately portray your view of Paul and this verse?

They fooled a bunch of people. But they never, ever fooled God. Sound familiar? It should.

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
​

You can capitalize PROVED, make it red font and even make it blink. That doesn’t mean they proved anything to God.

I started to respond to your post point-by-point, but I want to stop right here and ask you how I'm logically wrong?

Logically your fallacies just in this post are:

1. You throw out strawmen arguments for OSAS then defeat them. Like "

If a person who has outwardly proved to others that he is really, truly saved then apostatizes, as I have described above, what would you say about this person?

I don’t know a single reformed scholar that thinks it matters one cent what people think about another person’s salvation. Yet you somehow think you’ve defeated OSAS by pointing out the obvious. People are mistaken about all kinds of things. Another’s salvation (even their own) all the time.

What possible difference would it make to the Judge (God) whether “a person outwardly proved to others that he is really, truly saved� God frankly, couldn’t care less whether I found another person (or myself for that matter) truly saved or not. He gets to decide, not us. Matt 7:21

2. you state premises that are false like:

You couldn't say "he was never saved to begin with", because he has PROVED his true faith

James tells us quite a story about pigs and dogs and just exactly how to tell they are NOT saved. So I most certainly can say when someone was never saved to begin with. Yet he agrees with the fact that the true righteousness of a person is simply left up to God.

You agreed with my "point 1" above, which was: "1) It is possible to outwardly prove to others that you are really, truly saved"

The key words here are "truly saved". My contention if is that James is teaching we are showing our TRUE FAITH, we are showing something we TRULY HAVE (if I could make it blink, I would). We get this "true faith" from God, or don't you believe Calvin's "Gospel of Grace"?

Let me say that again. We HAVE true faith, which is "shown" by our deeds. Isn't that how you interpret James 2:21, 25?

If not, maybe you could clarify, without the snarky attitude this time, please.

 

[francisdesales]

Re: James 2 And OSAS

The norm is to have faith in Christ.
God grants merciful exceptions when a person was ignorant of the Gospel.
Let us remember that God is just AND merciful.

Regards

In your world that's only IF they deserve it.

Trying to stir the pot again. Do you have anything positive to add or are you just trolling again?

 

[smaller]

even though Moses and Aaron did not enter the promised land and died in the desert because of UNbelief they were SAVED anyway.

True and I enjoy that when some cannot find a list of rules to bind around a believers neck, they turn to trying to condemn other believers by the standard that some might have an "unsaving" level of faith. These same people have no doubt struggled at times with faith, but they grant themselves unlimited mercy for their unbelief, but try to establish some standard for other believers to judge their salvation. None of them keep the royal law, none of them grant to others the mercy they allow for their own weaknesses. Love your brother as yourself, never really enters their mind, its just another scripture to challenge the salvation of another believer. How far are these people from knowing God?

Yeah, I said earlier that every last one of these people who teach that we must believe that God might not save us believes that they are saved to the uttermost and will receive heaps of all the Godly blessings there are, even while they peddle their doubting wares.

s

 

[smaller]

Re: James 2 And OSAS

The norm is to have faith in Christ.
God grants merciful exceptions when a person was ignorant of the Gospel.
Let us remember that God is just AND merciful.

Regards

In your world that's only IF they deserve it.

Trying to stir the pot again. Do you have anything positive to add or are you just trolling again?

That is your factual position is it not? Why do you try to spin otherwise?

???

 

[smaller]

Some of the posters in this thread do not speak the same language as 'born again' believers speak.

One of them for example remarked that when a person is baptized they are born again. Presumably in some sects when an infant is baptized they are, voila, instant believers. Of course many adults who actually did believe eventually saw what an utter sham that was and would no longer participate in such exercises. The ones who left are now generally called Baptists. Point being they saw the futility of claiming a child a christian because they saw that it was not a reality when that child grew up. I think that's a legitimate sight myself.

The point being that there are some sacerdotal systems that teach that these matters of God and all thee only correct legitimate understandings only come through them and their own system.

So there is one difficulty, a language barrier. The language that these particular system adherents have generally amounts to 'only what our sect sez is right' and everyone else is automatically WRONG.

There is no effective way to communicate with such brainwashing.

s

 

[chessman]

Can such a "marriage" be still called a marriage? Is THAT salvation?

Regards

It seems here you are overlooking the obviousness that God hates divorce and will not be a part of it in His perfect afterlife or the promise He's made toward our eternal life as His Bride. He allows it, amongst us humans via the sin of adultery, but hates it of Himself. But the analogy only goes so far with respect to how God is treating His Bride. Hosea for example is more a picture of God's commitment.

 

[smaller]

Person A lives his Christian faith but occasionally gives into gossip at work.

Person B has no Christian faith, lives with a woman not his wife, does drugs and steals for a living.

And again the standard of Person A DESERVES Godly blessing and Person B DESERVES NOTHING because of how they 'act.'

What a simplistic notion. As if A always does only right and B never ever does one right thing.

Reality says that such setup questions are worthless because they actually do not exist.

A more than likely does do some bad things or have bad thoughts, but may appear very Godly on the outside.

And B may have gone though living HELL to land in the position of B, yet perhaps does some nice things as well.

But in some sects, if you pretend you're a good person, A, then you DESERVE to be saved.

and this of course allows you to condemn and look down upon person B.

so easily....

"just look at the outside of the cup"

s

 

[smaller]

This is a true story. Take it for what it's worth.

I spent most of my later working life in the home business as a builder. About 25 years ago I sold and built a new home for an elderly retired lady who had quite a bit of money and paid cash for her new home.

Somehow or another we discovered we were both Lutherans. She however was 'Missouri Synod.' I was born and raised ALC (which eventually merged with the ELC.) She informed me in no uncertain terms that if a person wasn't Missouri Synod' they were going to hell.

Needless to say I wasn't impressed with her theology. Nor am I saying that she was an accurate representation about her particular sect.

What it did show me however was that an apparently nice little old lady who probably never harmed anyone, IN REALITY in her heart actually believed that EVERYONE who was not LCMS (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod) were going to go to hell to be eternally burned alive forever or eternally killed.

and I thought, wow, you'd never know that person secretly, inside, was a manner of KILLER. IN fact the numbers of people she would see killed or tortured far exceeds any serial killer who has ever lived. And it was a little old lady.

It really doesn't pay to judge these matters on the outside.

And I believe God showed me that ugliness in her for a reason, to avoid it.

s

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Person A lives his Christian faith but occasionally gives into gossip at work.

Person B has no Christian faith, lives with a woman not his wife, does drugs and steals for a living.

And again the standard of Person A DESERVES Godly blessing and Person B DESERVES NOTHING because of how they 'act.'

Understand correctly: It is based on how they act because of their faith.

What a simplistic notion. As if A always does only right and B never ever does one right thing.

The church has so thoroughly separated faith from works that they can't comprehend the Biblical connection between faith and works when you try to explain it to them. 'Works' has become the four letter word of the faith because it always evokes the indoctrinated one track thinking of 'works salvation' so predominant in the church today. Somehow faith really doesn't have to do anything for faith to be able to save, in direct contradiction to James. James is lying.

 

[smaller]

Person A lives his Christian faith but occasionally gives into gossip at work.

Person B has no Christian faith, lives with a woman not his wife, does drugs and steals for a living.

And again the standard of Person A DESERVES Godly blessing and Person B DESERVES NOTHING because of how they 'act.'

Because of how they act because of their faith.

What a simplistic notion. As if A always does only right and B never ever does one right thing.

The church has so thoroughly separated faith from works that they can't comprehend the Biblical connection between faith and works when you try to explain it to them. 'Works' has become the four letter word of the faith because it always evokes the one indoctrinated one track thinking of 'works salvation' so predominant in the church today. Somehow faith really doesn't have to do anything for faith to be able to save, in direct contradiction to James.

Why don't we just 'get real' and understand the fact that EVERYONE does both good and bad.

Christians act like they are the only ones who 'do good' therefore they will be saved on the basis of doing what 'everyone else does' anyway.

I say so what? What is the difference between your good and the good of an unsaved person?

I see no difference. IN fact in many ways the unsaved person is better because they are not seeking a way to eternally kill me or burn me alive forever.

Go work that fact for awhile.

s

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This is a true story. Take it for what it's worth.

I spent most of my later working life in the home business as a builder. About 25 years ago I sold and built a new home for an elderly retired lady who had quite a bit of money and paid cash for her new home.

Somehow or another we discovered we were both Lutherans. She however was 'Missouri Synod.' I was born and raised ALC (which eventually merged with the ELC.) She informed me in no uncertain terms that if a person wasn't Missouri Synod' they were going to hell.

Needless to say I wasn't impressed with her theology. Nor am I saying that she was an accurate representation about her particular sect.

What it did show me however was that an apparently nice little old lady who probably never harmed anyone, IN REALITY in her heart actually believed that EVERYONE who was not LCMS (Lutheran Church Missouri Synod) were going to go to hell to be eternally burned alive forever or eternally killed.

and I thought, wow, you'd never know that person secretly, inside, was a manner of KILLER. IN fact the numbers of people she would see killed or tortured far exceeds any serial killer who has ever lived. And it was a little old lady.

It really doesn't pay to judge these matters on the outside.

And I believe God showed me that ugliness in her for a reason, to avoid it.

s

The problem of what you're teaching is it's always wrong to warn people and 'turn them from their error' because some people do that without knowledge. But I find it interesting that you have no problem assigning our work to that of the devil.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Because of how they act because of their faith.

What a simplistic notion. As if A always does only right and B never ever does one right thing.

The church has so thoroughly separated faith from works that they can't comprehend the Biblical connection between faith and works when you try to explain it to them. 'Works' has become the four letter word of the faith because it always evokes the one indoctrinated one track thinking of 'works salvation' so predominant in the church today. Somehow faith really doesn't have to do anything for faith to be able to save, in direct contradiction to James.

Why don't we just 'get real' and understand the fact that EVERYONE does both good and bad.

Why don't we get real in this OSAS discussion and start recognizing the difference between blood bought and protected believers who sin, and Christ rejecting, unbelieving, apostate unbelievers who sin, but who think they're still protected by the blood.

It has really been bugging me that the OSAS argument fails to make this distinction in this and other threads and lumps all sin and wrong-doing and the people who do that into one group.

There's a big difference between sinning and trusting the blood to keep you (and bring you to repentance), and sinning and NOT trusting the blood to keep you (and NOT coming to repentance). How is it that OSAS can't tell the difference?

 

[smaller]

The problem of what you're teaching

What am I teaching? Do you even know?

I happen to think that believers do bad and that fact can not be avoided. If they do 'less bad' as believers that's GOOD, but none of us are ever NOT SINNERS.

The notion that we must make ourselves 'sinless' as believers or that the measure of 'I am less of a sinner' is the basis of heaven entry is patently FALSE and an open practiced LIE.

is it's always wrong to warn people and 'turn them from their error'

What 'error' might that be? People do not 'need some denominational version of Jesus' to do good, if this is what your claim is.

because some people do that without knowledge. But I find it interesting that you have no problem assigning our work to that of the devil.

I know you'd like to take full credit for all of your sin and ignore this fact:

1 John 3:8
He that committeth sin is of the devil;

nah, none of you 'works for salvation' people have 'any of that fact.'

I prefer my faith to be heavily involved with facts. Sorry.

s