Not all born-again Christians make it through the sanctification process!

[Danus]

James 2:26 says that faith without works is dead, but what James is talking about is that dead faith produces no works. The context of the chapter begins in verse 14 where James says, “What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?” Notice that James asks, “can that faith save him?" The faith he is talking about is false faith, which he further clarifies when he mentions how the devil also believes in God (v. 19). The Devil has dead faith. He only acknowledges God’s existence.

So, with a real Christian, good works are the result of saving faith, not a contributing factor to salvation. Nor do our good works keep us saved. If that were the case, then salvation would be by works.

I would hardly call such a person "born again". That is, one with a dead faith.

 

[Guest]

It is impossible for the Holy Spirit to die inside of you once you're saved. Your faith will be an ongoing, active and alive faith until you die and are buried.

 

[Danus]

Agreed, but that wouldn't stop some people from thinking or calling themselves saved. Real faith produces fruit, there's no getting around that because,

True, and I think that's the crux of the counter argument being presented. However, that counter argument does not address not having faith either. Instead it seems to create a scheme to obtain salvation in some ongoing way, and to have some sort of faith in faith; as if to do is to be, rather than be to do. In other words, does salvation equal the Christian life? or does the Christian life equal salvation? I know of no one, and nothing in the bible that suggest the later is at all true; certainly not my own experience with God either.

Scheme maybe a harsh word, but I can't think of anything other for anyone who doers not have faith in salvation, or a faith that says you are saved, but to add something to it to suggest conscious effort, as apposed to a conscious recognition of what being done in them by God. Furthermore, I would not suggest someone making such effort is not saved, or would not be, but that's not our call on others anyway. Therefore, they either know it or they don't. Far be it from me that not knowing means ultimate condemnation. After all, people become aware of God every day.

 

[SeekHisFace]

I would hardly call such a person "born again". That is, one with a dead faith.

Agreed, but that wouldn't stop some people from thinking or calling themselves saved. Real faith produces fruit, there's no getting around that because,

It is impossible for the Holy Spirit to die inside of you once you're saved. Your faith will be an ongoing, active and alive faith until you die and are buried.

That's it!
Not our own works but the works of the Spirit producing fruit!
Fruits of the Spirit. Being led by the Spirit,walking in it--living it, and doing the Father's will.
Jesus said that only those doing the Father's will shall inherit the kingdom of God
AMEN!!

Blessings...

 

[dadof10]

I don't think you are understanding the parallel. Here is Pascals Wager in a nutshell: "God is, or He is not" A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up. According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions. You must wager. (It's not optional.) Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain. Here is the parallel I'm drawing:
1) Good deeds either effect salvation, or they do not.
2) A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
3) According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.
4) You must wager. (It's not optional.)
5) Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that good deeds effect salvation. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
6) Wager, then, without hesitation that good deeds effect salvation. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.
I can't see how anyone would disagree that "working as if it all depends on you" is the wisest course.

Sorry, dadof10, but you are using three logical fallacies here, and any one invalidates your proposition.
1) the assumption of an equality among unequals

This is not a Logical Fallacy, not one I can find, anyway. Do you mean the "B-List" fallacy of "Appeal to Equality"? According to Bo Bennett in his book "Logically Fallacious: The Ultimate Collection of Over 300 Logical Fallacies", it means "An assertion is deemed true or false based on an assumed pretense of equality". If this is what you meant, this "fallacy" doesn't apply because my "assertion" does not rest on two things being equal.

2) removal of the wager from the context (proof of the existence of God) and applying it to something that it is not intended, salvation.

Pascal's Wager does not "prove" there is a God, it simply makes the case that, we, as rational human beings, can't prove that God exists BY USING ONLY REASON, and, since we MUST choose either "yes" or "no", it is far more logical to choose "yes", because the gain is infinite and the loss is finite. You are misunderstanding Pascal.

3) adding works as a qualification for salvation which was neither in the wager, nor in the "cause" of salvation.

What does matter to me is that you are including works, and you did post this:

As I do really believe what I just wrote, it in no way will effect my future arguments.I

Please be specific so that I will not get it wrong, but what exactly is your position?

My position is that justification is a process, not a one time event. We are justified by faith working in love, not faith alone.

You keep harping on my quote "As I do really believe what I just wrote, it in no way will effect my future arguments" and trying to somehow nail me with it. Why? I made the point that "can't we all just get along" in the post. This comment was a joke, that means, even though I just made the case for peace and unity, I'm still going to argue, because I STILL believe that "sola-fide" is heresy and I like to argue. You are really making too much out of this one throw away sentence. Again, if you wish to argue "faith vs. works" we can do it in the two threads mentioned in my previous post.

 

[dadof10]

And here we are again. faith or works? .

Please tell me this isn't in response to my previous post to you...Please tell me this is just a generic post to this thread...

I really don't want to go down the "unanswered points, straw-man argumentation" road with you, yet again...

 

[dadof10]

Numbers 2 and 3 are not actual logical fallacies and number 1 is one I have not heard of before. Do you have a formal name for that fallacy?

1) the assumption of an equality among unequals is also called the masked man fallacy. the poster tried to make a parallel statement that is neither parallel nor congruent.

What are you talking about? Here is the definition of the "Masked Man Fallacy"

"The masked man fallacy is a fallacy of formal logic in which substitution of identical designators[clarification needed] in a true statement can lead to a false one. One form of the fallacy may be summarized as follows:

• Premise 1: I know who X is.
• Premise 2: I do not know who Y is.
• Conclusion: Therefore, X is not Y.

The problem arises because Premise 1 and Premise 2 can be simultaneously true even when X and Y refer to the same person. Consider the argument, "I know who my father is. I do not know who the thief is. Therefore, my father is not the thief." The premises may be true and the conclusion false if the father is the thief but the speaker does not know this about his father. Thus the argument is a fallacious one.
The name of the fallacy comes from the example, "I do not know who the masked man is", which can be true even though the masked man is Jones, and I know who Jones is.
If someone were to say, "I do not know the masked man," it implies, "If I do know the masked man, I do not know that he is the masked man." The masked man fallacy omits the implication.
Note that the following similar argument is valid:

• X is Z
• Y is not Z
• Therefore, X is not Y

But this is because being something is different from knowing (or believing, etc.) something.

Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/masked-man-fallacy#ixzz2QagW5hJp

This bears absolutely no resemblance to my argument. Please explain.
​

 

[dadof10]

It doesn't look at all like that is the masked man fallacy.


Well, Pascal's Wager isn't intended to "prove the existence of God." The gist of the Wager is that all things being equal, having examined the evidence and being at a stalemate as to whether or not God exists, it is far better to wager on the existence of God.

Regardless, I do not think that a syllogistic fallacy has occurred.

3) adding works as a qualification for salvation which was neither in the wager, nor in the "cause" of salvation Most important is that it is not Scriptural. This is circular reasoning because the poster begins with he ends with

You say it is not Scriptural, he says it is. It doesn't matter that "works salvation" is not in The Wager, if we use this wager for works, it doesn't end up being circular.

You beat me to it...

Really, I can't see what the big argument is about. Most Christians know that doing good deeds (love) is necessary for our Christian walk, whether they believe justification is a process or not. I'm not even arguing for this point, only that it is more logical to "work out your salvation" than to rest on your laurels.

 

[francisdesales]

I apologize if I have offended you. I am not diagnosing him. The story is well known about Luther and his conversion to "the gospel" as he saw it, esp. when he read Romans and "the righteousnes of God". HE tells us that he was scrupulous. Mr. Luther did posit his own issues onto Paul, which included thinking that first century Judaism was similar to his idea of Roman Catholicism in the 16th century ("works" salvation...).

No offense taken, I just expect better from francisdesales. I mean, usually you have a better take.

The OP, I thought, opened this thread very well in talking about the meaning of "faith", essentially. There where some good points used about definitions of belief.

If anything should be offensive, it's the title of the thread, but that's how someone who feels they are moving towards being saved would think, VS someone understanding their salvation in a moment at time and growing from there; which, despite what anyone wants to say about Luther, is what Luther, and many others, understood about their salvation.

We don't need to beat up on Luther the man, or call out anything that is too presumptuous on on our part, beyond what he's said publicaly. Everyone have the bible at hand and let's use that.

I bring this up because it appears too many people have whittled down the gospel to "faith v works", when it is about the Risen Lord and participation in the divine nature - being MADE righteous by the indwelling Holy Spirit. The "faith v works" argument is a truncated version of what God wants to give us. The source of "faith v works", of course, we know who. But I do find it interesting that many non-Catholics are writing about this in what is called the "NPP", or the "new perspectives in Paul". Wright and Dunn makes some good points, and it is based on Sanders' work to re-evaluate the first century Judaism, which has been tortured beyond what it really was.

OK, back to the OP.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Unless you refuse and reject Him... Hebrews 10 and 2 Peter 2 are very clear examples of this sort of thing.

How does a born again christian that is indwelled with God's spirit refuse and reject him?

How? Have you read some of the letters of Paul to some wayward communities? How about 1 Corinthians? How is it that there was so much dissension??? Why does Paul worry about warning them about particular acts of the flesh (1 Cor 6:9-10)? HOW about the guy caught in incest in 1 Cor 5? I could go on. HOW indeed. The fact is it happens. And we don't have to look far to see why - we still sin...

So I am going to state that man still has free will and CAN reject the Spirit of God, but this possibility becomes more remote the longer one remains in Christ.

Regards

 

[By Grace]

You say it is not Scriptural, he says it is. It doesn't matter that "works salvation" is not in The Wager, if we use this wager for works, it doesn't end up being circular.

Well, Pascal's Wager isn't intended to "prove the existence of God." The gist of the Wager is that all things being equal, having examined the evidence and being at a stalemate as to whether or not God exists, it is far better to wager on the existence of God. Regardless, I do not think that a syllogistic fallacy has occurred.

We disagree.
You asked questions, and I supplied you with answers to the questions.

To pursue this further does not seem to be a faith-building situation.

 

[Free]

It doesn't look at all like that is the masked man fallacy.


Well, Pascal's Wager isn't intended to "prove the existence of God." The gist of the Wager is that all things being equal, having examined the evidence and being at a stalemate as to whether or not God exists, it is far better to wager on the existence of God.

Regardless, I do not think that a syllogistic fallacy has occurred.

3) adding works as a qualification for salvation which was neither in the wager, nor in the "cause" of salvation Most important is that it is not Scriptural. This is circular reasoning because the poster begins with he ends with

You say it is not Scriptural, he says it is. It doesn't matter that "works salvation" is not in The Wager, if we use this wager for works, it doesn't end up being circular.

You beat me to it...

Really, I can't see what the big argument is about. Most Christians know that doing good deeds (love) is necessary for our Christian walk, whether they believe justification is a process or not. I'm not even arguing for this point, only that it is more logical to "work out your salvation" than to rest on your laurels.

In the least it ought to be cause for serious personal reflection and whether or not one has consistently been engaged in good works.

 

[Guest]

How? Have you read some of the letters of Paul to some wayward communities? How about 1 Corinthians? How is it that there was so much dissension??? Why does Paul worry about warning them about particular acts of the flesh (1 Cor 6:9-10)? HOW about the guy caught in incest in 1 Cor 5? I could go on. HOW indeed. The fact is it happens. And we don't have to look far to see why - we still sin...

So I am going to state that man still has free will and CAN reject the Spirit of God, but this possibility becomes more remote the longer one remains in Christ.

Regards

Yes, but you're also forgetting that the Holy Spirit is a teacher and convicter of sin. He shows you what sin is. Yes, MORE REMOTE! VERY GOOD! Yes we do sin and we make mistakes, it's ok to make mistakes AS LONG AS we LEARN from them.

For example francis, I will give you a great example. Before I came to Christ, I had dated this girl at work, and I fell in love with her. Well, it all just blew up in my face after like three months. She broke up with me and I STILL had to go to work and see her. It was an extremely difficult situation. The atmosphere in that room was TENSE because it was cubicles inside an office.

Now there is this girl at my new work/new job that likes me, but there's a problem. I compare this girl now to the girl I used to date. This girl is not in Christ and she ALSO works with me. CHRIST is the first thing on my mind when I make decisions like this now. I do however treat her with respect and I wrote her an email saying that it will never work because we work together and I am a born again christian.

The moral here is that I learned from my mistakes in the past, and also I know what sin looks like because of having a personal relationship with Christ. I've already in my heart have decided that I will NEVER date a woman who isn't in Christ and ALSO I will never date a woman who I work with, saved or not saved. These are the lessons God has showed me to keep me out of trouble. Because listen, we are all wired a different way. A born again christian could easily date another born again christian AT WORK and be ok with it because that's the way they are wired. I've realized I am not wired that way. I can literally feel the blessings because of my actions. I can THINK at work and not be paranoid all the time. Praise the LORD. I respect my job and my situation I have now more so because of what I went through in the past. The atmosphere I present to my co-workers is freedom and calmness and joy in the Lord. Amen.

Conclusion: Since we are all human we will mess up, saved or unsaved. We will still sin as a believer and an unbeliever all throughout life because we live in a fallen world. But here's the thing. A wise man will learn from his mistakes and TURN AWAY from sin that they have committed in the past, things that have gotten them into trouble, things that we're not of his will. But also keep in mind that for believers in Christ, if you mess up and sin and do wrong, God will NEVER cast you out. That's his promise. You can quench the spirit by living in sin and NOT GROW in the spirit, having slow growth, but he will never cast you out. That's his promise. I rather repent and have the Holy Spirit flow inside of me, but that's just me.

Living the christian life is not about shoving scripture down our throats about behaving or obeying or you're gonna be punished in the afterlife or any of that junk, no. You can preach the whole Bible, but if there is no transformation in your heart then forget it. They missed the whole point. The Holy Spirit will teach you what sin is, how great is that?? By the time the Holy Spirit is done with you, you will look at the world through new lenses, your eyes will be sanctified, and your mind and heart will HATE SIN! THAT'S where we need to be in our walk, to the point where sin is disgusting. Once we understand this, blessings from God will pour down upon you faster than you can say..Blessings.

 

[francisdesales]

Yes, but you're also forgetting that the Holy Spirit is a teacher and convicter of sin. He shows you what sin is. Yes, MORE REMOTE! VERY GOOD! Yes we do sin and we make mistakes, it's ok to make mistakes AS LONG AS we LEARN from them.

Thank you for the longer response.

I am not forgetting about the Spirit, I agree with the above comment. However, just as the more we continue in the Spirit, the chances become more remote, the reverse is true, as well. Sin can become a habit, and careless piety or practice can eventually lead to minor sins becoming major sins. The soft voice of the Spirit gets drowned out by the anxieties of the day (just as Jesus said they would in the parable of the sower. They started out in faith, but fell away later)

For example francis, I will give you a great example. Before I came to Christ, I had dated this girl at work, and I fell in love with her. Well, it all just blew up in my face after like three months. She broke up with me and I STILL had to go to work and see her. It was an extremely difficult situation. The atmosphere in that room was TENSE because it was cubicles inside an office.

Now there is this girl at my new work/new job that likes me, but there's a problem. I compare this girl now to the girl I used to date. This girl is not in Christ and she ALSO works with me. CHRIST is the first thing on my mind when I make decisions like this now. I do however treat her with respect and I wrote her an email saying that it will never work because we work together and I am a born again christian.

The moral here is that I learned from my mistakes in the past, and also I know what sin looks like because of having a personal relationship with Christ. I've already in my heart have decided that I will NEVER date a woman who isn't in Christ and ALSO I will never date a woman who I work with, saved or not saved. These are the lessons God has showed me to keep me out of trouble.

There is certainly a mixture of human wisdom mixed in there with Godly wisdom. When a person has been burned before at such a level, it becomes easier to avoid that the next time.

But what happens to the Christian who falls away, it is gradual. One silences the conscience on minor sins:

"Oh, well, I can use a condom, it's no big deal. Who am I hurting..."
"What's so bad at looking at porn on the internet? Who am I hurting? I still love my wife"
"Well, I am just talking to someone, I don't intend on meeting her..."
"I did not have sex with that woman!"

You see what happens? We gradually justify our own actions. And if we THINK we are "good Christians" because we go to church/service and read the scriptures occasionally, all the more the worse that we talk ourselves into thinking that the occasional makes up for the actions I lay out above. In our minds, they aren't so bad! And next thing you know, you are fantasizing about some female you have never actually met and have only written to. You have committed adultery in your heart vs your wife/girlfriend.

The above is just an example, it is not based on any personal experience...;)

Because listen, we are all wired a different way. A born again christian could easily date another born again christian AT WORK and be ok with it because that's the way they are wired.

I disagree, the same exact problem would come up if you broke up. It would STILL be uncomfortable, etc...

I'll finish where I left off, have to stop now.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Conclusion: Since we are all human we will mess up, saved or unsaved. We will still sin as a believer and an unbeliever all throughout life because we live in a fallen world. But here's the thing. A wise man will learn from his mistakes and TURN AWAY from sin that they have committed in the past, things that have gotten them into trouble, things that we're not of his will.

That is a presumption that everyone who is a Christian is a wise man who will see the folly of their current sinful life.

My experience with Christians is that Jesus was right. Some fall away. They start out very active and on fire for God. But things happen. I have seen a gradual decline and I have seen major events blamed on God that leads one to fall away. Now, is this a permanent thing? I cannot say, I don't know the end or God's final judgment. However, from the outside, a OSAS person would necessarily conclude "he was never saved to begin with" because his now current lifestyle is not in touch with God. He has stopped going to worship, doesn't read Scriptures or pray, and if the subject of God comes up, they get upset and angry. Or they become irritated that you are "judging" them.

And that is the point of denying that Christians DO NOT/CANNOT fall away from Christ. It denies the human experience.

But also keep in mind that for believers in Christ, if you mess up and sin and do wrong, God will NEVER cast you out. That's his promise.

There is no such promise for those who turn from God without repenting. Even the formerly righteous:

But if the just man turn himself away from his justice, and do iniquity according to all the abominations which the wicked man useth to work, shall he live? all his justices which he hath done, shall not be remembered: in the prevarication, by which he hath prevaricated, and in his sin, which he hath committed, in them he shall die. And you have said: The way of the Lord is not right. Hear ye, therefore, O house of Israel: Is it my way that is not right, and are not rather your ways perverse? For when the just turneth himself away from his justice, and committeth iniquity, he shall die therein: in the injustice that he hath wrought he shall die. Ez 18:24-26

A person who sins MUST repent. Salvation is conditional, and just because one was justified 20 years ago does not give anyone license to sin and not repent.

Living the christian life is not about shoving scripture down our throats about behaving or obeying or you're gonna be punished in the afterlife or any of that junk, no.

The Christian life is indeed about obedience. You are STILL a slave. Slave to Christ. You were purchased at a very expensive price. You are not "free" to do whatever you feel like it without any consequences. Since we are slaves - slaves obey.

You can preach the whole Bible, but if there is no transformation in your heart then forget it. They missed the whole point.

That's true. Conversion must take place. But that's certainly not the end of the journey.

The Holy Spirit will teach you what sin is, how great is that??

My friend, there are many "voices" that vie for our attention and direct our will. We have our own opinions. We are influenced by our culture, by our friends and family. We are tempted by the "old man" and our former ways. We have to put up with temptations of Satan, which always sound "good" (we are not tempted with doing things that we would never do because they are 'evil'. We are tempted with things on the "border" that don't sound too bad and appear to have a "good" intent).

Yes, the Spirit teaches us, but it is not always easy to discern His voice. This is the struggle of sanctification.

By the time the Holy Spirit is done with you, you will look at the world through new lenses, your eyes will be sanctified, and your mind and heart will HATE SIN!

That's not an automatic process, nor is it a quick one. Nor is it an assurance that anyone cannot return to sin.
There are plenty of examples of pastors or priests, men who were saved and loved God for a long time. And then they committed a grievous sin. What happened? They never were saved? That's a ridiculous assertion. Oh, they were once saved, but they fell away, just as God said could happen.

Thus, we are told to remain awake, be aware, persevere, etc...

Regards

 

[Elijah674]

Very true. Christ stated...

[2] Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
[3] All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. (Matt. 24)

--Elijah

 

[dadof10]

That is a presumption that everyone who is a Christian is a wise man who will see the folly of their current sinful life.

My experience with Christians is that Jesus was right. Some fall away. They start out very active and on fire for God. But things happen. I have seen a gradual decline and I have seen major events blamed on God that leads one to fall away. Now, is this a permanent thing? I cannot say, I don't know the end or God's final judgment. However, from the outside, a OSAS person would necessarily conclude "he was never saved to begin with" because his now current lifestyle is not in touch with God. He has stopped going to worship, doesn't read Scriptures or pray, and if the subject of God comes up, they get upset and angry. Or they become irritated that you are "judging" them.

And that is the point of denying that Christians DO NOT/CANNOT fall away from Christ. It denies the human experience.

I have personally known a few who are exactly as you describe. I have also known some who, even though they no longer pray, stop going to church, etc. they STILL consider themselves saved. Why? Faith alone justifies. They still consider themselves as faith filled, their actions don't matter. This is where sola-fide leads for some, which is why I think, even if we don't believe that "works" effect salvation, we should act as if they do. Our laziness and self-centeredness are tools Satan uses to move us away from God.

 

[Deborah13]

However, from the outside, a OSAS person would necessarily conclude "he was never saved to begin with" because his now current lifestyle is not in touch with God. He has stopped going to worship, doesn't read Scriptures or pray, and if the subject of God comes up, they get upset and angry. Or they become irritated that you are "judging" them.

As far as the person reacting upset and angry, could be a sign that they have rejected Christ or that they have not and when the subject is brought they are still under conviction and they don't want to talk about it.
If they get irritated that you are "judging" them, there is a good chance they are under conviction. They have not totally rejected Christ. It would seem to me that if a person who had once truly believed and then rejected the idea that Christ was their Savior and He did what He did they would not be worried about you judging them by
your Christian beliefs. They may get angry that you think you are better. They have "rejected" the whole idea of Christ therefore no conviction.

I just point this out because the human reaction to things can be very different from one person to another and people don't always share their true thoughts and hurts. They can appear to be very tough on the outside and be in terrible pain on the inside. We really need to seek the guidance of the HS if we are involved in this person's life.

 

[Deborah13]

Nor is it an assurance that anyone cannot return to sin.
There are plenty of examples of pastors or priests, men who were saved and loved God for a long time. And then they committed a grievous sin. What happened? They never were saved? That's a ridiculous assertion. Oh, they were once saved, but they fell away, just as God said could happen.

Why would you consider this to be a ridiculous assertion? Just as there are those lay persons in the church who are not saved, there can be pastors and priests who were never saved. We tend to think because they are in the positions they are in and God may even be blessings their ministries, that they must be saved.

So we see that this argument can go either way. In truth, only God knows the truth and maybe the person (they may not be sure themselves, if they were to search the arguments from each side).

 

[John Zain]

My experience with Christians is that Jesus was right. Some fall away.
They start out very active and on fire for God. But things happen.
I have seen a gradual decline and I have seen major events blamed on God
that leads one to fall away.

I have personally known a few who are exactly as you describe.
I have also known some who, even though they no longer pray, stop going to church, etc.
they STILL consider themselves saved. Why? Faith alone justifies.
They still consider themselves as faith filled, their actions don't matter.
This is where sola-fide leads for some, which is why I think,
even if we don't believe that "works" effect salvation, we should act as if they do.
Our laziness and self-centeredness are tools Satan uses to move us away from God.

Well, we have at least two here with some experience, wisdom, and common sense!
Praise the Lord!
But unfortunately, we also have many in the 1:26++ category.
That's why I started this thread.