Evangelicals: How do you know you have "Saving Faith"?

[geezerbob]

Jesus taught many things to the Jews who were under the Law or as His subjects of the Kingdom prior to the cross that do not directly apply to the believer (this side of the cross) who has been forever cleansed by His sacrificial blood - through faith.

 

[apophasis]

mdcpensive1:

I can counter your posts with scripture quotes and passages on how the Church understands these passages but it all comes down to the fundamental belief of what saves us that causes us to write these posts. It is your belief that it is faith which is “saving faith” that saves us and you have skillfully shown the passages that talk about faith or belief saving us.

I do not believe faith saves anyone. Not even “saving faith.” I believe God Himself saves by His grace (because of the cross) through faith (Eph. 2:8). And because of the cross of Christ He has the power and freedom to save completely and forever those who trust in Christ.

I should add that it is extremely important to understand belief from the point of view of the scripture writers and not our present day understanding of the words they used.

I agree. And one should not filter the Scriptures through one’s religious beliefs, but they should be tested by Scripture.

A question I have is “since faith is a gift that is given by God once and for all, why is it He gives some “saving faith” and others “plain faith” but not “saving faith””? Maybe you can help me understand what you believe?

I’ll tell you what I don’t believe and that is that faith is “a gift that is given by God.” Nor do I believe in “plain faith” vs. “saving faith.”

Maybe you’re referring to the passage in 1 Cor. 12:1 Cor 12:4-9 "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all {persons.} But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit,"Now the spiritual gifts and ministries listed here are manifiestations of the Holy Spirit working through believers for the “common good” of the Church, i.e., for the edification of the Body of Christ. None of this is in the context of “saving faith.” That is, the faith a sinner puts in Christ in order to be saved.

The exercise of the kind of faith spoken about here is experienced by those who are already saved, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, and are already part of the Body of Christ for the edification of the Body, for the sake of ministering to it.

As Catholics, we understand that luke-warm faith can grow into what you call “saving faith” if we co-operate with God’s graces.

What you’re presenting here is “non-saving faith” vs. a “mature saving faith.” And that mature saving faith is achieved by cooperative efforts on man’s part. Of course this cooperative effort must be exercised throughout one’s life time, and only at the end of one’s life will he know if God has accepted his efforts. But this is not divine salvation through faith in Christ’s work on our behalf, but salvation based on works of our own.

You see, mdv, I don’t believe faith saves anyone. GOD SAVES completely by GRACE “through faith” in the Person and sacrificial work of His beloved Son. Exactly what the Apostles preached to the world and preserved in holy writ.

I would ask you then to recall the story of the master who left on a trip who gave his servants various amounts of “talents” to care for in his absence. The ones who increased their amounts were called good and faithful servants while those who did not had theirs taken away. I see this as our personal growth in the gifts God has given us including our faith which is also a gift. Our faith can save us and is important but is a component, not the end of the road.

I see this parable as a lesson on stewardship. Faith is a personal response to the message of Messiah, His Person and redemptive work on our behalf. Salvation is not something one grows into, but is a “GIFT OF GOD” by His grace through faith (Eph. 2:8).

God the Father planned our salvation and God the Son gained the graces for our salvation by His death and resurrection. The Holy Spirit infuses the love of God into our hearts. Once as He gives us His grace as pure gift and again as we co-operate with what graces He has given us. Salvation is for us all, by grace through faith, but scripture says not only should we believe, but that we should also repent and be baptized. We cannot forget these last two.

The idea that Christ “gained graces” (merits) for our salvation is not Biblical or Apostolic. It is uniquely Catholic. It is the saved who have repented (turned from unbelief to belief in Christ), and it is the saved who are to be baptized. One is not baptized to be saved.

 

[apophasis]

geezerbob:
Can you quote me saying “everything” Jesus taught before the cross was “irrelevant?”

Afterall, this is what you’re claiming I said. Show me the quote, not what YOU read into it.

 

[geezerbob]

Sorry, I shouldn’t have said “everything.” Let me reword it:

Don’t you just love it? Now we’re being told that many things Jesus taught prior to the crucifixion are irrelevant. I guess that makes Him a liar, which would mean that He is not God, which would then mean that His crucifixion is irrelevant. How’s that for circular logic?

It still comes out the same way, though. It seems you are putting your interpretation of scripture, largely Paul’s writings, ahead of what Our Savior actually said.

 

[holy_wood]

Matt 19:16-17

Now behold, one came and said to Him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?”
17 So He said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Says nothing about having only “saving faith” now does it?

Matt 7:21

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven

Doing Gods will…sounds like a work to me.

John 6:53-54

Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. 54 Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

Be it taken sybolically or literally the verse says we must do something to be risen up.

John 15:1-6

“I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser.Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit. You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you. Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you abide in Me.
“I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.

Everyone agree that those branches were part of the body of Christ and does everyone agree that to truly be part of the body you need faith. Yes, then it is clear that those branches, already part of the body mind you, who do not bear**( a work)** good fruit will be thrown into the fire. “But they must abide in him.” (faith working through love)

James 2:22-24

Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? ( What the Catechism teaches) And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was *accounted to him for righteousness.” *And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.

What, The Word of Gos says we are not saved by faith alone, what else is left to debate?..Oh I also don’t see any reference to “saving faith”.

James 2:26

For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Cool analogy.
Body seperated from body = DEATH
Faith seperated from Works = **DEATH **
1 Tim 5:8
But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
This guy was a beliver but lost his salvation for failing to do…you guessed it a work.

---

P.S.-- Its funny how no where in the inerrant word of God do we find a distinction between faith and "saving faith."

---

Maybe because in the eyes of God there is no such distinction…

---

**Maybe this “saving faith” is one of those evil, evil traditions of men. **

---

There is much more for me to teach you but you cannot bear it now.

 

[Odell]

As someone else has said before Catholics dont disregard Jesus message before the Cross.

What does having a crucifix prove?

It shows the power of the Cross

What gifts are you offering?

"For by grace you have been saved through faith…the GIFT OF GOD,
​

OK im telling you that your offering YOUR Faith is nothing if you do not forgive others.​

 

[Odell]

I asked you this
How is a Jew or any non Christian for that matter consecrated to the blood of Christ?

Your response

Through faith in Christ.

So one who is Consecrated is one who believes Thanks:thumbsup:

I also said.
tell me how one goes up a degree in sanctification?

YOU said

By turning from unbelief to** belief** in Christ - trusting fully in His sacrificial work on your behalf. Then, and only then, are you “sanctified in Christ Jesus.” A “saint” by calling.

Thaks for clearing that up

there is only two degrees I recon according to apophasis theology.

YOU say one that is consecrated is one who believes
YOU say one that is move up a degree in sanctification is one who belives.

And the bible says those who are consecrated and sanctified by the blood (saved) and then conseders it unclean there will be a worse punishment.

Whats this worse punishment do I lose some Jewles?

 

[apophasis]

Sorry, I shouldn’t have said “everything.” Let me reword it:

It still comes out the same way, though.

So tell me “geezer,” does what Jesus said in Matt. 24:18-20 directly apply to you?

It seems you are putting your interpretation of scripture, largely Paul’s writings, ahead of what Our Savior actually said.

So you’re under the impression that Paul’s “gospel” was his own? Read Gal. 1:11-12. Are you under the impression that Paul’s writings are not theopneustos (God breathed)?

 

[holy_wood]

So you’re under the impression that Paul’s “gospel” was his own? Read Gal. 1:11-12. Are you under the impression that Paul’s writings are not theopneustos (God breathed)?

ooh snap!!!

 

[geezerbob]

So tell me “geezer,” does what Jesus said in Matt. 24:18-20 directly apply to you?So you’re under the impression that Paul’s “gospel” was his own? Read Gal. 1:11-12. Are you under the impression that Paul’s writings are not theopneustos (God breathed)?

You’ve certainly got a way of twisting things and avoiding issues.

Where did I imply that Paul’s writings were not inspired? To refresh your memory, I wrote that you seemed to be putting your interpretation of Paul ahead of what Christ taught. Big difference there.

You never did address the question of which of Christ’s teachings were relevant only to the Jews and have no application to us as Christians. To me, that’s putting the student ahead of the teacher and I would really like clarification on this from you since you’re the one who made that statement.

If you can stop microanalyzing Scripture long enough to see the big picture, you will find the same consistent message from Genesis to the Apocalypse of John, sometimes hidden, but there nonetheless. That message is that we are to love God and love our neighbor; that our love of God, whom we cannot see, is made manifest in our love of our fellow man (who is made in the image and likeness of God), whom we can see; that we will be judged on our obedience to these two commandments, and that the judgment will be whether we will spend eternity basking in the glory of God or burning in the fires of hell, not what size mansion we will get in heaven. The rest of Scripture (and the teachings of the Catholic Church) are primarily to direct us imperfect humans toward obedience to these commandments and thus to salvation. Some details may have changed when we went from the OT to the NT, but the meat of the message is the same, was relevant then, and is relevant now.

To me, the attempts to define the sometimes legalistic terms that Paul used, and to determine exactly what such things as justification, sanctification and glorification are and when they occur, are distractions from the real message that God has given man through the Scriptures and through His Church. We have taken a simple and direct message and have made it needlessly complicated. God, speaking through His prophet, Isaiah, saw much the same thing and went so far as to imply that the prayers of His people would not be heard until they were obedient, not to rituals such as wearing sackcloth and ashes, but to His command to care for the less fortunate (Ch. 58.) Christ repeats this command in the parable of the sheep and the goats (Mt. 25:31-) and describes in vivid and unmistakable detail the reward for obedience and the punishment for disobedience.

The words of the Bible become much less confusing when read with these two great commandments foremost in our minds. Christ’s crucifixion and death afforded us the means of obtaining salvation, but in no way released us from from the requirement that we be obedient in order to obtain that salvation. Anyone who interprets Paul to mean something other than that is indeed putting (his interpretation of) the pupil before the teacher.

That’s my belief and I’m sticking to it.

 

[apophasis]

You’ve certainly got a way of twisting things and avoiding issues.

Where did I imply that Paul’s writings were not inspired? To refresh your memory, I wrote that you seemed to be putting your interpretation of Paul ahead of what Christ taught. Big difference there.

No difference since I must interpret the words of Christ just as I must interpret the words of Paul.

You never did address the question of which of Christ’s teachings were relevant only to the Jews and have no application to us as Christians. To me, that’s putting the student ahead of the teacher and I would really like clarification on this from you since you’re the one who made that statement.

I suppose I could answer in one word: CONTEXT.

If you can stop microanalyzing Scripture long enough to see the big picture, you will find the same consistent message from Genesis to the Apocalypse of John, sometimes hidden, but there nonetheless. That message is that we are to love God and love our neighbor; that our love of God, whom we cannot see, is made manifest in our love of our fellow man (who is made in the image and likeness of God), whom we can see; that we will be judged on our obedience to these two commandments, and that the judgment will be whether we will spend eternity basking in the glory of God or burning in the fires of hell, not what size mansion we will get in heaven. The rest of Scripture (and the teachings of the Catholic Church) are primarily to direct us imperfect humans toward obedience to these commandments and thus to salvation.

Thank you. And this is why you cannot understand Paul’s writings. Within his Epistles, as no others, He explains in detail the “gospel” of God’s infinite GRACE toward us through faith in the Person and redemptive work of Christ Jesus on the cross.

The words of the Bible become much less confusing when read with these two great commandments foremost in our minds. Christ’s crucifixion and death afforded us the means of obtaining salvation, but in no way released us from from the requirement that we be obedient in order to obtain that salvation.

Which is the difference between works and saving faith.

Anyone who interprets Paul to mean something other than that is indeed putting (his interpretation of) the pupil before the teacher. That’s my belief and I’m sticking to it.

Actually, that’s your interpretation and you’re sticking to it. Hence, that makes you a pupil. So based on your own formula, where does that put the teacher?

 

[geezerbob]

I understand Paul’s epistles, but in the context of Jesus’ teachings, not as a gospel unto themselves. I see no reason to believe that your interpretation of Scripture is any more authoritative or correct than mine or, more importantly, than the interpretation of the Church to which Jesus entrusted such interpretation under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Context has nothing to do with answering the question about which of Christ’s teachings are irrelevant to Christians. If you misspoke, just say so.

And, here we go again with the “saving faith.” You have faith or you don’t. Are there two kinds? Where are they defined in the Bible? What’s the difference between the two? How do you know which you have? What’s the process of accepting God’s grace and moving from one kind to the other?

Thanks, I’ll just continue to accept His grace and continue to obey His commandments as best I, an imperfect human, can. Jesus said that’s what I must do to be counted among the sheep on judgment day and I’ll take His word for it over yours or anyone else’s.

 

[apophasis]

geezerbob:

I understand Paul’s epistles, but in the context of Jesus’ teachings, not as a gospel unto themselves. I see no reason to believe that your interpretation of Scripture is any more authoritative or correct than mine or, more importantly, than the interpretation of the Church to which Jesus entrusted such interpretation under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

“The Church to which Jesus entrusted such interpretation?” From where do you get this? From the Church that claims it?

Context has nothing to do with answering the question about which of Christ’s teachings are irrelevant to Christians. If you misspoke, just say so.

Context has everything to do with it. We are told to “rightly divide the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15). * “Mispoke?”* No, not at all.

And, here we go again with the “saving faith.” You have faith or you don’t. Are there two kinds? Where are they defined in the Bible? What’s the difference between the two? How do you know which you have? What’s the process of accepting God’s grace and moving from one kind to the other?

Saving faith is the faith through which God Himself saves a sinner. The content of that faith, as revealed in the N.T., is the Person and sacrificial work of Jesus Christ on our behalf. It’s quite simple. The problem is many acknowledge the cross but their faith rests not there but in something else (church, creeds, men, ultimately themselves). It goes like this:* “Yes, Jesus died for us but we still have to…”*

Thanks, I’ll just continue to accept His grace and continue to obey His commandments as best I, an imperfect human, can. Jesus said that’s what I must do to be counted among the sheep on judgment day and I’ll take His word for it over yours or anyone else’s.

See what I mean? But God’s Word says:Rom. 3:22-26 “…even {the} righteousness of God (how?) through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified (how?) as a gift by His grace (how?) through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. {This was} to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, {I say,} of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier (of whom?) of the one who has faith in Jesus.”

Notice it’s not faith that justifies, but it’s God Himself who justifies the one who has faith (total trust) in Jesus (His work on their behalf).

“Saving faith” is not faith that saves, but the faith through which God Himself saves the sinner. And He saves him completely and perfectly because of the finished and perfect sacrificial work of His Son whom He sent.

One knows he has saving faith when he trusts in Christ alone.

 

[mdcpensive1]

To Apophasis, Hello from mdcpensive1

Your Quote:

I’ll tell you what I don’t believe and that is that faith is “a gift that is given by God.” Nor do I believe in “plain faith” vs. “saving faith.”

Maybe you’re referring to the passage in 1 Cor. 12:

What is it that calls us to God in the first place if it is not a gift given by God? We are told that we can do nothing without God. If it is not grace that He gives us then what is it? And, I was thinking of The epistle of James where he talks about two characterizations of faith, one with works and the other without. If this does not make sense to you then maybe the part in Revelation 3 that has Laodesia having luke-warm faith makes a better understanding.

Your Quote:

What you’re presenting here is “non-saving faith” vs. a “mature saving faith.”

I am not presenting anything versus anything. I am making the point that many people see Christians maturing in their faith as they cooperate with graces given by God. This is the maturing of our faith as we grow in holiness. Have you never seen someone grow in faith and progress in their understanding of God in his or her life?

As I have said in posts previously, it is our difference in the understanding of how we are saved that is causing us some differences although I know that we have many many similarities in our faith. You have saved all at once and I say that this can be true as well as a process.

One thing to consider is that the cross of Christ is the thing that redeems us as part of the process. It is not the end of the process. It earned for us the graces for salvation to be used on our behalf through faith (by grace through faith). Let me use the example of the will of God. I cannot say that the will of God has been completely fulfilled here on earth. It is a process that is continually working to the day it is complete. This will of God is to impart the graces necessary for all to come home to Him for our salvation and it is continually at work.

mdcpensive1

 

[geezerbob]

Apophasis, I really hate to come across as rude, but you have made several things very clear. In your “discernment” of the Word of God, you have put your interpretation of Paul in a position that it supersedes the words spoken by Christ, Himself, and have determined that you have the authority to determine which of Our Savior’s teachings are to be obeyed and which are irrelevant. I would be extremely hesitant to label you a Christian since you apparently believe that Paul (or at least your interpretation of his writings) speaks with more authority than Christ. Any person who has the pride and unmitigated gall to dismiss any of the teachings of Jesus because he has determined that he has the discernment and authority to do so has lost all credibility with me. I’m really having a hard time determining whether you worship Paul or yourself and will no longer be a part of this discussion, but will pray that humility will enter your heart and the scales lifted from your eyes.

 

[apophasis]

Apophasis, I really hate to come across as rude, but you have made several things very clear.

I do not consider you post as rude - just very honest.

In your “discernment” of the Word of God, you have put your interpretation of Paul in a position that it supersedes the words spoken by Christ, Himself, and have determined that you have the authority to determine which of Our Savior’s teachings are to be obeyed and which are irrelevant.

Well, I wouldn’t put it exactly that way. ALL Christ’s words are to be obeyed, it’s just that not ALL of Christ’s words directly apply to the Church He’s building in this present age.

I would be extremely hesitant to label you a Christian since you apparently believe that Paul (or at least your interpretation of his writings) speaks with more authority than Christ.

I do not at all believe that Paul speaks with more authority than Christ, but it is Paul (along with the other Apostles) who was entrusted with the gospel (“good-news”) of Christ. He explains the cross of Christ and the true believer’s salvation by grace through faith in it. Paul got his teaching directly from Christ. He speaks with His authority and his Epistles (along with the others in the N.T.) are theopneustos (God-breathed).

Any person who has the pride and unmitigated gall to dismiss any of the teachings of Jesus because he has determined that he has the discernment and authority to do so has lost all credibility with me.

As I said, I haven’t “dismissed” His teachings. But I have recognized their proper context. All who study the Bible must do that.

I’m really having a hard time determining whether you worship Paul or yourself

Actually, because of Paul’s clear teachings on the Person and sacrificial work of Jesus Christ, I can worship my Lord with great joy, thanking Him and rejoicing in Him daily for what He accomplished for me once for all. And I have a clear understanding of who I am now “in Christ Jesus.”

and will no longer be a part of this discussion, but will pray that humility will enter your heart and the scales lifted from your eyes.

I’ll always covet your prayers for my humility. However, please don’t confuse confidence with what I know regarding the Peson and work of my Savior (through Paul’s Epistles) with personal pride. It is not pride that develops as one grows in the grace and knowledge of Him, but deep, humble joy. As for the scales, they fell from my eyes the moment I turned from unbelief to belief in Christ and trusted in Him alone.

Thanks, Bob, for your participation. I do not at all consider you a rude person, but honest in presenting your opinions. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[guanophore]

Closely associating one’s self with a society of true believers can result in experiencing a degree of “sanctification,” but those men, negatively described in Hebrews chapter ten, never fully committed themselves to the faith.

This is statement has to rank up there with the most preposterous things you have ever said, apo. I thought when you said that Jesus did not have much of anything valid to say about salvation I had heard it all. But NO! I have yet to hear more! Be assured that no one can be sanctified who is not first justified. Such a person is most definitely on the path to salvation. Now whether you believe one can “lose” it or not, anyone who experiences a degree of sanctification cannot possibly do so without the regenerating power of the HS at work within. Maybe you just used a poor choice of words, here, because in the past, you have explained that such persons just had the experience of the graces of the HS fall upon them without any willful participation of their own?

Such men are found in every church fellowship, even to this day.

You mean , people being sanctified (being mady holy by the blood of Jesus and the power of the HS) who are not saved!?

 

[guanophore]

Catholics believe this in error. The whole context (including chapter 11) is about walking by faith and those listed in chapter eleven as examples of personal endurance.

I if a person thought that laying aside every weight and sin that so easily besets and running the race with patience was the ONLY thing believed that would be erroneous. If one is not justified, then one’s efforts to lay aside sin and running the race will be of no avail, since they would be works of the flesh.

The writer of Hebrews encourages the believer to lay aside every encumbrance and sin which so easily entangles us, and to run the race set before us with endurance. The focus here is not salvation, but the endurance of a daily, sanctified life of the believer who has already been saved through faith.

Just semantics, Apo. To you, salvation is an event that happens at one point in time (at justification). But Catholics do not separate the parts of salvation from each other. One can give up one’s birthright as a son, as did Esau, and the prodigal son. A person who does not endure the daily disciplines of a son will not be saved.

It’s about our “race of endurance” Home. Not for salvation but living out a life while here on earth of sanctification.I said that in the context of one working FOR his salvation.

They are all parts of the same event. Beginning with justification, sanctification building upon it, resulting in glorification. They cannot be separated.

Works result in a fear of condemnation

Only works of the flesh. Works of the spirit glorify Our God!

Remember, the author of Hebrews is writing to fellow Jews and when addressing them, corporately, he uses the personal pronoun “we,” i.e., “we Jews.”

In verse 29 he is addressing those fence sitting Jews among them who have not yet made a full committment of faith in the Messiah, but desire to revert back to the sacrificial system of the Law. He is not addressing true believers. “Who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant” is not the response of a true believer.

AGAIN, he is addrssing and warning the “fence sitters” among them. Those among them who have not made a full committment to Christ by faith alone. Keep this in mind when reading all the warnings in the Book of Hebrews.
Heb 5:11-6:3

They may have become fence sitters, but they were converts at one time:

11 About this we have much to say which is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. 12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need some one to teach you again the first principles of God’s word. You need milk, not solid food; 13 for every one who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a child. 14 But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their faculties trained by practice to distinguish good from evil.

They were baby Christians.

Hebrews 6

6:1 Therefore let us leave the elementary doctrine of Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 with instruction about ablutions, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.

They had at least elementary instructions, a foundation about repentance, and good works, and faith, baptism, ordination, etc…

One who is dead and lost is not in need of “reconciliation.” Reconciliation is between enemies. If one is “dead” he needs life. If one is “lost” he needs direction. Not reconciliation.

This comment is almost as preposterous as saying that Jesus did not have much of value to say about salvation, because he had not yet been crucified. Sin makes us enemies with God. One who is lost in sin is an enemy of God, and needs reconciliation. Life is found in Christ, and outside of Him, there is no life, so the dead needs to be reconciled with God that he might find life.

Hence, unlike the prodigal son, impossible for the believer to squander.

You can’t have it both ways. First you say he squandered his inheritance, then you say he could not squander it because it was his by birth and he could not. So which?

You are really stretching, trying to work around these passages that indicate someon can throw away his inheritance in Christ. Why?

 

[guanophore]

And one should not filter the Scriptures through one’s religious beliefs, but they should be tested by Scripture.

Which do you think came first, the beliefs, or the writings about the beliefs?

what I don’t believe and that is that faith is “a gift that is given by God.” Nor do I believe in “plain faith” vs. “saving faith.”

If faith is not a gift from God, then what is it, or where does it come from?

The exercise of the kind of faith spoken about here is experienced by those who are already saved, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, and are already part of the Body of Christ for the edification of the Body, for the sake of ministering to it.What you’re presenting here is “non-saving faith” vs. a “mature saving faith.” And that mature saving faith is achieved by cooperative efforts on man’s part.

WAIT!! You said you didn’t believe in faith achieved by cooperative efforts on man’s part! I saved the post, in case you forgot.

Of course this cooperative effort must be exercised throughout one’s life time, and only at the end of one’s life will he know if God has accepted his efforts. But this is not divine salvation through faith in Christ’s work on our behalf, but salvation based on works of our own.

Gracious mercy, you are sounding more Catholic Every day!

You see, mdv, I don’t believe faith saves anyone. GOD SAVES completely by GRACE “through faith” in the Person and sacrificial work of His beloved Son.

Why do you suppose Jesus was fond of saying “your faith has saved you” ?

The idea that Christ “gained graces” (merits) for our salvation is not Biblical or Apostolic. It is uniquely Catholic.

It is both biblical and Apostolic, as well as uniquely Catholic (since the Bible and Apostolic teaching are also!) . But, perhaps that belongs on another thread?

It is the saved who have repented (turned from unbelief to belief in Christ), and it is the saved who are to be baptized. One is not baptized to be saved.

I think it is true that people must repent and believe before they are baptized, but baptism is salvific. I would be curious to hear what you have to say about this passage in Col. :

10 and you have come to fulness of life in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ; 12 and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses…"Col 2:10-14

The Apostle seems to teach here that baptism replaces circumcision, and that it is actually Christ who performs this ritual initiation into His Body. In Baptism, the body of flesh is “put off”, we are buried with Him, and raised with him. We are “made alive and forgiven”. This is infused grace.

 

[guanophore]

Can you quote me saying “everything” Jesus taught before the cross was “irrelevant?”

Afterall, this is what you’re claiming I said. Show me the quote, not what YOU read into it.

The doctrines of salvation are not found in, or built upon, parables - not even Christ’s. They’re found in the post-cross teachings of the Epistles. The parables Christ presented to the Jews, prior to His sacrificial death and bodily resurrection, did not necessarily take His atoning work on the cross into consideration. His parables taught, in a limited way, a specific lesson by example, but they are not salvation doctrines based on and rooted in His atoning work on the cross. For these you must go to the Epistles.

But Jesus did not teach salvation in the context of the crosss, since that event was yet future when He taught the parables. For this reason, if you want to truly understand salvation, this side of the cross, and in light of it, you must turn to the Epistles - especially Pauline. By divine revelation Paul was given great insight into this “mystery of Christ” (Eph. 3:3-5).

The doctrines of salvation, in light of the historical, finished work of Christ on the cross, are presented and fully explained in the Epistles, not Christ’s parables.

Can you show me where Jesus teaches specifically about justification, redemption, propitiation, identification, sanctification, etc. in the parables?

Why would Jesus give Paul insight into the mystery of Himself if He’d already disclosed it all to Israel? And why would he teach these post-cross mysteries to unbelievers? Truths that are addressed to faith and concern only believers.

I’m not saying Jesus didn’t teach about salvation. In fact He spoke a lot about eternal life through faith in Him alone. And He specifically presented Himself as the object of salvation faith. But He did not disclose to them the “doctrines of salvation” which could only be presented and fully understood AFTER His sacrificial, substitutionary death, burial, bodily resurrection and ascension. ALL on which the “doctrines of salvation” are based.

You admit that the teachings of Jesus about salvation do not inform your understanding of salvation. That, in your opinion, Jesus did not teach the doctrines of salvation. You are saying that whatever Jesus taught about salvation in parables has little impact, since He had not yet been crucified.