Faith Alone

  • Thread starter Thread starter Timmy_Z
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
For all the Calvinist believers out there respond to this challenge: PROVE that man can not cooperate with a God willed work!
 
IMO, Catholics forget the parable of the wheat, and the tares, and the presence of each in Christ’s Church.
Alot of people forget that parable. At least we can agree on the necessity of faith in Jesus, and His grace, for salvation.

It was nice debating with you, but I have to bow out for a while. I just started a six week summer class tonight, and I won’t have time for the forum. If this thread is still going, I’ll jump back in when it’s done.

God bless you,

Ryan O’Neil:)
 
sandusky: do you think that man can cooperate with a God willed work?
 
He is not referring to water baptism, but a baptism which is not the removal of dirt from the body. Water baptism does remove dirt from the body—this is as difficult as you make it.
This is a common modern evangelical misunderstanding of the Apostolic Teaching. The Reformers wanted to separate God’s grace from God’s “ordinances” so attempted to redefine the sacraments according to such a manner that would not depend upon the priesthood.

This passage does, indeed, refer to water baptism. The purpose of baptism, sandusky, is not to remove dirt from the body. I am astonished that you would suggest such a thing. Baptism is the normative means by which people are initiated into the Kingdom (Church). No, water baptism is not intended to remove dirt from the body, but to clear the conscience before God. It is not some kind of soap scrubbing!
Israel was immersed into Moses in the same way Peter speaks of immersion into Christ1 Corinthians 10:2

…and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea…That is not an external baptism; it is not the removal of dirt from the body, but an identification with Moses.

It’s not a question of logic, but of the writer’s choice of words.
I agree! You note that the Apostle uses words related to water?
In the passage Peter is talking about the sarx, or “flesh;” he is not talking about the psuche, or “soul,” as you contend; therefore, you are incorrect because you refuse to take the writer’s words in their simple sense.
Exactly. Peter is saying that water baptism is NOT for the purpose of removing dirt from the sarx, but to create a clean conscience toward God.
I’ve read the scripture, cover to cover, many, many, many times in my life as a regenerate Christian, and have yet to find any scripture that states that water baptism is the agent of salvation.

The agent of salvation is clearly stated in the passage from Titus that you cite:Titus 3:5-7

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,

whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,

Yes to this extent, you are in agreement with Apostolic Teaching. It is the HS that regenerates us in Baptism, not the water itself. Jesus chose to use water, just as He chose to make a mud paste to heal the blind man. Jesus is able to heal and regenerate through whatever means He chooses.
sandusky;3755549:
so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
The agent of regeneration and renewing is identified above as the HS and not the baptismal font.Ephesians 2:1, 4, 5

It is not appropriate to separate the two. They are not separated in the NT, and they have never been separated by the Apostolic Churches, until the Reformation.
…you were dead…But God, being rich in mercy…made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)…
That’s a pre-baptismal event of God; otherwise, how would one even know to be water baptized?
People don’t have to “know” to be baptized. That is why the Apostles taught infant baptism. However, for adults, I agree, one must come to faith first.
I agree, regeneration is not symbolic; it is, however, a pre-water-baptism event; how else could one know to be baptized (repent, believe, be baptized in Christ’s name)?
For some people it is. Some people are baptized first, and come to a more personal relationship with Christ later. This happens to many who are baptized as infants.
Furthermore, one does not become justified by baptism, but by faith (cf Rom 4:3, 10-12).

Baptism does not save (cf Mk 16:16), but faith…belief.
The two are not to be separated from one another. All who believed were baptized. It is the faith that is acted upon in baptism that saves. Saving faith is faith that works, obedient faith. It is obedient faith that justifies us.
 
IMO, Catholics forget the parable of the wheat, and the tares, and the presence of each in Christ’s Church.

I’ll restate what I said in an earlier post on this thread:
That is because we know our history. We know that the Church was persecuted until Christianity was decrimminalized by the Edict of Milan in 313. Unlike our churches today, those who were not initiated were not permitted. The period of catechumenate was three years, and catechumens were put out of the assembly prior to the mysteries, which were only for the initiated. Everyone who wanted to enter had to be vouched for by a member (like Barnabas vouched for Paul with the Apostles). This is how they protected themselves. Only persons who had made a profession of faith (the creed) were admitted. The modern notion of unbelievers being present cannot be applied.
 
Cathocism does NOT teach that people can do anything to merit saving grace, which comes from God. However, having received this grace by faith, we are then to live a life worthy of the calling to which we are called. I am curious about your and sandusky’s take on this:

“Therefore, beloved, while you are waiting for these things, strive to be found by him at peace, without spot or blemish; 15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation.” 2 Peter 3:14-15

What does the Apostle mean by “strive”? How can any human effort enable us to be found by Christ at peace, without spot or blemish? If we are saved once and for all time permanently, why strive at all? If we are covered by Jesus blood for all sins past, present, and future, why “strive” to be found without spot or blemish? How can the striving of a man add anything to the blood of Christ?
It’s not a salvation verse. Scripture does not say, “For by grace you have been saved through striving…” This verse refers to our experiential sanctification:"Therefore, beloved, while you are waiting for these things
 
Just one question.

Is it necessary for us to love God in order to be saved?

A simple “yes” or “no” will suffice.
I am taken aback every time I see calvinist answer “no” to this question. Then try the “merited salvation argument” to side track and deflect the glaring indigation of their pronouncement.

They will admit that love is greater than faith. That love is eternal, but can’t admit that loving God is required. It’s part of the bias that has been taught to them, I suppose.

A faith without love of God and obedience to God is just an intellectual faith. It cannot be a saving faith or a “humble faith” as some calvinist seem to call it.
 
Just one question.

Is it necessary for us to love God in order to be saved?

A simple “yes” or “no” will suffice.
No.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith…a gift of God; not as a result of works…”
**
1 John 4:19 “We love, because He first loved us.**”
 
40.png
guanophore:
This is a common modern evangelical misunderstanding of the Apostolic Teaching. The Reformers wanted to separate God’s grace from God’s “ordinances” so attempted to redefine the sacraments according to such a manner that would not depend upon the priesthood.
Luther re-discovered the true gospel that had been lost for almost 1,500 years—the RC sacraments and priesthood are not part of that gospel, neither is there any mention of either in the NT writings of the apostles.

All of that comes from the early church error concerning replacement theology.

Anyone interested can read about that early church error, and its effect on the CC up to today in the book Israel and the Church.
40.png
guanophore:
This passage does, indeed, refer to water baptism. The purpose of baptism, sandusky, is not to remove dirt from the body. I am astonished that you would suggest such a thing. Baptism is the normative means by which people are initiated into the Kingdom (Church). No, water baptism is not intended to remove dirt from the body, but to clear the conscience before God. It is not some kind of soap scrubbing!
How much more do you misinterpret scripture?
40.png
guanophore:
Yes to this extent, you are in agreement with Apostolic Teaching. It is the HS that regenerates us in Baptism, not the water itself.
Actually, the book of Acts records that regeneration precedes baptism.
40.png
guanophore:
It is not appropriate to separate the two. They are not separated in the NT, and they have never been separated by the Apostolic Churches, until the Reformation.
Actually they were never linked until the early church erroneously did so.

In the book of the Acts the sequence is easily seen by anyone reading with an un-jaundiced eye: repent…believe…be baptized in the name of Christ.
40.png
guanophore:
That is because we know our history. We know that the Church was persecuted until Christianity was decrimminalized by the Edict of Milan in 313. Unlike our churches today, those who were not initiated were not permitted. The period of catechumenate was three years, and catechumens were put out of the assembly prior to the mysteries, which were only for the initiated. Everyone who wanted to enter had to be vouched for by a member (like Barnabas vouched for Paul with the Apostles). This is how they protected themselves. Only persons who had made a profession of faith (the creed) were admitted. The modern notion of unbelievers being present cannot be applied.
You certainly need for it to be this way in order to keep your errant soteriology intact.

However, the point of the wheat and the tares is that one cannot tell the difference.

Furthermore, the tares are not a threat to the church physically, as you contend above, but spiritually, and oftentimes, they’re no threat at all.

In the scenario you present above, I’m certain that tares were vouching for wheat, and vice versa, all of the time. 👍
 
Luther re-discovered the true gospel that had been lost for almost 1,500 years—the RC sacraments and priesthood are not part of that gospel, neither is there any mention of either in the NT writings of the apostles. Does God bless your marriage? No! must be your answer then. Baptism is clearly in scripture instituted by Christ. No need to disprove your assertions for each sacrament. The first two were easily disproven.

All of that comes from the early church error concerning replacement theology. Sure beats the theology that a persons supposed “faith” will force God to grant them salvation.

Anyone interested can read about that early church error, and its effect on the CC up to today in the book Israel and the Church.

How much more do you misinterpret scripture? Ditto

Actually, the book of Acts records that regeneration precedes baptism. in your opinion

Actually they were never linked until the early church erroneously did so. in your opinion.

In the book of the Acts the sequence is easily seen by anyone reading with an un-jaundiced eye: repent…believe…be baptized in the name of Christ. Repentance is necessary? Faith alone has be proven false by your statement.

You certainly need for it to be this way in order to keep your errant soteriology intact. Ditto

However, the point of the wheat and the tares is that one cannot tell the difference.

Furthermore, the tares are not a threat to the church physically, as you contend above, but spiritually, and oftentimes, they’re no threat at all. Only your personal opinion of course

In the scenario you present above, I’m certain that tares were vouching for wheat, and vice versa, all of the time. 👍
😃 Luther rediscovery Truth. That kills me! So your position is that Christ was incorrect when he said his Church would preserve until the end.

Why even suggest any source for your beliefs besides scripture? Was that book, “Israel and the Church” inspired by God somehow? The answer is no. Can it reach faulty conclusions. Of course!

Next…
 
So how do you explain:
Mat 24 12Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.
Jesus is describing the conditions in Israel at the end of the age (vs. 3), just prior to His physical return to this earth to set up His Millennial Kingdom. Because of the sinful condition at that future time (the Tribulation, vs. 21), the hearts of men will grow cold toward one another.

However, the reference to salvation in that verse is not to the salvation of the soul of the believer (in context, Jewish) who endures persecution at that time, but to his deliverance from it (persecution) by the Lord’s return. No one’s soul is ever saved by a warm heart and his ability to endure (persevere). One is always saved “by grace through faith…”
 
I have a question for those who believe in “faith alone.” What happens to toddlers who die? Are they doomed to hell because of Original Sin? If not, then what saves them?
 
Instantly with the Lord.

No.

Grace.
This is fascinating to me. OSAS folks clearly believe that those who do not have faith are condemned already (as do Catholics) because of original sin. Original sin separates us from God. We all believe that we can only be saved by grace, through faith. So, how is it that these souls are “instantly with the Lord”, when they are born under a death sentence?
 
Just one question.

Is it necessary for us to love God in order to be saved?

A simple “yes” or “no” will suffice.
No.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith…a gift of God; not as a result of works…”
**
1 John 4:19 “We love, because He first loved us.**”
moondweller,

I want to thank you for answering honestly and not avoiding the question/issue. It is sometimes a little like “pulling teeth” to get some folks to give a straight answer to this inquiry. Your courteous and straight forward response is appreciated.

That having been said, it is now time to exam the issue by way of logic and scripture. Please be advised that it makes sense that we must first have faith in God in order to love God. We cannot love God if we do not believe in God. No one will suggest that we are saved by love “alone.” Likewise, I will show that it is also improper to suggest that we are saved by faith “alone”, because of what scripture says about love of God.

The following passages are very instructive.
1 Cor 8:3
…but anyone who loves God is known by him.

Relative to this idea of being known by God we read many things in scripture that inform us of the importance of being known by God. In Hosea 11:12 it says, "Ephraim has encompassed me with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit; but Judah is still known by God, and is faithful to the Holy One. This passage shows the relationship of being “known by God” and things that we do. We are either sinful(i.e. we turn from God} or we are faithful and we are known by God. Likewise, we must love God to be known by God.

In 1 John 4:7-8 we read the following:
“Beloved, let us love one another; for love is of God, and he who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God; for God is love.” In verse 13 John says that God has given us “his own Spirit,” and he goes on in verse 16 to say “God is love.”

From these verses we learn some very important things about salvation. We know that those that are saved are “born again in water and Spirit.” We know that God is love. We know that those that are saved are given the Spirit of God. The Spirit of God is the essence of God which is love. Without this Spirit of love within us and our loving God we are clearly not saved.

This is brought home by 1John 4:16-18 which says,

“God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. In this is love perfected with us, that we may have confidence for the day of judgment, because as he is so are we in this world. There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and he who fears is not perfected in love.”

Without the love of God perfected in us there is no reason for confidence on the day of judgment.

Jesus tells us, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.” The truth is a person and that person is Jesus. In light of this it is important to look at 2 Thess 2:10. In this verse we are told this:

“…and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.”

This passage tells us that if we do not love Jesus, who is the truth, we will not be saved. Everything else is a deception, and those that follow a deception and do not love the truth will perish.

Paul’s language gets even stronger and more pointed when he says, “Let anyone be accursed who has no love for the Lord. Our Lord, come!”[1 Cor 16:22]

The apostle James also says many important things about love relative to eternal life. He says "Blessed is anyone who endures temptation. Such a one has stood the test and** will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him**.[James 1:12-15]

In James 2:5 the apostle goes on to ask a rhetorical question by saying, “Has not God chosen the poor in the world to be rich in faith and to be heirs of the kingdom that he has promised to those who love him?”

Jesus made the importance of loving God for purposes of eternal life abundantly clear in Luke 10:25-37 where we read this:

“Teacher,” he said, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” He said to him, “What is written in the law? What do you read there?” He answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." And he said to him, "You have given the right answer; do this, and you will live."

I hope these passages are helpful in showing the necessity of our loving God as part of our salvation.
 
So how do you explain:
Mat 24 12Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.
Jesus is describing the conditions in Israel at the end of the age (vs. 3), just prior to His physical return to this earth to set up His Millennial Kingdom. Because of the sinful condition at that future time (the Tribulation, vs. 21), the hearts of men will grow cold toward one another.

However, the reference to salvation in that verse is not to the salvation of the soul of the believer (in context, Jewish) who endures persecution at that time, but to his deliverance from it (persecution) by the Lord’s return. No one’s soul is ever saved by a warm heart and his ability to endure (persevere). One is always saved “by grace through faith…”
This is the weirdest explanation of this passage that I have ever seen and it is contrary to scripture. I have already shown the necessity of love which you are now calling “a warm heart.” I will now show by scripture the necessity of endurance/perseverence which you now deny as well.

Scripture has this to say about endurance/perseverence:

Luke 21:19
By your endurance you will gain your souls.

Heb 10:36
For you need endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised.

Matt 24 :12-13
And because of the increase of lawlessness, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.

Love and endurance are not the only other necessities for salvation. We must also conquer sin by grace. This is made especially clear in the book of Revelation which says the following:

Rev 2:7 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. **To him who conquers **I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.’

Rev 2:11 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. **He who conquers **shall not be hurt by the second death.’

Rev 2:17 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. **To him who conquers **I will give some of the hidden manna, and I will give him a white stone, with a new name written on the stone which no one knows except him who receives it.’

Rev 2:26-29 He who conquers and who keeps my works until the end, I will give him power over the nations, and he shall rule them with a rod of iron, as when earthen pots are broken in pieces, even as I myself have received power from my Father; and I will give him the morning star. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’

Rev 3:4-5 Yet you have still a few names in Sardis, people who have not soiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy. **He who conquers **shall be clad thus in white garments, and I will not blot his name out of the book of life; I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels.

Rev 3:11-13 I am coming soon; hold fast what you have, so that no one may seize your crown. He who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God; never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’

Rev 3:21-22 He who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I myself conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’

Rev 12:11 **And they have conquered him **by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death.

Rev 21:7-8 **He who conquers **shall have this heritage, and I will be his God and he shall be my son. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death."

I hope this helps.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top