Salvation by faith and works : intellectually ridiculous?

My time here has exposed me to people who hold the view that salvation is achieved by something other than just faith in the finished redemptive work of Jesus Christ (salvation by faith alone). These views, although they vary alot all seem to put salvation in our hands to a greater or lesser extent. In essence, our choices determine our destination. Two examples of what I mean. There may be more.Example 1
One may be judged simply on our performance in relation to two golden rules given by Jesus: love God, love neighbour as self - irrespective of what we have believed about God or Jesus or anything else in the Bible.Example 2
Salvation may consist of a more complex route: when a person believes, they receive the Holy Spirit as a guide/assisting power as to how a person should obey Gods laws fully. Whilst the person receives guidance/power, they may chose to disobey and the extent of the disobedience/adherance determines their eternal destination.Logical conclusion from self-influenced salvation
Irrespective of the nature of self-influenced salvation the following seems inescapable. In the end, God will have to draw a line between who has conformed/obeyed/loved him and others or at least tried to, sufficient to enter heaven - and who hasn't. No one would I hope, say that they obey all Gods laws at all times. One may say one tries to do so to the best of their ability but that appears to be leave open the possibility for any level of trying - surely if one fails then one has, per definition, tried as hard as one can at that moment yet failed.
God is in a position to measure everything up and to draw such a line. This raises the spectre of the person who just scrapes into heaven and the person who misses it by a gnats whisker obtaining those positions even though on Gods paper they are nigh on neck in neck.Intellectually ridiculous?
Given that say: 60 billion people have lived and died thus far, we might suppose that the very last occupant to earn Hell may have looked at a woman with lust in his heart for a total of only 0.1 second more than the person who just scrapes into Heaven - other sin/not obeying/not loving God and neighbour being equal.Is this not lunacy?If not, can anyone explain the mechanisms of (partially) self-dependant salvation which excludes this intellectual insult. Assertion is okay so long as it contributes to completing the mechanism.Faith and Belief please.This message has been edited by iano, 18-Apr-2006 03:08 AMThis message has been edited by iano, 18-Apr-2006 03:09 AM

Salvation by faith alone doesn't seem to present that particular problem - if only because there doesn't seem to be any tangible 'by the skin of your teeth in/ out' aspect offered by its tenets. Whilst there is mystery posed by the paradox of salvation: "God pre-ordains/choses whom he choses" vs. "He wants that none should perish/our choice" there is nothing I can think of with which to infer 'nearly'. Perhaps, but purgatory would mean that RC isn't a salvation by works religion and so falls outside the boundaries of the OP. Works would determine the duration spent in purgatory but presumably one would eventually get into heaven and thus there is no nearly. If my understanding of RC is correct then committing a mortal sin ensures damnation in which case there is no purgatory and no nearly either.If it is being RC which permits one the...er.. opportunity to enter purgatory then there is no works-based 'nearly' here either. One cannot nearly be a RC.You might gather that I am not fully clear on the RC mechanism of salvation so I'm struggling here a bit

It avoids it by presenting absolutes as to position and without posing any areas in which that which results in the positional change being comparable to "close-but-no-cigar".In Adam/In Christ...spiritually dead/alive...entering a personal relationship or no (you either meet someone personally or you don't)... no effort on our behalf (if a person believes it is because God brought them to that point - he supplies ability to believe/have faith) meaning there is nothing for us to nearly do....etc.Its hard to argue for a nearly w.r.t. to (God supplied) faith alone without an inkling as to what that nearly might consist of. Intellectual mystery as opposed to intellectual insult is all I can offer.

Have a read of the OP again Jar. The questions contained within are there for inspection. I put up a conclusion that seemed logical to me as an outworking of self-determined salvation. I may be wrong and there is another view.Its all yours...

Lets not turn this thread into a faith-alone examination. The OP is fairly clear. Skin-of-your-teeth-salvation-by-works If he is a God-made Christian (as opposed to the man-made variety) then he can clatter you all over the head all he likes and not lose his place in the Kingdom. Before he does so however, ask him to read the beginning of Romans 6 and do warn him about the discipline God metes out to those whom he loves. It includes killing them!

Hi Cavediver (and that spine chilling avatar of yours) Ask the thief on the cross. As far as I know he had no doctrine to speak of. He recognised (as did many in gospels) Jesus as Lord, acknowledged that and expressed faith in him as saviour. And that was kind of that. And the only way he could do as he did was if God revealed Jesus to him. Otherwise Jesus was just someone else being crucified.Even a cursory biblical reading of what happens people when they encounter Jesus should make it fairly obvious that God is going to do something dramatic to a person prior to and post them becoming Christians. Its not the kind of thing one would mistake. And it doesn't seem to rely much on their understanding and adhering to doctrine. Doctrine doesn't save. Jesus does. It is an act of God not of man. That people head off in a zillion different directions matters not. God works in spite of not because of these things. He can cut through the false-est of doctrines and convert a person. Many have been surprised where God met them. Not least me.Think citizenship. There a huge varieties amongst the citizens of a country: some good, some bad, some tall some short. Citizenship is not a function of these things. Being made a Christian is a positional thing. A legal/forensic actA thread topic "Faith + works = intellectually ludicrous". I should have known it would be the ludicrousness of faith alone I'd get bogged down in - for it is ludicrous.Not that I mind in the least

distilling your post down I see this... It was your view that semi-inspired example 1 in the OP. And I put up what I thought was a logical conclusion stemming from this and other self-determined salvation viewpoints.Yours to dismantle in a mechanical way or simply say you don't know what happens. Not mine to defend a work-less salvation. That'd be OT

Paul, Read the sub-topic at the start of this post. Mystery.Moses was up on a mountain one day and he sees a bush burning but not being consumed. How can this be. Curious, he goes to look closer only to have God speak to him. He is told not to come nearer and to remove his sandles for he is standing on holy ground. Moses reponse is to fall flat on his face.In Romans 9 Paul is dealing with the doctrine of pre-destination. Election. God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy. Stuff that puts sentimental God-is-only-love view through the wringer. Paul lashes those who will approach with intellectually sandled feet, areas of Gods working that he has chosed not to reveal. Although Paul is reaching an end of his brilliant exposition as to the reasons-for and mechanisms-of salvation, he 'defends' Gods right to be God. To have black boxes in the otherwise revealed mechanism.Me? I fall flat on my face when approaching such things. I have no intellectual difficulty with it for I trust him when he says that he wants that none should perish. How he achieves that whilst pre-destining I do not know. But knowing God, I know he is well able.As to your (sandle-shod ) arguments: Paul in Romans 9 points out that if God had arbitrarily chosen some for salvation and some for damnation - simply so that those saved could better appreciate his mercy unto them - then that would be his perogative. We're only clay moulded by a potter. We forget that and demand what we have no right to. He is not made unjust by our definition of just.As to why go out and tell others? Because he says so. Its called obedience. And he equips you with anguish as a spur.Faith alone IS ludicrous. God gives salvation for free? Prior to salvation and open spiritual eyes it can only end in intellectual insult. 1 Cor 2:14 explains it wellThe thread? Self-determined-salvation: how to deal with the OP's logical conclusion and intellectual insult.

I couldn't agree with you more JM. I don't say anything about it being fair - I said it was intellectually insulting. Just like faith alone is might be to an unsaved person. I acknowledge mystery in the mechanism of faith alone.I was just wondering was the scenario posed that which is envisaged by self-determined salvationists. And if not - what is.

Thank God someone is talking about self-determined salvation at last is what I think.To deal with your last point first. My own take is that Hell and Heaven are both digital and analogue (for God created both). Digital in the sense that there is a definite line between the environments of heaven and hell. I can't see how anyone could extract any impression from the biblical view on hell that it is a place to be avoided at all costs (if you'll forgive the salvation by works sounding lapse). Similarily I cannot see how anyone could extract the impression that heaven is anything but exquisite compared to the blend of hell/heaven that is life on earth. "To know God and to enjoy him forever"Having said that I do think that our works matter. Not for salvation but for the extent of reward/punishment that a person will experience. Analogue in that internal sense. Digital in the overall sense I read somewhere that 60 billion people are estimated to have lived and died thus far. At currect rates another 6 billion are added every 70 years or so to that figure. "0.1 seconds lust" was I thought, a rather generous separation. Wherever you decide the divide might lay it would appear that inserting a cigarette paper between the two will entail some crumpling and creasing. ALthough God would be able, with his perfect weighing scales, to do so without problems.But does it not seem slightly lunatic to suppose that that 0.1 second lust (or some such divide) should result in such reward/punishment (given a (biblically more reasonable) digalous model of heaven/hell as opposed to a seamless -infinity to +infinity model with the switchover at zero) A study in scriptures view on Hell left me depressed for two weeks - even though I know I'm not going there. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy - had I got one. To me too. I causes me to fall flat on my face at timesBTW CS: any brief mechanism as to such a salvation? I thought RC meant guaranteed purgatory for RC's then heaven unless a mortaller had been committed? The rest are doomed?

Hi SLThe thread has the implicit notion that there is such thing as God and that folk will end up in either heaven or hell. This is not a "does God exist thread"

The two have such a gulf between them that one might draw comparisons. Some other time: bogged down threads are as easy as salvation by faith alone (for the recipient of course - not for the ransom payer) No one knows. A presumption that it must be deeds is a natural one but there is no need for it to be so. That salvation could be completely free just bends our work-orientated heads. As Paul points out in Romans, God could simply have created some for destruction so that those whom he destined to be saved would greater appreciate his mercy. And who could argue with him or call him unjust (he who defines justness)We're just potter clay. We just forget that factThis message has been edited by iano, 18-Apr-2006 05:48 PM

I have already said that aspects of faith alone (for the unbeliever) are an intellectual 'insult'. This, because they don't allow for man-sized intellectual resolution. You presume all aspects of Gods workings should be intellectually resolvable but haven't told me why this should be so. The OP didn't include mention of examining the faith only viewpoint so I don't feel compelled to have to answer. If you have a question however I will endeavor to answer as best I can.When it comes to "what criteria does God use to chose" I say that I don't know - which doesn't automatically mean it will be our behaviour which influences things. Or even necessarily that there are us-dependant criteria at all. This latter on the basis of the paradox when trying to reconcile his pre-destining people to be saved vs his wanting that none should perish. Its a paradox I can't (nor feel a need) to resolve.Suffice to say, a person who knows God will have a different approach to the black box than one who doesn't. The latter can only retire with an offended intellect. The former tend to fall on their face in wonder at the sheer size of their Father.

Hi Crevo,What I am asking of those who hold to self-determined salvation is how to they reconcile the logical conclusion posed. How they respond to that is what is of interest. If one said: it is a mystery then fine, the thread will move to look at the consequences of that - if any.I don't hold that self-determined salvation is of God so there is nothing wrong with looking at an apparently ludicrous aspect of it from my perspective. If such an adherant says its holy ground for them - "it just is that way" then fine. If you were a Christian it wouldn't affect your destination no matter what denomination or doctrine you held to. But I would ask how one believing the former would have difficulty with the latter. For another time: when faith only is under discussion I have already conceded such. God could discern. But generally, works unto salvation can be taken as greater adherance to Gods will and works unto damnation lesser adherance to Gods will. Thus whilst I cannot discern the dividing line myself I am being told by the adherants what is being measured. And such measurement throws up the logical conclusion in the OP: the difference between the last in heaven and first in hell will be some relatively trival difference in works. A "fraction of a sin" as it werre - if you take the amounts of people who will be measuredUnless someone has some other explanation - an offer extended in the OP

I am encouraged by Pauls use of the qualification in Romans 9:22 where he poses this notion. "What if God..." He is making the point that it is not for us to question God. We do of course. But it is not our place.The Bible tends to dispel notions about God that people are want to err towards. You have the "God full of wrath" god beloved of hellfire and brimstone merchants. You have the fluffy bearded, ultra-benevolent "God is Love" god: this one looks down on our actions and smiles at our little 'mistakes' wondering "what ever will they think of next - as if I didn't know". You also have the "God must be completely intellectually reconcilable before I'll believe in him" god. He is especially popular here at EvC. Is this the "I know he's completely holy and can't abide sin God but if he judges us according to his own standards we'll all be shagged" god?That was the whole point. God is God. He cannot change who he is. It was because we would be judged by his standards that he planned what he planned (will "the omnipotent God who can do absolutely anything" god please stand up at this point)Whenever your inclined to be cross with him (or my puny representations of him) do remember what he did to his son. Will ya?This message has been edited by iano, 18-Apr-2006 06:38 PM