Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8898 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2019 10:36 PM
23 online now:
Tanypteryx (1 member, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,681 Year: 3,718/19,786 Month: 713/1,087 Week: 82/221 Day: 36/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
45678Next
Author Topic:   Works, Faith, & Salvation (for Iano)
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2140 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 31 of 106 (267370)
12-09-2005 10:09 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by iano
12-09-2005 12:50 PM


Re: Case not Made
But "He that began a good work in you will bring it to completion until the day of Jesus Christ.

That is about the emptiest promise there is in almost any American church that might quote it. People get colder and more bored as time passes. It is a rare gem that gets more zealous and has the work of God being completed in him.

We can't discuss this verse, because you've never seen it happen. I know what that verse means, because I experience it. I know what it's like inside the church of God, where disciples are gathered and not just a hodge podge of people varying from very interested to mildly interested to offended by Christ's commands.

Inside the church of God, that gathering of disciples, this is a true and beautiful description of what happens. No one is unaffected by the grace of God when they enter into the household of God. It goes on, and it grows, and people change.

Some people, however, can't bear the growing pains, and they flee. Paul experienced that, too, and therefore he warned his children in the faith not to grow weary in doing good.

truthlover writes:

My premise is that when Paul speaks of salvation in the future tense, he speaks of salvation from the judgment, and the wrath associated with it, by the life of Christ producing works in us.

iano writes:

Your premise is that decisions on our part are effectual in attaining 'final' salvation.


No, my premise is what I said it is. This habit of yours of putting words in my mouth and then addressing those words is pretty obnoxious.

My premise is what I said it is, and by trying to change it, you dodge it.

I most certainly do believe that our decisions affect whether we attain salvation in the end, because only those who endure to the end will be saved. However, when I want to propose that as true, I present verses that back up what I'm saying.

I used Romans 5:9,10 to show the way Paul talked about salvation, because if a person is going to see consistency in Paul's letters, then in James' letters compared with Paul, and then in the writings of the church for the next two or three centuries, he or she needs to know how Paul spoke of salvation. Romans 5:9,10 illustrates it, but the proof of it is not Romans 5:9,10. The proof of it is all of Paul's letters which consistently speak of works and judgment in the future and faith and the death of Christ in the past.

That's important all by itself.

I did address how our decisions affect our judgment, because you asked. When you asked that, I gave you verses to back that up. You did not address those verses. You chose to act like I was using Romans 5:9,10 to say that our decisions affect our eternal judgment, and I was not.

I am careful to pay attention to the whole context of Scripture, iano. You talk about it, but you don't do it. Here, you ignored four passages that I specifically listed for you, and then you misstated what I said about Romans 5:9,10.

The things I'm saying are comfortable no matter what book of the Bible you are reading. I won't take credit for any brilliance or inspiration in that. Most of it was taught to me from the writings of those who heard the apostles or who were in their churches within a century of their death. I will take credit for pursuing honesty with a whole heart, and being willing to swallow hard, change my mind, and face the upbraiding and resentment of my friends when I found out that something I believe was contradicted by Scripture.

The fact is, though, that you won't find difficult contradictions to my premise about the way Paul spoke about salvation. He believed that a person needed to be saved from sin, by faith apart from works, and he believed that there is a future judgment in which eternal life will be given to those that have done good. Read his writings. You will find they read wonderfully smoothly this way, and you'll have an extremely difficult time finding any exceptions, because I care whether what I say is true, so I look hard to see if it is. In this case, unless someone can show me I missed something, it is.

Now, on the related but different topic of whether a person who is saved from sin can be turned away at the judgment because they didn't live by the grace they were given, I give different verses. I started with four, which I carefully listed at the end of my last post. I'll list them again:

1 Cor 6:9,10
Gal 5:19-21
Eph 5:3-5
Gal 6:7-9


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by iano, posted 12-09-2005 12:50 PM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by iano, posted 12-12-2005 7:36 AM truthlover has responded
 Message 33 by iano, posted 12-12-2005 7:54 AM truthlover has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 22 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 32 of 106 (268067)
12-12-2005 7:36 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by truthlover
12-09-2005 10:09 PM


Re: Case not Made
iano writes:

But "He that began a good work in you will bring it to completion until the day of Jesus Christ.

tl writes:

That is about the emptiest promise there is in almost any American church that might quote it. People get colder and more bored as time passes. It is a rare gem that gets more zealous and has the work of God being completed in him.

I think you're missing my point TL. God makes promises. He keeps his promises. What you or I think doesn't affect that one whit. The purpose of me including 'promise' passages was to demonstrate that people who were being addressed in the context of them being justified and declared righteous (your 'first' salvation) were promised that they would be saved also from wrath (your second salvation). But there is no separation. If you have been justified then you will be saved from wrath - when that time comes. It's a package deal. A gift can contain many componants: justification, declaration of righteousness, the right to be called a son of God, receipt of the holy spirit, freedom from the law of sin and death, God's residence within, sanctification, glorification, saved from wrath, a prepared mansion in heaven, peace which surpasses all understanding, intercession of the spirit on our behalf etc, etc

One gift. If you want to hold to second salvation as a separate, sure-to-happen componant of the same gift then fine. I agree.

We can't discuss this verse, because you've never seen it happen. I know what that verse means, because I experience it. I know what it's like inside the church of God, where disciples are gathered and not just a hodge podge of people varying from very interested to mildly interested to offended by Christ's commands.

Began a good work, will complete. God at work. I have and do see it happen. Both in myself and in others. If you mean that you don't see it happen according to your doctrine of works then you'd be right. People who are not "works = salvation based" will probably not live as 'holy' a life as those who believe they will be damned if they don't obey. But the former would argue that works done for that reason are entirely worthless from a salvation from wrath point of view.

iano writes:

Your premise is that decisions on our part are effectual in attaining 'final' salvation.

tl writes:

No, my premise is what I said it is. This habit of yours of putting words in my mouth and then addressing those words is pretty obnoxious.

But your premise (second post: which included the references admin requested so as to illustrate your premise) included a stack load of verses all pointing towards not doing a,b,c,d. Your holding that there is a second salvation used works as a central distinguishing factor. The very engine room of salvation from wrath. You also said this in your OP

tl's OP writes:

3.) Future tense salvation is based on works and has nothing to do with faith, except insofar that faith supplied the means to do the works that future tense salvation is based on. It is a salvation from condemnation, and it's goal is entering eternal life and heaven.

Works is what saves according to you. The decision to do works necessary is the persons own. If they decide to obey and do so then they will be saved. If they decide to ignore the work of the holy spirit in them then they will be lost. Their decision is effectual in their being second saved or not. As I stated above. What words was I placing in your mouth?

I used Romans 5:9,10 to show the way Paul talked about salvation, because if a person is going to see consistency in Paul's letters, then in James' letters compared with Paul, and then in the writings of the church for the next two or three centuries, he or she needs to know how Paul spoke of salvation. Romans 5:9,10 illustrates it, but the proof of it is not Romans 5:9,10.

I have dealt with quite a number of verses (all I think) you put up to support your opening premise. I'm not presuming that I did so adequately but I put a basic opposing view. One of the key ones was this one. The only thing it said was that those who have been justified/reconciled shall be saved by his life. An if/then statment - amplified and underlined by the expression "much more"

Paul talked about final salvation (saved by his life you seem to concur) as something that was going to happen if a person was justified/reconciled. A promise. You have said nothing yet about any of the promise arguements I have posed.

The proof of it is all of Paul's letters which consistently speak of works and judgment in the future and faith and the death of Christ in the past.

This remains to be seen

I did address how our decisions affect our judgment, because you asked. When you asked that, I gave you verses to back that up. You did not address those verses. You chose to act like I was using Romans 5:9,10 to say that our decisions affect our eternal judgment, and I was not.

As far as I can recall I've dealt with all verses put up in your OP references. Will do a scan back to collate the argument thus far

I started with four, which I carefully listed at the end of my last post. I'll list them again:

1 Cor 6:9,10
Gal 5:19-21
Eph 5:3-5
Gal 6:7-9

And I told you I would come back on them. But I need you to deal with what I have said to the 8 or so verses you have already put up. There is little point in adding more material if what is already responded to is not worked out by us

This message has been edited by iano, 12-Dec-2005 12:36 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by truthlover, posted 12-09-2005 10:09 PM truthlover has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by truthlover, posted 12-12-2005 8:43 AM iano has responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 22 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 33 of 106 (268068)
12-12-2005 7:54 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by truthlover
12-09-2005 10:09 PM


Summation of OP verses
Here are the verses you posed in your opening posts. And my reponse to them. I'm not sure which of them you feel best forms a basis for the doctrine of a separate, works based salvation. I feel none of them speak at all about this. You seem to claim that in context they do. In which case it's the context in which they are made which might prove a route forward. We can all claim context supports us but without investigating context, whose to know?

quote:
Much more then, having now been justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

I don't see anything referring to works here. I see another if/then statement. If we have been reconciled we shall be saved. If we have been justified, we shall be saved. "If you love me you will obey my commands". If condition A then result B. The thing which is referred to as saving us is "by" and "through" him. Nothing to do with us here. Nothing to do with works.

quote:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, so that we should no longer serve sin.

Our old man crucified. Why? In order that the body of sin might be destroyed. Why? So that we should no longer serve sin. Period. This has nothing to say about second salvation or that that should it exist be works based.

quote:
I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live. Yet not I, but Christ lives in me, and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

No reference to second salvation or works based salvation. Christ in Paul and Paul living now by faith in Christ.

quote:
Matt 25 - This is the passage of the sheep and the goats. As can be seen, the only difference between the sheep and the goats is their works; what they did and didn't do.

No surprise. Jesus said that the people who love him WILL obey his commands. Works is a automatic consequence of love. It is going to happen. Jesus said it would. So it will.

quote:
John 5:27-29 - Here Y'shua says he has authority to execute judgment and that he will call both those who have done good and those who have done evil out of the grave to receive either life or condemnation.

No verse put up but having read it this is how I would argue it. "Will obey my commands". Automatic

quote:
Rom 2:6 - The judgment is said here to be according to works, with those doing good works reaping eternal life and those who disobey reaping condemnation.

No verse put up but this is how I would argue it "Will obey my commands" Automatic

quote:
2 Cor 5:10 - This passage doesn't give the repayment, but it does say that both good and bad works will be judged.

No talk of condemnation according to works. So not relevant to salvation threads. All will be judged, I agree.

quote:
1 Pet 1:17 - This says that God judges everyone without partiality (and this includes without partiality to believers) according to their works.

Judging can be a trial leading to execution or it can be a bake-a-nice-cake competition. God can judge all impartially. Question is: are you on trial or are you in a beauty contest. There is insufficient here to tell

quote:
2 Pet 1:5-11 - While this doesn't directly mention the judgment, it does say to "give diligence to make your calling and election sure" by "doing these things." This diligence in "doing these things" will (future tense) provide an entrance into Y'shua's everlasting kingdom.

10Therefore, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure. For if you do these things, you will never fall, 11and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

It would take another study in this to find out whether these relate to a final salvation: calling/election. What are these precisely?

quote:
Rev 3:4,5 - Again, judgment is not mentioned, but this does say that only the worthy will walk with Christ in white and the rest will have their names blotted out of the Book of Life.

Another bible study necessary. Who are the worthy? How are they made so? What is it that has defiled their garments? There is more to be said about this.

This message has been edited by iano, 12-Dec-2005 01:15 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by truthlover, posted 12-09-2005 10:09 PM truthlover has not yet responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2140 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 34 of 106 (268081)
12-12-2005 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by iano
12-12-2005 7:36 AM


Re: Case not Made
Began a good work, will complete. God at work. I have and do see it happen. Both in myself and in others.

No, you don't. You don't see it happen as a promise. You said, "God makes promises. He keeps his promises." Just because you see a person here or there growing doesn't establish this as a promise. Most people like you fall away or get cold. Most.

You can try to ignore that or write that off by saying, "Oh, well they weren't true Christians," but since there's nothing to distinguish you from them except whether they continued in your faith, such a statement is just a copout.

The fact is, you should heed the warnings I've been quoting, because most people like you fall away or get cold. You've agreed that if you're a true Christian, then you should be keeping the commandments (in some way) and the work of God should be continuing in you. Should you go the way of the majority, then it won't matter much whether you were true and fell away or whether you were never true at all, will it? The end result will be the same.

If you want to hold to second salvation as a separate, sure-to-happen componant of the same gift then fine. I agree.

There's not really any difference if it's a separate, sure-to-happen component of the same gift, because you and I and everyone else knows that people fall away, no matter how good they look. So you can argue at the end that they "never were" or that they "lost it," but it makes no difference at all.

The only reason this issue would matter to me is that people who believe like you generally throw out the warnings of Scripture.

That "sure-to-happen" thing is your issue, not mine. I find that issue irrelevant; always have. My issue is works in the future, not certainty or uncertainty, because even if you don't know, everyone else already knows your future of following God is uncertain. Maybe you'll continue; maybe you won't, but most people like you won't.

What words was I placing in your mouth?

Iano. Listen.

Go back and read my post. I was quite clear in what I was saying. I had two separate points, one from Rom 5:9,10 and another, that you asked about, from Gal 5:19-21 and others. You quoted Rom 5:9,10 and said I was trying to prove the second point. Meanwhile, you ignored the verses I gave for that second point, and you acted like the first point never existed.

I am not denying, and did not deny, that I am most definitely talking about a judgment by works. However, for you to answer Rom 5:9,10 as though I was talking about judgment by works in that passage is blowing smoke over the issue, not addressing it.

But I need you to deal with what I have said to the 8 or so verses you have already put up.

I have dealt with everything you've said, because you've said almost nothing. You have answered everything I said basically by saying "God began a good work and he'll continue it to the end," and then by saying "Rom 5:9,10 doesn't prove salvation by works."

I addressed the first, and I addressed the second, which is not an answer.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by iano, posted 12-12-2005 7:36 AM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by iano, posted 12-12-2005 11:30 AM truthlover has responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 22 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 35 of 106 (268101)
12-12-2005 9:57 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by truthlover
12-09-2005 10:23 AM


Context
quote:
Gal 6:7-9: "Do not be deceived. God is not mocked. Whatever a person sows, that is also what he will reap. He who sows to the flesh will reap corruption from the flesh. He who sows to the Spirit will reap everlasting life from the Spirit. Let's not get tired of doing good, because in due time we will reap, if we do not lose heart."

Now, what is Paul telling these Christians that they will reap if they do not get tired of doing good and lose heart? In context? In context, he is telling them they will reap eternal life if they continue to do good (hey, that's just what he said in Rom 2:6,7, too!) and don't lose heart.

Your comment here is illustrative of the mis-use or ignoring of context. You've aligned two verses which you hold say the same thing. But if you look at the Romans verse in context you will see he is not addressing those who have been justified by faith and declared righteous.

He has opened up in chapter 1 talking about the ungodly, the wicked and the unrighteous. They are Gentiles. They know about God: not through his laws (which were only given to the Jews) but "understood through the things that are made": nature without (evidence of God)/conscience within (evidence of God). I hold that further investigation would show that there can be no doubt in Romans 1 that he is talking not about people who have been justified by faith nor is he talking about the Jew. You may agree.

Then in Romans 2 he turns on the Jew. How do we know it's a Jew? Well, the person is judging. A person can only judge if they have a standard against which to judge. Some standard by which they can say "that evil person - look at how they do wrong" And that is only possible if one knows the law. Gods law. There is no objective way to judge otherwise. And only the Jews had Gods law. But Paul is saying that they too do wrong. They do precisely the same things. They are like be like the law-knowing Pharisees "clean on the outside but inside full of dead mens bones". There are other references in Romans 2 which allow us to know it is to the Jew he speaks.

And he pulls the rug right out from under their feet

Romans 2

quote:
6God "will give to each person according to what he has done." (Note that this is an OT or Old Covenant quote) 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. 9There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; 10but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.

11For God does not show favoritism.


And we can deduce that the measure God will use when he " will render to every man according to his deeds" is the law. Paul is talking about law breaking here: And it doesn't matter whether you know about the law or don't - God will render ever man according to his obeying of the law.

quote:
13For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous/shall be justified.

"Glory and honor... to Jew or Gentile" - we are directed back to this by the "for" at the beginning of verse 13. Thus Glory and honour... not by hearing or knowing about the law but by doing the law, obeying the law, following the law. It's only the doers of the law who will be declared/shall be.....

quote:
"righteous/justified"

Truthlover, you have just linked the Galatians passage to a passage in Romans which tells us that a person is justified/declared righteous (according to the Old Convenant/Contract) if they are doers of the law. IOW, you are linking your argument of second (final) salvation by works to a verse which explains the way (by works) of attaining of that which you say is by faith (first salvation): justification/declared righteous.

What is actually going on is that Paul is explaining to the Jew that the attaining of justification/righteousness according to the Old Covenant (pre-gospel) is not knowing about the law, having access to the law, or giving a nod in the direction of the law - but only by doing the law. There is no hint of trying here either. Just doing. And Paul is going to wind up his argument at Romans 3:20

quote:
Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

To sum Pauls argument up:

- The Old Covenant says that only by doing the law can a man be declared righteous/ be justified.

- But no one is going to be declared righteous according the the demands of this Old Convenant. This is because no one can do the law. They can try, they may try very hard. Or they may not try at all. But nobody, Gentile and Jew will actually achieve it

But it seems that this righteousness/justification is very important. Paul has shown us (for that is his purpose up to this point) that the Old Covenant (obedience to the law) won't supply it. So how does one get it then? The very next verse Paul introduces the gospel.

Romans 3:21 Paul starts the gospel

quote:
1But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.

Righteousness comes not from the law but from faith in the one person who actually did follow every single morsel of the law. The only actual doer of the law who ever lived. Jesus Christ.

I don't hold to your assertion that the Galatians passage says the exact same thing at all to this Romans 1 verse. If you hold they do then could you show how the context of Romans 1/2 works as you see it. Or maybe you will agree that despite the similar words Romans 1 in context doesn't mean at all what it may mean in Galatians. We may get to Galatians and what IT means in context but first we have quite a few of your verses to deal with as well as fitting some certainty verses regarding salvation into a possible second salvation

Edited to clarify

This message has been edited by iano, 13-Dec-2005 12:52 PM

This message has been edited by iano, 13-Dec-2005 12:57 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by truthlover, posted 12-09-2005 10:23 AM truthlover has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by truthlover, posted 12-13-2005 5:42 PM iano has responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 22 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 36 of 106 (268134)
12-12-2005 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by truthlover
12-12-2005 8:43 AM


Re: Case not Made
tl writes:

No, you don't. You don't see it happen as a promise. You said, "God makes promises. He keeps his promises." Just because you see a person here or there growing doesn't establish this as a promise. Most people like you fall away or get cold. Most.

If God makes a promise and there are no conditions put on him fulfilling it that then fulfilled it will whether I like it or not. If I have been justified then I shall be saved by his life. Unless you can explain why it could be otherwise. If he has begun a good work in me he will bring it to completion - unless you can describe otherwise.

You can try to ignore that or write that off by saying, "Oh, well they weren't true Christians,"

I didn't say anyone in the NT wasn't a true Christian based on their works. I was making the point that not every single bit of the NT is directed at those who have been justified/declared righteous. The second half of Romans 1 is patently not addressed as justifed people (Christians). Romans 2 I have argued is not addressed at Christians either.

My background stance (I am hear to counter your arguement for second salvation by works) is that a person justifed by faith is saved full stop. No loss of salvation possible, no further salvation by works necessary. Thus I would be pointing to 'warning passages' being directed at those who have yet to be justifed - but who may attend the church in question (then as now).

then you should be keeping the commandments (in some way) and the work of God should be continuing in you.

Like I said, I see it happening in me. I am aware of it. I do keep the commandments in some way. I argue that warning passages are there so that the individual can test and see for themselves that that which is promised ("will obey my commands") is indeed evident in them. I think it has far less to do with what other think. All that matters in the end is that a person know themselves they are saved.

Works as evidence that they are saved. Not works effecting their salvation. If a person wants to know, then that is one way of knowing. The danger is that people start working it up in themselves and fooling themselves that it is God working in them causing them to obey. That's a sham. It is precisely that they look at themselves and see the changes wrought in them and in awe say "how did this happen - he has indeed changed me!" that convinces a person that "He that began a good work..." is going to complete it

There's not really any difference if it's a separate, sure-to-happen component of the same gift, because you and I and everyone else knows that people fall away, no matter how good they look. So you can argue at the end that they "never were" or that they "lost it," but it makes no difference at all.

I wouldn't argue that anyone who was justified can lose their place in heaven. Someone who never was justified could cool off and leave it. They never were a Christian. Someone call fall away but if they have been justified then saved they are. Eternal life is theirs nonetheless. From the outside you may not tell the difference.

If it is a sure-to-happen then it makes all the difference. How could anyone who is surely saved not be saved. If they aren't in the end then it wasn't sure was it?

The only reason this issue would matter to me is that people who believe like you generally throw out the warnings of Scripture

A warning passage aimed at letting a person test whether they are saved loses it's prime usefulness once the person knows that they are saved. They don't need to be thrown out. They are worthwhile reminders of the life that befits a Christian. But warnings unto damnation they are no more

"Smoking causes cancer" is of no prime use to a non-smoker. It may remind them to tell their kids not to smoke but it has no direct bearing on the non-smoker. They are relevant to you because of your doctrine of works.

That "sure-to-happen" thing is your issue, not mine. I find that issue irrelevant;

How can sure fire salvation be irrelevant in a discussion about the need of second salvation. How can a person who is going to be saved finally and forever, irrespective of works, "need" this second salvation when they already have it. I am a lotto winner I need to win the lotto. It makes no sense

Go back and read my post.

The first point, that Paul talks of second salvation at all. You seem to think that because he talks of future tense that it is a different thing altogether. You have not addressed my contention that final salvation is but an element of the one salvation that is by faith. Past, present and future elements of that which happens by, is heralded by, is effected by and only by that which converts a person. God. A process whose outcome is sure. 1 process and a certain one at that.

Your drifting into works is the only way you can separate the two. Thus the two are indivisable: "second salvation by works". Whilst Paul spends alot of time (Romans 2 and 3) showing us how a man is not justified by obeying the law and spends Chapter 4 showing how he is in fact justified (as he always has been): by faith, he neglects to form his doctrine of second salvation except by verses scattered about the epistles, none of which directly explain in anything like the painstaking way he does for justification, the case for "your works are what will effect your final salvation"

I have dealt with everything you've said, because you've said almost nothing.

Three promise passages (for now)

Will obey my commands
Began a good work and will complete
If justified then shall saved by his life

How did you say these fitted into a possibly-saved-if-we-produce-the-goods separate and final salvation again?

This message has been edited by iano, 12-Dec-2005 04:37 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by truthlover, posted 12-12-2005 8:43 AM truthlover has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by truthlover, posted 12-13-2005 6:01 PM iano has responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2140 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 37 of 106 (268922)
12-13-2005 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by iano
12-12-2005 9:57 AM


Re: Context
Your comment here is illustrative of the mis-use or ignoring of context. You've aligned two verses which you hold say the same thing. But if you look at the Romans verse in context

You then spent a rather lengthy post in Romans addressing a parenthetical remark I made.

The verse you started with at the top, Gal 6:7-9; can you address that and the questions I asked that you quoted, rather than the parenthetical remark I made?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by iano, posted 12-12-2005 9:57 AM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by iano, posted 12-14-2005 4:50 AM truthlover has responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2140 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 38 of 106 (268933)
12-13-2005 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by iano
12-12-2005 11:30 AM


Re: Case not Made
If God makes a promise and there are no conditions put on him fulfilling it that then fulfilled it will whether I like it or not. If I have been justified then I shall be saved by his life. Unless you can explain why it could be otherwise. If he has begun a good work in me he will bring it to completion - unless you can describe otherwise.

Maybe the work didn't really begin, and you just think it did. I assume that would be your explanation if someone fell completely away. Maybe the promises have conditions on them that are explained in the context of the letter or even of what we know of history at the time, which is how I would explain why those promises aren't fulfilled.

In my opinion, pretending that the promise is fulfilled when it clearly is not (i.e., most people fall away or grow cold) is not an option. I prefer to work with reality, not with what I wish reality was.

Personally, I don't think Philippians 1:6 has even a little bit to do with the modern church system, so to apply it to a person in a modern church system is wrong. Either way, it clearly is not happening no matter how much you want to "faith" it into existence.

I didn't say anyone in the NT wasn't a true Christian based on their works.

You did say we would be able to tell by their works. You also said the works were going to happen "automatically" if they were a true Christian.

Are you backing off on that? Because if you are, we have to back up to that all over again.

Thus I would be pointing to 'warning passages' being directed at those who have yet to be justifed - but who may attend the church in question (then as now).

Well, then go ahead and do that. You're spending a lot of time on Romans 2. Have you not noticed that I haven't argued with you about Rom 2 being directed at unjustified people? I have avoided that on purpose, because by itself I agree that there is no way to tell whether Rom 2:6 is talking about just the unsaved.

The reason I believe that Rom 2:6 is talking about everyone, including the true Christians in Rome, is because it lines up with other things Paul, Y'shua, and Peter said. That is why I made the parenthetical remark I made when I referenced Gal 6:7-9, which is clearly addressing believers.

My answer to Romans 2 is that by itself I can't argue that it's addressed to believers. So that's fine, let's leave it alone, and let's look at those warning passages you mentioned. Or we can look at all the other judgment passages, which also say the same thing as Romans 2.

(You covered the judgment passages in passing once, but I let it ride, because there were too many other subjects to address, and I think when you list the judgment passages all in a row they shout the truth at the reader even while you're trying to explain them away.)

I would prefer to look at the warning verses, because you mentioned them in this post, and you asked me to provide them earlier. Gal 6:7-9 is a great place to start, and we can cover Gal 5:19-21 at the same time. Eph 5:3-5 and 1 Cor 6:9,10 are just repeats of Gal 5:19-21, anyway.

A warning passage aimed at letting a person test whether they are saved loses it's prime usefulness once the person knows that they are saved. They don't need to be thrown out. They are worthwhile reminders of the life that befits a Christian. But warnings unto damnation they are no more

This is the same as throwing them out. Why write Gal 5:19-21 to believers if it can't apply to them? Why use the wording he used in Eph 5 ("no [such person] has any inheritance...") if he didn't mean it? You make Eph 5:3-5 of no effect whatsoever by your belief, and you make it bizarre that he would even write such a thing.

On the other hand, Gal 6:7-9 is much harder to dodge. It is clearly written to believers, it clearly mentions doing good, and it clearly addresses eternal life.

Three promise passages (for now)

Will obey my commands
Began a good work and will complete
If justified then shall saved by his life

First isn't a promise, but a statement of fact. The person who loves him will obey his commands. I don't have any problem with that. It was you that took some convincing to believe it.

I addressed the part about began a good work. I believe you have to be in an actual church in order for that to be true.

The third involves really being saved by his life. That doesn't mean "you shall obey commands forever no matter what you do and you'll go to heaven even if you don't." It means that if he was willing to cleanse you from past sin by his death, then how much more will he be willing to impart his life to you. Then, IF you walk by the Spirit and not by the flesh. you will fulfill the righteous requirement of the law, turn from willful sin, and inherit eternal life at the judgment.

We can continue to address this if you want, because without anything else to press, I'm sure you'll need to press this. However, I'd appreciate it if you'd address Gal 6:7-9.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by iano, posted 12-12-2005 11:30 AM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by iano, posted 12-14-2005 6:27 AM truthlover has responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 22 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 39 of 106 (269129)
12-14-2005 4:50 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by truthlover
12-13-2005 5:42 PM


Re: Context
It served to illustrate the point that context is essential when deciding the relevance of a particular piece of scripture when utilising it to support whichever doctrine you happen to be promoting.

I note that you don't do this. Standalone verses are placed up whose words seem to fit your case but seeing as there is no context in which to examine them placed alongside I am left with the idea that you rely simply on the verse. The Romans 1 verse was a case in point. Here we have something which aligns very closely ("the same thing" IIRC you said) with the Galatians passage. Yet contextually, we find out:

a) it is not addressed to people who have been justified
b) it warns that work-or-else refers to the gaining of righteousness/justification according to the Old Covenent
c) gaining righteousness by obeying the law is not possible

I would have imagined that the person making their case would be keen to demonstrate the verses they use are contextually intended to mean what the case-maker says they mean. Are you as wildly off the mark with the Galatians passage as you were with the Romans one. If you think not, could you demonstrate it?.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by truthlover, posted 12-13-2005 5:42 PM truthlover has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by truthlover, posted 12-14-2005 9:19 AM iano has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 22 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 40 of 106 (269133)
12-14-2005 6:27 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by truthlover
12-13-2005 6:01 PM


Re: Case not Made
iano writes:

If God makes a promise and there are no conditions put on him fulfilling it that then fulfilled it will whether I like it or not. If I have been justified then I shall be saved by his life. Unless you can explain why it could be otherwise. If he has begun a good work in me he will bring it to completion - unless you can describe otherwise.

tl writes:

Maybe the work didn't really begin, and you just think it did. I assume that would be your explanation if someone fell completely away. Maybe the promises have conditions on them that are explained in the context of the letter or even of what we know of history at the time, which is how I would explain why those promises aren't fulfilled.

The question we are dealing with in the overall sense is second/separate salvation by works. That my decision as to works are effectual in this salvation - as opposed to being indicators of a one and only salvation process at work. We seem to agree that a person can only be justified/declared righteous by faith. And we seem to have clear indications that if that has happened then a person will be finally saved. The verses that link justification with final salvation don't include conditions. They are simply if/then statements. The key element is patently the 'if'. Should that be fulfilled (if a person is justified) then final salvation will follow.

You've put up a position and we have observations that seem to conflict with your position. The way out of these observations (if/then) is to find a some condition that can be shown to apply to a justified person. If such a condition exists then salvation is not automatic it relies on the condition. IOW fulfilling that condition is the effectual bit (either in final salvation or bringing a person to the next condition...and so on).

Can you interrupt justification > final salvation with a condition?

You did say we would be able to tell by their works. You also said the works were going to happen "automatically" if they were a true Christian.

I think you'll find it's you that has this thing about being able to see works happening to a level that you consider satisfactory. I hold that certain passages about works are there so that the individual can examine THEMSELVES and confirm for themselves that "he has begun a good work". Take me for example. I'm am much more patient that I ever was. One of the fruits of the Spirit is patience. You might not see it. You might think that I am, in fact, impatient. But I know I am far more patient than I ever was. The world gets some of the benefit of it. But the world isn't going to see this as fruit of the Spirit - they just aren't going to get their car mirrors kicked off when they pull out in front of my motorcycle. The fruit of the spirit is primarily noticeable by the person themselves.

Well, then go ahead and do that. You're spending a lot of time on Romans 2. Have you not noticed that I haven't argued with you about Rom 2 being directed at unjustified people? I have avoided that on purpose, because by itself I agree that there is no way to tell whether Rom 2:6 is talking about just the unsaved.

The people to whom he is addressing his remarks in Romans 2 are people who think that they are justified by works. There could have been those types in Rome in amongst the people who were justified by faith, it could be someone reading it in Co. Cork 5 minutes ago. No one will be justified by observing the law. No one.

The reason I believe that Rom 2:6 is talking about everyone, including the true Christians in Rome, is because it lines up with other things Paul, Y'shua, and Peter said. That is why I made the parenthetical remark I made when I referenced Gal 6:7-9, which is clearly addressing believers.

I think this topic is acutally becoming impossible TL. Not for lack of want on either side but simply because of the lack of common ground on which to discuss. Take "True Christians". What is a true Christian? No doubt your view will differ from mine. And what is a believer? That too will no doubt differ from mine.

I think a problem we are facing is that so much of the language we bandy about actually has different meanings for both of us. Christian/believer/in Christ/saved/unsaved/faith/works/sanctified. How can we discuss when we are talking different languages. How do we build a case if the very words used in building either case don't mean the same things to both of us?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by truthlover, posted 12-13-2005 6:01 PM truthlover has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by truthlover, posted 12-14-2005 9:35 AM iano has responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2140 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 41 of 106 (269150)
12-14-2005 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by iano
12-14-2005 4:50 AM


Re: Context
I would have imagined that the person making their case would be keen to demonstrate the verses they use are contextually intended to mean what the case-maker says they mean. Are you as wildly off the mark with the Galatians passage as you were with the Romans one. If you think not, could you demonstrate it?

I am not wildly off the mark with the Romans verse. Your fantasy assertions about its context mean nothing at all. In context, using only Romans, it is impossible to tell whether Rom 2:6 is directed just at unbelievers.

It is true that the only reason for thinking it even might be only directed at unbelievers in Martin Luther's bizarre and unscriptural beliefs that were invented 1400 years or more after the writings of the Bible were completed, so there's no good reason for thinking what you think. However, there is no proof for or against it in Rom 2.

The only way to determine the audience of Rom 2 is to look at other verses like that. So, if you'll quit your little dance jig trying to dodge reality, could you go ahead and address Gal 6:7-9, and not simply hope that I'm "wildly off the mark"?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by iano, posted 12-14-2005 4:50 AM iano has not yet responded

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 2140 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 42 of 106 (269155)
12-14-2005 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by iano
12-14-2005 6:27 AM


Re: Case not Made
I think you'll find it's you that has this thing about being able to see works happening to a level that you consider satisfactory. I hold that certain passages about works are there so that the individual can examine THEMSELVES and confirm for themselves that "he has begun a good work".

Uh, huh. And I think you will find that it was you who writhed and twisted and fought even having to look at the verses in 1 John, and finally felt compelled to agree to what they obviously said, because you were basically publically berated into it.

But here you are, proving the old adage, "He who is convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

After we nailed you to the wall in your eternal life thread (I think that's where it was), you were forced to admit that the Scriptures say that Christians need to produce something noticeable in this life.

I think this topic is acutally becoming impossible TL. Not for lack of want on either side but simply because of the lack of common ground on which to discuss. Take "True Christians". What is a true Christian? No doubt your view will differ from mine. And what is a believer? That too will no doubt differ from mine.

Gosh, something we agree on. The problem, however, is not that there's a disagreement on what's a true Christian. The problem is, you believe what you believe, and you don't care a bit if its Scriptural or not. That's ok. Schrafinator and Minnemooseus, Nosy Ned and Mammuthus are the same. They don't care whether their beliefs are Scriptural, either.

However, they don't pretend that they do care.

Thanks for your time, iano. I was already of the mind to quit wasting my time with you before you suggested this.

I don't know what's wrong with me that keeps expecting Christians to be honest. There's no indication that intellectual honesty is a common fault among Christians, yet I keep thinking that one day they're really going to admit, "Hey, we have our own religion here, and we like it whether it works or not. So quit reminding us how bad it is, and definitely stop pointing out Scripture to us, because we're doing quite fine with the parts of it we like."

Sigh...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by iano, posted 12-14-2005 6:27 AM iano has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by iano, posted 12-14-2005 10:11 AM truthlover has not yet responded
 Message 44 by iano, posted 12-14-2005 11:43 AM truthlover has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 22 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 43 of 106 (269167)
12-14-2005 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by truthlover
12-14-2005 9:35 AM


Re: Case not Made
The problem, however, is not that there's a disagreement on what's a true Christian.

I think the problem is that in trying to construct a scriptural case for second salvation (or anything else for that matter), words get used, the meaning of which we disagree on. You can assert that this is not the case but I afraid the only way to decide on what is a true Christian is to let the bible determine that for us.

And we seem to have a problem in our respective methods of extracting truth from the bible. Whilst I can understand that frustration may be what led you to fill your last post with assertions - the truth remains that neither of us seem to have found a common ground on which to 'do battle'.

Maybe "How should one go about extracting truths from the bible" would be a fitting thread at some point for both of us

Ian


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by truthlover, posted 12-14-2005 9:35 AM truthlover has not yet responded

  
iano
Member (Idle past 22 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 44 of 106 (269214)
12-14-2005 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by truthlover
12-14-2005 9:35 AM


Re: Case not Made
you were forced to admit that the Scriptures say that Christians need to produce something noticeable in this life.

Before I could evaluate whether I was forced to admit anything I suppose I would have to know for what reason I supposed "Christians need to produce something noticeable in this life". You forgot to mention what it was. (hint: it most certainly had nothing to do with gaining salvation of whatever hue.)

Goes to prove the old adage I suppose

"He who paraphrases ought to include the context of that which he paraphrases - otherwise he might find himself making inaccurate, outlandish and self-delusional claims"

:)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by truthlover, posted 12-14-2005 9:35 AM truthlover has not yet responded

  
Mr. Ex Nihilo
Member (Idle past 4629 days)
Posts: 708
Joined: 04-12-2005


Message 45 of 106 (270490)
12-18-2005 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by purpledawn
12-08-2005 3:10 PM


Re: Case Made
purpledawn writes:

Truthlover has made his case.

You, unfortuantely, have not made your case or clearly shown his case to be wrong, insufficient, or even mildly incorrect.

You've said he is wrong, but you have not explained how the text says something different than what Truthlover has said that it says.

You have not shown us how his explanation uses the verses out of context.

You haven't provided any coherent alternative to discuss.

For the record, I totally agree with purdledawn here -- totally. Truthlover has clearly presented his/her case. And iano has not clearly refuted anything that Truthlover has pointed out as far as I've read so far.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by purpledawn, posted 12-08-2005 3:10 PM purpledawn has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by iano, posted 12-19-2005 6:59 AM Mr. Ex Nihilo has responded

    
Prev12
3
45678Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019