Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 278

Thread: James vs Paul (side by side chart)

  1. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    Actually you did ask me about my thoughts on them in this post. That's why I brought them up again because it seemed you wanted me to clarify my statements.


    I'll leave you alone and let you and Ronin play.

    I notice that you are very knowledgeable about the bible and the early church. That is why I also took an interest in your knowledge of the reformers, but I'll try to leave them out of future conversations with you.
    I think only one of us is really playing. I have a whole lot less to lose, in the fun and games department. The "Christians" seem to be REALLY tough on their own. Maybe it's that Roman gladiator historical influence coming through. Or more probably just because the stakes are so small.

    Have you noticed?
    Last edited by Ronin Truth; 09-30-2014 at 11:26 PM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #92
    1Jo 3:13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you.
    1Jo 3:14 ¶ We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.
    1Jo 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
    1Jo 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
    1Jo 3:17 But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?
    1Jo 3:18 My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
    1Jo 3:19 And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.
    1Jo 3:20 ¶ For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.
    1Jo 3:21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.
    1Jo 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
    1Jo 3:23 ¶ And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
    1Jo 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
    Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession.
    ~ George Washington

  4. #93
    I'm aware of this quote. I've always wondered what TJ would think of Eastern Rite Christianity if he had been able to study it. (FWIW, TJ had some downright nasty things to say about Calvin, his doctrine, and the five points...and I totally agree with him on that)

    ETA: For future reference, I would appreciate your posts a lot more and take them more seriously if you were as thoughtful and articulate as TJ.
    Last edited by heavenlyboy34; 09-30-2014 at 11:43 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  5. #94
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post

    God is likened to a king.... ART
    I don't understand your facepalm. erowe is correct WRT the artistry of the literary genre y'all are discussing. IMO, the reason a lot of Westerners don't understand the OT (and the NT apocalyptic lit) well is because the literary genres are so different than what we're accustomed to.
    Quote Originally Posted by Torchbearer
    what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.
    Hear/buy my music here "government is the enemy of liberty"-RP Support me on Patreon here Ephesians 6:12

  6. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by lilymc View Post
    I agree that the gift can be rejected. Many people in the world reject it. However, once a person has truly received that gift, it's not returnable. And once a person becomes a son or daughter of God and has passed from death to life, it's a one time thing. You can't hop back and forth from saved to unsaved to saved to unsaved.

    As was posted on another thread, this passage clearly states that nothing can separate us from the love of God, including ourselves!

    Notice the bold.


    For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

    Romans 8:38-39
    Then by your belief, people who confess Jesus and are baptized are Once Saved Always Saved. Then you're saying if they reject the gift at any point and time that they were never saved to begin with.

    Today people are sued in a court of law for this kind of practice. You can't guarantee a gift based upon confession and baptism and then tell them if they choose to walk away from that gift it was never theirs in the first place.

    Obviously they were guaranteed the gift--owned it based upon a promise and then chose to abandon it. It was always theirs based upon that promise, so you can't say that they never owned the gift or that they never received something they were guaranteed to receive. Hence--they were saved at one point and chose to walk away from the gift.

  7. #96
    Quote Originally Posted by Terry1 View Post
    Today people are sued in a court of law for this kind of practice. You can't guarantee a gift based upon confession and baptism and then tell them if they choose to walk away from that gift it was never theirs in the first place.
    I'm sure Calvin, Attorney at Law, could find a legal loophole at the Pearly Gates.



  8. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  9. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    I'm sure Calvin, Attorney at Law, could find a legal loophole at the Pearly Gates.
    I'm sure he would. This entire belief system of the perseverance of the saints is totally biblically illogical. It's as if those who believe this are trying to pound a square peg into a round hole to make it fit by using Old Testament scripture that applies to what we shouldn't do-- then they're misunderstanding that and attempting to apply the very same to what we should be doing now under the New Testament Law of faith.

    Faith can never work alone by itself and nowhere in scripture does it say that "faith alone" does anything but "die" as James tells us.

    What scripture does support and say is that faith without our good works is dead, just the same as works without faith are dead too.

    They're continually quoting scripture about the dead works of the Mosaic Law that the NT refers to as those we shouldn't do and not understanding that our good works of faith are what we're told to do and that faith absent these good works is no faith at all and dead.

    This isn't something that's not important with regard to our salvation, because people who believe in OSAS don't place any emphasis on their good works at all thinking that they're some automatic byproduct of faith that simultaneously happens as a result of confession of belief.

    In other words, the Holy Spirit could be dropping bricks on their heads trying to get a response out of them regarding their calling and they're just sitting back saying--"well that won't save me--so why worry about doing it". That is what saves us because that's called "walking in the spirit" and is the only way we know what we're supposed to be doing with regard to answering our calling.

    Those "good works" are what we're commanded to do and the only way to glorify the Father in heaven as Jesus tells us in Matthew. Those good works are our choice to do or not to do. If someone believes that this isn't what saves us--then there's no possible way they can be walking in the spirit and choosing to do those same good works that are in response to what we're being called to do.
    Last edited by Terry1; 10-01-2014 at 06:51 AM.

  10. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by Terry1 View Post
    Faith can never work alone by itself and nowhere in scripture does it say that "faith alone" does anything but "die" as James tells us.
    Looking up the definitions of both "faith" and "Alone" shows the inconsistencies of this doctrine.

    Someone will say faith alone, but then they will add more to it making it not by faith alone.

    By the definition below and using the same logic, it could say something to the effect of we are saved by "love alone which is inseparable from hope and faith." St Paul said otherwise with his quotations of faith to move mountains...

    And this definition was in response to a post I made about hope, faith, and love. If I had made a post that left out hope and love but mentioned Grace or the Holy Spirit, I imagine the definition would have changed. For such a seemingly solid doctrine, it seems to have a lot of wiggle room, to the point that I could say I agree with faith alone if I could add whatever I wanted to the definition.

    I might be a bit too nit-picky but "alone" is a pretty solid word. Maybe the doctrine should have been called "Faith, hope, and love... ...with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit... ...with Grace... ...that leads to good works... ...alone."

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    It means that faith, an internal orientation toward God that is seen by God and not men which is inseparable from hope and love, is all that is required in order to become declared righteous by God...

    Any outward acts (i.e. works) that will be produced by that inward orientation toward God are not the same thing as faith itself, and are not the means by which righteousness in God's sight is attained, but rather the result of it. Similar works as those performed by people with genuine saving faith can be performed by people who lack faith, but those works cannot make them righteous in God's sight. Therefore, no person or organization on earth has the power to dictate to people that they must perform certain acts and participate in certain ceremonies, the legitimacy of which those people and organizations control, in order to be righteous in the sight of God.

  11. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    Looking up the definitions of both "faith" and "Alone" shows the inconsistencies of this doctrine.

    Someone will say faith alone, but then they will add more to it making it not by faith alone.

    By the definition below and using the same logic, it could say something to the effect of we are saved by "love alone which is inseparable from hope and faith." St Paul said otherwise with his quotations of faith to move mountains...

    And this definition was in response to a post I made about hope, faith, and love. If I had made a post that left out hope and love but mentioned Grace or the Holy Spirit, I imagine the definition would have changed. For such a seemingly solid doctrine, it seems to have a lot of wiggle room, to the point that I could say I agree with faith alone if I could add whatever I wanted to the definition.

    I might be a bit too nit-picky but "alone" is a pretty solid word. Maybe the doctrine should have been called "Faith, hope, and love... ...with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit... ...with Grace... ...that leads to good works... ...alone."
    You're exactly right. What this all comes down to is that they believe that faith and belief are synonymous as if these two spiritual elements could inhabit a rock and still have the same effect that they do on people.

    So the rock says--I believe and have faith and Jesus says to the rock show me your good works and the rock says again, but I have belief and faith. So James says that your faith is dead without good works. So the rock says--but I have faith and my faith is my good works. So Jesus says--but I'm telling you to go feed the hungry sitting out in the cold and the rock says--but that won't save me because I have belief and faith that does. So Jesus says--I'm commanding you to go love them and do this and the rock replies--I don't have to because that's not what saved me, my belief and faith alone saved me.

    So the starving man died out in the cold and Jesus said--why didn't you feed him like I asked you to do? The rock says--well that wasn't a prerequisite for my salvation. All you told me to do was to believe and have faith.

    Last edited by Terry1; 10-01-2014 at 07:18 AM.

  12. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post

    God is likened to a king.... ART
    Did I read you wrong? Or did you not just admit that you haven't even read the book that you're mocking?

  13. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    By the definition below and using the same logic, it could say something to the effect of we are saved by "love alone which is inseparable from hope and faith." St Paul said otherwise with his quotations of faith to move mountains...
    I don't see the problem here.

    What quotations of Paul are you talking about?

    One reason for adopting the word "faith" to describe that inward orientation (it needs some word for it after all) is that the Greek noun the New Testament most often uses for it is pistis, which is best translated as faith, and the verb it most often uses for the adoption of this inward orientation is pisteuo, which is best translated to believe.

    When a person has this pistis, prior to doing any works, then according to the Bible they are declared righteous in God's sight, are forgiven of all their sins, past, present, and future, possess right then eternal life, and are 100% certain to go to Heaven.

    Is there such a thing as a person who genuinely has this pistis but is not righteous in God's sight because they lack something else that needs to be added to it? The Bible says, no there is not. We can never say to someone, "That's good that you have faith, but unless you also perform actions A, B, and C, you can't be saved."

    There do exist people like James talks about who don't have genuine saving living pistis, but who instead just have this dead pistis which doesn't save. And the difference between saving faith and dead faith is bound to be demonstrated by the works that flow from them. But none of those works is a prerequisite for salvation. In that same passage in James he says that God declared Abraham righteous as soon as he believed, decades before he performed the good work that James points to as proof that his faith was the living kind.
    Last edited by erowe1; 10-01-2014 at 08:14 AM.

  14. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34 View Post
    I'm aware of this quote. I've always wondered what TJ would think of Eastern Rite Christianity if he had been able to study it. (FWIW, TJ had some downright nasty things to say about Calvin, his doctrine, and the five points...and I totally agree with him on that)

    ETA: For future reference, I would appreciate your posts a lot more and take them more seriously if you were as thoughtful and articulate as TJ.

    Noted! I ain't here for the popularity contest. Check the Google TJ link bomb and you may be able to correctly discern and SWAG TJ's view on the EO too.

    TJ was a "red pill" guy (in a Matrix sense), I consider myself to be one too. Having a July 4th birthday has lead me, I believe, to have a real soft spot in my head for TJ.

    If I was as thoughtful and articulate as TJ, I wouldn't be spending so much of my time here on RPF. (Nor being POTUS either.)
    Last edited by Ronin Truth; 10-01-2014 at 07:53 AM.

  15. #103
    It's odd, earlier this week I started looking into the definition of the word pistis. Right now it's like going through the devastation of a Ronin google bomb

    In most websites I'm seeing articles using their own definition to justify their own beliefs and contradicting each other. I may return to this post in the distant future. If you could suggest a fairly neutral, or even a not-so neutral but a good read, I'll read it.

    As to the bible verse:
    1 Corinthians 13:2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.


    I know I said I'd stay away from this discussion but I had some new thoughts over the evening.

    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    But do you really think that's what the Reformers were up to? Coming up with loopholes to avoid living like Christians? Where do you get that?
    I believe I was wrong about the reformers in that statement. In the historical context of the reformation in rebelling against the abuses by the Catholic Church (most of which wasn't church policy but was rather priests taking advantage of a situation) I see the honor in what they were trying to say.

    However, when separated from the context of the reformation, the definition of "faith alone" (not your personal one, Erowe) logically leads to antinomianism. Although, by far most Protestants seem to go by your definition (which I pretty much agree with) there is a visceral distaste to living the gospel in daily life-- as demonstrated by the reaction in the fasting thread. Among other things, It also went on to desacramentalize what God has united making marriage a government action. I believe it has wreaked more havoc than good.

    I know I've said this over a few post, but I wanted a concise summery.

    The sad part of these arguments is that on the basic level, I think we pretty much agree. If you note, my big disagreement is where I see it potentially leading rather than me telling you what you believe. I notice that you return the favor. Thank you.

  16. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    I don't see the problem here.

    What quotations of Paul are you talking about?

    One reason for adopting the word "faith" to describe that inward orientation (it needs some word for it after all) is that the Greek noun the New Testament most often uses for it is pistis, which is best translated as faith, and the verb it most often uses for the adoption of this inward orientation is pisteuo, which is best translated to believe.

    When a person has this pistis, prior to doing any works, then according to the Bible they are declared righteous in God's sight, are forgiven of all their sins, past, present, and future, possess right then eternal life, and are 100% to go to Heaven.

    Is there such a thing as a person who genuinely has this pistis but is not righteous in God's sight because they lack something else that needs to be added to it? The Bible says, no there is not. We can never say to someone, "That's good that you have faith, but unless you also perform actions A, B, and C, you can't be saved."

    There do exist people like James talks about who don't have genuine saving living pistis, but who instead just have this dead pistis which doesn't save. And the difference between saving faith and dead faith is bound to be demonstrated by the works that flow from them. But none of those works is a prerequisite for salvation. In that same passage in James he says that God declared Abraham righteous as soon as he believed, decades before he performed the good work that James points to as proof that his faith was the living kind.
    You good works are your faith, of which without--James (2:17), Paul (1 Thes. 1:3), (2 Thes. 1:11), (John 15:5) and (Hebrews 6:4). Without the fruit of faith being acted upon and evident, which Jesus calls our "light that shines for all to see"--you have no faith--it's dead. Hence--without these good works and works that follow faith by us choosing to do them in obedience--you can not be in a state of elect or saved.

    Also, Pistis is a noun, it means to trust something/someone with great confidence. One of the problems in our Bibles is that the translators used the word “believe” for a derivative of pistis-- Pisteuo. Everyone should be able to see the same root there-- Pistis is faith, and Pisteuo should be the verb form of faith--to faithe, faithes, faithing.

    While you are rightly calling the word Pisteuo a verb--you're still attempting to say that faith acts upon itself as in having *faith in faith* and that an effort required on the part of the believer is not necessary--which is totally incorrect. The only way our faith can live is if we act upon it according to what the Holy Spirit is telling us to do. This is the *only* way a believer can walk in the spirit of the Lord--otherwise--you're not walking in the spirit and your faith is dead as the NT tells you. Without these fruits that are supposed to be the result of our faith and belief--the branch "in the true Vine" dies and is cut off and burned. John 15:5, Hebrews 6:4.



  17. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  18. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by Terry1 View Post
    you're still attempting to say that faith acts upon itself as in having *faith in faith*
    No I'm not.

  19. #106

  20. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by RJB View Post
    It's odd, earlier this week I started looking into the definition of the word pistis. Right now it's like going through the devastation of a Ronin google bomb

    In most websites I'm seeing articles using their own definition to justify their own beliefs and contradicting each other. I may return to this post in the distant future. If you could suggest a fairly neutral, or even a not-so neutral but a good read, I'll read it.

    As to the bible verse:
    It's significant to me that Paul isn't talking about how to become saved in that verse. It would be wrong to use it that way.

    The way most people today use the word "love" is different than the way it's used in the Bible, IMHO. Today most people do think of love as something on the inside, like an emotion, or maybe something more than just an emotion, but still something basically internal. When the Bible uses it, I think it's usually talking about actions themselves. For example, John 3:16 isn't saying that God had this emotion of love that motivated him to send his son, it's saying that the manner in which God loved was by sending his son. Notice that the KJV translates this word in 1 Corinthians 13 as "charity" rather than "love."

    So 1 Corinthians 13:2 is saying something a lot like what James is saying in James 2. It's telling believers what their faith ought to produce outwardly.

    If we're trying to use the word "love" in this biblical sense, then I don't think it would be a good replacement for the word faith, in referring to that inward quality that leads to the doing of good works. It would be better to use the word "love" for the works themselves.

    However, the other word that Paul uses in that chapter, "hope," I think is much closer in meaning to "faith." And sometimes, especially in Hebrews, the Bible does use the word "hope" for that same inward orientation toward God that it usually calls faith.

  21. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Did I read you wrong? Or did you not just admit that you haven't even read the book that you're mocking?
    Meh, I guess I shouldn't be surprised how theologically messed up Christianity is. After all this is the religion that believes a man who walked on earth is God... Obviously there is no concept of the Oneness of God to offend, so liken Kings with God all you want!

  22. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    Obviously there is no concept of the Oneness of God to offend, so liken Kings with God all you want!
    Just to be clear, by your own admission you still don't have any idea what you're talking about. Is that right?

  23. #110
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Just to be clear, by your own admission you still don't have any idea what you're talking about. Is that right?
    I skimmed the first few chapters of Daniel. I don't need to have read any of it if you are accurately depicting it

  24. #111
    Quote Originally Posted by Influenza View Post
    I skimmed the first few chapters of Daniel. I don't need to have read any of it if you are accurately depicting it
    Why do you insist on pontificating about something that, by your own admission, you know nothing about?

  25. #112
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    Why do you insist on pontificating about something that, by your own admission, you know nothing about?
    You really bore me. It's ok, I'm done.



  26. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  27. #113
    Quote Originally Posted by Terry1 View Post
    Then by your belief, people who confess Jesus and are baptized are Once Saved Always Saved. Then you're saying if they reject the gift at any point and time that they were never saved to begin with.

    Today people are sued in a court of law for this kind of practice. You can't guarantee a gift based upon confession and baptism and then tell them if they choose to walk away from that gift it was never theirs in the first place.

    Obviously they were guaranteed the gift--owned it based upon a promise and then chose to abandon it. It was always theirs based upon that promise, so you can't say that they never owned the gift or that they never received something they were guaranteed to receive. Hence--they were saved at one point and chose to walk away from the gift.

    No, that is not what I said or what I believe.

    But I can see why you wanted to set up that strawman, to have something easy to knock over.

    God knows our hearts. GOD (not you, or anyone else) knows if one's confession of faith is sincere and genuine, and if the faith is in HIM and not in our works.

    Nobody is saying that simply stating a few magic words means someone is saved. That seems to be where your problem is, you seem to think that OSAS means one can state a few words then automatically be saved. You are not giving God enough credit for being able to do His job. You can trust that God knows what He's doing. Nobody is going to pull the wool over His eyes.

    So to imply that the gift is "guaranteed" upon merely stating a few words or being water baptized is a misrepresentation or misunderstanding.

    Again, just trust that God knows what He's doing. He doesn't make mistakes.
    “I have no doubt that it is a part of the destiny of the human race, in its gradual improvement, to leave off eating animals, as surely as the savage tribes have left off eating each other.”

    ― Henry David Thoreau

  28. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    I don't see the problem here.

    What quotations of Paul are you talking about?

    One reason for adopting the word "faith" to describe that inward orientation (it needs some word for it after all) is that the Greek noun the New Testament most often uses for it is pistis, which is best translated as faith, and the verb it most often uses for the adoption of this inward orientation is pisteuo, which is best translated to believe.

    When a person has this pistis, prior to doing any works, then according to the Bible they are declared righteous in God's sight, are forgiven of all their sins, past, present, and future, possess right then eternal life, and are 100% certain to go to Heaven.

    Is there such a thing as a person who genuinely has this pistis but is not righteous in God's sight because they lack something else that needs to be added to it? The Bible says, no there is not. We can never say to someone, "That's good that you have faith, but unless you also perform actions A, B, and C, you can't be saved."

    There do exist people like James talks about who don't have genuine saving living pistis, but who instead just have this dead pistis which doesn't save. And the difference between saving faith and dead faith is bound to be demonstrated by the works that flow from them. But none of those works is a prerequisite for salvation. In that same passage in James he says that God declared Abraham righteous as soon as he believed, decades before he performed the good work that James points to as proof that his faith was the living kind.
    Actually all along faith and works were together. The very first mention of Abraham is when he obeyed God and left his homeland in search for the promised land.

    Please read:

    Genesis 15 King James Version (KJV)

    15 After these things the word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.

    2 And Abram said, Lord God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?

    3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.

    4 And, behold, the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

    5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.

    6 And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

    7 And he said unto him, I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it.


    So, by the time Abraham was declared righteous through his faith, he had already acted on it. Compare with Hebrews 11.

    8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

    9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

    10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

    11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.

    12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.

    13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

    14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.

    15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.

    16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

    17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

    18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:


    Note that in Hebrews 11:8 the evidence of Abraham's faith was that he was willing to leave his homeland. So it's a mistake to pretend that there were no works of faith until Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac. But check out what God, through His angel, had to say when Abraham was willing to sacrificing Isaac.

    Genesis 15
    11 And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.

    12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.


    Now isn't that an odd thing for God to say? Or even for an angel of the Lord to say? "For now I know that thou fearsest God". Wasn't that already known? Here is something to consider. While Abraham had shown faith by leaving his homeland, his faith was not complete. Note that when he was "declared righteous" what was he having faith in? Genesis 15 is where Abraham told God that he would leave his property to his servant because he and his wife were childless. God promised Abraham a son. Abraham had faith in that promise. But that faith wavered. It wavered twice when Abraham told two different kings that his wife was his sister. (Half truth. She was his half sister. But he was not up front about the fact that she was his wife.) Why is this showing a lack of faith in God's promise that he would have a son? Well obviously if you are childless and God has promised you a son, that must mean that you're going to live long enough to impregnate someone. His faith also wavered with the choice of Hagar to bear him a son. God didn't tell Abraham to "help him out." So in a way, the call to sacrifice Isaac was the ultimate test of Abraham's faith in that promise. After all, God didn't just promise Abraham a son, but promised him that all the nations would be blessed through that son. Like the test Abraham failed when he sought to spare his own life, would he fail and put more stock in his love for his son than in his faith in God?

    Interestingly enough, I keep hearing people saith that works of faith are for "justification before men." Really? Where is that in the Bible? Who man was Abraham "justified" in front of? And why did the angel of the Lord say "Now I know" as opposed to "Now some man knows"?
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  29. #115
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Actually all along faith and works were together. The very first mention of Abraham is when he obeyed God and left his homeland in search for the promised land.

    Please read:

    Genesis 15 King James Version (KJV)

    15 After these things the word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.

    2 And Abram said, Lord God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?

    3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.

    4 And, behold, the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

    5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.

    6 And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

    7 And he said unto him, I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it.


    So, by the time Abraham was declared righteous through his faith, he had already acted on it. Compare with Hebrews 11.

    8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

    9 By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise:

    10 For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God.

    11 Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.

    12 Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable.

    13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

    14 For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.

    15 And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned.

    16 But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.

    17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

    18 Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called:


    Note that in Hebrews 11:8 the evidence of Abraham's faith was that he was willing to leave his homeland. So it's a mistake to pretend that there were no works of faith until Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac. But check out what God, through His angel, had to say when Abraham was willing to sacrificing Isaac.

    Genesis 15
    11 And the angel of the Lord called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.

    12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.


    Now isn't that an odd thing for God to say? Or even for an angel of the Lord to say? "For now I know that thou fearsest God". Wasn't that already known? Here is something to consider. While Abraham had shown faith by leaving his homeland, his faith was not complete. Note that when he was "declared righteous" what was he having faith in? Genesis 15 is where Abraham told God that he would leave his property to his servant because he and his wife were childless. God promised Abraham a son. Abraham had faith in that promise. But that faith wavered. It wavered twice when Abraham told two different kings that his wife was his sister. (Half truth. She was his half sister. But he was not up front about the fact that she was his wife.) Why is this showing a lack of faith in God's promise that he would have a son? Well obviously if you are childless and God has promised you a son, that must mean that you're going to live long enough to impregnate someone. His faith also wavered with the choice of Hagar to bear him a son. God didn't tell Abraham to "help him out." So in a way, the call to sacrifice Isaac was the ultimate test of Abraham's faith in that promise. After all, God didn't just promise Abraham a son, but promised him that all the nations would be blessed through that son. Like the test Abraham failed when he sought to spare his own life, would he fail and put more stock in his love for his son than in his faith in God?

    Interestingly enough, I keep hearing people saith that works of faith are for "justification before men." Really? Where is that in the Bible? Who man was Abraham "justified" in front of? And why did the angel of the Lord say "Now I know" as opposed to "Now some man knows"?
    The points you're making from Genesis are valid. But they're different from the point James makes. The only work he mentions is the offering up of Isaac, not the leaving of the homeland. And it was when Abraham believed God that God declared him righteous, before he did that work. What you're saying about God's words "now I know" is not a point James chooses to bring out, nor is the question of what men saw what Abraham did (from James' point of view, everyone who knows the story is a witness of the work that demonstrates Abraham's faith). But for the practical purposes of his audience, it is their outward demonstration of their faith, such as can be seen by others, that he means by the word "justify." God can see their faith, and declare them righteous on the basis of what he sees that men can't. But if their faith is genuine, then the will also demonstrate their righteousness outwardly (i.e. be justified).

    Paul in Romans 4 also makes the point of the time relationship between Abraham's faith, justification, and works. And when he refers to his justification he's talking about his being declared righteous in the sight of God. The work Paul mentions is Abraham's circumcision, which also happened years after his faith and his righteousness in God's sight. Paul goes out of his way to point out that this proves that Abraham's works were not a prerequisite for being righteous in God's sight, but only his faith was.

    Neither author mentions the work of leaving Ur. But we can still make the same point with that. Abraham's faith preceded that work. Of course Genesis 15:6 comes later in the narrative of Genesis, but since it is a retrospective, it must be referring to the faith he already had when he left Ur. His leaving Ur was another outward demonstration of that inner faith that he already must have had, since, had he not had faith he wouldn't have left Ur, as Hebrews 11 points out.
    Last edited by erowe1; 10-01-2014 at 01:43 PM.

  30. #116
    Quote Originally Posted by lilymc View Post
    No, that is not what I said or what I believe.

    But I can see why you wanted to set up that strawman, to have something easy to knock over.

    God knows our hearts. GOD (not you, or anyone else) knows if one's confession of faith is sincere and genuine, and if the faith is in HIM and not in our works.

    Nobody is saying that simply stating a few magic words means someone is saved. That seems to be where your problem is, you seem to think that OSAS means one can state a few words then automatically be saved. You are not giving God enough credit for being able to do His job. You can trust that God knows what He's doing. Nobody is going to pull the wool over His eyes.

    So to imply that the gift is "guaranteed" upon merely stating a few words or being water baptized is a misrepresentation or misunderstanding.

    Again, just trust that God knows what He's doing. He doesn't make mistakes.
    It's not just someone saying "magic words" Lily. Again I give you the example of Baalam. He believed in God. He prophesied for God. And on the way to curse God's people, God had another conversation with him. From everything we can tell Baalam was lost. Jesus said not only did some of the "goats" say the "magic words" but they did works in His name including casting out demons. It is impossible to cast out demons in the name of Jesus without having faith in Jesus. There were some young men in the book of Acts that tried that and the demon possessed man kicked their butts. And of course James says that the "Devils believe and tremble". So nobody is talking about someone who just says "I believe in Jesus" as a catch phrase, not really believing in Jesus at all, but going through the motions for insurance. We're talking about people that at the very least at one point had an existential belief in Jesus. But in the parable of the sower, Jesus goes further and talks about people who hear the gospel and at first accept it with joy but then wither away at persecution because they have no root or people where the seed of the gospel germinated but got choked out by the "cares of this world." So that's beyond existential belief that even demons have.

    As for "trusting that a living God knows what He's doing", I don't see anyone arguing otherwise. The question is, what is He doing? Do we take the parables of Jesus, which seem clearly to debunk OSAS, at face value? The man with the large debt that was forgiven but was later reinstated because he was unforgiving to a fellow servant who owed a small debt? How about the parable of the talents where each servant (i.e. believer) was given certain talents, but one servant decided to hide his? What happened to that servant? He was bound and cast into "outer darkness."

    Here is the deal. You show God that you trust Him the same way you show Him that you love Him and that's by doing what He says. You don't have to make up stuff to do in order to impress Him. That's the mistake the Jews made in the rules they added to the Sabbath. That's also the mistake, IMO, of "salvation by sacrament" and the"indulgence system."

    Anyway, the question that I have yet to see you or Kevin or Erowe1 attempt to answer is how does one know they have what you call "saving faith?" Why is that question so hard to answer?
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  31. #117
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    The points you're making from Genesis are valid. But they're different from the point James makes. The only work he mentions is the offering up of Isaac, not the leaving of the homeland. And it was when Abraham believed God that God declared him righteous, before he did that work. What you're saying about God's words "now I know" is not a point James chooses to bring out, nor is the question of what men saw what Abraham did (from James' point of view, everyone who knows the story is a witness of the work that demonstrates Abraham's faith). But for the practical purposes of his audience, it is their outward demonstration of their faith, such as can be seen by others, that he means by the word "justify." God can see their faith, and declare them righteous on the basis of what he sees that men can't. But if their faith is genuine, then the will also demonstrate their righteousness outwardly (i.e. be justified).
    Okay. But no where does James say anything about "justification before men." And really, that's rather absurd on its face. I don't think very highly of Jeptha for example.

    Edit: And for the record, it was you who brought up the first instance of Abraham being declared righteous long before the incident with Isaac. James makes no mention of the first declaration of righteousness. Paul does. But by going to where that happened you are taken to Genesis 15 where God observes the fact that Abraham had already acted on his faith by leaving Ur.
    Last edited by jmdrake; 10-01-2014 at 01:43 PM.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  32. #118
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Okay. But no where does James say anything about "justification before men." And really, that's rather absurd on its face. I don't think very highly of Jeptha for example.

    Edit: And for the record, it was you who brought up the first instance of Abraham being declared righteous long before the incident with Isaac. James makes no mention of the first declaration of righteousness. Paul does. But by going to where that happened you are taken to Genesis 15 where God observes the fact that Abraham had already acted on his faith by leaving Ur.
    James 2:18:
    18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”

    Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.
    And James does quote Genesis 15:6 in James 2:23.

  33. #119
    Quote Originally Posted by erowe1 View Post
    James 2:18:


    And James does quote Genesis 15:6 in James 2:23.
    Okay. Toche' on James 2:23. But James 2:18 does not say "Justification before men". You're reading that into the text. What he is saying is that if faith does not produce deeds then it's not faith. It doesn't justify you before men or before God.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    "It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

  34. #120
    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    It's not just someone saying "magic words" Lily. Again I give you the example of Baalam. He believed in God. He prophesied for God. And on the way to curse God's people, God had another conversation with him. From everything we can tell Baalam was lost. Jesus said not only did some of the "goats" say the "magic words" but they did works in His name including casting out demons. It is impossible to cast out demons in the name of Jesus without having faith in Jesus. There were some young men in the book of Acts that tried that and the demon possessed man kicked their butts. And of course James says that the "Devils believe and tremble". So nobody is talking about someone who just says "I believe in Jesus" as a catch phrase, not really believing in Jesus at all, but going through the motions for insurance. We're talking about people that at the very least at one point had an existential belief in Jesus. But in the parable of the sower, Jesus goes further and talks about people who hear the gospel and at first accept it with joy but then wither away at persecution because they have no root or people where the seed of the gospel germinated but got choked out by the "cares of this world." So that's beyond existential belief that even demons have.

    As for "trusting that a living God knows what He's doing", I don't see anyone arguing otherwise. The question is, what is He doing? Do we take the parables of Jesus, which seem clearly to debunk OSAS, at face value? The man with the large debt that was forgiven but was later reinstated because he was unforgiving to a fellow servant who owed a small debt? How about the parable of the talents where each servant (i.e. believer) was given certain talents, but one servant decided to hide his? What happened to that servant? He was bound and cast into "outer darkness."

    Here is the deal. You show God that you trust Him the same way you show Him that you love Him and that's by doing what He says. You don't have to make up stuff to do in order to impress Him. That's the mistake the Jews made in the rules they added to the Sabbath. That's also the mistake, IMO, of "salvation by sacrament" and the"indulgence system."

    Anyway, the question that I have yet to see you or Kevin or Erowe1 attempt to answer is how does one know they have what you call "saving faith?" Why is that question so hard to answer?
    You did a pretty good job of answering Lily, so I'll just leave it right there. I'm glad that you asked that question for them to describe their version of "saving faith" again too, because I've already asked it and got zip. Maybe they'll answer you.



  35. Remove this section of ads by registering.
Page 4 of 10 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-10-2011, 06:03 PM
  2. Monopoly Money and Federal Reserve Note Side By Side
    By evadmurd in forum Economy & Markets
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-28-2011, 07:12 AM
  3. A side-by-side comparison of the Keynsian, Austrian, and Islamic economic paradigms
    By ibaghdadi in forum Austrian Economics / Economic Theory
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 06-03-2010, 08:48 AM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-15-2009, 07:18 AM
  5. Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-24-2007, 07:29 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •