Do you believe these verses?greenspun.com : LUSENET : The Christian Church : One Thread |
I would like to ask for the views of the people in the forum on the following verses. Do you believe these verses are inspired by God? Do you believe they really mean what they say? Romans 10:8-13 8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. 12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.Any comments?
-- Anonymous, May 18, 2001
"But on the other hand, there is still this verse of Scripture, Romans 10:9-10. There are also many verses that contain promises about salvation through faith that do not mention water baptism. This passage, Romans 10:9-10 is one that a lot of evangelicals use as a key text in explaining what one must do to be saved."Link....first of all...truth is not determined by "evangelical handcounts."
Second, Scott Sheridan is exactly right. This horse was beat to death before.
THE ONLY reason I am responding....briefly....is so that the readers know that there is a proper translation to the text that has nothing to do with how one becomes a Christian.
The key word in that passage is...."WHOEVER."
The purpose of that passage is to teach WHO can be saved.....not HOW.
There was a struggle in the church of Rome that was a problem of fellowship between the Jews and the Gentiles. Both of those groups considered themselves the "sons of God" while the other group was rejected by God.
So...in the first chapter Paul makes it clear that the Gentiles are under sin. In the second chapter he makes it clear that the Jews are under sin. The summation is found in chapter 3:23....."Therefore all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
You see....none of them had the right to condemn each other since both groups were under sin.
In chapters 4 & 5 he then develops the idea that faith in Christ is the basis of salvation.
Long story short....this culminates in chapter 10 where he points out....whether Jew or Gentile...."WHOEVER calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
So again....the purpose of the passage is NOT HOW TO CALL UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD.....it is WHO CAN CALL UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD.
Now....if one wants to learn HOW to call upon the name of the Lord....then I would recommend Acts 22 which describes the conversion of the Apostle Paul.
Specifically notice vs. 16 where Ananias tells Paul...."Arise...be baptized and wash away your sins.....CALLING UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD."
That my friends....is HOW you call upon the name of the Lord.
We could do a lot more to develop this sound interpretation...but as Scott said...this horse has been beat to death.
It just bothers me when Link sets up a "I believe the Scriptures and you don't" false dichotomy.....which is exactly what he did.
Alright Link.....you WILL GET THE LAST WORD. So go ahead with your "yes-but...." method of interpretation.
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
Link,This horse has been beat already. Read my article at http://www.cccflorida.org/How%20To%20Make%20A%20Call.htm for my take on verse 13. But the rest of the chapter follows the same vein.
-- Anonymous, May 18, 2001
Hi, Link,I believe they are definitely inspired by God and I believe them 1000%.
-- Anonymous, May 18, 2001
Brother Link:We believe every verse in the Word of God and therefore believe the one you have quoted above as much as any other of God's eternal words.
Let me ask you. Do you believe this verse? "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is batized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned." Mark 16:16
Do you believe these verses? "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen. Matthew 28:19,20.
DO you believe this verse? "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." Matt. 26:28.
And do you believe this verse? "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Acts 2:38
DO you believe this verse? "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." Acts 22:16.
Do you believe this verse? "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also [in the likeness] of [his] resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." ROmans 6:3-6.
Do you believe this verse? "But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." Romans 6:17,18.
Do you believe this verse? "In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;" Col. 2:11-13.
Do you believe this verse? " Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" 1 Coriinthians 1:12,13.
Do you believe this verse? "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." Galatians 3:26,27.
Do you believe this verse? " Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Acts 8:14,15.
Do you believe this verse? "Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on [their] way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, [here is] water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him." Acts 8:35-38.
Do you believe these verses? " Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:" I Peter 3:20,21
Do you believe this verse? "For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, [and] hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" TItus 3:3-5
Bo you believe this verse? "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word," Eph. 5:25,26.
Do you believe this verse? "Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." Heb. 10:22.
Do you believe these verses? "What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be [ye] warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what [doth it] profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent [them] out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." James 2:14-26.
If you do not believe these above verse, Brother Link, are there any other verses in the inspired word of God that you do not believe?
For Christ and truth,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 19, 2001
Lee,I believe all those verses.
So if you believe Romans 10, would yous ay taht if someone confesses Jesus as Lord and believes in his heart that God has raised Him from the dead, He will be saved?
-- Anonymous, May 19, 2001
I probably shouldn't stick my nose in here, however, I am curious if it would help the discussion to agree upon a definition of what faith is according to Scripture; that is to say, what kind of faith saves? Consider harmonizing what is specifically stated, what is offered by way of example, what is given by way of illustration, as well as any other pertinent passages that deal with what kind of faith saves.I know that some have offered a definition within their posts from time to time, but that particular point seems to have lost its emphasis within the arguements from position to position. It would seem that if all could agree on God's definition, then most of the arguements would be concluded on their own.
Just a thought as we pursue the truth together,
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
David, Good Point!Also, we shouldn't just take a single verse and develop a 'position' based upon it. Since we know that the Bible doesn't contradict itself, we need to take it As A WHOLE and develop an understanding ('position') based upon that.
Link: that is how I fit the verses you quoted to start this thread with the many verses Lee quoted. It is obvious (to me) that the Bible requires water baptism... so... the verses you quote must include that somehow... and they do: FAITH in ACTION.
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
Let me say first that _functionally_ I see a lot of value to the way people in the various strains of the RM view baptism. We dont' see the apostles having people repeat a 'sinner's prayer' to be saved in the New Testament. We do see the early Christians baptizing those who want to receive the Gospel.But on the other hand, there is still this verse of Scripture, Romans 10:9-10. There are also many verses that contain promises about salvation through faith that do not mention water baptism. This passage, Romans 10:9-10 is one that a lot of evangelicals use as a key text in explaining what one must do to be saved.
Imagine that at the final judgment, a man who is judged can make his defense of why he thinks he could be saved.
Suppose a man is there beign judged and he tells God that He confessed Jesus as Lord, and was wanting to be baptized, but before he could make it to the water, he was fed to the lions because he continued to confess that Jesus is Lord, and refused to deny Christ. This man could 'claim' a lot of scriptures. He could point out the scrpture that says that if you confess Jesus before men, He will confess you before the Father which is in heaven. He could point to Romans 10:9 and 10, and point out that He had confessed Jesus as Lord and believed that God had raised him from the dead.
Some of the more extreme RM people might think that God would throw such a man into the Lake of Fire, (perhaps in the part where they hink John Wesley, John Knox, and Martin Luther will be housed? ;)
I've seen some RM arguments that 'faith' somehow includes baptism. That seems like a stretch. Surely in the Greek mind, the word 'faith' itself didn't include the concept of water baptism.
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Notice this verse does not say that he that believes and is not baptized will be damned. Think about that.
If one believes and is baptized is he saved, or does he have to hold to an RM position on baptism? Does faith in Christ save, or faith in baptism?
Let's think about some of the teachings of the New Testament. God made Abraham a promise about his seed, a prophecy that related to Christ, and Abraham believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Notice that Abraham hadn't been baptized in the waters of Christian baptism that we see in scripture. He hadn't been circumcised yet either, but his faith was imputed unto him for righteousness.
Is it possible that the martyr who didn't make it to water yet could be saved, even though some scriptures about salvation do relate to baptism?
Let's imagine I have a son and I tell him 'If you clean your room, I'll give you an ice cream cone.' I also tell him on another occasion, 'If you clean the garage I'll give you an ice cream cone.' If he cleans either his room or the garage, shouldn't I give him an ice cream cone. Shouldn't I keep each individual promise I make? Or shoudl I only give him the ice cream cone if he cleans his room and the garage? (I don't necessarily endorse this fattening method of child rearing.)
Let's think about that period before Christ was crucified. There were people in Israel whose sins were beign forgive before the cross. In fact, these people could hold on to a promise from a prophet of God about forgiveness of sins. John preached baptism for the repentance of sins, and many people were baptized, confessing their sins.
So during this period, there was a method for forgiving sins.
But during this pre-crucificion period, some men brought Jesus a man sick of the palsy. Jesus pronounced that man's sins forgiven _when he saw their faith._ Think about that now. During this pre- crucifiction period baptism for the remission of sins was already being preached. But Jesus was able to-- right then and there-- declare this man's sins forgiven when he saw 'their faith.
Let us look at the passage: Matthew 9:2-8 2 And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee. 3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth. 4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? 5 For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? 6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. 7 And he arose, and departed to his house. 8 But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men.
Jesus actions didn't remove the validity of what John was preaching about baptism for the remission of sins. Those people who were being baptized were probably responding in faith, believing God to wash away their sins as they submitted to His word.
There are many on this forum who seem to think that a man _must_ be baptized to be saved. Although Mark 16:16 doesn't teach this, many try to use this verse to argue for that idea. Does anyone ahve any scripture to prove that if a man is not baptized in water, that he cannot be saved?
I don't have a problem with someone 'leading someone to Christ' by sharing the Gospel and them baptizing him. The early chruch did that. It is one thing to say that he that believesand is baptized will be saved. It is another to say that if one is not baptized in water, that he cannot be saved.
Any comments? Brief comments preferred.
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
Brother Link you have said:“Lee, I believe all those verses.”
I am indeed happy to hear you say that you believe all of the verses that I quoted in my previous post. That is indeed comforting to know that we are not choosing to believe part of God’s word and refusing to believe the rest of it! For this indeed is the problem with those who take verses that speak of faith and confession as being essential to salvation and reject verses which teach that REPENTANCE and BAPTISM are also spoken of as being essential. For just as the Apostle Paul in this verse says “for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness and with the month confession is made unto salvation”. (Romans 10:9,10) shows that faith ALONE without confessing Christ with the mouth is not enough to save. Indeed even in this verse faith ALONE cannot save, isn’t that true? For we see in these verses that both faith and confession is essential to our salvation, now don’t we? Thus when someone says that all one has to do to be saved is “believe”, because he has left out confessing Christ before men (Romans 10:10; Matt. 10:32,33; 1 Tim. 6:13,14), he is not telling the WHOLE truth, now is he?
Then you asked:
“So if you believe Romans 10, would yous ay taht if someone confesses Jesus as Lord and believes in his heart that God has raised Him from the dead, He will be saved?”
What I would say is of little consequence when compared to what GOD SAYS. And thus I invite you to consider what God says about your question in His inspired word.
Indeed such a person WILL be saved, according to God’s word, if he believes sufficiently that “God raised” Christ “from the dead”. For if he is not willing to be “buried with him in baptism into death that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the father even we also should walk in newness of life”. (Romans 6:3-6) then he does not believe it no matter how much he claims to do so. Thus when his faith leads him to not only confess Christ but to obey him by repenting of his sins and being baptized for the remission of his sins then, and not one moment before then will he be saved. (Acts 3:19; Acts 2:38). But he will not be saved the “moment that he believes in Christ” if one means by that that he simply gives nothing more than “mental assent or acceptance of the facts concerning Christ”. For faith alone is DEAD (James 2:14-24) and cannot save anyone. But the moment his faith leads him to complete his obedience to God’s commands to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins (acts 2:38) will he receive the actual remission of sins. For we must accept the teaching of the entire word of God on the subject of salvation. For, “the sum of thy word is truth”. Now, what God will decide concerning any person at the judgement is not my responsibility to either determine or say. My responsibility before God is to teach and preach the gospel of Christ and urge all to adhere to and obey God’s word. And to remind them that they will be judged by Christ (Acts 17:30) according to his words (John 12:48).
We are told “he that rejecteth me and recieveth not my words hath one that Judgeth him, the words that I have spoken the same shall judge him in the last day.” (John 12:48). And Christ spoke the following words, “ Go ye therefore and peach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:15,16). Christ commanded the apostles to preach the gospel to every creature. And he predicted two responses to that gospel and the consequences of both of them. Those that “believe and are baptized shall be saved” and those who do not believe that gospel will be condemned. He did not contemplate that there would be anyone who truly believed His gospel that would not obey it by submitting to His commands in it to the apostles to baptize those believers in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Mat. 28:19,20). Thus according to Christ those who desire to be saved upon hearing the gospel must believe and be baptized. And those who do not believe and thus who do not desire the salvation offered through it need only reject it to be condemned.
And let us notice something important about “believing”. It does not matter when we think we believe. It matters only when God accepts our faith. And God does not treat the disobedient as “believers”. Read this passage again: “Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” James 2:18-24 When was Abraham considered one who “believed God”? Notice that he was considered by God to have “believed God” after he had obeyed God by offering his son Isaac on thee alter. When was Abraham “justified”? Was it the moment that he mentally accepted the truth about God? No! It was “WHEN HE OFFERED HIS SON ISAAC UPON THE ALTER”. Thus Abraham believed WHEN he obeyed God. Thus it is true according to the word of God that those who obey are the one’s whom God accepts as “believers”. Look further at this verse, “He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life; He that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him.” (John 3:36). Here the words “believeth” and “obeyeth” are used interchangeably as if one is included in the other. So we can understand why God accepted Abraham as one that “believed God” WHEN he had obeyed God’s command to offer his son Isaac on the alter. And thus we can see that the principle of faith includes humble and submissive obedience to the will of God in al things. For this reason we are told by the Hebrew writer, “Though he were a Son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered and being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY him.” (Heb. 5:8,9). For those who “obey” him are the ones who truly “believe on him”. Those who simply call him “Lord, Lord” but do not do the things, which he says, are not going to enter the Kingdom of heaven according to Christ. Hear Him, “Not every one that saith unto me ‘Lord, Lord’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven but he that DOETH the WILL OF MY FATHER IN HEAVEN” (Matt 7:21). For you see no one can justly claim Christ as their Lord and Master if they do not obey Him and none can justly claim to believe in Christ if they do not trust Him enough to obey His commands.
Now notice also that Christ said, “verily, verily I say unto thee, except thou repent ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3). And we are told “repent ye therefore and be converted that you sins may be blotted out” (Acts 3:19). And again, “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:” (Acts 17:30). And we are again told, “repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS” (Acts 2:38). No one will be saved without having their sins remitted and none can have them remitted until they REPENT and Romans 10:9, 10 say nothing whatsoever about repentance. Are we to conclude that we will be saved without repenting of our sin if we only believe? Surely not! For none will receive the remission of their past sins without repenting of them. Thus the verse that you quote does not tell us all of what is essential to our salvation. From those verses we learn that we must “believe” and that we must “confess” in order to our salvation. And in the rest of the word of God we learn that we must also repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38). Those who obey all that God has commanded us to do for remission of sins are the one’s who truly “believe”. Those who resist obeying God by refusing to REPENT and be BAPTIZED do not believe in Christ for it was Christ who commanded it.
Thus it should be obvious that the answer to your question is that those who believe and confess Christ will indeed be saved for it is their faith that will lead them to obey Christ by repenting of their sins and submitting willingly to his commanded to be baptized. (Mark 16:16;Acts 2:38). Those who refuse to repent of sins and submit to Christ command to be baptized are simply unbelievers no matter how often they profess falsely that Christ is their Lord. For as Christ said “why call ye me Lord, Lord and do not the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46).
This explains why Christ said, “If ye LOVE ME KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS”. Those who do not love the Lord do not believe in Him, no matter how much they pretend and profess that they do.
But surely God will judge these men according to truth. I will not judge them nor will Brother Link. Thus I cannot condemn them to Hell any more than Link can consign them to heaven. For we are told to preach the gospel and teach the word of God. (Matt. 28:19,20; 1 Timothy 4; Titus1). Now the word of God commands: Faith (John 3:36; Romans 10:9) repentance (Acts 3:19; Acts 17:30; Acts 2:38) Confession of Christ (Romans 10:10; 1 Tim. 6:13,14; Matt. 10:32,33) and baptism (Mark 16:16; Matt. 28:19,20; John 3:3-5; Titus 3:3-5; Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Acts 8:12-40; Romans 6:3-6,17; Col. 2:11-13; Gal. 3:26,27; Eph. 5:25,26; Hb. 10:22; 1 Peter 3:20,21). And we are made free from sin WHEN we obey that form of doctrine that was delivered to us by the Christ through the Holy Spirit speaking in the apostles of Christ. For Paul said, “But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being THEN made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." (Romans 6:17,18). Thus we can see that one is not saved the “moment he believes” but WHEN we OBEY “from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered to the Romans as described in 1 Cor. 15:1-4; Romans 1:16; Romans 6:3-6; 17,18). So the doctrine of salvation by “faith only” is simply false to the very core and those who depend upon it are following a lie and lies will save no one. In fact the “father of lies” is Satan and this particular deception called “faith only” is a lie that comes from the father of lies for it is contrary to the very word of God in its entirety. Faith saves when it is sufficient to cause us to act in harmony with the will of God. Anything less than this is not faith it is rebellion against God. Remember the “devils believe” (James 2:17) but they tremble for they also at the same time rebel against the very God that they believe in. Those who believe but refuse to obey are rebels against the very Christ that they believe in. Christ said he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. It is a simple thing to believe the gospel and obey it. (1 Cor. 15:1-4) and a tragedy when one does not obey it (2 Thess. 1:8,9) for it is the very “power of God unto salvation (Romans 1:16,17). If anyone out there has not been baptized into Christ (Gal. 3:26, 27) how long will you rebel against God and refuse to obey Him? Those who rejected the baptism of John “rejected the counsel of God against themselves being not baptized of him” (Luke 7:29,30). How much more then are you rejecting the counsel of God AGAINST YOURSELF by not being baptized according to the command of Christ? Let me urge you to believe the gospel (Romans 10:9,10) (that Christ died for your sins, was buried and raised again on the third day according to the scriptures I Cor. 15:1-4). And repent of your sin (Acts 3:19; Acts 2:38; Acts 17:30) and confess Christ (Romans 10:10) and be baptized for the remission of your sins (Acts 2:38) and you will be saved from them (Mark 16:16; 1 Peter 3:21) and the Lord will add you to His Church (Acts 2:47). And if you live faithful unto death (Rev. 2:10) you will receive a “crown of righteousness” which the Lord the “righteous Judge” will give unto us in that day. But if you imagine that God will in some other way than that which he has revealed in His word save you from your sins you risk being terribly and eternally disappointed!
For Christ and the truth,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
My comment is that instead of trying to find the minimum requirement for salvation we should be more concerned with what all we can do to please our Lord. Things like, beleive, repent, obey, confess, love, sacrifise, discern, be baptized and avoid useless argument. In brotherly love Cliff
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
Cliff,Respectfully speaking, until we can come to God on God's terms (i.e. what is necessary to be saved), then there is nothing you CAN do to please God. You see, to God, our best is as "filthy rags". Outside of Christ - those rags condemn us.............inside of Christ those rags are forgotten. So.....the question, "what must we do" to be saved is as valid today as it ever was. It is the "crux of the biscuit" so to speak.
Link,
Knowing that Baptism was mentioned at least 96 times in the New Testament, it is an exercise in futility to try to deny it or explain it away based solely on one or two verses of Scripture. We know God is not a God of confusion, but of order. Therefore if God is to be consistant (and therefore believed), Romans 9:9-10 has to be "washed" or consolidated with those 96+ references to baptism or else the whole matter is moot.......as an inconsistant God is not worthy to be served.
With that said, Do you believe this verse: ?
"But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed (Greek word "anathema" - i.e. - consigned to Hell). Gal 1:9
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
And this brother says AMEN!
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
Brother Link:You have said:
“Suppose a man is there beign judged and he tells God that He confessed Jesus as Lord, and was wanting to be baptized, but before he could make it to the water, he was fed to the lions because he continued to confess that Jesus is Lord, and refused to deny Christ.”
Why do not you show us from God’s word where God has taken up this subject and revealed to us just what he will do about it instead presuming that you know that His reasoning on the matter will be exactly the same as yours? For are we not told, “my ways are not your ways saith the Lord neither are my thoughts your thoughts. For as the heavens are higher than the earth so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isa. 55:8,9).
There is not a person in our reading audience, who has not been baptized, that cannot now “make it to the water” as you say. And if they know the truth that Christ commands them to “believe and be baptized” (Mark 16:16). And if they know of the command to “repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins”. (Acs 2:38). And if they are not this very moment on their way to the water they most assuredly will not be able to say along with any “martyr” that they wanted to obey Christ’s command to repent and be baptized but they were killed on the way, now will they? In fact, it seems that you and others are hoping that they will take comfort in your words and delay their obedience. Since you seem to wish to make it appear that repentance and baptism, both of which are not mentioned in this verse, are not urgent matters that must be attended to in order to our salvation. And it also seems that some of them are hoping that you will be able to persuade them that they are perfectly safe to just neglect these commands of the Lord. I can assure you that every person that will this very moment determine to obey God will make it to a state of repentance for their sins and to the water to submit to the Lordship of Christ. (Acts 3:19; Acts 17:30; Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16). For God is just as able to protect them till they arrive at the water as he is to save them if they do not. And if they neglect this opportunity they will HAVE NO EXCUSE IN THE JUDGEMENT and even “MARTYRDOM” will not save them! Listen to Paul when he spoke of the importance of Love as compared to “giving our bodies to be burned”. “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have [the gift of] prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed [the poor], and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.” (1 Cor. 13:1-3). So we can see that it is perfectly possible for one to be a martyr by “giving his body to be burned” and it would “profit him nothing”. But Brother Link’s assumption is based upon the idea that martyrdom is some kind of guarantee of salvation. But as we see from Paul’s word’s such is not necessarily the truth. The death of a man who has never repented of his sins and is therefore NOT forgiven is a tragic thing and even if that death were because he refused to deny Christ if he did not have enough love for Christ to obey him it would profit him nothing. That God may save him anyway we do not know for God has not said. And even if he did love Christ and was on his way to obey him and was killed we have no word from God concerning his fate. And even if we did know what God intends to do about such a one it would not have ANY bearing whatsoever upon the case with the rest of us who are not even this moment contemplating being obedient to God. But are rather seeking to use this so-called martyrdom as an EXCUSE to ignore God’s will in these important and urgent matters. I can assure you that it is not the spirit and faith of the martyrs that causes these souls to delay their obedience to Christ as LORD! If they had even a fraction of the martyrs we would be up all night this very night baptizing them into Christ! Why do we not, therefore, answer the more practical question as to why those who know the will of God at this moment are rebelling and refusing to obey it? Can not Brother Link join with me in URGING them to “Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38) right now while they are alive and before they die whether it be as a martyr or of natural causes?
They may instead offer the excuse that they believe Brother Link who said that God would make allowances if someone were martyred before they had the opportunity to be baptized. Even though Brother Link offered not one single passage of scripture to indicate that God had promised to save those who wanted to obey but could not for whatever reason do so. God has not revealed to us just what he might do with those who were at least, after repenting of their sins, on their way to the water so that they could submit to Christ as Lord. By being, “ buried with him by baptism into death that like as Christ was raised up by the glory of the Father even so we also should walk in newness of life.” (Romans 6:3-6).
But Link comforts them with human reasoning instead of any clear statements from God’s word. God is a righteous Judge and whatever he may do concerning those who are at the very least ON THEIR WAY to submit to Christ as Lord in obeying His command to be baptized for the remission of sins will be just and right. But he has not revealed to us what he will do concerning them and for Brother Link to assume that he knows what God will do is nothing more than pure presumption. And what is worse is to use this presumption as a means of vitiating against the plain truth revealed in God’s word concerning the fact that we must believe, repent, confess, and be baptized in order to be saved from our past sins.
Let us suggest this, Brother Link. Those of you out there that have not yet yielded to the Lordship of Christ by submitting to His command to be baptized in obedience to the gospel. Get up right now, if you truthfully believe that Christ is Lord and go to the water and obey his command to be baptized. And if you do not make it and are killed on the way we will only be able to say that you will be in the hands of a just God. One who knows all facts in your case such as whether you had this opportunity numerous times before and rejected it and all other pertinent facts in your case. But if you sit idle where you are now, knowing that Christ the Lord has commanded you to believe, repent confess Him and be baptized and reject His commands by deliberately refusing to obey them. And you do this solely because you think that in some way you will be condemning someone to hell who never obeyed the Lord's will. And you are killed in your rebellious state you most assuredly will not be saved just because you CLAIMED that you believe Christ is Lord but proved by your stiff- necked rebellion and refusal to obey him that he was nothing to you. In this case no one can have any hope for you in the least. In the former case we can only hope that it is right for God to save you. But no one can preach that God will in fact without doubt save you by any means other than believing and obeying the gospel of Christ. (1 Cor. 15:1-4; 2 Thess. 1:8,9; Heb. 5:8,9). Would you rather take your “chances” that Brother Link’s presumption is correct. Or would you rather know that you have obeyed God’s revealed will in the matter and that you rely upon his revealed promises concerning it. For then you can rest assured of your salvation that when you have completed your faithful obedience and submission to the will of God. For the certainty of your salvation will then be based upon the revealed and confirmed word of God instead of the human presumption of men like Brother Link. Whose intentions are good but whose knowledge of the mind of God apart from that which God has revealed in the word of God is, as with all men, woefully lacking.
Brother Link has absolutely no idea what God will do with those who intended to obey God but died before having the opportunity to do it. Neither do I for we have no revelation from God on that matter. But we do know that God has commanded us to believe, repent, confess, and be baptized in order to our salvation. Those of our readers out there who have not obeyed God’s will in these matters will now never be able to be saved by “martyrdom” and offer the excuse that they were on their way and were killed before they we able to obey, now will they? For they are either now on their way or they are still rebelling against God, now aren’t they? And what will be there excuse for rejecting the gospel when they heard it?
And you can rest assured that those who are at this moment refusing to obey Christ’s command to be baptized are not intending or hoping to become martyrs! In fact, they are very unlikely candidates for such. They do not even believe in Christ enough or love Him enough to go to water right now and be baptized in the name of Christ that their sins may be remitted. Indeed this is not the spirit of the martyrs! Salvation in Christ does not always require martyrdom. But it has always required that we have the faith of martyrs who were willing to give their lives for Christ. But those of you out there that know that Christ commands you to be baptized and sit there refusing to at this very moment immediately obey Him are not men or women of “faith”. And you have not the soul or faith of a martyr! If you cannot bring yourself to do this simple thing that Christ has commanded us to do how can you even think that you have enough faith to die for him? Where there is no obedience there is no faith and where there is resistance to obedience there is surely faithlessness. DO you really believe in Christ? Then submit to his commands without hesitation! I urge you to obey him now. And if you do not you will not be able to use martyrdom to save you at the judgement. If you die in your sins there is no hope given in the scriptures that martyrdom will save you. Not one single word! Why not just trust Christ by obeying His commands. He is indeed the “author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him”. (Heb. 5:8,9). WE therefore urge you to obey and reject this foolishness of using some martyr who was on his way to the baptistery but died first as an excuse for your present disobedience. If you were like this martyr in any way you would be on your way to the water right now. And if you are now own your way we will pray that you arrive safely and obey Him. But if you are not now own your way after hearing the gospel and the truth you will never be in the same condition before God at the judgement as this martyr spoken of by Link. Whatever those condition might be, for we have no revelation from God concerning his state. But whatever it is your case will never be like it. But if you prefer to be saved as Brother Link ASSUMES this martyr was saved then at least go to a place where they are killing Christians and offer your body up to martyrdom and se how things work out! But I cannot imagine why you would do such a thing when the word of God tells you that you will be saved if you believe (John 3:16; Repent (acts 3:19; Confess with your mouth (Romans 10:9,100 and be baptised (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 1 Peter 3:21; Roamns 6:3-6,17,18; Gal. 3:26,27; Acts 22:16; Titus 3:3- 5; John 3:3-5; Eph. 5:25,26; Heb. 10:22; Acts 8:12-40; Acts 19:1-6). You chose! But I do sincerely doubt that those of you who cannot muster enough faith in CHrist to obey His command to be baptised are likely to muster enough courage and faith in Christ to go somewhere and be a martyr!
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
E Lee wrote,>>But Brother Link’s assumption is based upon the idea that martyrdom is some kind of guarantee of salvation.<<
This is a foolish and deceptive statement. I said no such thing. If you are going to respond to my posts, respond to what I say. Don't twist my ideas or try to put words in my mouth. No one can earn his own salvation through being martyred. The fact is that there WERE people who were killed during certain periods of history for their confession of faith in Christ. This is why some came up with the 'baptism of blood' idea (which I sure can't see scriptural support for.)
>> Why do not you show us from God’s word where God has taken up this subject and revealed to us just what he will do about it instead presuming that you know that His reasoning on the matter will be exactly the same as yours?<<
I gave a scenario, and asked a few questions. I asked what the group thought God would do in this situation.
We DO have some revealed truth that relates to this issue. I quoted some of it above- Romans 10:9-10. The verses say that if you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that god has raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
So I ask you, if the martyr in this scenario confessed with his mouth the Lord Jesus and believed in his heart that God raised him from the dead, was he saved or not?
What I'm asking you to do is actually deal with tese verses, and to have a view of salvation which takes these verses into account.
Btw, I do urge people to repent and be baptized.
Danny,
You wrote,
>>The key word in that passage is...."WHOEVER." The purpose of that passage is to teach WHO can be saved.....not HOW. <<<
All these scriptures that God has inspired and given to us are profitable for doctrine, included Romans 10. Paul does deal with the salvation of Gentiles in this letter, and he may have had a desire to drive home the idea that salvation was for both Jews and Gentiles in thsi passage, but in the course of the discussion, he does write about the 'word of faith' which he preached. We should not ignore this part of the passage.
In this passage, Paul says that if you shalt confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
>>There was a struggle in the church of Rome that was a problem of fellowship between the Jews and the Gentiles. Both of those groups considered themselves the "sons of God" while the other group was rejected by God<<
This is a bit of speculation. Paul hadn't been to Rome yet. Maybe he just wanted them to have a rather detailed account of the Gospel he preached. Maybe he knew of specific poblems in Rome. We just don't know. Paul does tell the Romans to mark them which cause divisions and offenses among them. Maybe a few troublemakers were trying to stir up division between the Jews and the Gentiles in the church. Your statements above, and mine are speculation. Maybe reasonable sepuclation but still speculation. Whatever happened to being silent when the text is silent. He says inthe first chapter that he is not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, and continues on to share this Gospel with them. There was a church in Rome that met in the house of Aquilla and Priscilla. These two would have known and taught that Gentiles could be saved.
>>>>So again....the purpose of the passage is NOT HOW TO CALL UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD.....it is WHO CAN CALL UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD.
> Now....if one wants to learn HOW to call upon the name of the Lord....then I would recommend Acts 22 which describes the conversion of the Apostle Paul.
> Specifically notice vs. 16 where Ananias tells Paul...."Arise...be baptized and wash away your sins.....CALLING UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD." <<<
Danny, I don't see any logical reason to discount Romans 10:9-10 as an illegitimate way of calling upon the Lord, and maintain that Acts 22:16 is 'the real' way to call upon the Lord. Can you provide an argument for this idea from the actual text of scripture? We shouldn't try to make one scripture argue with another. Both of these passages of scripture.
Besides, Acts 22:16 doesn't say that being baptized is _the way to_ call upon the name of the Lord. Ananias told Paul to be baptized, calling upon the name of the Lord.
Consider this sentence: "Danny typed on the keyboard, eating a bologna sandwich."
Is typing on a keyboard _the way to_ eat a bologna sandwich? No. One can eat a bolongna sandwich while typing on a keyboard, or one can type and eat bologna sandwiches at different times.
>>> It just bothers me when Link sets up a "I believe the Scriptures and you don't" false dichotomy.....which is exactly what he did<<<
I want you and others to have an interpretation of scripture which adequately incorporates this passage and other passages of scripture. Frankly, you haven't done a very good job in this thread.
Mark W.
>>>"But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed (Greek word "anathema" - i.e. - consigned to Hell). Gal 1:9<<<<
Paul preached that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. If someone else goes around preaching what Paul called 'the word of faith, which we preach' would you consider him to be accursed?
You wrote,
>>>Knowing that Baptism was mentioned at least 96 times in the New Testament, it is an exercise in futility to try to deny it or explain it away based solely on one or two verses of Scripture.<<<
I am not denying or explaining away baptism. I just don't anyone to deny or explain away the rest of the New Testment either, including Romans 10. I haven't counted up the references to promises of salvation by faith which do not include baptism, but there just might be more than 96.
It is not my purpose to dissuade anyone from preaching to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. Go ahead and preach it.
What I would like to see is people that have a view of scripture that dequately considers passages like this one in addition to the passages about baptism.
Before the crucifixion, baptism for the remission of sins was being offered, but Christ still forgave sins when he saw faith. Where does the Bible teach that if one is not baptized, his sins cannot be forgiven? We can both agree that the scripture mentions baptism for the remission of sins, not only in the Gospels but also in Acts after the day of Pentecost. Where does it teach that God will not forgive the sins of an un-water-baptized person? We have to take Romans 10:9-10 into account.
In regard to how to evangelize, there are some who try to strip the Gospel down to 'bare bones.' Much of the preaching in evangelical churches has been influenced by this 'bare bones' mentality from previous movements in the past, and that is very unfortunately.
Jesus did send for the 11 apostles to preach, baptize, and disciple. Baptism was a part of the evangelization process in Acts.
But on the other hand, our view of scripture has to honestly take every bit of it into account, including the passages from John and the Pauline epistles which promise salvation with no mention of baptism.
Have you ever noticed how many Christians stand by their churches dogma on certain issues. many Lutherans will argue tooth and nail to support the idea of infant baptism. Many Baptists will argue for salvation by faith and confessing the Lord. No doubt CoC and CC people find this frustrating. But don't some people in the RM stick to their own churches idea that no one is saved without baptism? Shouldn't we take all scripture into account and not stick to an unwritten denominational or 'undenominational' creed?
-- Anonymous, May 20, 2001
E Lee Saffold wrote>>>They may instead offer the excuse that they believe Brother Link who said that God would make allowances if someone were martyred before they had the opportunity to be baptized. Even though Brother Link offered not one single passage of scripture to indicate that God had promised to save those who wanted to obey but could not for whatever reason do so.<<<
HELLO! Wake up! Read my messages. Read Romans 10:9-10. The issue is not whether or not the martyr had time to make it to water or not. The issue is whether or not this martyr in our hypothetical situation has confessed with his mouth the Lord Jesus, and believed in his heart that God has raised him from the dead, will he be saved.
I've referred everyone to Romans 10:9-10. I would like to see some reasoned answer to this question, rather than a bunch of statements that beg the question.
Do you have any scripture that shows that if a man confesses with his mouth the Lord Jesus, and believes in his heart that God has raised him from the dead, that he won't be saved, if he doesn't get baptized?
I never said that God made special allowances for martyrs. Don't read into what I said. As for a 'single passage of scripture: LOOK AT ROMANS 10:9-10!!!
You wrote,
>>But Link comforts them with human reasoning instead of any clear statements from God's word.<<
If you want to see clear statements from the Bible LOOK AT ROMANS 10:9-10!!! If you didn't catch that, wipe off your glasses or your monitor screen and take another look.
My message is not about comforting martyrs. I don't advocate trying to preach a gospel that has been boiled down to 'bare bones' as opposed to the whole council of God's word. But I would like to see people here on this forum adequately account for such passages as Romans 10:9-10.
Just as a historical note, there was a period of time in history when baptismal candidates were expected to study for three years before being baptized! Elders priests (and deacons?) were considered to be the only ones who could baptize..
No wonder some people could die in the stadiums for their confession of faith without having been baptized with all those rules! Rules developed, perhaps, with an intention to prevent the spread of heresy.
Considering the beliefs about baptism at this time, and the fact that even to this day the eastern churches practice immersion, some conservative RM people might consider these people, finally baptized after three years of study, to have been genuine Christians.
-- Anonymous, May 21, 2001
Brethren and Friends:Brother Link quoted my words and then replied as follows:
“You wrote, >>But Link comforts them with human reasoning instead of any clear statements from God's word.<< If you want to see clear statements from the Bible LOOK AT ROMANS 10:9-10!!! If you didn't catch that, wipe off your glasses or your monitor screen and take another look.”
In those comments of mine, which Brother Link quoted, I was referring to his assertion or at least his implication that one might be saved without being baptized. AS he attempted to show from his hypothetical martyr at the yet to come judgement that was “killed before he made it to water”. And his complete isolation of Romans 10:9,10 from its immediate context and the teaching of the rest of God’s word as he stated in his following words:
“Suppose a man is there beign judged and he tells God that He confessed Jesus as Lord, and was wanting to be baptized, but before he could make it to the water, he was fed to the lions because he continued to confess that Jesus is Lord, and refused to deny Christ. This man could 'claim' a lot of scriptures. He could point out the scripture that says that if you confess Jesus before men, He will confess you before the Father which is in heaven. He could point to Romans 10:9 and 10, and point out that He had confessed Jesus as Lord and believed that God had raised him from the dead.”
Now, Brother Link gave this illustration in order to demonstrate that one could be saved without obeying the commands of Christ contained in the gospel of Christ to “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). And my response was that he did so by the use of “human reason without any clear statements from God’s word”. And that was the truth. For Roman’s 10:9, 10 say nothing, clear or unclear, whatsoever about what would happen in Brother Link’s humanly devised scenario and his reasoning from it. The verse says nothing about repentance or baptism and as much about what would happen to Brother Link’s so-called martyr in the yet to come judgement. The verse is not being written to even tell the Romans HOW to be saved but to teach them that all who would believe in Christ and confess him with their mouths would be saved whether they were Jews or gentiles. But he is not even attempting to indicate that they can therefore completely neglect the commands of the gospel to REPENT. Nor is he trying to indicate that baptism is of little importance and of no consequence in relation to the remission of our sins and thus our salvation from the severe consequences that they bring upon us. Thus, by giving us this illustration he wandered far, as many preachers are apt to do these days, from the subject matter of his deliberately “isolated” text. And he presented us with the suggestion, not even remotely intimated by the verse which he had asked us to contemplate. That we should believe that one could actually be saved from his sins without ever REPENTING of them or being baptized to have then “remitted” (Acts 2:38) or “washed away” (Acts 22:16) and thus they could be saved while neglecting God’s commands related to the gospel. It only takes a causal look at the context of these verses to realize that such an erroneous idea does not even begin to fit into the purpose and intent of Paul’s argument. And it is not, therefore a NECESSARY INFERENCE that we conclude from these words that Brother Link’s notion of salvation apart from obedience to Christ is contemplated by the inspired apostle Paul in this place.
But Brother Link does not want us to consider the context nor the teaching of the rest of God’s word in responding to his question. Instead he wants us to look at these verses in total isolation from the context and the rest of the teaching of God’s word in the numerous passages that I quoted for him that he claims to believe. For to look at all of this would demonstrate conclusively that these words of Romans 10:9,10 are not intended to contradict the words of the same apostle Paul in the earlier part of the Book (Romans 6:3- 6,17,18). For there we are told that the Romans were made “free from sin” when they “OBEYED” from the heart that form of doctrine that was delivered to them in the least. Not when they first believed nor when they “confessed with their mouth” but when they “obeyed” that form of doctrine by being buried with Christ by baptism and raised with him to walk a new life. And They are certainly not intended to contradict the same inspired apostle who wrote, “And though he were a son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; and being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY him.” (Heb. 5:8,9). But, Brother Link wants us to ignore all of these things and look only at these verses in total isolation from their own context and the teaching of the same apostle in the rest of God’s word. But we will not do it that way for to follow such a procedure is to fail to “handle the word of God rightly”. (2 Tim. 2:15).
Nevertheless, I spoke the truth when I stated that Brother Link had stated this illustration and offered not one word from God about it. For The only passage he mentioned was Romans 10:9,10 which says nothing whatsoever about what God will do with those who have not repented of their sins and yielded to the Lordship of Christ by humbly submitting to Him in baptism. That was the question he wanted us to contemplate and it is one that his “isolated text” says not one word about. For it says nothing about repentance at all, now does it? And it says nothing directly about baptism either now does it? And it says nothing about the judgement and what will happen to those who, for whatever reason, have failed to comply with the clear command of Christ to “repent and baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). Thus we have justly stated the truth that Brother Link is trying to teach something that is not only contrary to the doctrine of Christ. And that he is attempting to do so without offering one single verse of scripture that even remotely mentions what he was trying to convey with his illustration about a “martyr” that had believed and confessed Christ but died without repenting of his sins or being baptized. And that is a fact that our observant and even our casual readers can easily see.
But regardless of this simple truth he appears to have been somewhat upset and responded with what appears to be a touch of arrogance and sinful pride as follow:
“If you didn't catch that, wipe off your glasses or your monitor screen and take another look.”
Well, I did as Brother Link asked. I checked my computer screen and found that it was already clear and clean and did not need to be wiped off. I do not wear glasses and thus could not comply with his request to “wipe off my glasses”. And since I had only recently had an eye examination and my vision was proven by qualified physicians to have been 20/15 with no impairment in the least I felt that there was no need of further examination. Thus having checked all that was related to my eyesight I found no reason that I would have been unable to read Romans 10:9,10 I was convinced therefore that I had not missed anything as Brother Link would like for us to believe that I did. In fact, I was only unable to see what is not there in the first place for it was nothing more than Brother Link’s delusion that he wanted us all to see. For this verse is saying nothing about HOW one is saved but only that the salvation is for those whether Jew or gentile that believe that God raised Christ from the dead and confess as much with their mouths. And it does not take a genius to know that both of these things are done when one is baptized into Christ as the baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch demonstrates (Acts 8:35-40). But Brother Link does not want us to be allowed to contemplate that fact in our efforts to understanding of this verse. But nothing is said in it about HOW they are to go about appropriating that salvation. Only that these two things, which were mentioned specifically by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 28:16) wherein the prophet predicted that the gospel of their Messiah was for Jew and Gentile alike. And because these two words were significant to his audience which was composed of Jew and Gentile he stated it this way to prove that the gospel was for all men, and not Jews only and there should be no difference between them. But Brother Link does not want to allow any discussion of this context for he has sought instead to “isolate” this verse and thereby insolate his erroneous theory from just and truthful examination.
Be all of that as it may the verses would, if they were speaking of things as Brother Link imagines that they are would still prove conclusively that faith ONLY will not save. For even these verses speak of an act of faith called “confession with the mouth unto salvation”. And we do well to remember that John said, “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:” (John 1:12). Those who believe have the “POWER TO BECOME” sons of God. They do not automatically, the moment they believe, become sons of God but rather because they believe they have the power to become sons of God. In like manner in this verse Paul is showing that the salvation offered by the gospel is for every one that is willing to believe that Christ was raised from the dead and to openly and publicly confess it whether they are Jews or gentiles. For there were many Jews who had believed in Christ but were unwilling to confess him because to do so would have caused them to be cast out of the synagogue. “As he spake these words, many believed on him. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, [then] are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” John 8:31,32). “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess [him], lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” SO here we have persons who believed but did not confess Christ because they loved the praise of Man more than the praise that comes from God alone. If one were saved by faith ONLY then these men would have been saved.
But it is not saying that ONLY believing will save them. Neither is it saying that ONLY believing and confessing will save them. It is saying that all that are willing to do these things will be saved. For faith will lead them to obey Christ which is essential to their salvation (Heb. 5:8,9). And it will lead them to obey the gospel, which is also essential to salvation (1 Cor. 15:1-4; 2 Thess. 1,8,9). And if one will only read Romans 10:16 he will see that belief and obedience to the gospel are inseparably connected. And that the word “believe” is equated with obedience to the gospel. “But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?” (Rom. 10:16). Those who obey are the one’s considered believers.
Thus the word “believe” is equated with obedience to the gospel. “But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?” (Rom. 10:16). The only way one can “believe the gospel” is to obey it. Those who obey are the one’s considered believers in the very context of this verse and the disobedient have always been considered UNBELIEVERS. So Brother Link’s efforts to sever faith from obedience to the gospel is nothing short of an absurd failure to take the context of this verse into Consideration. And he can do this only by ignoring what the rest of the scriptures teach on the subject of our salvation, and he knows it. Nevertheless, I did comply with his request to look at the verse again.
And inasmuch as he is unwilling for us to LOOK at any other verses in the context of this passage or in the rest of the Bible for help in understanding the meaning of this one verse I did not read any other verses but this one. Though I must confess that I cannot understand why he wants our eyes to be wide open, and our “glasses clean” and our computer screens wiped so that we see this verse. And at the same time he wants us to take our glasses off, close our eyes, and cover our computer screens so that no other verses from God’s word are visible which relate to our salvation. Such an attempt to blind us from the rest of God’s word hard to understand with out being tempted to draw the conclusion that he is deliberately trying to HIDE something form our view.
But let us ask him to answer a question while looking at this verse only. The verse reads as follows:
“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Romans 10:9,10).
According to this verse one cannot be saved by “faith only” because there are clearly two things required, if we accept Brother Link’s interpretation which is based upon a deliberate neglect to consider the immediate context of these verses or anything else in the Bible on this subject. One is faith in the heart and the other is confession with the mouth. Does that not destroy the entire concept of salvation by faith ONLY? What if his so-called martyr that was killed for Christ without being baptized had died of natural causes before he ever had an opportunity to CONFESS WITH HIS MOUTH THE LORD JESUS? Would he be saved? For it is clearly stated “IF thou wilt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, AND shalt believe in thy heart” are requirements of salvation in this verse. That is, if we accept Brother Link’s notion that these verses are being written to tell us HOW TO BE SAVED rather than to explain salvation is offered to all believers who are willing to confess Christ whether they are Jew or Gentile? Now, if this martyr believed but did not die as a martyr but died a natural death before he ever had the opportunity to confess with his mouth what he believed in his heart would he be saved? And remember now that there is nothing in this verse stating what would happen to those who do not believe and do not confess. Nor is there any discussion concerning those who believe but do not confess and those who confess but do not sincerely believe in their hearts. All we have here is two things believe and confess unto salvation. I ask these things because he has said to us what he will not say to himself. When we quoted Mark 16:16, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved:” we were told by Bother Link that it does not say he that is not baptized shall be lost. But when he reads this verse he does not say, “it does not say he that does not confess shall be lost. And he does not notice that the verse does not SAY, “ he that does not believe shall be lost”. So if he were as deliberately ignorant in reading these verses as he is in reading Mark 16:16 he would remind us, “This verse does not say that he that does not confess shall be lost and it does not even say he that does not believe shall be lost. In fact the idea of anyone being lost for failing to comply with the requirements is not even discussed in Romans 10:9,10. Now, the fact that we are told that if they do these things they shall be saved is sufficient to convince me that if they do not do both of them they will remain in their lost condition. And that is what convinced me that when Christ said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved:” that both are required for our salvation. And those who do not do both of them will remain in their lost condition. But he does not allow this when reading Mark 16:16. So are we to conclude that he would not allow it in this verse either?
And let us consider another question. If one believes in his heart and confesses Christ with his mouth but stubbornly refuses to repent of his sins will he be saved? In other words if one only believes and confesses will his sins be “blotted out” without his ever giving any attention to the matter of REPENTANCE (Acts 3:19; 17:30; 2:38)? For these verses, Romans 10:9,10, say absolutely nothing about repentance. And we have excellent eyesight and still cannot find repentance in this verse anywhere. So, is Paul teaching men that salvation can come to us without our ever making any attempt to repent of their sins? Now I could quote many verses from the rest of the scriptures, that tells us that if we do not repent we shall perish. (Luke 13:3) And that we must repent in order to have our sins remitted. (Acts 2:38). And remember that it is SIN that Christ died to save us from. But Brother Link does not want to allow us to consider the teaching of any other verses that might shed light on this matter. So we ask him. Are we correct if we draw the conclusion from these verses, Romans 10:9,10) that repentance is not necessary or even required of us to obtain the remission of our sins and thereby our salvation from them? According to these verses are we to conclude that one who believes in Christ and confesses it will be saved even if he never repents of his sins? For REPENTANCE is not required according to these verses.
Now, also let us think about another question. Will a person be saved according to these verses alone if he does not obey the gospel? Not a single word is mentioned here about obeying the gospel. So will one be saved if he believes in his heart and confesses with his mouth but refuses to obey the gospel? If Brother Link would allow you to read some other verses you would be able to learn that no one who has not “obeyed the gospel” is going to be saved. (2 Thess 1:8,9; 1 Cor.`15:1-4). But he does not want you to read those verses, now does he? He thinks that the entire plan of Salvation is contained in these two Verses. In fact, Paul had no need to write the rest of the inspired book of Romans, for these verses contain all that we need to know, according to Brother Link. Now the Bible answers this question concerning whether one can be saved without obeying the gospel in other places (2 Thess. 1:8,9; 1 Cor. 15:1-4) but Brother Link does not want us to “look” at those verses and give them even the slightest consideration. He thinks that God’s entire plan of salvation is found in this one place and nowhere else.
And we are compelled to ask if it is possible for one to have “believed in vain”? (1 Cor. 15:1-4).
Were the Romans saved in the same way that all of the others who became Christians in the New Testament or was there some special plan for them and a different one for the Eunuch and the Samaritans and the Corinthians? Or were they all saved the same way?
It is possible that the some of the Christians at Rome were among the “strangers of Rome” present on the day of Pentecost. And in that place neither faith nor confession is mentioned, is it? For there only “repentance and baptism” are required for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38). But I forget, Brother Link does not want us to see those verses so we will just have to leave them out, won’t we?
It is indeed interesting to me that one can see what is NOT written in Romans 10:9, 10 and be completely BLIND to what is written in Acts 2:38. This type of selective interpretation of God’s word is foolish to say the least. But if one reads the entire context, which Brother Link does not allow, he would find that Paul was not even discussing “how” one is to be saved. But only that salvation is for all both Jew and Gentile who will believe God raised Christ from the dead and will confess with their mouths. But as far as how that faith is to save them nothing and what is involved in a profession of faith with the mouth is not explained. But it would be an interesting study to review all that the Bible says about this “confession” and the meaning of truly believing that God raised Christ from the dead and all that is involved in that subject. But brother Link does not want to engage in that effort. He wants to keep these verses isolated from the facts of the word of God. For by this means only can his human theory of salvation by faith ONLY without ANY REPENTANCE of sin, OBEDIENCE TO THE GOSPEL, or submission to Christ as Lord can be maintained. For it is in the act of faith accomplished when one obeys Christ’s command to be “ buried with Christ in baptism and raised with Him to walk a new life” that one “obeys the gospel” (2 Thess. 1:8,9; 1 Cor. 15:1-4; Romans 6:3-6,17,18). But those who are truly interested in the salvation that is in Christ will want to study these things.
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 21, 2001
E Lee Saffold wrote, >>The verse is not being written to even tell the Romans HOW to be saved but to teach them that all who would believe in Christ and confess him with their mouths would be saved whether they were Jews or gentiles.<<Prove your assertions from scripture.
Someone earlier quoted Ananias telling Paul to wash away his sins. Suppose someone who advocates salvation by faith said that this verse isn't being written to tell you how to get saved, but rather to tell us about the history of Saul's conversion. Would this kind of 'double talk' convince you to change your theology? I don't think so.
The purpose of a scripture is not limited just because you say it is. If you say that Romans 10:9-10 was not written to show someone how to be saved, why should I believe you? the passage says that Paul preached that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
This does show up in the context of Paul discussing grace being available to both Jews and Gentiles. But we can learn _many_ things from theis passage.
The passage also says 'how shall they hear without a preacher?' What if someone said, 'That doesn't mean there should be preachers because the purpose of the chapter is not to talk about preachers, but rather to talk about who can be saved.' That would be a dumb idea to believe about the passage. One passage of scripture teaches us MANY things, not just one thing.
So prove to me from scripture that this passage is not written to tell _how_ to get saved. Show me that in the scriptures.
>>But Brother Link does not want us to consider the context nor the teaching of the rest of God’s word in responding to his question. <<
This is a lie (or an extremely irresponsible falsehood if unintentional.) You shouldn't make junk up about people and post it as fact.
I want readers here to consider the context of Romans 10:9-10, and fit this scripture into their understanding of salvation, and give some good sound teachings that take all scriptures into consideration. Saying that the purpose of Romans 10 is not to say _how_ to get saved, is just explaning away the issue rather than dealing with it. There are plenty of other scriptures that talk about savlation through faith.
>>For to look at all of this would demonstrate conclusively that these words of Romans 10:9,10 are not intended to contradict the words of the same apostle Paul in the earlier part of the Book (Romans 6:3-6,17,18).<<
There is not a contradiction. This is part of the point of the discussion.
Consider the period before the crucifixion. John was preaching baptism for the remission of sins and people's sins were beign forgiven. But Jesus also went around forgiving sins as well. He forgave a man on a stretcher, and others as well.
I'm not saying it's normative or acceptable for someone not to be baptized with water. That is not the issue. The issue I'd like you to address is where do you get the idea from scripture that if a person is not baptized he cannot be saved. Do you have any scripture to support this view? We see in Romans 6 and elsewhere a promise of resurrection for those who have been buried with Christ in baptism. But this passage does not say that if one is not baptized with water, he will not be saved.
E Lee wrote,
>>For The only passage he mentioned was Romans 10:9,10 which says nothing whatsoever about what God will do with those who have not repented of their sins and yielded to the Lordship of Christ by humbly submitting to Him in baptism. That was the question he wanted us to contemplate and it is one that his “isolated text” says not one word about. For it says nothing about repentance at all, now does it? And it says nothing directly about baptism either now does it? <<
No duh. The passage doesn't mention water baptism, and yet talks about how a man can be saved. That's kind of the point.
The passage I mentioned said that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your mouth that God has raised him from the dead, he shall be saved. And the passage doesn't mention water baptism.
Acts 2:38 is an isolated text if you don't read the verses around it. So what's your point? Read the verses around romans 10:9-10 and it won't be an isolated text to you anymore.
Aren't the 'isolated texts' fo scripture inspired? >>And it says nothing about the judgement and what will happen to those who, for whatever reason, have failed to comply with the clear command of Christ to “repent and baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). Thus we have justly stated the truth that Brother Link is trying to teach something that is not only contrary to the doctrine of Christ.<
This is a bunch of convoluted reasoning. Let me get this straight. Because I refer people to Romans 10:9-10 for a discussion on it's implications to salvation, and Romans 10:9-10 doesn't mention baptism but is supposedly an 'isolated text' you accuseme of teaching something contrary to the doctrine of Christ?
I thought you acknowledged that you believed this passage of Scripture, Romans 10:9-10 is inspired. You have no right to accuse me of not teaching according to the doctrine of Christ because I mentioned Romans 10:9-10 and because that passage doesn't mention water baptism. I didn't write that passage. If you feel that the passage does not adequately represent the doctrine of Christ, don't blame me. Take your problem to God. I wasn't the one who inspired the passage.
>>And that he is attempting to do so without offering one single verse of scripture that even remotely mentions what he was trying to convey with his illustration about a “martyr” that had believed and confessed Christ but died without repenting of his sins or being baptized. And that is a fact that our observant and even our casual readers can easily see. <<
The scenario I gave was of a man who believed in his heart that Jesus rose from the dead and confessed him as Lord with his mouth. Hmmm. Let's see. Does that have anything to do with Romans 10:9-10. You say I hadn't offered a 'hat even remotely mentions what he was trying to convey with his illustration about a “martyr” that had believed and confessed Christ but died without repenting of his sins or being baptized."
Quit putting words in my mouth! I didn't say anything about the martyr not having repented. In the illustration, he hadn't made it to water yet. And Romans 10:9-10 mentions confessing Jesus as Lord and believing that God raised him from the dead, and people who read English can clearly see that this relates to the scenario of one who confesses Jesus as Lord and believes in his heart that God can raise him from the dead.
I'll make it really simple for you. See the connection? From the martyr's scenario--> Confesses Jesus as Lord. From Romans 10:9-10---------> Confess with his mouth the Lord Jesus.
From the martyr's scenario->believed in his heart that God has raised him from the dead. From Romans 10:9-10--> believe in his heart that God had raised him from the dead.
If you can't see the connection between the verse and my scenario, I don't know what else I can do to help you. Maybe I could refer you to someone to offer you English lessons, or just suggest that you wipe off the dust from your computer screen. If you still don't get it, pray for the ability to understand English.
Seriously, I think you are so busy pontificating and loading down your messages with heavy rhetoric, that sometimes your messages get so loaded down with this stuff that they don't make sense anymore. Maybe you should cut back on the aggressive rhetoric and just try to write brief messages that make sense, without imagining the motices of others and without trying to put words in their mouths.
>>But regardless of this simple truth he appears to have been somewhat upset and responded with what appears to be a touch of arrogance and sinful pride as follow:“If you didn't catch that, wipe off your glasses or your monitor screen and take another look.”<<
Remove the log of arrogance from your own eye. Your messages exude with it. I take this tone with you because of the judgmental tone of your own messages, and because of some of the rediculous things you write- like the example above. If I am going to answer you at all, shouldn't I point out some of the things which you write that are folly. Your messages are a mixture of some good things- scripture, and doctrine, and also human folly and false accusations. If you'll notice, I don't write to others on here like this, even those who disagree with me most of the time.
Don't put yourself in the place of God and try to think you can know what is in my heart. I wrote that message calmly. You don't appreciate it when other people accuse you of having emotions when you write, or of having a sense of humor. Remember the debate over whether 'ha' was a laugh or not? If you really believe in obeying Jesus, then whatsoever you would have men do to you, do you even so to them. That includes not reading emotions into their messages.
As for arrogance and sinful pride, don't pretend to be God. You can't see into my heart. You seem to presume to know what is in other people's hearts. You seem to think you can know what Link would have everyone believe.' It's like you think that what you guess about someone is automatically true. This is something really disturbign about you Lee. This is the type of reasoning process that people with certain types of mental disorders have.
I talked with this guy one time who was having some kind of episode with a mental problem. There was some kind of object in his yard- a glove or a screw driver. His mind thought of a scenario where someone crawled under his house, and the guy dropped a screwdriver on the way in. He opened all the doors of his house. I asked him what other evidence he had. This guy had been thinking like this for a while. He'd see some evidence and think of _a possible_ scenario, and think that this scenario is automatically true. For some people 'I guess' quickly becomes 'I know.'
In your posts, you often attribute motives to people. based on the words of the page, these are _possible_ motives perhaps. But your 'I guess' to quickly becomes 'I know.' You use this type of reasoning to accuse people. If you really believe everything you write, then your reasoning process, in places, resembles the reasoning of someone with mental problems. I'm not saying you are completely paranoid schitzophrenic, just that you have some problems with the way you reason, especially when it comes to accusing people of things. If you don't really believe what you write, then you need to repent of being so wreckless, slandering people by writing your own guesswork about their motives.
You often get accused of arrogance, probably because of how quickly you, with your 'I guess becomes I know' reasoning process leads you to accuse others of wrong doing. You don't seem to even consider the possibility that you are actually arrogant or have sinful pride in your heart. If you do consider the possibility, you don't acknowledge it publicly. I'll tell you what I'll do. I'll pray and let the Lord correct me if I have pride in my heart. And I would ask you to do the same.
Of course a very proud man might not want to pray ask God if he has pride in his heart. To do that, he would ahve to consider the possibility of being wrong.
Being proud might also lead a man to insane reasoning processes. A man so full of pride might think that if he thinks of something it must be true. After all, he may think '___I___ thought of it, so it must be true.'
>> Link’s delusion that he wanted us all to see. For this verse is saying nothing about HOW one is saved but only that the salvation is for those whether Jew or gentile that believe that God raised Christ from the dead and confess as much with their mouths.<<
"If....he shall be saved." Read the verse again a little more slowly and more carefully this time, and maybe you'll see what I'm talking about.
>>And it does not take a genius to know that both of these things are done when one is baptized into Christ as the baptism of the Ethiopian Eunuch demonstrates (Acts 8:35-40). But Brother Link does not want us to be allowed to contemplate that fact in our efforts to understanding of this verse.<<
There you go with your unstable method of reasoning again. You falsely attribute something to me. Acts 8:35-40 is a very good verse to discuss in light of Romans 10. I am very much in favor of a discussion on that passage.
But I am not in favor of someone writing a long diatribe full of false accusations, using scripture quotations to falsely attribute the wrong motives to others.
How quickly you accuse without evidence. Do you think that because you _guess_ that I don't want people to contemplate Acts 8:35-40, that it must be so? If this is your reasoning process, you have some problems with the way you reason. The Bible says that God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of a SOUND MIND. You don't believe Christians have the Spirit in them now, though. Maybe if you could study the word, yeild to what it says, and believer, you could pray to be filled with the Holy Spirit, and start tapping into this promise of a _sound mind._
On the other hand, if you already know that there was no evidence for your accusation, you just need to repent.
And if you are so full of zeal to say bad things about others that you don't even consider whether your false accusations are true or false, you need to repent. If you yeild to this kind of urge, it can effect your reasoning process over time. Maybe it has already.
So either way, you need to do some praying about this issue.
>>And we do well to remember that John said, “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:” (John 1:12). <<
This is an interesting point, and one I've considered in relation to the once-saved-always-saved debate.
To all,
Another issue to be discussed is what does Paul mean by 'saved' in Romans 10. Does it refer to eternal salvation, termporary salvation, the beginning of a process that can continue on to eternal salvation?
>>But it is not saying that ONLY believing will save them. Neither is it saying that ONLY believing and confessing will save them. It is saying that all that are willing to do these things will be saved. For faith will lead them to obey Christ which is essential to their salvation (Heb. 5:8,9).<<
Christ did teach that people should believe in Him. So if someone believes in Christ, that is obedience to various commands that Christ gave.
But the Romans 10:9-10 passage does say that if you confess with your moth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved. So the word 'salvation' in some sense does apply here, to confession and faith.
We must look at the whole context of scripture, but we can't ignore what individual scriptures actually say.
> Brother Link’s efforts to sever faith from obedience to the gospel is nothing short of an absurd failure to take the context of this verse into Consideration. <
I didn't attempt to sever faith from obedience to the gospel. I started out asking if people believed Romans 10:9-10 is inspired, and continued on making some comments and asking some questions. Don't falsely attribute things to me that I did not say. You do that a lot.
>>And at the same time he wants us to take our glasses off, close our eyes, and cover our computer screens so that no other verses from God’s word are visible which relate to our salvation.<<<
There you go again. I want you to _reconcile_ all these verses, in yoru understanding with what Romans 10:9-10 actually says. I do want people to consider the other verses from the Bible. What you wrote above is a lie.
>>Such an attempt to blind us from the rest of God’s word hard to understand with out being tempted to draw the conclusion that he is deliberately trying to HIDE something form our view. <<
A foolish and unjustifiable conclusion. I have done nothing to hide the rest of scripture from anyone. That's a rediculous idea. People have Bible's, and it doesn't make sense that if I mentioned one verse in my initial post, that I would be trying to HIDE the rest of the Bible from anyone. That doesn't even make sense. I wanted to see people discussion how Romans 10 fit into the rest of scripture, as a matter of fact. I didn't want to see pages full of accusations and rhetoric, with some scriptural arguments thrown in, which is what I got from you. If you would just make arguments from scripture, and not accuse people, it would save a lot of bandwidth.
I notice you used the word 'tempted.' Judged from the comments you made before this, which I quoted above (starting 'And at the same time...') it appears that you have already yielded to this temptation.
>>One is faith in the heart and the other is confession with the mouth. Does that not destroy the entire concept of salvation by faith ONLY? <<
Just for the record, search through the posts on this forum and you will never see where I wrote that salvation is 'by faith only.'
E Lee wrote again, >But Brother Link does not want to allow us to consider the teaching of any other verses that might shed light on this matter.<
You are not content to repeat a lie just once, are you?
Lee, why do you yeild to temptation to falsely attribute motives to other people? Resist the Devil and he will flee from you.
-- Anonymous, May 22, 2001
Somehow it seems part of my previous post got deleted.E Lee Saffold wrote,
>> Such an attempt to blind us from the rest of God’s word hard to understand with out being tempted to draw the conclusion that he is deliberately trying to HIDE something form our view. <<
It is interesting that you acknowledge that you were tempted. It's obvious from your post that you yielded to temptation and false attributed things to me that I did not say or intend.
Next time, don't yield to temptation to write things that are false and libel other people. 'Resist the Devil and he will flee from you.'
-- Anonymous, May 22, 2001
Pardon me for being a muckraker, but ...Dr. John Rowe of Hope International University spoke at our church this past Sunday, and in his sermon he said that there were actually 40 things mentioned in the New Testament that are said to "save" us. So are we to worriedly seek out all 40 and strive to keep them, lest we not be saved, like the Jews of old who sought out all 600+ laws to try to keep every one? Or are we saved by faith, as was Abraham?
-- Anonymous, May 22, 2001
John,I would be interested in that list of 40 with its Scriptural references. If you have that list, could you email it to me? Since you gave his name and location, I suppose I could seek out the info through him.
I have always been curious why some choose to emphasize some areas of obedience and others emphasize other areas. Well, I suppose I can answer that with a little thought,,, hmmmmmm. However, what really astounds me, is when men and women, who claim to believe in the inspired Word of God, pick and choose what they will believe or not believe.
For example: If the Bible says we are to believe,,, then we should believe,,, right? If the Bible says we are to confess Jesus as the Christ,,, then we should confess Jesus as Christ,,, right? If the Bible says that we should repent,,, then we ought to repent,,, right? Well, why stop here? How is it that WE CLAIM THE RIGHT to say some things are ESSENTIAL to salvation, based upon the wording such as, he that believes in his heart and confesses with his mouth will be saved,,,,, yet we deny other passages that when asked what to do,,, we are told, repent and be baptized. Maybe I am dense here, but it seems to me that I must accept both with equal authority and meaning. How can I in good conscience deny either? If one is ESSENTIAL,,, why are they both not ESSENTIAL? (or visa versa)
I suppose I am much to simple minded. I do believe that God can do and will do according to His own good pleasure whenever He wants to do it. But, as for me, I can only encourage others to appreciate the whole of Scripture just as God has said it. If God has chosen to state one or two things in one passage regarding salvation,,, and then He chooses to state a couple of other things in another passage,, then in a completely different passage He does a mix and match,,, what am I to conclude?
It seems to me that I have at least a couple of choices. I can conclude that God has chosen differing standards for different groups of people. There is no consistent way to know just what to do, so I can pick what seems good to me and pray that God will find me acceptable and wash me with the blood of Christ. OR
I can conclude that God said what He said for His own reasons,,,, when and where He chose... and as for me? I must study to show myself approved,,, a workman who needs not be ashamed, because I can rightly divide the Word of truth... that being to study all of God's Word, and conform myself to all of His teaching, doing my best to leave no stone unturned.
Now, I am not saying that I can earn my own salvation,,,, God forbid. However, I am saying the following, I must do all that I can to include everything that God has said,,, and OMIT nothing. Then I can be more sure, than one who chooses to exclude some things.
What can I say, I have a simple mind. My daddy taught me that I must teach the WHOLE COUNSEL OF GOD. I wasn't allowed to pick and choose just the things that were easy or those things sounded reasonable to the academic portion of my mind. How about we teach it all. Just like the Bible does. If God chooses to save someone who was not obedient to the Word of God, that is up to Him. Let us not take it upon ourselves to reason that God WILL SAVE SOMEONE who has not been obedient to the Word.
Just one little mind stuggling through,,, with great joy, mind you.
-- Anonymous, May 23, 2001
Brother David:I just want to say AMEN AND AMEN to your post. May our Lord abundantly bless you. And I pray that all will follow your good example of Love for Christ, the Church and the truth.
Your Brother in Christ,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 23, 2001
Brother John:You have said:
“Dr. John Rowe of Hope International University spoke at our church this past Sunday, and in his sermon he said that there were actually 40 things mentioned in the New Testament that are said to "save" us. So are we to worriedly seek out all 40 and strive to keep them, lest we not be saved, like the Jews of old who sought out all 600+ laws to try to keep every one? Or are we saved by faith, as was Abraham?”
Well, I am not sure of the number of things that “Dr. John Rowe” claims are mentioned in the New Testament that saves us. But I am certain from the inspired writings of Brother James that we are not saved by “FAITH ONLY” or “FAITH ALONE” as some false teachers claim. For we are told plainly:
“"What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be [ye] warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what [doth it] profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent [them] out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." (James 2:14-26).
And we are not here discussing “WHAT” saves us nor “HOW” those things save us but rather “WHEN” we are saved by God through them. Notice that Abraham was justified by faith “WHEN HE OFFERED HIS SON ISAAC UPON THE ALTER”. God justified him by faith WHEN it led him to obey God’s command. God justified him WHEN his faith lead him to OBEY GOD. And the exact same principle of justification BY FAITH is working to this day. We are justified BY FAITH when that faith causes us to act in harmony with the will of God. And we are talking also about initial remission of all of our past sins. Peter told those who believed the gospel that he preached in Acts the second chapter to “repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins” (Acts 2:38). Indicating WHEN their sins would be remitted. They would be remitted WHEN they repented of their sins and obeyed the command to be baptized in the name of Christ. And even Christ himself said concerning those who would hear the gospel and respond to it, “He that believeth (the gospel) and is baptized (in obedience to the gospel preached) shall be saved:” (Mark 16:15,16). And when one reads all of the accounts of conversion that are found in the scriptures he will find that they were all called upon to do the same things for the remission of their sins. Read the account of the conversion of the Ethiopian Eunuch. And see that as a result of hearing Phillip preach nothing but “JESUS” the first thing to come out of his mouth when he came to a certain water was, “see here is water what doeth hinder me to be baptized”. (Acts 8:35-40). There was no need for him to search for “40 different things that save us”. But only for his faith to lead him to OBEY the gospel of Christ as it was preached by the inspired preacher Phillip which included the Lord’s command to be baptized in WATER for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38).
So, it is true that we are saved by faith as Abraham was WHEN faith leads us to OBEY, as Abraham did in offering his son Isaac, God’s command to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and not one moment before. And we are not, as false teachers would like for us to believe, saved by a DEAD faith that is alone and devoid of any desire whatsoever to obey God’s command. We are saved by faith, as was Abraham when faith leads to obedience to God. We are not saved by FAITH ONLY (James 2:24) for Abraham was not justified by “FAITH ONLY” but a living, active and obedient faith.
And we are saved by faith WHEN we obey God. This is the reason we are told that Christ is the “author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY him. (Heb. 5:8,9) and that those who have not obeyed the gospel will be “ punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of God and the glory of His power”. (2 Thess. 1:8,9). Faith apart from obedience to Christ is DEAD being alone. And faith lives by obedience to God and is conjoined with it so that one is useless without the other. It is not those who follow the example of Abraham’s faith that have gone wrong. Rather it is those who have sought the empty promises of an imaginary salvation made up in their own minds that requires nothing more than mere “mental assent” to certain facts about Christ that are deceived. But those who follow God’s word have a faith that cannot exist alone rather it is one that compels a total surrender and denial of self and complete submission of the human will to the will of God. One that immediately, humbly, and submissively obeys with out questioning God as to why he requires obedience of us in any matter. It is a greater faith than that of one who balks when he or she cannot see the connection between water and the remission of sins as some faithless souls do concerning baptism commanded by Christ (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38). This is the faith of Abraham and anything short of that faith is a dead, lifeless and useless faith that cannot save anyone at anytime.
Let us not forget that the operation of God that removes sins from our souls takes place WHEN our faith leads us into the waters of baptism for the remission of our sins. (Acts 2:38). Read this verse of scripture:
“In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;” (Col. 2:11-13).
And now compare it with this verse:
“What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also [in the likeness] of [his] resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” Romans 6: 3-6).
When are we to walk in newness of life? After we have been buried with Christ by baptism and risen with him. When is the old man crucified that the body of SIN might be destroyed? When we are buried with him by baptism and raised with him to walk a new life.
And read this verse where the apostle Paul, continuing his discussion of this same matter in the same chapter says:
“But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being THEN made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.” (Romans 6:17,18).
When were the Romans made “FREE FROM SIN”? When they “OBEYED FREOM THE HEART THAT FORM OF DOCTRINE THAT WAS DELIVERED” TO THEM as had been described by the apostle in Romans 6:3-6. They were saved by faith just as Abraham was justified by faith WHEN his faith lead him to OBEY God and NOT ONE MOMENT BEFORE.
Your Brother in Christ,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 23, 2001
E. Lee Saffold wrote,>>So, it is true that we are saved by faith as Abraham was WHEN faith leads us to OBEY, as Abraham did in offering his son Isaac, God’s command to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and not one moment before. <<
>>They were saved by faith just as Abraham was justified by faith WHEN his faith lead him to OBEY God and NOT ONE MOMENT BEFORE.<<
You need to consider Romans 4 in your interpretation of James 2.
Following the chronology of Genesis, in chapter 15 we read that Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness. In chatper 17, we read about God commanding circumcision. Isaac was born in chapter 21. Then, in chapter 22, we read about Abraham taking Isaac with him to be sacrificed on the altar.
But Abraham's faith was counted to him for righteousness before Isaac was even born, because Abraham was circumcised before Isaac's birth, adn his faith was counted to him for righteousness before he was even circumcised. Read Paul on the subject:
Romans 4:9-11 9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Abraham's faith was counted to him for righteousness years before he offerred Isaac on the altar, before he was even circumcised.
Jude didn't say that Abraham wasn't righteous until he offerred Isaac. He did write, in connection with Abraham's offering up of Issac, that the scripture was fulfilled which said Abraham believed God and it was imputed unto him for righteousness....
-- Anonymous, May 23, 2001
Our uninspired Brother Link says:“Abraham's faith was counted to him for righteousness years before he offerred Isaac on the altar, before he was even circumcised.”
The inspired apostle James says:
“Was not Abraham our father justified by works, WHEN HE HAD OFFERED ISAAC HIS SON UPON THE ALTAR? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?” (James 2:14-24).
Now, I do not know about the rest of you but I will believe what the Holy Spirit said through James rather than what Brother Hudson would like for him to have said and his false assertion that Abraham was justified before he offered his soon Isaac.
For James says that Abraham was justified “WHEN HE HAD OFFERED HIS SOON ISAAC ON THE ALTER”. James 2:23,24).
But Just for the record, Brother Link, when was ABRAHAM JUSTIFIED according to the word of God? The key word here being “JUSTIFIED”. When, Brother Link does the word of God say Abraham was JUSTIFIED? Now Brethren and friends watch to see if Brother Link will even attempt to answer that question. But you and I already know the answer don’t we? For James has told us in the verse quoted above hasn’t he? But we will wait and see how this debate between our Brother Link and the Holy Spirit proceeds, won’t we? For Brother Link is certainly at odds with God on this one. The difference between him and the Holy Spirit speaking through the apostle James is obvious isn’t it?
Surely everyone one can see here the clear difference between the self-delusions of Brother Link and the Holy Spirit speaking in Brother James. If Brother Link disagrees with the Holy Spirit speaking through James I would recommend that he take that matter up with God. But for me I will believe the Holy Spirit, won’t you?
What Brother Link needs to find to fit his false doctrine is a scripture that teaches that Abraham was saved by “FAITH ONLY” before and without any obedience to God in the least. And He has not found any such scripture has he? The principle of faith described by James is the same throughout the word of God. The Principle was that faith is perfected by obedience. And that “faith without works is dead”. We are “justified by works and NOT BY FAITH ONLY” (James 2:24).
And the point made clear by James is that “faith wrought with his works and by works was faith made perfect (or complete)”. Faith is incomplete without works according to the Holy Spirit. And, just as in the case of Abraham, our faith in Christ is “MADE PERFECT” or complete in our obedience to Christ’s command to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16). And thus in baptism is WHEN we are justified and cleansed of our sins by faith (Col. 2:11-13; Acts 22:16; Acts 2:38).
Yes, Brother Link has shown us how much he disagrees with the Holy Spirit speaking through the apostle James, hasn’t he? And this is what men must do when they depart from the truth, isn’t it.
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 23, 2001
E. Lee Saffold,When will you learn your lesson? When will you stop falsely accusing people and making yourself look very foolish. It comes off as irresponsible and foolish when you jump all over someone elses case about something when you are clearly wrong. It is even more foolish to not apologize. This is the word of God we are dealing with, here. The word of God is to save the soul. It is not meant to be used as a weapon for E. Lee Saffold to satisfy his carnal urge to attack other people through the Internet.
Lee wrote,
>>Now, I do not know about the rest of you but I will believe what the Holy Spirit said through James rather than what Brother Hudson would like for him to have said and his false assertion that Abraham was justified before he offered his soon Isaac. <<
You call this MY false assertion? Your problem is with Paul, not me. Read the quote from my message, which inclued a quote from the apostle Paul:
>>>Romans 4:9-11 9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Abraham's faith was counted to him for righteousness years before he offerred Isaac on the altar, before he was even circumcised.<<<
Notice that the verse part is from Paul. Notice verse 10. 'How was it then reckoned?' What is 'it' in this verse. Righteousness. When was the righteousness reckoned? When Abraham was still uncircumcised. If you can't see in this passage that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, you need to read more carefully, or pray that God will unblind your heart and mind to understand these words. You wrote earlier that you read Greek. If you think there is a big translation consipiracy, and all the translations are wrong in clearly showing that faith was rocked to Abraham for righteousness before he was circumcised, then show your evidence.
Read the chapters in Genesis I referred to earlier, and you can see that Abraham was circumcised BEFORE the attempted sacrifice of Isaac. And Paul makes it clear that faith was credited to Abraham for righteousness.
This was a part of an argument to show that 'this blessedness' of verse 9 was also for the uncircumcised, since Abraham was uncircumcised when faith was reckoned to him for righteouness, this blessedness is also for the Gnetiles. What is the 'blessedness.' Look at veerses & through 8: 'Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him.' (NIV)
E. Lee, you need to really check your attitude. Read my post closely. Did I say anything at all that was unscriptural. Really search it. I was very careful to see that the wording of my message was in line with the wording of scripture. I pointed out that Abraham's faith was counted for righteouness when he was still uncircumcised. This is proven from the verses I quoted in the very message I posted. I pointed out that James does not write that Abraham wasn't righteous until he had offerred Isaac (a believe that would have been contradictory to Romans 4.)
I didn't even say that Abraham was 'saved' before circumcision in that message. I certainly didn't say that he was not 'justified by works.' I worded my message carefully to be in line with scripture. Yet you accused me of debating with the Holy Spirit. My message said nothing that contradicted the book of James. All I did was point out one of the important points Paul made in the book of Romans. If you feel that, by doing so, I was supposedly was debating with the Holy Spirit, others might conclude that you do not believe in the inspiration of the book of Romans. Maybe you just didn't understand the verses I posted. Whatever the case, it is extremely foolish to jump all over people like that. When you do, and you turn out to be wrong, as in this case, it looks really foolish.
Now, normally I would expect a mature person of good character to apologize after making a big mistake like this. Think about it. I was right about something, clearly right, and you jumped all over me. I would expect a mature Christian of good moral character to apologize after something like this. I would even expect a mature non-Christian who is a reasonably nice person to apologize in a situation like this. But, based on past experiences, I don't expect you to apologize Lee. Feel free to surprise me. In the past, in situations like this, you either keep at it with your vicious attacks at worse, or, at best, just ignore the fact that you are wrong. Surprise me Lee. Suprise me and repent of this evil attitude of yours.
Your messages are full of vicious, accusatory rhetoric. Not only does this turn your readers off, making it less likely that those who disagree with you will be convinced by what you say, but in cases like this, it also makes you look very foolish. I just agreed with Paul, and you attacked me. Why did you do it? I don't know for sure. But what I do see is that there are certain people that you always write vicious accusatory messages to by default. That's just the way you do things. Fear God and stop behaving like this. Paul wrote addressing the Jew who considered himself to be a teacher of the law 'God's name is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.' (Romans 4:24 NIV.) You should be ahsamed of yourself, and be conscious of the fact that your bad behavior can be seen on the web throughout the world. You should realize that you have identified yourself as a part of the Church of Christ. You should be ashamed when you think that the behavior that you exhibited in this thread might be associated with the name of Christ by unbelieving Gnetiles who read this website. (E.g. Your falsely attributing ideas to others and accusing others of debating with the Holy Spirit for agreeing with Paul in the book of Romans. Your behavior is not consistent with the love of God.)
You accused me of debating with the Holy Spirit because I agreed with Romans 4. If you see my comments that were supported by Romans 4 as contradictory to James 2, that really illustrates the fact that you are imbalanced in your approach to scripture. You need to take all scriptures into account. Romans 10 shouldn't be disregarded because of Acts 2. Romans 4 shouldn't be disregarded because of James 2.
E. Lee,
Btw, I usually just skip over your messages, and I wouldn't blame others for doing the same. The contain scripture verses and some Bible teaching. But I can read my Bible at home. I don't feel like actually reading a lot of the rhetoric, false accusations, and other trash you write between the Bible verses. Get on your knees and repent and pray that God will forgive you for your libelous, unloving attitude. You write about repentance- in theory- in this thread. Act it out. If God doesn't forgive the unrepentant, don't just write about it. Repent!
-- Anonymous, May 23, 2001
Link,How do you square Romans 4 and James 2?
-- Anonymous, May 24, 2001
Lee, How do you square Romans 4 with James 2?I apologize to both of you if you have already answered this question. I went back through your posts in this thread and didn't see an actual side by side explaination of these two passages.
-- Anonymous, May 24, 2001
Brother David:I appreciate your following words:
"Lee, How do you square Romans 4 with James 2? I apologize to both of you if you have already answered this question. I went back through your posts in this thread and didn't see an actual side by side explaination of these two passages."
I did read your earlier request but because of my work I have not had much time to respond to it. I apologize to you for the delay but it just could not be helped as I have had a very busy week.
I am sure that you agree with me that Both the words of Paul in Romans square pefectly with the words of James and that the Holy Spirit does not need for me to "square" them up with each other. But the thing that makes them appear to some to be somewhat "out of square" is the false doctrine of "salvation by faith only" which has been unjustly ascribed to Paul that makes them appear to be "out of square". And it is the false notion that "works" are are forever in conflict with and separte from and perpetually incompatable with faith as some ascribe to Paul that makes them appear out of square. And thus, instead of attempting to "square Paul in Romans with James" I will, with your permission seek rather to show that Paul and James have always been in perfect sync with one another and they never appeared to be in the least bit out of "square" with one another until the truth that we are saved by faith as taught by Paul was perverted into the doctrine of salvation by faith ONLY and imposed by men like John Calvin onto the teaching of Paul that the two ever appeared by anyone to be "out of square".
I am following this post with my introductory remarks concerning my detailed response to your question and will follow that one by a lengthy discussion of many things in response to your question. As you will see from my remarks in the post that I am submitting as soon as I submit this one to you that I am starting a new thread to go into this matter in some significant detail. I will start the New thread tomorrow. But because I have been working on your question and you appear to sense that I am neglecting it I have decided to post my introductory remarks with my intentions to start a new thread and explanations as to why I am doing such so that you can see that I agree that we should give diigence to respond to your wise question. I must continue tomorrow however because it is after midnight now in Georgia and I must rest. Do read my post that follows this one and you will see that I have strong intentions of giving serious consideration to your very wise and good question.
Your Brother in Christ,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 26, 2001
Brethren:Brother David Prentice has wisely requested that we give an exposition of the inspired words of the apostle Paul found in Romans the 4th chapter. And that we also, by way of comparison, examine the equally inspired words of James the brother of our Lord in the 2nd chapter of the book of James. And understanding as we do the numerous efforts to distort the truth concerning salvation by faith as taught by both Paul and James into the deliberate and well crafted lie of “salvation by faith ONLY”, which was taught by neither of them, we now honor the request of Brother Prentice. And we do so with a thankful spirit toward God for the wisdom displayed by Brother Prentice in making this reasonable and sage request.
Thus we offer in what follows an exposition and comparison not only of the two portions of scripture from Romans and James mentioned by Brother Prentice. But also a complete comparison of the teachings of the Holy Spirit through Paul in Galatians, Hebrews, and the several other statements in the other fourteen books of the New Testament of which he was the inspired author with the teaching of the Same Holy Spirit through James. We will therefore, through this process, thoroughly collect, compare, and comprehend what the Holy Spirit is speaking to us through the writings of these men concerning “salvation by faith”. And it is our prayer and fervent hope that all reasonable men will then be able to see clearly the truth of God. And thus we will spare them from the delusions produced by the deceptive means of Satan which we have witnessed often in this forum and through out the religious world. For these willful “ messengers of Satan”, in violent opposition to both James and Paul, deliberately distort their teaching.
For they attempt at every opportunity to make it appear that the Holy Spirit could not have contradicted Himself by inspiring Paul to teach salvation by “faith only” without any works whatsoever and James to teach the direct opposite notion of salvation by faith through works. But they do so without ever attempting in the least to explain what James said, what he meant and why he said it. In fact, Luther was so miserably frustrated by his complete inability to hold on to the false doctrine of salvation by faith only as he mistakenly assumed Paul taught. And harmonize the words of James with it that he decided that James could not have been inspired of God. He chose rather to rejected a potion of God’s inspired word than accept the idea that since he was definitely an uninspired man it just might have been possible that his false theory of salvation by “faith only” could have been wrong. And that his understanding either of Paul, James or both was defective. This is often the case when men become so proud of the theories that they have concocted that they cannot even accept as inspired any portion of God’s word that contradicts their theories.
Hence those who hold to this erroneous theory seek to delude us by persuading us to falsely believe salvation is by “faith only” apart from ANY WORKS prompted by faith WHATSOEVER. They do this as Peter warned some were doing in his day with the wittings of Paul. He said, “And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness.” (2 Peter 3:15-17).
Thus by “twisting” the Holy Spirit’s words “to their own destruction” and ignoring the Holy Spirit’s words written by James until someone brings them up. Then, when James is brought to their attention, they respond by deliberately attempting to make it appear that those words cannot mean “by works a man is justified and not by faith only” (James 2:24). For, say they, if those words meant what James clearly says, then it necessarily follows that James would be opposed to Paul and Paul to James. Hence their immediate response is to assert that our understanding of James cannot be correct since it is not in harmony with their deliberate distortion, note I do not say their simple misunderstanding, of the words of Paul. And they seldom take up the task of showing exactly how we might have misunderstood James but only assume rather that because they are certain that they have clearly understood Paul to teach salvation by faith only that we therefore must have misunderstood James. It does not occur to them to candidly admit the possibility that since James’ statement, “ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY” (James 2:24) cannot be misunderstood. Or that his statement can even remotely be explained by them so as to harmonize with their doctrine of salvation by “FAITH ONLY”, which they ascribe to Paul, that there is a distinct possibility that they have misunderstood Paul. We shall therefore endeavor to show that they have, in truth, willfully misunderstood both of them.
Thus they hope that it will never occur to us that they have deliberately distorted the teachings of Paul. And they hope that we will not see the simple truth that the words of James are the clearest evidence of their deliberate distortion and a glaring signal or warning for us to examine their distortions of the same truth taught by Paul. And they further hope that we will not demand to have a clear understanding of what James said. And that we will just assume with them that James must have meant that we are saved by “FAITH OLNY” when he said, “ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY” (James 2:24). It is their highest hope that we will falsely conclude with them that if James truly meant that by “works a man is justified” he would contradict Paul. And that there is therefore no other way for the two to be harmonized with one another without accepting their false doctrine of “salvation by faith only”. They most certainly do not want us to realize the truth that the only way that anyone can harmonize the two with one another is to realize that Paul is not teaching their false doctrine of “salvation by faith ONLY”. For they cannot show that James is teaching such nonsense. He is a perpetual “thorn in their side” so to speak. In other words they do not want us to suddenly realize that Paul taught salvation by Faith through works just as did James. And that James does not contradict Paul but rather that he only appears contradictory to Paul because we have been falsely lead to believe that Paul taught “salvation by faith only” when in truth he taught no such nonsense. Instead he taught along with and in complete harmony with James that we are “justified by works and NOT BY FAITH ONLY”. Thus they hope that you and I cannot comprehend that it is not “Paul” that James contradicts but instead it is their false doctrine of “salvation by Faith only” that it’s most ardent adherents falsely ascribe to Paul that James CLEARLY and accurately CONTRADICTS and effectively forever refutes!
And when we complete this task. We are certain that the unbiased reader and sincere inquirer will be provided with ample evidence that Both Paul and James taught consistently, when touching upon the subject of salvation by faith, the absolute truth that it is by “works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY”. (James 2:24). And that, unless anyone can show that James did not teach that “by works a man is justified and not by faith only” (James 2:24). That any effort to show that Paul taught we are justified by FAITH ONLY apart from any works whatsoever will be nothing short of demanding that the Holy Spirit who inspired both men hopelessly contradicted himself. And that if we find such hopeless contradiction in their words we must either believe that the Holy Spirit did not inspire either of them. Or that he inspired one or the other of them, as was Luther’s solution to the problem claiming that the book of James was not inspired of God. Or we would be forced to conclude that Paul was not inspired of God and thus more than half of the New Testament becomes nothing more than the uninspired words of a man whose “much learning had made him mad” as the Jews thought. Or we must conclude that something is clearly wrong with the doctrine of “salvation by faith only”. And that since James clearly did not teach such nonsense that it is highly probable that Paul didn’t either. And we are therefore justified in reviewing what Paul taught to see if it is not more than likely that he has been either misunderstood or deliberately distorted in order to maintain the tenants of John Calvin rather than the truth of Jesus Christ. And I can assure you, and will demonstrate from the scriptures, that the only answer is that something is grossly wrong with the false doctrine of “salvation by faith only” which was never taught by Paul or any other inspired writer of the New Testament.
This is my introduction to the subject, Brethren, which I am posting in a new thread because we have now started down a path that is related only remotely to the subject of this thread. The question of this thread was whether we believe Romans 10:9,10. We have answered that question sufficiently in the affirmative. And now proceed to start a new thread to continue discussing this matter of “salvation by faith only” as falsely ascribed to Paul. And the truth that “by works a man is justified and not by faith only” as taught by not only both James and Paul but the rest of the word of God as well, which was suggested in the process of discussing the questions asked in this thread. I do this because in order to honor Brother David Prentice’s valuable and wise suggestion that we give some attention to this matter we will need to have sufficient space with which to attempt at least to do justice to his question. Which involves an exposition of numerous passages of scripture including Romans the fourth chapter, James the second chapter, Hebrews the eleventh chapter, the teaching of Paul in the book of Galatians along with numerous other quotations from Paul in his other epistles. Not to mention a clear discussion of the faith of Abraham which we must “walk in” so that we can be heirs of the promises that God made to him.
I hope that you will find this discussion useful, helpful, and at the very least thought provoking in your efforts to “grow in the grace and Knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ”. And it is my sincere prayer that it will help you to come to a better understanding of justification by faith in Christ and His precious blood, which He willingly, painfully and lovingly shed for the remission of our sins. (Matt. 26:28;Acts 2:38).
Your Brother in Christ,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 26, 2001
From what I've been told, his editor is the one who insisted to included thoses verses.
-- Anonymous, May 26, 2001
To all:It is beneficial to point out that James was written to Christians, Born Again believers.
James was not telling Christians how to be redeemed (lutroo) but how to be justified (dikaioo).
As we can see, the attempt is being made to meld two different concepts together, redemption for the sinner and justification for the believer.
3084,lutroo
"To release on receipt of ransom" (akin to lutron, "a ransom"), is used in the Middle Voice, signifying "to release by paying a ransom price, to redeem" (a) in the natural sense of delivering, Luke 24:21, of setting Israel free from the Roman yoke; (b) in a spiritual sense, Titus 2:14, of the work of Christ in "redeeming" men "from all iniquity" (anomia, "lawlessness," the bondage of self-will which rejects the will of God); 1 Pet. 1:18 (Passive Voice), "ye were redeemed," from a vain manner of life, i.e., from bondage to tradition. In both instances the Death of Christ is stated as the means of "redemption."
1344,dikaioo
Primarily, "to deem to be right," signifies, in the NT, (a) "to show to be right or righteous;" in the Passive Voice, to be justified, Matt. 11:19; Luke 7:35; Rom. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:16; (b) "to declare to be righteous, to pronounce righteous," (1) by man, concerning God, Luke 7:29 (see Rom. 3:4, above); concerning himself, Luke 10:29; 16:15; (2) by God concerning men, who are declared to be righteous before Him on certain conditions laid down by Him.
Redemption is the act of God on our behalf - not merited upon our own work.
Justification is the act of God on our behalf - being merited to us upon condition.
The truth of this whole matter is quite clear with James' example of Abraham being "justified" after he met the condition. Yet Abraham was already considered "righteous" years before this event took place. The same is true for Christians today.
1 John 1:9
"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
As Christians, when we confess our sin we are then justified. We are not born again over and over and over every time we meet a condition for justification.
We are initially born again by faith.
John 6:47 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
After being born again and we commit a trespass, we can be justified, just as Abraham was, and just as James teaches.
In Christ's Love,
-- Anonymous, May 30, 2001
Brethren and friends:Mr. Hanson has said:
“To all: It is beneficial to point out that James was written to Christians, Born Again believers.”
It is equally beneficial to point out that the book of Romans was also written to “Christians” who were “born again believers” as opposed to those “believers” who were not born again. And this fact does not prevent Mr. Hanson from concluding that many things in that book, including the fourth chapter, were written to show how the Romans had become Christians. And Paul did it in much the same way as James reminded Christians of how they were saved by Faith but not by “faith only”. So, it is clear that Mr. Hanson can understand, as we all should, that simply because a book is addressing Christians is not evidence that the writer could not have been discussing how men initially become justified and thereby become Christians. If Mr. Hanson’s argument were true concerning James it would apply with equal force concerning the words of Paul to the SAINTS at Rome. But he will not admit this much for that would destroy completely his false doctrine of justification by faith only.
Now it would also be beneficial to read James again and see just what he is talking about. Look at the following verses again.
“"What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be [ye] warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what [doth it] profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent [them] out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." James 2:14-26.
It is obvious to any thinking person who reads the question that James is answering that he was not talking about how to obtain forgiveness “after one has been born again”. For he asked at the beginning of his statements concerning faith a question that he then proceeds to answer and that question was:
““"What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?” (James 2:14).
James did not ask, “what happens brethren if a Christian sins after he has been born again as Mr. Hanson would like for you to imagine, now does he?
The question that James was answering was “if a man say he hath faith, and have not works can faith save him?” Mr. Hanson would have answered “yes” to that question but any one who is able to read is capable of seeing that the inspired James answered, “NO”. He said, “ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT by faith only”. (James 2:24). The difference here between the inspired James and the uninspired Mr. Hanson is glaring isn’t it?
Mr. Hanson then claims that James is not telling “Christians how to be redeemed” as follows:
“James was not telling Christians how to be redeemed (lutroo) but how to be justified (dikaioo).”
James was not teaching Christians how they “to be” (future tense) either redeemed or justified. Instead he was answering his question that he had asked them. Which was a reference to the idea of a man being “saved” which a clear reference to becoming a Christian rather than “being one”. He was reminding them that they did not become Christians by faith ONLY and therefore they cannot expect to live as Christians by “faith only”. His question again was, “What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?” (James 2:14). Thus, in teaching them about faith and works he does so by referring to the truth about how one is saved initially. And he makes it abundantly clear in his answer that faith without works will not save.
Neither was Paul trying to teach Christians how to be “redeemed” or “Justified” but he reminded them of how they had been redeemed and justified at the same time when they initially became Christians in obedience to the gospel and so does James. And in doing so they both showed all men including those who have not been redeemed and justified just how to become “redeemed and justified”.
But then Mr. Hanson tries to act as if the difference between “redemption” (Lutroo) and justified (dikaioo) makes a difference to what James says as follows:
“As we can see, the attempt is being made to meld two different concepts together, redemption for the sinner and justification for the believer.”
First of all no one has made any attempt to “meld two different concepts together”. Mr. Hanson does not quote a single word from anyone who has even mentioned these two “concepts” together. But no one can deny that the two concepts are in fact related to one another for none will be redeemed until they are “justified” and if one will simply read the words of Paul he will find both of these concepts in his letter to the Christians at Rome. Though he will not find him using the term “redemption” in the fourth Chapter where Paul discusses the justification of Abraham. For they both in Romans 4 and James 2 use only the term “justified” and that term means the same in both places. In fact one can easily see how that we are redeemed when we are justified or by the process of “justification by faith” as taught by both James and Paul. But we are not justified by faith only as James makes so abundantly clear that even Mr. Hanson cannot “muddy the water” enough to prevent it from being seen.
And I wish now to quote and mention Mr. Hanson’s simple definitions as given by him. And state that we agree with the definitions of these terms but there is much about those terms that he has left out but that is not now of any consequence for we can agree with the definitions of these terms as he gave them in the following:
"To release on receipt of ransom" (akin to lutron, "a ransom"), is used in the Middle Voice, signifying "to release by paying a ransom price, to redeem" (a) in the natural sense of delivering, Luke 24:21, of setting Israel free from the Roman yoke; (b) in a spiritual sense, Titus 2:14, of the work of Christ in "redeeming" men "from all iniquity" (anomia, "lawlessness," the bondage of self-will which rejects the will of God); 1 Pet. 1:18 (Passive Voice), "ye were redeemed," from a vain manner of life, i.e., from bondage to tradition. In both instances the Death of Christ is stated as the means of "redemption."
“1344,dikaioo Primarily, "to deem to be right," signifies, in the NT, (a) "to show to be right or righteous;" in the Passive Voice, to be justified, Matt. 11:19; Luke 7:35; Rom. 3:4; 1 Tim. 3:16; (b) "to declare to be righteous, to pronounce righteous," (1) by man, concerning God, Luke 7:29 (see Rom. 3:4, above); concerning himself, Luke 10:29; 16:15; (2) by God concerning men, who are declared to be righteous before Him on certain conditions laid down by Him.”
We are presently involved in response to the request of Brother Prentice to discuss both James 2 and Romans 4 by way of comparison. In honoring his request we are currently writing an exposition of Romans 4 and James 2 and a detailed comparison both for your benefit and we write much about the term justification simply by way of explaining it within the text and the context in which it is found. And we will let the readers examine that when we are finished and post it to the forum. But for now it is sufficient to say that the word “redemption” is not found in either of these two text in connection with their discussion of justification by faith as exemplified by Abraham. And that this term “redemption” has nothing to do with Mr. Hanson’s false argument in the least. For he is giving a pathetic explanation of James and evidence of it is the fact that he seeks to define words that James does not use such as “redemption”. And it is a word that Paul when discussing the same subject in Romans 4, which Mr. Hanson uses to support his false doctrine of salvation by faith only, does not use either. Thus if James is saying that justification belongs only to the Christian after he has been redeemed then Paul would be saying the same thing when he discusses justification by faith. And if that were true it would be the death nail to Mr. Hanson’s false premise that Paul in Romans 4 is talking about our initial redemption by “faith only” for he does not mention redemption in Romans 4 at all.
But James does discuss Justification and so does Paul. And it is interesting to note that in Romans 4 Paul also discusses justification with no mention whatsoever of “redemption”. Now neither James nor Paul was implying by the use of the word “justification” instead of “redemption” that they were therefore discussing something that had nothing whatsoever to do with “redemption”. Nor that they were both talking about what happens to a Christian who has sinned instead of how these Christians were initially redeemed by being justified by faith. Mr. Hanson has made a grievous error in failing to realize that James and Paul are both discussing justification and both use Abraham as an example of it and neither of them even use the word “redemption” in connection with their discussion of Justification by faith. And he has made an even greater blunder in assuming without proof that justification has nothing to do with redemption. Indeed justification has a different meaning than redemption but that does not prove that it has nothing to do with redemption, now does it? Repentance has a different meaning than the word redemption. It is a different “concept altogether” now isn’t it? But who can say that it has nothing to do with our redemption and prove it? And the term “crucifixion” has a completely different meaning from the word “redemption” doesn’t it? But who would say that it has nothing to do with our redemption? The word “resurrection” is a completely different concept from redemption but who can say that it has nothing to do with our redemption. In fact the resurrection of the body is the redemption of it though the two words have a different meaning and express a different concept. The resurrection of our bodies is HOW they are redeemed. And it is just as likely that we can demonstrate that our souls are also redeemed when we are justified by faith. It is essential that we obtain the remission of our sins. And no one will be redeemed or justified while sin remains their master. And until they are remitted we are not justified or redeemed. And let us not forget that when we talk of redemption and justification that the remission of sins is essential to both of them. And we are told how to obtain the remission of our sins, which must come before we can be justified or redeemed. WE are promised that we will receive the remission of our sins when we “repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Acts 2:38). This is a fact that Mr. Hanson has still failed to reasonably explain to us. If “repentance and baptism” are “for (in order to) the remission of sins” how can we receive the remission of sins with out repenting and being baptized? Well, Peter said that “repentance and baptism” are both “for (eis meaning in order to or unto) the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38). No matter how hard he tries he will never get around that very simple truth of God’s word.
Mr. Hanson then claims the following concerning “justification and redemption” as follows:
“Redemption is the act of God on our behalf - not merited upon our own work. Justification is the act of God on our behalf - being merited to us upon condition.”
I am so glad that Mr. Hanson now admits that Justification is conditional though I deny his contention that it is in any form whatsoever “meritorious”. For he offers not one ounce of proof that justification is meritorious just because it is conditioned upon obedience to the commands of God. And we will also show that both “redemption and justification” are conditional. And that “redemption” is what happens when we are justified and not before it as Mr. Hanson would like for you to believe.
Note that Paul says:
“In whom we have redemption through his blood, [even] the forgiveness of sins:” Thus redemption and forgiveness of sins are used to refer to the same thing. And it is clear that the God redeems us by forgiving or remitting our sins. But are we taught that remission of sins comes without conditions? The inspired apostle Peter placed two conditions upon remission of sins as we have shown. He said, “repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the REMISSION of sins.” (Acts 2:38). Thus redemption “even the forgiveness of our sins through the blood of Christ is conditional upon our faithful obedience to His commands to repent and be baptized. And this is the same redemption that Paul speaks about in Romans the third chapter as follows: “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:” (Romans 3:24). Thus it follows that even though there are clearly conditions of faithful obedience to Christ commands to “repent and be baptized” as Christ said through Peter (Acts 2:38) those conditions do not in any way prevent Paul from referring to that redemption as being “freely by grace”. Therefore, the phrase, “freely by grace” does not preclude the conditions of “obedience of faith” (Romans 16:26,27) and obedience to the gospel which saves us (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Rom. 1:16; 2 Thess. 1:8,9; 1 Peter 4:16-18).
Then we read the following nonsense:
“The truth of this whole matter is quite clear with James' example of Abraham being "justified" after he met the condition. Yet Abraham was already considered "righteous" years before this event took place. The same is true for Christians today.” The word “dikaios” means righteous or justified.
And thus Mr. Hanson is saying that Abraham was justified before he was justified. He was saying that Abraham was “righteous before he was righteous”. This is pure nonsense and Mr. Hanson knows it. He is just trying so hard to run from the truth and it is blatantly obvious isn’t it? But we will discuss this matter more fully in our exposition of Romans 4 and James 2 and our comparison of them.
Then he quotes John as follows:
“1 John 1:9 "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."
Indeed this is true of those who have already been justified by works in obedience to the God as was Abraham but it is not true of those who have never obtained the remission of their past sins in obedience to the gospel. This passage does not prove that it is impossible for one who has not become a Christian to be justified by faith in the process of becoming one, as Mr. Hanson would like for you to believe. The doctrine of justification by belief as taught in the scriptures applies to the righteousness of God that comes in obedience to the gospel.
Read Romans 1:16,17, “
Also read this: “But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:” (1 Cor. 1:30). Notice here that “righteousness” (dikiaos) and redemption are both applied to the Christian. But Mr. Hanson wants you to believe that “redemption can only happen to a man who has never been a Christian but that Justification applies solely to the Christian and it cannot happen to one in the process of becoming a Christian.
But look at what Paul said:
“And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses.” (Acts 13:39) And ask yourself what were the things that the Law could not justify them from? It was sin wasn’t it? Read the words of Paul again, “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law [is] the knowledge of sin.” (Romans 3:20).
Then hear Paul again:
“Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:” (Romans 5:1). Notice that they were not Christians when they became “justified by faith”.
Now compare these two verses:
““In whom we have redemption through his blood, [even] the forgiveness of sins:” (Eph. 1:7)
“Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.” (Romans 5:1)
Now isn’t it interesting that we are not only “redeemed by the blood of Christ” we are also “justified by His blood”. And that this happens to us when we become Christians as well as after we become Christians. All of this is very much the direct opposite of Mr. Hanson’s delusions isn’t it?
Notice this verse:
“Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Cor. 6: 10,11)
Look at this verse closely, Brethren and you will see that some of these Corinthians were thieves, extortioners, drunkards, and revilers, and covetous. And also note that Paul makes it clear that none of these shall inherit the “kingdom of God”. But these Corinthians are “washed, sanctified, and justified” in the name of the lord Jesus. Thus, the words washed, sanctified, and justified refers to what happened to them before they we allowed entrance into God’s kingdom upon becoming Christians. (Col. 1:13). It is indeed interesting that the terms “washed, sanctified, justified” refer to the same thing though the words have different meanings. And it applies the word “justified” to something that happened to them in the process of being accepted into God’s Kingdom and becoming Christians.
Read this:
“Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.” (Gal. 3:24). This verse is clearly shows that when we come unto Christ we can be “justified by faith”. And compare it with this verse: “Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.” (Romans 5:9). Justified by faith and by the blood of Christ happens when we become Christians. And compare this verse also, “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.” (Gal. 2:16). They had believed in Jesus in order to be justified. They were not redeemed by Jesus and later justified by faith in Him. Rather they were justified and redeemed at the same time when they obeyed the gospel of Christ. (1Cor. 15:1-4).
Now read another verse about “redemption” as follows:
“In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;” (Eph. 1:7) Notice again the equation of redemption and forgiveness of sins. No man ever became a Christian with out FIRST obtaining the remission of sins which came by “repentance and baptism in the name of Christ (Acts 2:38) and never by “faith only”.
Then Mr. Hansonsays:
“As Christians, when we confess our sin we are then justified. We are not born again over and over and over every time we meet a condition for justification.”
Indeed it is true that we are not born again over and over and over. But it is not true that we are “justified over and over and over as Mr. Hanson would have you believe. WE are rather forgiven over and over and over because we have been justified and we meet the condition of “walking in the light as He is in the light” but we come into that light ONCE.
Then he says:
“We are initially born again by faith.”
But we are not born again initially by “faith only” and Mr. Hanson cannot find a single scripture that teaches that we are initially born again by faith only though we have asked him numerous times to find one and show it to us. He has filed miserably in this matter. WE are told however by Peter who also was writing to Christians reminding them of how they had been born again as follow:
“Seeing ye have purified your souls in OBEYING THE TRUTH through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: being born again not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth forever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass whithereth, and the flower thereof falleth away; But the word of God endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the GOSPEL is preached unto you.” (1 Peter 1:22-25).
So, we can see that Mr. Hanson says we are initially “born again by faith” and Peter shows us that it is not by faith alone but rather that by faith we “purify our souls in obeying the truth. Faith that leads to obedience again “purifies” our souls. But Mr. Hanson wants you to believe that it all happens the moment that you believe ONLY. He would have you believe that our souls are purified by “FAITH ONLY”. But Peter, James and Paul all deny this nonsense.
Then he says:
“John 6:47 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.”
Indeed this is true but the passage does not say, “he that only believeth on me hath everlasting life.” And that is what it would have to say in order for Mr. Hanson's doctrine to be true. It was this same Jesus that also said “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: he that believeth not shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16) And it was this same Jesus who sent the Holy Spirit to the apostle Peter to inspire him to say, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins.” No my friends the doctrine of salvation by FAITH ONLY is not found in your Bible even though Mr. Hanson wishes that it was found there. Then Mr. Hanson ends his post with an assertion that he has failed to prove to be true.
“After being born again and we commit a trespass, we can be justified, just as Abraham was, and just as James teaches.”
It is true that after we are “born again” and have become Christians that we can sin and be forgiven if we repent it is not true that James teaches this. For James is not even discussing this matter. James is answering the question that he asked which was, “What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?” His question that he was answering was not, “what does a man do if he sins after becoming a Christian?” as Mr. Hanson has deliberately tried to deceive you into believing, now was it?
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, May 30, 2001
Lee makes a very important observation as he spoke to the very proposition of Mr. Hanson's claims. I hope you all caught it. Here it is again.Lee writes,
"James is not even discussing this matter." (ie, the matter Mr. Hanson claims as to obedient faith follows redemption) "James is answering the question that he asked which was, “What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?” His question that he was answering was not, “what does a man do if he sins after becoming a Christian?”
Lee, Please forgive me for reposting this. But there are a few people who may not have read your post claiming its length as reason. So I didn't want them to miss this most salient point.
Your Brother
-- Anonymous, May 31, 2001
Brother David:I appreciate very much your "reposting" this significant though salient point. You are absolutely correct that in a lengthy post some points can easily be missed.
Also I want to mention to that I have started a new thread in order to keep my promise to you to honor your wise suggestion that we examine Romans 4 and James 2 by way of comparison to see how that they both harmoniously teach Justification by faith and that neither of them teach justification by "faith Only".
You will notice that it will be a lengthy and detailed exposition of numerous passages from the word of God covering not only Romans 4 and James 2 but also Hebrews 11, Galatians 3, and several other significant passages from the inspired word. Though I have started the thread and have only posted some introductory material this will take several days for me to complete. But I have started the new thread and will cover each of the points that I have specificantly outlined as I have the time each day to write.
It is my sincere hope and prayer that all in the forum will benefit from this "labor of love" prompted by your wise suggestion.
The New thread is entitled "Justification by Belief". I hope that you, and your father will take note of it, correct me if you find errors, and draw out and give emphasis to salient points that you think might be "overlooked" because the exposition is lengthy as you have done in this post.
Your Brother in Christ,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, June 01, 2001
To All:A point that needs to be made for the benefit of the readers who may not be aware of what I have actually said.
The Scriptures plainly teach that we are saved by grace through faith.
I realize I have stated this before, however, as a reader when one continually reads misinformation one tends to forget the actual truth. It is like throwing as much mud as one can and hoping that eventually something will stick, even if it isn't true. This is used in politics all the time.
I encourage all to read any message I have posted to see if I have ever said we are saved by "faith alone".
The Scriptures plainly teach….
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."
Grace + Faith = Redemption + Good Works
To change this "formula" (for lack of a better word) is contrary to the good news. The Grace of God must accompany our faith.
In Christ's love,
-- Anonymous, June 04, 2001
Mr. Hanson, You wrote,"Grace + Faith = Redemption + Good Works"
Consider: God's Grace + Our Obedient Faith = Redemption through which we are saved unto 'Good Works'.
There are many other provisions that could be included in this very simplistic equation. Justification, Purification, Sanctification, Propitiation, etc, Praise God, etc.
One more note to throw into the mix, and maybe this could be a new thread. Is it possible that Jesus can be one's savior and not be his/her Lord (soveriegn)? If it is a both or nothing proposition (and I believe it is), then how can Jesus be one's Lord without obedience being directly tied to faith from the very beginning and to the very end?
Simply offered for consideration,
-- Anonymous, June 05, 2001
David,Thank you for the response. I hope that my response in turn will be respectful and unambiguous.
You asked me to: "Consider: God's Grace + Our Obedient Faith = Redemption through which we are saved unto 'Good Works'."
I realize it was not on this particular thread when I addressed this before, therefore, I will gladly visit this again for your consideration….
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life", John 6:47.
He that believeth has been saved is a true statement.
Throughout my messages I have provided a multitude of overwhelming evidence that states unequivocally that a sinner is born again upon believing, and this declaration is made completely independent of water baptism or any other good work. When we examine Ephesians 2:8,9 we learn that is by grace through faith and not by good works that we are saved.
Therefore we arrive at the Bible understanding of the Good News…. (notice that I have never said "faith alone" as it has been falsely stated)
Believe + Grace (Christ's finished work) = redemption + good works.
Now some have gone on to add to this initial "formula"….
Believe + Grace (Christ's finished work) + water baptism = redemption
Believe + Grace (Christ's finished work) + repentance = redemption
Believe + Grace (Christ's finished work) + forgiving those who have sinned against you = redemption
Believe + Grace (Christ's finished work) + obedience = redemption
Believe + Grace (Christ's finished work) + confession = redemption
Some people have added to the initial plan of salvation - the question begs to be asked then, are those secondary issues necessary in the plan of God? And the resounding answer is returned, NO. Actually I am not even sure where the list of conditions end? A message posted on one of these threads stated that there are some forty plus conditions (?) If obedience is part of the equation for obtaining redemption then there are a multitude of commands we are obligated to obey. You yourself even stated…
"There are many other provisions that could be included in this very simplistic equation. Justification, Purification, Sanctification, Propitiation, etc, Praise God, etc."
My question: When does the list end and when is one confident they have actually met all conditions? Moreover, what if there are further conditions which we have not met yet - once we learn of those are we to be re-saved by meeting those conditions? Were we saved to begin with? If so, how do we know, perhaps there are still conditions unmet?
Herein is the underlying principle: Grace + Belief = Redemption + Good Works, if one wishes to be water baptized along with faith this still would not detract from the initial truth as long as one is not viewing this as completing Christ's finished work. However, if a person is being water baptized in obedience to Christ's command, then they are no longer lost, they have believed the gospel and now their faith is prompting them to obedience, which would fall under the second half of the equation above.
There was a point in time when I would have been quite argumentative here, I have changed. A couple weeks ago the Holy Spirit touched my life in a powerful way - I am not here to argue, only to present what I consider to be the truth, in love.
What concerns me greatly is that those who add to the initial plan of God are misplacing their faith in the fact they have been obedient. Or that those who believe in additional works to merit redemption above grace would not see themselves as the only ones who have been saved because of their own action or to look down on those who have simply believed the Gospel and then have gone on to good works. I believe this is the very reason for the Holy Spirit's admonition, "not of works lest any man should boast".
I am going on longer than I anticipated, I hope the length here does not detract from the simplicity I am aiming for, however, you did ask me to consider the following…
"God's Grace + Our Obedient Faith = Redemption through which we are saved unto 'Good Works'."
In this equation you are qualifying faith as being "obedient" in order to come to redemption. I do not know that I disagree, in that, faith if it is saving faith will be obedient, as James has taught, faith being alone is dead. I believe where we would part company is that God is not requiring us to manifest that obedience before redemption - how could He? Before we are redeemed we are "children of disobedience" Eph.2:2 - by definition a person who is not redeemed is disobedient - therefore by definition a person who is obedient has been redeemed. Do you follow? A disobedient child will not be obedient, if he were obedient by faith that would qualify him as being a child of God and disqualify him as lost.
Obedience follows saving faith. How does one know they have saving faith? They will do good works as I have outlined…
Believe + Grace (Christ's finished work) = redemption + good works.
Good works cannot precede redemption, otherwise they are done in order to merit Gods free gift, good works are resultant of God's grace and redemption. I am saved to good works, not saved by good works. Thus, after I was born again my faith prompted me to good works because it was not dead.
Sincerely and in Christ's Love,
-- Anonymous, June 06, 2001
BarryI heartily say, AMEN!
-- Anonymous, June 06, 2001
Brethren and Friends: Mr. Hanson has said: “Thank you for the response. I hope that my response in turn will be respectful and unambiguous. You asked me to: "Consider: God's Grace + Our Obedient Faith = Redemption through which we are saved unto 'Good Works'." “I realize it was not on this particular thread when I addressed this before, therefore, I will gladly visit this again for your consideration…. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life", John 6:47. He that believeth has been saved is a true statement.” Now, Mr. Hanson, you have again failed to prove your false doctrine that one is saved by “faith only” without any obedience whatsoever. Indeed, as we have shown several times we all agree that we are saved by faith. For the scriptures teach that such is the case. But you have been saying that a person is saved the moment that he believes without repenting of his sins (Acts 3:19) confessing Christ (Romans 10:9,10) and being baptized (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 22:16; Acts 8:35-40; Gal. 3:26,27; Col. 2:11-13; Romans 6:3-6; 17,18). But those numerous scriptures, which I have listed above, teach otherwise and you continue to attempt to avoid our questions that we asked you about those things. And in particular, we pointed out that Peter told those on the day of Pentecost when they asked him “what shall we do?” to “repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION OF YOUR SINS.” (Acts 2:38). Now these men were already believers in Christ but their sins had not yet been remitted, now had they? And they asked him what to do and he told those BELIEVERS what they needed to do to obtain the remission of their sins. He told them to “repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins.” (Acts 2:38). Now, if they had received the remission of their sins the “moment that they believed” or by “faith only” as you falsely teach then Peter’s words to them, which he spoke as the “spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4) were not the truth. But the truth is that Peter’s words are true and yours are false. Those who believe must also repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ FOR (unto or in order to) the remission of their sins.” (Acts 2:38). And no one is saved or “born again” until their sins are remitted or “washed away” (Acts 22:16). And you have deliberately ignored our arguments concerning the meaning of the Greek word “eis” in Acts 2:38. For you falsely claimed that the word this verse should read “repent and be baptized because of the remission of your sins” and we thoroughly answered that nonsense and you did not reply. All you did was claim all of sudden that you had an “experience with the Holy Spirit” and you were too full of “love” to answer our reasoned response which we called upon you often to respond to.Then you say:
“Throughout my messages I have provided a multitude of overwhelming evidence that states unequivocally that a sinner is born again upon believing, and this declaration is made completely independent of water baptism or any other good work.” This statement by you is false to its very core. You have not shown one single passage of Scripture that says we are “born again upon believing” and you know it. It would seem that one who claims to be being guided directly by the Holy Spirit as you falsely claim would at least try to tell the truth. You completely overlook the fact that Christ said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved:” (Mark 16:16) and that is not “completely independent of water baptism” now is it? Not only is there not one single passage of scripture in the entire word of God that says that a sinner is “born again upon believing and that this is said completely independent of water baptism” but there are several passages which state the exact opposite. Notice the following verse and read it honestly: “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, [see that ye] love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.” (1 Peter 1:22,23).
Now, Mr. Hanson says that we are born again upon believing but Peter, who was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit, instead of pretending to have had “experiences with the Holy Spirit” as Mr. Hanson claims said that they had “purified their souls in OBEYING THE TRUTH”. And that in doing so they were “born again by the word of God”. Now, it is clear that they were “born again” when they obeyed the truth of Gods word and not merely “upon believing” as Mr. Hanson would have you to believe. Now I believe the inspired Peter instead of the false claims of Mr. Hanson. And James also speaks of this matter as follows, “of his own will begat he us with the word of truth”. James 1:18 and remember James does not agree with Mr. Hanson about “justification by faith only” for James said, “ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY”. (James 2:24). Now if a man is not justified by faith only as James clearly states then how could he be “born again” by faith only? For we know that a man is saved when he is born again. And we know that no man will be saved or born again until he is “justified” and according to James it is “by works a man is justified and not by faith only”. (James 2:24) And James said this in response to his own question which was, “what doeth it prophet my brethren if a man say he hath faith and have not works? Can faith save him?” (James 2:14) and James answered, “ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY”. (James 2:24).
And James points out to us that the “devils believe and tremble” (James 2:17) and they even acknowledge Christ as the Son of God (Mark 3:11) and since Mr. Hanson’s theory says that “upon believing on is born again”. It would mean, it seems that he would have you to believe that the devils have been “born again” because they believe. And if one is “born again merely upon believing” then they would of necessity be born again because James makes it clear that they do believe but they tremble. And Mark makes it clear that they even believed in Christ as the Son of God. (Mark 3:11). Were they born again? The reason they tremble is because even though they believe they have not been “born again” or saved because believing alone is not sufficient for salvation. We must, as Peter said, “purify our souls in obedience to the truth”. And Paul himself in Hebrews says, “he (Christ) is the author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY him”. (Heb. 5:8,9). Now if those who are “born again” have never obeyed him. Then either they will be lost even though they have been born again because Christ is the savior of those who obey him or they will be saved without obeying Christ and the Hebrew writer did not tell the truth. Then again we are told that Christ is coming again to take vengeance on those who do not obey the gospel. “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;” (2 Thess. 1:8,9)). Now notice, Friends and Brethren that Christ is going to take vengeance upon them that OBEY NOT THE GOSPEL.
Then we are told:
“ When we examine Ephesians 2:8,9 we learn that is by grace through faith and not by good works that we are saved.” But notice that this verse does not teach we are saved by “faith only” and notice also that it does not say that we are saved “upon believing”. I remind every one again that we are not discussing what saves us but WHEN does it save us. We are saved by faith WHEN that faith leads us to obey the truth (2 Peter 1:22,23) and to obey Christ (Heb 5:8,9) and to obey the gospel (2 Thess. 1:8,9; 1 Cor, 15:1-4). For “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” (James 2:17). And one cannot have a living faith without works, “James says: “Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” James 2:18). And agin James says, “But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” James 2:20
And this is the reason that we find persons in the New Testament who believed in Christ but would not confess him, were they “saved by grace through faith” read these words:
“Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess [him], lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” (John 12:42,43). They had the faith for we are told that they “believed on him” but they did not have enough faith to “confess him” and Christ said, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.” “Matthew 10:32,33). And Paul, by inspiration of the Holy Spirit says, “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Romans 10:9,10). But these Jews, who “believed on Jesus” would not confess him! Yet Mr. Hanson would have you to believe that if a person “truly believes” he WILL CONFESS CHRIST. But not these Jews! They believed and they would not confess him because they “loved the praise of men more than the praise of God. But Mr. Hanson says that they were saved “upon believing” even though Paul said that “with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” therefore it is evident that after one believes he is still not saved until he “confesses with his mouth”! But these Jews “did not confess him”. And therefore they did not make with their mouths the “confession unto salvation even though they believed on Jesus Christ. So, brethren and Friends, there is much in the scriptures that are completely contrary to the false doctrine of salvation by faith only as taught by our friend Mr. Hanson, now isn’t their?
Again, my friends and Brethren, Mr. Hanson deliberately lies to us when he says the following:
“Therefore we arrive at the Bible understanding of the Good News…. (notice that I have never said "faith alone" as it has been falsely stated)”
Now Mr. Hanson, in the above quote from him says “(Notice that I have never said “faith alone” as it has been falsely stated)”. Well brethren, if you will simply go to the thread entitled “Revival of an Old Discussion on Baptism” you will find the following remarks by Mr. Hanson, while discussing the exact same passage which he is now discussing. And therein you will find him clearly, emphatically and definitely saying what he NOW CLAIMS that he NEVER said as follows: “Moving on…you state… "The Lord did not say that one is saved by believing alone, now did he?" Well, yes, Mr. Saffold, Jesus has mentioned on numerous occasions one is saved by believing alone. John 5:24, John 6:47, John 7:38, John 11:25, John 12:46, John 12:46, Matt.26:28. -- Barry R. Hanson (obci2000@yahoo.com), May 10, 2001.”
Now you can go to that thread and read it, friends. Mr., Hanson did definitely say in response to my question “the Lord did not say that one is saved by faith only, now did he?” and he said in his response, “Well, yes. Mr. Saffold, Jesus has mentioned on several occasions that one is saved by faith alone”. And he gave the references that he falsely claimed represented Jesus as saying that which Jesus never said. All one need to do is read them and you will not find Christ ever said in any of them that we are saved by “faith alone” as Mr. Hanson falsely claimed. But now he wants you to believe that he has been “falsely” charged with saying “faith alone” but as you can see he is not telling the truth, now is he? Now we having provided irrefutable evidence here, Friends and Brethren, that Mr. Hanson is denying that he ever said “faith alone” and we have given you the exact thread with the exact date and place where he did in fact say “believing alone”. Now Mr. Hanson needs to come back in here and admit that he said those words and repent for having lied to us in claiming that he “never” said them, now doesn’t he?
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, June 06, 2001
Mr. Hanson,In direct response to my question (which I appreciate) you wrote,
"In this equation you are qualifying faith as being "obedient" in order to come to redemption. I do not know that I disagree, in that, faith if it is saving faith will be obedient, as James has taught, faith being alone is dead."
Does James place the same futuristic note in his book as you did in your statement. Seems to me that James was very emphatic as to his statements. Saving faith is obedient, rather than 'will be obedient' as you have stated.
I realize that many reason that because God knows the heart, He knows who 'will be' obedient and who will not be in the future, therefore He cannot be fooled into saving someone that will not be obedient. This same reasoning is applied to one who would turn away from God at some later date. Some might reason that they were never 'saved' in the first place.
This truely seems contrary to so much of Scripture. Why warn Christians not to go back to the world, for they will be worse off then those who never knew Christ. Why are there so many other teachings in the Word that are stated just as directly as the ones you choose to say believe and be saved, and then we find direct passages that say, repent, be baptized, confess,, obey,,, and be saved. Now I realize that I have provided none of those direct quotes, but I fail to believe that any reasoned reader of this post hasn't read any number of these statements in the Word of God. They have been posted over and over again throughout many of these threads, including this thread.
Finding all these direct statements in the Scripture connecting these different things directly to one's salvation, that is to say, (these are paraphrased and if you wish I will type a follow up with direct quotes)
Believe and be saved Call upon the name of the Lord and be saved Repent..... and be forgiven ... be baptized and be forgiven Confess with your mouth and you will be saved.
How is it that anyone who wishes to teach the whole counsel of God, dismiss any one of these? These are all found in a context that is very direct and to the point. Applying the same hermanuetic principles to each passage, they all are just as direct toward one entering into a saved condition by the blood of Jesus Christ.
There is more to this I am sure, but let me also back up to one of the thoughts I suggested earlier as well.
Mr. Hanson, Do you believe that Jesus can be savior and not Lord to a human being? If you do not believe this, then how can there be a Lord without a servant? What is it that makes a servant? Is it not obedience? 1. I am not saying that 'faith alone' saves. 2. I am not saying that 'work alone' saves. 3. I am saying that the Bible, as noted above, ties faith and work together in a way that I cannot untie. The Bible tells the difference between dead faith and living faith.
I hope you find these questions fair to the Word of God even though they may seem tough. Here we go...
1. What is the result of faith (belief) that is dead? 2. What is the result of works alone? 3. What is the result of faith (belief) that is living? 4. What is the difference between dead faith and living faith?
I know that there are many that will wrestle with the answers to these simple questions. But they are simple questions, which I hope we all ask the Lord as we read HIS Word. Why is it that we have to go to such lengths to change its simplicity.
The Bible simply says....... Well, the Bible simply says.....
hmmmmmm they can't be contradictory,,,, (I believe we all hold this position????? I hope, otherwise we may as well quit now...) therefore I must simply accept both statements as true, and stop fighting over them...
Lest I get too far off track,,, Your statement was pretty clear that you, at least, do not disagree. I take it that if you do not disagree, that you cannot argue the points made to show that they are false. Is that a fair assumption? Yet you go on to say that something else, contrary to what I stated, is true. Forgive me please, but I don't see how that can be. However, if you read carefully the statements and reasoning that I have just completed above, I believe you will find a better way to reason how it is that Jesus, Paul, James, Peter and more, are in complete agreement.
The onus is upon us to receive what they all said, and not pick and choose one over the other. You asked "When does the list end and when is one confident they have actually met all conditions? Moreover, what if there are further conditions which we have not met yet - once we learn of those are we to be re-saved by meeting those conditions? Were we saved to begin with? If so, how do we know, perhaps there are still conditions unmet?"
I can only tell you to study, study, study the Word of God to find that answer. If God said, and He did through His inspired Word, , “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Romans 10:9,10)." As mentioned in the post above, this is only one of the many passages that says, in essense, he that confesses will be saved. That is pretty plain talk. Just as plain as believe in your heart and you will be saved. What do we do with these two??? Seems only reasonable to deny neither and claim both, teach both, not allow anyone to remove either. Where does the list stop? Find all those direct passages, and there is your answer. "Study to show thyself approved, a workman who needeth not be ashamed." "Always prepared to give an answer for the hope that is in you."
Mr. Hanson, Will you (and all the readers of this forum) along with me commit ourselves to including all that the Word has simply stated - whatever they may be? Lets stop argueing over what we can omit and what we cannot omit. Lets just present the Word as it is written and let the Spirit do His thing in the hearts of man.
If you were asked, as Peter was on the day of Penticost, "Men and brethren, what must we do?", Are you willing to say, (knowing that they have heard the truth and been cut to the heart) "Repent and baptized, every one of you, for the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Or will you continue to argue?
Simply offered,
P.S. I haven't gone over this for typos,,, hope they are minimal.
-- Anonymous, June 07, 2001
An additional thought, I have no difficulty replying to someone who asks about salvation, that the Bible says that we are to "Believe/have Faith. I have no problem replying to folks that the Bible says to "Call upon the name of the Lord." I have no difficulty replying them by saying, It is with the mouth that we confess unto salvation.As the Scripture teaches, I will do my best to teach all without a personal bias that would exclude anything that God has seen fit to include.
Just thought I would follow up with this, for I kind of figured that I might be asked these questions in return, and I thought I would get it out of the way.
Keepin on
-- Anonymous, June 07, 2001
David,I appreciate your message, as I am not here to argue as in the past I am content to simply say, I agree to disagree respectfully.
I want to draw your attention to your answer to my question - which was not really an answer. I asked…
""When does the list end and when is one confident they have actually met all conditions? Moreover, what if there are further conditions which we have not met yet - once we learn of those are we to be re-saved by meeting those conditions? Were we saved to begin with? If so, how do we know, perhaps there are still conditions unmet?"
You stated…
"I can only tell you to study, study, study the Word of God to find that answer."
Without being presumptuous (as I have been in the past), I will ask, do you not know the answer? It would seem to me to be the most pivotal question you would have completely covered yourself - believing that you must meet these conditions to obtain redemption I would think that you would have had this list readily available. This has prompted me to ask (and please do not think I am merely drudging up questions), honestly, could it be that even at this point you are still unsure as to your own condition? Perhaps you have yet to study a verse or a command and even in your own mind or heart you wonder if you have completely fulfilled your obligation to be obedient to every command?
There is a lot of Scripture. I have read through the Scriptures many times and yet each year I discover more - sometimes I wonder how it was I hadn't seen a particular verse in the way I see it after reading it for the 100th time. It is amazing to me how the Word of God is living! Perhaps, you have had a similar experience? Maybe not. However, upon these thoughts it is quite likely that there are many verses that at first reading you did not consider a condition and then a year or so later you read it again and it strikes you that this too classifies as a condition for Gods free gift.
If this is not the case please forgive me, but it would seem to me that if I considered obedience a prerequisite for redemption then I would gather an exhaustive list of "to do's" and fulfill them to the letter to ensure that I had done everything required to merit my redemption, otherwise I would be headed for hell.
David, I could not live like this. The constant worry that perhaps I had yet to fulfill some unforeseen condition.
Perhaps I have spent more time than necessary on this first point, I want to respectfully address the rest of your message.
I have not had the time to consider your proposition - it is not possible for Jesus to be Savior apart from Lord. I have heard in the past people admit that they had an easier time accepting Jesus as Savior, the one who died for them to redeem them but it took some time for them to accept Jesus as Lord of their lives. They could see the love God had for them and gave into that love and in time that love conquered the fear they had in submitting their entire lives to His lordship. Honestly, I will have to think on this one some more.
Admittedly I had a hard time following your message in parts. You stated…
"hmmmmmm they can't be contradictory,,,, (I believe we all hold this position????? I hope, otherwise we may as well quit now...) therefore I must simply accept both statements as true, and stop fighting over them..."
I believe you have come to the conclusion that because our positions are apparently not compatible you have decided these Scriptures can only be reconciled with each other by taking them independently of each other. For instance one says "by grace through faith not of works" and another says "believe and be baptized" another says "believe and confess" - therefore with all the differences you have decided that these are all prerequisites to redemption making the formula Grace + Faith + Confession + Forgiveness + Baptism + Obedience + Repentance + Justification + Purification + ……. = Redemption.
My position - the few verses must be understood in the context of the whole. For instance, in the Scriptures the vast majority of evidence clearly outlines the formula I have set forth, Grace + Faith = Redemption + Good Works. However, a few verses seem to indicate that in addition to Christ's finished work and faith additional steps of obedience must be taken. These few verses must be placed into context with the whole and should not change the Gospel message. Nevertheless, these few verses have already been debated back and forth and I feel that I have already shown these verses, when examined, are not saying what some have claimed.
I have learned some people are going to believe what they want despite the evidence and there is nothing I could say that is going to change that and really all God wants me to do in that situation is to love the person.
Grace is not grace if it must be earned. That is completely contrary to the definition. Redemption is merited to us upon Christ's finished work. We cannot earn grace. Christ's work was on our behalf - and it is the Grace of God that confers His work upon us which we must receive by faith. If we must contribute to Christ's work this it is tantamount in saying that Christ's work is not sufficient to save - He did not complete the work, we must complete it through our own action and obedience. I do not think you would go this far but this to me is the logical conclusion.
To the argument that says, "it is God who requires us to do these works to gain God's grace", my reply is, "no, it is a person's interpretation of a few verses that works are essential to obtaining grace". Obviously, the argument could be turned on me, that is fine, this is why I have already admitted to agree to disagree.
You also said…
"Where does the list stop? Find all those direct passages, and there is your answer."
But my question then, can someone who has already gone through and found these "direct passages" please post them? I can almost guarantee that any list someone posts - yet another verse could be added to the list that would then throw into question whether they are saved or not for not adhering to every command.
I hope you don't mind me posting your comments as it is the best way to respond….you stated…
"Mr. Hanson, Will you (and all the readers of this forum) along with me commit ourselves to including all that the Word has simply stated - whatever they may be? Lets stop argueing over what we can omit and what we cannot omit. Lets just present the Word as it is written and let the Spirit do His thing in the hearts of man."
I get the impression you think I have "omitted" some verse from the Scriptures? As I have already stated I have concluded that any verse must be taken in light of the context of the rest of Scripture. For instance, much reference is made to James. James states that faith without works is dead and his example is Abraham. Yet when taken in context we see that God had already called Abraham righteous YEARS before he offered Isaac upon the altar. The same is true of believers today. Our good works which indicate we have a saving faith occur AFTER we are considered righteous by God. This is not "omitting" Scripture, simply placing it into context. Again, I am not here to argue, if it seems that I am, I apologize and will discontinue our conversation if you feel I am.
Finally you ask…
"If you were asked, as Peter was on the day of Penticost, "Men and brethren, what must we do?", Are you willing to say, (knowing that they have heard the truth and been cut to the heart) "Repent and baptized, every one of you, for the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Or will you continue to argue?"
Actually I have discussed this specifically in the "Rvival of an old unfinshed discussion Concerning baptism" thread on May 9th if you are interested in reading it.
As I have run out of time today, I have not had time to go back and proof read, I hope I have responded in a respectful manner and in the spirit of love.
In Christian Love,
-- Anonymous, June 07, 2001
Yes, I believe they are inspired. Many try to make the simple message of the gospel complicated and to weigh people down with legnthy theological discussions. All Scripture is "God breathed" and the Bible itself makes clear that the Bible we all use are the Scriptures. God does not "breath" inaccurate or contradictory messages. The Bible does not "contain" the Word of God, it IS the Word of God. (Archeaology and the science of textual criticism prove that there is no substantive variation from the original writings to our modern texts.)As to commentary on your text, the mere act of mouthing words does not save. Faith occurs on a spiritual level when the individual acknowledges their need for restoration with God and that Christ has provided the means for that restoration through His death and resurrection. How can true faith be silenced? Confession of the truth of the gospel is the evidence of true faith, just as water baptism is an outward testimony of the inward faith in Christ. The theif on the cross believed and Jesus told him, "today you will be with Me in Paradise." That man had no opportunity to do any "work" for his salvation. He only expressed faith. Christ could have read his mind if he had no tongue and the result would have been the same.
-- Anonymous, June 08, 2001
Barry,As you have said, we may have to agree to disagree. However, you asked for the verses in the same kind of context so as to compare apples to apples. My answer takes us back to the top, for I think we have made full circle to the title of the thread. "Do you believe these verses."
Link asked,
"Do you believe these verses are inspired by God? Do you believe they really mean what they say? Romans 10:8-13 8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. 12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
To which Lee responded,
"We believe every verse in the Word of God and therefore believe the one you have quoted above as much as any other of God's eternal words.
Let me ask you. Do you believe this verse? "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is batized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned." Mark 16:16
Do you believe these verses? "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen. Matthew 28:19,20.
DO you believe this verse? "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." Matt. 26:28.
And do you believe this verse? "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Acts 2:38
DO you believe this verse? "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." Acts 22:16.
Do you believe this verse? "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also [in the likeness] of [his] resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with [him], that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." ROmans 6:3-6.
Do you believe this verse? "But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." Romans 6:17,18.
Do you believe this verse? "In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;" Col. 2:11-13.
Do you believe this verse? " Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" 1 Coriinthians 1:12,13.
Do you believe this verse? "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." Galatians 3:26,27.
Do you believe this verse? " Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Acts 8:14,15.
Do you believe this verse? "Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on [their] way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, [here is] water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him." Acts 8:35-38.
Do you believe these verses? " Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:" I Peter 3:20,21
Do you believe this verse? "For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, [and] hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" TItus 3:3-5
Bo you believe this verse? "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word," Eph. 5:25,26.
Do you believe this verse? "Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." Heb. 10:22.
Do you believe these verses? "What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be [ye] warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what [doth it] profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent [them] out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also." James 2:14-26."
Barry,
I too believe every verse that has been written above. And, contextually, (which is the criteria whereby you have stated is the measure) every one of these have to do with SALVATION. This being true, all of them are involved in this process of salvation of which is provided by the grace of God. There has never been and never will be anything that man can do to 'earn' the salvation that God has graciously offered. However, even though God has graciously offered this gift, it is still incumbant upon the man to receive it by choice. (I realize that there are those who are reading this that disagree with man's free will.) Making a choice can be considered 'work'. Yet this work is not one toward earning, but rather toward responding. Never-the-less, it is work. God has stated specific responses that He states will save. Among them are hearing, believing, repenting, confessing, being baptized (not merely getting wet). Other than hearing,,, believing, repenting, confessing and baptizm are all responses of obedience. God said it, I do it and He promises salvation - by His own Word - honoring that obedience.
Herein is the point that hasn't yet been directly responded to... The context is salvation. God promises salvation to those who respond according to what the quoted Scripture just said. Will we teach what it says, or will we minimize or exclude altogether some of them to suit our differing position.
What say you?
Skip,
Turn in your Bible beyond the resurrection and the day of Penticost. I would also suggest that you consider the difference between Paradise and Heaven. You will find a thread entitled, "Was the repentant Thief really told he’d be in heaven with Jesus?" that may be a better venue for that discussion. But for the time being, (I state this academically not personally) you are comparing apples to oranges - as they say.
Still Studying,
-- Anonymous, June 08, 2001
David,As I have said, I am not here to argue, and I enjoy this conversation as it has been kept on a respectful tone - you have stated…
"I too believe every verse that has been written above. And, contextually, (which is the criteria whereby you have stated is the measure) every one of these have to do with SALVATION."
I do not know if you realize this or not but I have done what you have encouraged me to do in a previous message, "study, study, study" (for quite a few years now) - and in reality have addresses many of the verses you have pasted into your message - I believe every one of the verses listed and do not understand them in the same way you or others in your denomination see them - respectfully.
Many of those verses purported to say water baptism is essential to redemption have nothing whatsoever to do with water baptism but rather our baptism into Christ. Others, also I see in a completely different context than yourself. We will have to agree to disagree.
Also, I see a difference between our concepts of Salvation, apparently. Salvation is an ongoing condition following our redemption. Christ redeems us, this is the event that commences our salvation. The Scriptures encourage us to "work out our own salvation" which I believe, but I cannot work out my own redemption. I hope you follow. Christ completed ALL the work necessary for my redemption - the moment I believe, I have been translated into the kingdom of God and cease to be a child of disobedience, it is then that I for the first time have a godly desire to please God. Any attempt before this time to "work out my salvation" is done strictly on a selfish, fleshly level - I am attempting in my own ability to please God because I have not believed and am still a child of disobedience. Once I believe, I have or posses everlasting life according to Jesus….
John 6:47
"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."
David, I too am still studying….
In Christ's love,
-- Anonymous, June 08, 2001
Barry: Well put. SIN has created a separation between man and God that man cannot hope to bridge. Christ bridged that gap once for all. To place a requirement of works for redemption is equivalent to a slap in God's face saying "What you have provided on the cross obviously isn't enough, let me help save myself." Rather, "all our works are as filthy rags."David: The difference between Paradise and Heaven is not the point here. The point is the expression by the theif of who Christ was and Christ's acceptance of Him. He didn't tell the man "Sorry buddy, you're too late. You should have lived a good life, gotten baptized and done many good works before you got stuck on this cross." Death is final and what then? Up or down. It's that simple. Either in or out of the prescence of God. I don't think Paradise is apart from the prescence of God, whatever it is and how it compares with heaven. None of us have ever been there so we really don't know what those places are. Maybe they are one in the same!
-- Anonymous, June 09, 2001
Brethren:Mr. Hanson has said:
“Christ completed ALL the work necessary for my redemption - the moment I believe, I have been translated into the kingdom of God and cease to be a child of disobedience, it is then that I for the first time have a godly desire to please God.”
I hope that every one here will realize that Mr. Hanson has not offered in his above statement one single passage of scripture that says, “the moment I believe, I have been translated into the kingdom of God”. The reason he does not refer to any such scripture is because there is not one in your Bible that says any such thing. And he overlooks the numerous passages, which tell us exactly when we are “made free from sin” and when we obtain the “remission of our sins”, and whom the author of our salvation says he will save. Notice these passage which state those things for us:
“Paul says, “But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being THEN made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.” (Romans 6:17,18). Notice when these Romans were “made free from sin and became servants of righteousness. It is not “the moment they first believed” as Mr. Hanson would like for you to believe. But it was WHEN they “obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered” to them in the preaching of the gospel.
Then read this verse:
“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” (Acts 2:38). Now, here Peter is talking to those who had believed the gospel that he had preached and they believed that Christ was the messiah and that they had crucified him. And these believers asked him “Men and brethren what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37). Not even though they had already believed they wanted to know what to do to be saved and Peter told them to repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Acts 2:38). Now it is obvious to any thinking person that even though these men were believers that they had not yet received the remission of their sins because they had not “repented and been baptized” which two things were essential to receiving the remission of sins. And it is also quite certain that they did not receive remission of sins the “moment that they believed” as Mr. Hanson falsely claims. Now remember that no one is saved until his or her sins are remitted. And this verse which was spoke as the Spirit gave Peter utterance (Acts 2:4) tells us to “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). And until we obey the command of Christ through the Holy Spirit to repent and be baptized we will not receive the remission of sins. And this is the “doctrine” that the Romans obeyed from the heart and they were “THEN made free from sin” (Romans 6:3-6,17,18) and not one moment before.
And then the Hebrew writer makes it abundantly clear that Christ will save those who “obey him” as follows:
“Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;” (Hebrews 5:8,9).
Christ is not the savior of those who “believe only” and do not obey him. This is the reason he says, “Not every one that saith unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of heaven but he that DOETH THE WILL OF MY FATHER IN HEAVEN.
And James makes it abundantly clear that “faith only” cannot save us. He says, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” (James 2:24). Now Mr. Hanson says we are saved the moment that we believe and therefore it would be by faith and “faith only” that we are justified but James says the direct opposite. And no one, especially Mr. Hanson has even come close to dealing with what James so emphatically declares. And Mr. Hanson is clearly diametrically opposed to what James said by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, now isn’t he?
And of course Jesus himself ruled out the notion of salvation by faith only when he said, “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16). Then Mr. Hanson again says falsely:
“Once I believe, I have or posses everlasting life according to Jesus….”
Jesus said no such thing and Mr. Hanson has not shown a single place where Jesus said anything like that. And Jesus is the one that said; “ he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” (Mark 16:16) and Mr. Hanson says that he that believed will be saved whether he is baptized or not”. Mr. Hanson’s doctrine is clearly opposed to the very doctrine.
FOr Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, June 09, 2001
Mr Safford, why do you seek to pollute the gospel of Christ? Is not the grace of God sufficient? "My grace is sufficient for thee." What "work" can you or I do that can in any way gain God's tiniest amount of favor other than to simply take Him at His Word? "To obey is better than sacrifice." James states: "What use is it, brethren, if a man SAYS he has faith, but he has no works? Can that (so called) "faith" save him?" I submit that in James 2:14-26, the writer makes a distinction between salvation and justification. To take the "Works saves" position is to corrupt the whole of the rest of Scripture. Rom. 5:1 "Therefore, having been justified by FAITH". James is teaching that works is the evidence that faith exists; that works justifies, or proves, the genuineness of the faith. Jesus cursed the fig tree because it had no fruit. Spiritual fruit is the proof of spiritual life. "For all our works are as filthy rags." It is beyond me still, what you think you can do that can satisfy God's righteous standards? For lulling your students into believing this false doctrine, you will be held to account for their souls.
-- Anonymous, June 10, 2001
Brethren and Friends:Skip has said the following:
“Barry: Well put. SIN has created a separation between man and God that man cannot hope to bridge. Christ bridged that gap once for all.”
Now, by implication our friend Skip has attempted to leave the impression that we do not believe that sin has “placed a gap between God and Man that man cannot hope to bridge”. And he also implies that we do not believe that “Christ has “bridged that Gap”. Now, while we would prefer to use the scriptural terminology concerning this matter we do very much believe that “sin has separated man from God” and that until sin is removed it will remain a barrier separating man from God. And indeed it was the sacrifice of Christ that made the removal of that barrier possible. Let me give some passages of scripture that support what I have just said.
We are told by Isaiah, “Behold, the LORD'S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid [his] face from you, that he will not hear.” (Isa. 59:1,2).
Now from this passage we learn that all men are, until their sins are remitted, guilty of sin and thus are separated from God. “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Therefore indeed it is true that we are all separated from God by sin and until our sins are “taken away” or “remitted” or forgiven which only God can do we are indeed separated from God, without hope in this world.
Then we are told that Christ was “manifest to take away sins is also quite clear. “And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.” (1 John 3:5).
And again when Jesus came to John to be baptized of him he looked up and saw Christ and said, “The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” (John 1:29).
But the idea that the entire world was immediately and completely forgiven by God of all of their sins the moment that Christ died on the cross is just not the truth. For Jesus himself had warned the Jews, “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins.” (John 8:24) It is obvious from this verse that the day Christ died on the cross he thereby made it possible for God to forgive sins. But God did not forgive the entire world of their sins at that moment. The moment that Christ died on the cross he made it possible for God to not only be just but also be the Justifier of him that believes in Christ. But the “work of redemption and reconciliation” was not “finished” at that point, as some would have you to believe when they speak foolishly about the “finished work of Christ”. As if it was something that brought salvation and forgiveness automatically to all men the moment that Christ died on the cross. The moment that Christ died on the cross He became the substitute for the sins of all those who would believe and obey HIM and not others. For he said except ye believe that I am he ye shall die in your sins.” And the Hebrew writer says that Christ is the “author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him” (Heb 5:8,9).
You may not have noticed that there is not a single reference in the scriptures to the “finished work of Christ” in the sense of his dying have completed all that was necessary to our forgiveness of sin in the scriptures. There is one reference to the work of Christ, which God had given him to do as being finished. Christ, while praying to God in John the 17th chapter says, “I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do.” (John 17:2). But Christ was still alive when he said those words in prayer to God which means only that he had completed the work that God had given him to do while on this earth. “Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.” (John 4:34). Thus the work of Christ was to do the will of God. He did that and completed it. Christ came to make the forgiveness of our sins possible. Christ is the propitiation of our sins and God is the one who pardons our sins. Thus the moment that Christ died on the cross our propitiation was provided. But our pardon was not. “My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.” (1 John 2:1,2). What happened when Christ died upon the Cross? He became the “propitiation” of our sins. This is a translation of the Greek word “hilasmos {hil-as-mos'} which means “an appeasing or a propitiation In Alexandrian usage, the means of appeasing, a propitiation” (Thayer page 301). Thus the day Christ died on the Cross, for the first time since Adam and Eve sinned in the garden there was finally the means by which God could be “appeased” or persuaded to actually forgive our sins. But God did not immediately pardon every sinner’s past sins. For if he had done that every sinner would have been immediately redeemed without even believing in Christ or turning from sin and rebellion against God (repenting) and submitting themselves to the lordship of Christ in obedience to God’s will. Thus while Christ’s work of becoming a propitiatory sacrifice in our place was finished God had yet to forgive any man still living in rebellion against him. He waits until those men have the opportunity to hear the gospel, believe it and obey it before he actually grants the forgiveness that the death of Christ allowed Him to be willing to do and to be justified in doing. Until those men should hear the gospel and believe in Christ and obey Him they will not be forgiven. For this reason we are told that the gospel is the “power of God unto salvation” (Romans 1:16) for the preaching of it is what produces faith (Romans 10:17) which is essential to persuade God to accept the sacrifice of Christ in our stead. And this explains just why it is that God determined that “through the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe”. (1 Cor. 1:18).
And all of this explains why God requires that we have faith and that we repent of our sins and that we obey the command to be baptized. For the scriptures says:
“Except ye believe that I am he ye shall DIE IN YOUR SINS”. Thus, even though Christ died for you God will not pardon or forgive you until you believe in Christ.
And Christ also said, “I tell you nay, but except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish” (Luke 13:3,5)
And we are told, “Repent ye therefore and be converted THAT YOUR SINS MAY BE BLOTTED Out”. (Acts 3:19) Now this statement was made long after the death of Christ. And if all men’s sins had been “blotted out the moment that Christ died on the cross these men whom Peter was addressing would not have needed to repent that their sins may be blotted out for they would have been blotted out already the day that Christ died. But that was just not the case, now was it?
Then Peter spoke on the day of Pentecost telling his audience that they had crucified the Messiah and that He had become both Lord and Christ. Then they believed Peter and asked, “Men and brethren what shall we do?” Now, if the so-called “finished work of Christ” had already caused God to forgive without any thing else left to be done by anyone. Then Peter would have said, “relax, brethren, have no fear. God has already forgiven you because of the ‘finished work of Christ’. And therefore there is absolutely nothing left to be done and nothing whatsoever that you could do because you are so depraved it is impossible in the first place for you to do anything whatsoever to ‘save yourself’ since it has all been accomplished by the finished work of Christ!” But Peter did not say any such thing! Instead Peter answered that question and said, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION OF YOUR SINS”. (Acts 2:38). Now it is clear that their sins had not yet been remitted even though Christ had died for them and they believed in Christ. And that Peter told them to repent and be baptized FOR THE REMISSIONOF THEIR SINS. If their sins had been remitted the day Christ “finished his work on the cross” they would have had no sins to repent of and no sins to be remitted. And if they had been saved the “moment they first believed” their sins would have already been remitted and thus there would have been no need for them to do anything in order to obtain the remission of them. But that was not the case with them now was it? For Peter told these for who Christ had already died and that had already come to believe in Christ through the preaching of the gospel to “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins”. (Acts 2:38).
Christ is our propitiation and because of it God is justified in granting us pardon for our sins. Which he has determined to do when we end our rebellion against him by submitting to the lordship of His Son, Jesus Christ by believing in him (John 3:16) repenting (Acts 3:19) and being baptized. (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 22:16; John 3:3-5; Titus 3:3-5; Romans 6:3-6; 17,18; Gal. 3:26,27; Heb. 10:22; Eph. 5:25,26; Matt. 28:19,20; Col 2:11-13; 1 Cor. 15:1-4).
Then Skip tells us:
“To place a requirement of works for redemption is equivalent to a slap in God's face saying "What you have provided on the cross obviously isn't enough, let me help save myself."
Well, I suppose that skip is accusing James of “slapping God in the face” when he says, “ye see then how that by works a man is justified and not by faith only”. (James 2:24). And I suppose that he thinks that when the Holy Spirit gave Peter the utterance of these words, “And with many other words did he testify and exhort saying, ‘SAVE YOURSELVES FROM THIS UNTOWARD GENERATION’ (Acts 2:40) the Holy Spirit was “slapping God in the face!
Then he quotes:
"all our works are as filthy rags."
Indeed our works do not amount to any profit for us. They do not earn us anything whatsoever but God has commanded that we bring him those “filthy rags” not that they have any value to be traded but because he wants our rebellion against him to end by our submitting to and obeying his commands. For this reason again we are told “He is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him.” (Heb. 5:8,9). We must understand that even though God requires us to obey him and forgives us for Christ sake. When we cease our rebellion and submit to Christ as Lord we are nevertheless told, “So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things, which are, commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.” (Luke 17:10). It is important for us to realize that when we have done all that God has commanded us we cannot do enough to place Him into our debt. We are still unprofitable. But God nevertheless commands us to obey him in order for Him to pardon us of our sins. So bring these “filthy rags” for we are told, “ye see then how that by works (filthy rags) a man is justified and not by faith only. Those rags may be filthy but they are not useless and since God has determined that our faith is perfected by them. Thus we must have them or our faith is dead.
“What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works (filthy rags)? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be [ye] warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what [doth it] profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works (filthy rags), is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works (filthy rags): shew me thy faith without thy works (filthy rags), and I will shew thee my faith by my works (filthy rags). Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works (filthy rags) is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works (filthy rags), when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works (filthy rags) a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works (filthy rags), when she had received the messengers, and had sent [them] out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works (filthy rags) is dead also.” (James 2:14-26). It seems quite clear from these passages that the answer to James question, “What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?” is “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” (James 2:24). So, bring God those “filthy rags” for he has commanded them and without them it is impossible to have a living faith that is able to save!
Even faith itself is a WORK (filthy rags). “Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.”. (John 6:29). If works have nothing to do with our salvation then faith cannot save us because faith is indeed a WORK (filthy rags).
“Remembering without ceasing your work (filthy rags) of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father; (1 Tim. 1:3).
“For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh (produces filthy rags) by love. (Gal. 5:6).
Then our friend skip, like many others who agree with him, thinks that the thief on the Cross had never been baptized. He says:
“David: The difference between Paradise and Heaven is not the point here. “The point is the expression by the thief of who Christ was and Christ's acceptance of Him. He didn't tell the man "Sorry buddy, you're too late. You should have lived a good life, gotten baptized and done many good works before you got stuck on this cross." Death is final and what then? Up or down. It's that simple. Either in or out of the prescence of God.”
Now this argument is based upon the unproven assumption that the thief on the cross was never baptized.
Skip thus argues that people today can be saved in the same way that the "thief on the Cross" was saved but he does not know for sure if the thief was saved without being baptized now do he? There is as much, if not more, evidence to indicate that the thief may have been baptized at the baptism of John as there is that he had not been baptized ever at all for any reason in his life. But, based upon this assumption skip falsely concludes that anyone today can be saved in the same way that the thief on the cross was saved. In order for that argument to have any validity he must prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the thief had never heard John the Baptist preach and accepted that baptism which was for the remission of sins. “John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” (Mark 1:4).
We are told, “And all the people that heard [him], and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John.” (Luke 2:29). Now is it possible for anyone to prove that it was absolutely impossible that the thief could have ever been among “all the people that heard him” and were baptized with the baptism of John? Especially in light of the fact that John preached “repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand”.
We are told that Christ was preached throughout all Judea as “lord of all”. “But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. The word which [God] sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:) That word, [I say], ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;” (Acts 10:35-37). Now all Judea heard these things and it began from Galilee after the baptism that John preached. Is it not at least possible that the thief had the opportunity to hear John the Baptist preaching that Christ was Lord? Furthermore, during the same time we are told that Jesus baptized more disciples than John. “When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,) He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee.” (John 4:1-3). Now, not only did John baptize many of the people of Judea and the region around Jordan but also Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John (though his disciples actually did the baptizing). Is it not possible with all of this baptizing going on during that time that this thief heard either the teaching of John the Baptist or of even Jesus Christ himself and submitted to the baptism, which they were administering?
Now, there are some things said by the thief on the cross that indicates a certain familiarity with the teachings of both John and Jesus. Listen to his words:
“But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. (Luke:23:39-43).
Now notice the thief indicated the justice of his condemnation which could at least imply that he had at some point before his capture and crucifixion come to repentance about what he had done. Notice also that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance unto the remission of sins”. (Mark 1:4). Then this thief knows for a surety that Christ was innocent. “This man hath done nothing amiss.” Now, those who were evil, sinful, and impenitent men had no such knowledge of Christ. In fact no one can say that a total stranger is innocent! This thief obviously knew enough about Christ to draw the conclusion that he was innocent implying far more than a casual knowledge of this controversial figure! Then he said some very significant words to Christ. He said, “Lord”. Now on what basis did this thief recognize that Christ was not just an ordinary innocent man being crucified unjustly but that he was LORD? Is it not in the least bit likely that he could have heard the teaching of Christ, John, or their disciples who were always teaching that Christ was “LORD”. No band of thieves, who had no knowledge of Christ and had not heard any teaching from Him or about him would have concluded that Christ was “Lord”, now would they? And then he says to Christ, “remember me”. Now on what basis could this thief expect Christ, whom he had learned very likely from the teaching of either John, Jesus or one of their disciples that Christ was Lord for such was the only source of such information, expect that Christ would have any reason to “remember” him? And he says remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom! Now how in the world would this thief have learned that Christ had a Kingdom and that he was, even though hanging upon a cross, coming into it? It was Christ and John the Baptist and their disciples who were preaching “repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand”. Is it not possible that this thief had heard them preach of this coming Kingdom of Christ? And would he make such a request of Christ if he did not believe that Christ was coming to a kingdom as taught by himself and John the Baptist? And if this thief had head all of this instruction form either John the Baptist, or Jesus and believed it enough to count upon it in the hour of his death that he might not have also believed what they taught about baptism and have submitted to it? It is indeed possible! Is it possible for anyone to prove that nothing like this ever happened? Some might say that he was a thief and justly condemned for it is proof that such could not have happened. But this is not necessarily so. For this thief could have heard the teaching of John the Baptist or Christ and repented of his stealing and was baptized by them and later convicted of Crimes that he had committed in the past for which he had been forgiven by God but not man? And is it not possible that this thief had repented and been baptized at the teaching of either John the Baptist or Christ and then lapsed back into his old habits and sins. And was convicted for them and then repented before Christ and asked to be remembered by him when he came into his kingdom? And indeed, it is at the very least highly unlikely that he had absolutely no knowledge gained from hearing John or Christ or one of their disciples teaching. For he had knowledge of these things that we know he must have known or he could not have said the things that he said while speaking of and to Christ on the cross.
Unless you can prove that such was absolutely IMPOSSIBLE you cannot with honesty prove that this thief was saved without being baptized. And even if you could prove such a thing, if you wish to show that one can be saved without being baptized today, you must also prove that Christ will definitely, without any doubt, save anyone else in exactly the same way that he saved the thief. This you also cannot prove. You must also prove that the New Covenant which went into effect after the death of Christ allows one to be saved just as the thief on the cross was saved, however that was. In fact there are some, and I am not one of them, that contend that we cannot even know for sure if this thief was, in fact, saved. While I agree that he was saved we are not certain if he was saved without having been baptized and can never be certain of it. And we are not certain that, even if he were, that Christ would save others in the same way.
But our friend, Skip, would offer to others the hope of being saved while refusing to obey Christ command to be baptized (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38). Even though he is not sure that such is the case nor is he even certain that this thief was saved without having been baptized. On the basis of silence and uncertainty and a complete lack of evidence to support the underlying assumption upon which his argument rests. He yet continues to argue for that which conflicts with the clear teaching of the word of God throughout the New Testament that baptism is in order to the remission of sins and hence necessary to our salvation. For he is certain, without any evidence justify his assumptions that the thief was saved without being baptized! When the truth is that no one is going to be saved without being baptized under the New Covenant of Christ for Christ says, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16) and “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins”. (Acts 2:38).
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, June 10, 2001
John 6:47"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."
It is at the moment I believe on Jesus that I have everlasting life!
Or in other words, I have left the kingdom of darkness and have been translated into the kingdom of God, this is what it means to "have everlasting life".
Verily, Verily!
-- Anonymous, June 10, 2001
Brethren and Friends:Notice that when Mr. Hanson cannot answer the arguments that have been made against his false doctrine of “salvation by faith only” his only tactic left is to ignore them and present one of his own, that we have answered now numerous times, as if it is fresh and new. His repeated and often answered argument is as follows:
“John 6:47 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."
Now this verse is from God’s word and we have now said often that we believe every word of it as much as any one. But notice that this verse does not say we are saved or justified by “faith only” as Mr. Hanson would have you to believe. For if it did say such nonsense it would contradict the plain teaching of the Holy Spirit spoken by James which says, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY” (James 2:24). And one cannot forget that it was this same Jesus who said these words also, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:16).
But Mr. Hanson, ignoring all of the rest of Gods words and Isolating this verse completely, gives the following explanation of what it says:
“It is at the moment I believe on Jesus that I have everlasting life!”
Now all one has to do is read the verse again. It says, “verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me hath everlasting life.” (John 6:47). Now this verse says nothing about “what” believing on him is nor “when” believing on him gives us everlasting life, nor “how” it brings us to everlasting life. In fact it does not even say what kind of faith will produce this result. But we are told that the “devils believe and tremble” (James 2:16-18) and they even believed on Jesus Christ as the Son of God (Mark 3:11). Did they receive everlasting life the moment they believed on Christ as the Son of God? I think not! And then we have the account of the Jews that believed on Jesus but would not confess him because they “loved the praise of men more than the praise of God. “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess [him], lest they should be put out of the synagogue:” (John 12:42). Now these men “believed on Jesus” but they would not confess him! Did they receive everlasting life the moment that they believed on Jesus? Well we are told, “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness but with the MOUTH CONFESSION IS MADE UNTO SALVATION” (Romans 10:9,10). And Christ said, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 10:32,33). So it should be obvious that they did not receive everlasting life “the moment they believed on Jesus” Mr. Hanson’s false theory notwithstanding! For if they did they received everlasting life without being saved and even though Christ would deny them before the father, which is in heaven! Who can believe such nonsense as this, which is offered by our friend Mr. Hanson? No one who believes God’s word can accept it, now can they?
But according to Mr. Hanson’s doctrine, the “MOMENT’ they believed on Jesus they immediately possessed everlasting life! Now it does not take a scholar to see that this verse says nothing about “the moment that we believe” now does it? Nor does it say that such is when we receive everlasting life. And according to James, believing alone, without any works of faith, it is DEAD. (James 2:17) Yes, believe on Jesus Means that you obey Him. Read this verse, “And he is the author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY Him” (Heb. 5:8,9).
So, let us put this verse side by side with other verses in the scriptures and we will find that indeed he that believeth on Christ hath everlasting life. But not one who does nothing except believes ONLY. For that would be salvation by a dead faith one that believes but will not obey Christ or confess him. For we are told that “ faith if it have not works is DEAD being alone.” (James 2:17) and no one can have saving faith without obeying Christ (Heb. 5:8,9). Notice this from the book of John, which speaks of this same subject as follows:
“He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.” (John 3:36). Now, did you notice this Brethren and Friends? He that DOES NOT OBEY THE SON SHALL NOT SEE LIFE! And Paul also made it abundantly clear to anyone that can read that those who do not obey the gospel will be punished with “everlasting destruction from the presence of God and the glory of his power”. (2 Thess. 1:8,9) Therefore it is obvious to all who can read that one does not have everlasting life the “moment that he believes” but rather after his belief has lead him to OBEY THE SON. For if these believers do not obey the SON they “will not see life”. Actually in this verse we see that faith and obedience are spoken of as if they were “synonymous” terms rather than mutually exclusive ones!
But let us do our comparison:
“"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." (John 6:47)
““He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.” (John 3:36).
“ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY” (James 2:24).
“And he is the author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY HIM.” (Heb. 5:8,9).
“Why call ye me “Lord, Lord and do not the things which I say?” (Luke 6:46)
Not every one that saith unto me Lord, Lord shall enter the Kingdom of heaven but he that DOETH THE WILL of my father in heaven.” (Matt. 7:21)
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved:” (mark 16:16).
I believe that the above passages of scripture are sufficient to put this matter in it’s correct perspective for those who are honest enough to want to know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
But for those interested in deceiving themselves Mr. Hanson offers the following:
““It is at the moment I believe on Jesus that I have everlasting life!” Or in other words, I have left the kingdom of darkness and have been translated into the kingdom of God, this is what it means to "have everlasting life". Verily, Verily!”
The passage says nothing about “the moment” we believe but if you desire to deceive yourself as Mr. Hanson has done you might feel better believing something that GOD NEVER SAID. And indeed it is true that when we are translated into the Kingdom of God we are among those who can hope for everlasting life. But if you need the comfort of believing that you can just then sit down, ignore the Lord’s commands and do as you please without any fear of ever losing your soul. Then you may wish to deceive yourself into believing that the moment you are translated into God’s kingdom you have it made and nothing else you do or say after that matters. It is all over, you are saved and no matter what happens after that you will live forever! You may wish to deceive yourself into believing such nonsense as Mr. Hanson has done. But you must be willing to ignore the simple fact that the passage, which he referred us to, say none of it, and neither does the rest of God’s word! And you will only be woefully disappointed at the judgement. But there are those who do not love the truth and even God sends them a “strong delusion” that they might be condemned who love not the truth but have pleasure in unrighteousness. Read this stern warning:
“And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” (2 Thess 2:10- 12).
“But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,” (Romans 2:8).
“O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?” (Gal. 3:1).
“Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?” (Gal. 5:7)
“Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, [see that ye] love one another with a pure heart fervently:” (1 Peter 1:22).
“For the time [is come] that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if [it] first [begin] at us, what shall the end [be] of them that obey not the gospel of God?” (1 Peter 4:17).
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, June 10, 2001
Skip:You have asked:
“Mr Safford, why do you seek to pollute the gospel of Christ?”
Now, just because you assume without any evidence to prove that it is true that I am seeking to “pollute” the gospel of Christ does not mean that such is actually what I am trying to do, now does it? What I am actually seeking, is to correct the false doctrine of those such as yourself who appear to be seeking to DILUTE the gospel of Christ. For the seem to seek to do so in such a way as to prevent men from being obedient to Christ which is essential to our obtaining the benefits of God’s grace. For we are told, “But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.” (Acts 20:24) and this gospel must be obeyed, “By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:” (Romans 1:5) And again, “But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:” Romans 16:26). And grace must be obtained by faith as it was by our father Abraham. “Therefore [it is] of faith, that [it might be] by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,” (Romans 4:16). Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?” (James 2:21,22). So you see that Abraham received God’s grace of favor by faith WHEN HE OFFERED HIS son Isaac upon the altar in obedience to God’s command. Thus by works was his “faith made perfect or “complete”. No one will obtain the grace of God by an imperfect, incomplete, dead, lifeless faith! So the scriptures teach. So indeed we are “saved by grace through faith” (Eph. 3:8) but not through an incomplete, dead, lifeless disobedient faith. Therefore when our faith leads us to obey Christ we obtain the salvation that comes by his grace. “And he is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him” (Heb. 5:8,9). Grace does not come, therefore by works only nor does it come by faith only but it comes from the obedience that proceeds from our faith. (Romans 16:26;5:1).
Then you say:
“Is not the grace of God sufficient?”
Indeed it is sufficient but it does not come to us ALONE but by faith. And it does not come to us by “faith only” but by a “perfected faith” as was the faith of Abraham, which was perfected or made complete, when his faith led him to obey God. (James 2:21-22).
What "work" can you or I do that can in any way gain God's tiniest amount of favor other than to simply take Him at His Word? "To obey is better than sacrifice.”
The work that we can do is to obey the commands of Christ. For we are told, “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.” (John 3:36). Indeed to “obey is better than sacrifice and to harken than the fat of Rams.” Which is proof conclusive that God does not want us to believe ONLY but also to obey him otherwise we will not see life.
Then you say:
" James states: "What use is it, brethren, if a man SAYS he has faith, but he has no works? Can that (so called) "faith" save him?"”
Indeed faith that does not obey God is “so-called” faith. It is a dead faith (James 2:17) and cannot save anyone, now can it?
Then you say:
“ I submit that in James 2:14-26, the writer makes a distinction between salvation and justification.”
Well that is a fine submission but it would have been more effective if you would have at least taken the trouble to make some attempt to prove that such nonsense is true, now wouldn’t it? You might have learned something in the process of trying to prove that James makes some particular “distinction” between salvation and Justification as if they had nothing whatsoever to do with one another. If you will make that effort I will examine it. But I can tell you that you will find that such is far from true.
Then you say:
“To take the "Works saves" position is to corrupt the whole of the rest of Scripture.”
Well this is another fine assertion made without offering one shred of evidence that would cause any thinking person to believe it. The book of James is a part of the “rest of Scripture” and it tells us, “ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY.” It is the doctrine of salvation by “faith ONLY that cannot be found in the scriptures. There is not a single passage that teaches that we are saved or “justified by” faith ONLY anywhere.
But you make a feeble attempt to show that we are saved by faith only without any obedience or "works" whatsoever as follows:
“Rom. 5:1 "Therefore, having been justified by FAITH". James is teaching that works is the evidence that faith exists; that works justifies, or proves, the genuineness of the faith.”
Indeed Romans 5:1 shows that we are justified by faith. But it does not teach that we are justified by “FAITH ONLY” now does it? According to James we are told, “Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?” (James 2:22) faith wrought with his works by works was his faith made perfect or complete. We are not taught anywhere in the word of God that works merely “proves, the genuineness of the faith” as you falsely claim. James says that by works faith was actually “made perfect” not that faith was “proven to be genuine” . But be that as it may, no person will be justified by a faith that is not genuine, now will he? And you are not correct when you say that “works Justifies” for that is not what James says. And that is exactly what Paul condemns. James says that faith “wrought with his works” not works alone without faith. And Paul taught that works alone that did not proceed from faith would not justify. It is faith and works “wrought together” rather than faith without works or works without faith that justifies us. And Abraham is the example used by both James and Paul to clarify this very important point. “Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?” (James 2:22). So, it is those who are trying to prevent works from being “wrought with faith” so that faith can be complete or perfect which it the kind of faith that Justifies us who are trying to “dilute” the gospel. Those of us who are seeking to combine our faith with works of obedience to Christ proceeding from faith in him that are holding to what is taught in God’s word. And to do such is to follow the truth in it’s purity and it does not pollute the truth to obey it, now does it? But it does dilute the truth to take something from it as you seem to be trying to do.
Then you say:
“ Jesus cursed the fig tree because it had no fruit.”
Indeed, while it is true that we are not “fig trees” that was an object lesson to us all. If we do not bear fruit it matters not how much “faith” we claim to have that faith is barren and useless and Christ will “curse” such “faith trees” that are barren. And it is interesting that you have not notice that James speaks of faith ONLY as something that is “dead or barren and lifeless”. So it seems to me that you might be willing to admit that if we are “barren and fruitless” that our faith is dead! So according to this it would take faith plus fruitfulness for one to be accepted by the Lord. Is that what you are trying to say? If it is then your doctrine of salvation by faith only is dead isn’t it?
Then you say:
“Spiritual fruit is the proof of spiritual life.”
But works is needed to “perfect or complete” faith it does not merely “prove it”. And a perfect or complete faith is essential to a “spiritual life” which produces spiritual fruit. So, faith if it hath not works is dead and one with a dead faith is not “spiritually alive” and therefore cannot produce spiritual fruit”. Thus faith only will not produce spiritual life, or fruit! Seems to me that people had better be greatly concerned about works of faith. “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. “ (James 2:26)
“I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, [even] where Satan's seat [is]: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas [was] my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.” (Rev. 2:13)
“I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last [to be] more than the first.” (Rev. 2:19).
Then you say:
"For all our works are as filthy rags."
Indeed that they may be but according to James, “faith wrought with his works (filthy rags) and by works (filthy rags) was faith made perfect.” (James 2:22). So, though they may be “filthy rags” (you should study the context of the verse that you quote concerning our works being filthy rags and see what it really means. I will not seek to embarrass you for appearing not to know) but those filthy rags when wrought with our faith makes our faith perfect and complete and only such a faith can justify us. It is works alone apart from faith in Christ that is worthless and it is faith alone apart from obedience to Christ that is worthless. But faith wrought with works is a perfected faith that is the faith that saves us.
Then you say:
“It is beyond me still, what you think you can do that can satisfy God's righteous standards?”
It is not really beyond you, Skip. You can understand it if you will study your Bible instead of your theology books, which tell you that we are saved by faith ONLY, which is not taught anywhere in the scriptures. And it is not a satisfying of “God’s righteous standards” that we are talking about. It is obeying God’s commands so that our faith in Christ will end our rebellion against God. And he will, when we have ended that rebellion by obeying from the heart that form of doctrine that was delivered to us” he will “then” make us free from sin so that we are no longer servants of sin but servants of God. (Romans 6:17,18). And we are told, “Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.” Romans 6:16-18). When are we “made free from sin” according to the above verse? WHEN we obey from the heart that form of doctrine that was delivered to us. And that is done when we are repenting and are baptized. (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:3-6; Col. 2:11-13).
Then you say:
“For lulling your students into believing this false doctrine, you will be held to account for their souls.”
Now you have not proven that I have any students much less that I have made any attempt to “lure’ them anywhere. I am willing to be taught by anyone in this forum or elsewhere who can show that the arguments which I have made are not the truth. I am not teaching these things in a “corner” skip. I am teaching them in a public forum where anyone can correct me. But you falsely attempt to leave the impression that I am trying to “lull” students into believing false doctrine. When the truth is that I am leading them away from the false doctrine of salvation by FAITH ONLY as taught by you and others. And I must tell you that we are indeed having success with this effort. But if you can prove that salvation by FAITH ONLY is the truth I will cease to fight against it and teach it myself. But as of this moment no one has proven that the scriptures teach that we are saved by “faith only”. And until they do we will continue to resist it. And they have not failed for lack of trying to prove it either. They have failed simply because there is not one passage of scripture in the entire word of God that says we are “saved or Justified by FAITH ONLY. And you cannot find one that teaches it anywhere now can you?
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, June 10, 2001
John 6:47"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."
Hath is present tense.
Grace + Faith = Redemption + Good Works.
Simply
-- Anonymous, June 11, 2001
Brethren and Friends:Yet again Mr. Hanson, because he cannot answer the arguments that we have made, merely ignores them and continues his futile attempts to show that we are saved by "faith only" by quoting verses that say nothing about salvation by "faith only and contrary to the inspired James who said, "ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY". He again quotes the following verse which does not support his false doctrine in the least as follows:
"John 6:47 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. Hath is present tense.”
Indeed it is true that “hath” is present tense.
But read just seven verses up from this one in your Bibles and you will find.
John 6:40
“For this is the will of my Father, that every one that beholdeth the Son, and believeth on him, should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”
“Should have” is future tense. Now how can one explain just how it is that the Lord said that those who believe on him “should have” (future tense) in John 6:40 and then seven verses later say he that believeth on me “hath” (present tense) everlasting life? Which one is it? It cannot be both, now can it? But the truth is that those who believe on Christ do, in the present tense have eternal life in prospect. In other words what they have is the “power to become sons of God the end result of which is eternal life. “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:” (John 1:12). The moment that one believes he has the “power to become” but he is not at that moment a “son of God”. But having the right or power to become sons of God is certainly the right to everlasting life, now isn’t it.
But as we have shown before there were many who believed on Christ who did not exersize that right by allowing their faith to lead them into submitting to his lordship and obeying him. For this reason we are told that christ is the “author of eternal life to all them that obey him.” (Heb. 5:8,9). We are told that the “devils believe and tremble” (James 2:16-18) and they even believed on Jesus Christ as the Son of God (Mark 3:11). Did they receive everlasting life the moment they believed on Christ as the Son of God? I think not! And then we have the account of the Jews that believed on Jesus but would not confess him because they “loved the praise of men more than the praise of God. “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess [him], lest they should be put out of the synagogue:” (John 12:42). Now these men “believed on Jesus” but they would not confess him! Did they receive everlasting life the moment that they believed on Jesus? Well we are told, “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness but with the MOUTH CONFESSION IS MADE UNTO SALVATION” (Romans 10:9,10). And Christ said, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 10:32,33). Again we have yet another case. “As he spake these words, many believed on him.” (John 8:30). Now these were believers who “believed on” Christ. Here are clearly some believers. Do they have eternal life? We will see. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, [then] are ye my disciples indeed; (John 8:31). Jesus then continues His address to “those Jews which believed on Him” until at the fortieth verse he says: “But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.” TO these same believers he says, “Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” (John 8:44). Here were persons who believed on the Son of God but they sought kill him, and he tells them that they are children of the devil. Surely then he who believes on the son of God. But does not “perfect” his faith (James 2:21-22) by obedience to His will (Luke 6:46; Matt. 7:21; Heb. 5:8,9; James 2:21-22) cannot have eternal life, either in possession or in prospect, unless, indeed, he may be a “son of God” and a child of the devil at the same time!
So it should be obvious that none of these listed above received everlasting life “the moment they believed on Jesus”. Mr. Hanson’s false theory notwithstanding! For if they did they receive everlasting life they received it without being saved, even though Christ would deny them before the father, which is in heaven, and while they remained children of the devil intent upon killing the Son of God! Who can believe such nonsense as this, which is offered by our friend Mr. Hanson? None, who believes God’s word can accept it, now can they?
Now let us notice how the rest of the word of God abuntantly shows that we have eternal life in prospect in this life and in actuallity in the next. When do we have eteranl life, before or after we are “raised up at the last day”? Jesus said plainly, “I will raise him up at the last day. He does not “raise him up” the moment that he believes, now does he?
Nothing is more clearly taught in the scriptures that a man never has eternal life otherwise than in prospect while he dwells in the flesh. Eternalmeans without beginning or end – of endless duration. But Paul says to the Corinthians, “More over brethren I declare unto you the gospel which I preaced unto you, which also ye received, and wherein ye stand, by which also ye are saved, IF ye keep in memeory what I preached unto you unless ye have BELIEVED IN VAIN?” (1 Cor. 15:1,2). How could a man ever have “believed in vain” if he were in possess of eternal life the moment that he believed? For if one has eternal life in actual possession, rather than simply in prospect, he cannot “believe in vain” . He cannot fall away and be lost for then it would not be eternal life, now would it. That it is possible for one fall away and be eternally lost can be seen from these passages of scripture.
Peter said, “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:” (2 Peter 1:10). If they already possessed everlasting life then it could not ever end. And thus there would have been no need to make their “calling and election sure” for it would have already been sure the moment that they believed. But the truth is that they needed to make it sure and if they did these thing they would never fall. If they did not “do these things” they would fall or would at least be liable to fall. Thus they had eteranl life in prospect but not in actual possession as a certain never ending right.
Then Paul told the Romans, “destroy not him with thy meat for who Christ died.” Roamns 14:15) and to the corinthians he said, “and through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for who Christ died.” (1 Cor. 8:11). Thus we see that it is possible for those “weak brothers” who believed on Christ to “be destroyed” or “perish” evn though they believed on Christ and He had died for them. So, if they were to have been destroyed that would have been the “end” of their “ever;asting life” if they actually possessed it. But the truth is that they had it only in prospect or as a promise that they would receive upon the condition of continued faithfulness to Christ.
Then we are told, “But there were false prophets among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and BRING UPON THEMSELVES SWIFT DESTRUCTION.” (2 Peter 2:1). Now, here we have Peter speaking of alse teachers that would deny the Lord that bought them and bring upon themselves swift destruction. How did the Lord buy them? Paul admonished the Elders at Ephesus to “feed the church of God which he purchased with is own blood”. (Acts 20:28). Then it was with the blood of Christ that these false teachers had been bought ye they would deny Him and be destroyed swiftly! Now, if they had “everlasting life the moment that they believed on Christ” in their actual possession rather than in prospect how could they have been destroyed. For such a distruction would have put an end to that which was “eternal”. Well, the truth is that they had the hope of eternal life in the life to come. But they never actually possessed it in this life. Otherwise it would have been impossible for them to have been destroyed now wouldn’t it?
But further confirmation of the fact that eternal life only in prospect. “And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's, But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.” (Mark 10:29,30). Luke gives an abridgement of this promise, “Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting. (Luke 18:30). Here the Lord expressly tells us when his followers shall have eternal life. We shall have it IN THE WORLD TO COME. According to Mr. Hanson’s theory the disciples of the Lord could have replied to Christ: “Lord, you said that ‘he that believeth on the son of God hath everlasting life’; we believe on you, and therefore have eternal life now: why do you say that we shall have it in the world to come?”
Paul said, “Now, being made free from sin, and become servants unto God, ye have your fruit unto holiness and in the end eternal life.” Paul’s brethren at Rome were then pardoned- free from sin- servants of God- and ofcourse were believers in Jesus, yet they were to HAVE ETERNAL LIFE AT THE END.
And again Paul speaks of the righteous judgement, when God, “will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by PATIENT CONTINUANCE IN WELL DOING seek for glory, and honor and immortality, and eternal life; but to them that are contentious, and do not OBEY THE TRUTH, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul that doeth evil, of the Jew first and also of the gentile.” (Romans 2:6-8). Thus those who persevere in well-doing unto the end will then receive eternal life.
Paul admonished Timothy to fight the good fight of faith, that he might “lay hold on eternal life”. (1 Tim. 6:12). Surely this man of God did not have to fight to lay hold on that which he already had the moment that he believed on Christ!
And to titus Paul said, “ being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.” (Titus 3:7). He who is justified by grace “hopes for eternal life”; yet he cannot hope for that which he already has. For we are told, “but if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it”. (Romans 3:25). But Mr. Hanson does not want to “wait for it” he insist that he already has it! So it is obvious that he does not have the “hope of eternal life” but rather he actually possess it.
So, those who had been baptised at the baptism of John had eternal life but how did they have it. They had it in prospect or by right or grant. They were heirs of eternal life but they had not yet received their inheritance. In fact, Christ had not even died for these men as yet when he spoke those words. And if they had believed on him at that very moment in response to his words they could not have been given at that very moment everlasting life for Christ had not yet been crucified! If they received eternal life at that very moment they would have been saved without the blood of Christ being shed for them. He was telling them if they believed on him they have eternal life as a right or an inheritance which they would receive after he died for them for “without the shedding of blood there is no remission”
Then here is MR. Hanson’s formula for salvation but it is not the same as Christ fromula.
Mr. Hanson’s formula is:
“Grace + Faith = Redemption + Good Works.”
Christ said he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved”
Faith + Baptism = salvation
“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Acts 2:38).
Repent +Baptism = remission of sins
Romans 10:9,10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Now if a person believes in his heart and at that moment he receives everlasting life before he even opens his mouth to confess Christ, then how could he confess “unto salvation” if he had already received it the moment that he believed what he would only later confess. For one cannot confess that which he has not first concieved and believed. But be that as it may the essense of this verse would be:
Faith +confession = salvation
Taken all together from God’s word we get
Grace +faith + repentance + confession + baptism =salvation
As you can see Mr. Hanson’s formula leaves out much that God’s word puts in, now doesn’t it?
Ther is not way in which Mr. Hanson can find one single verse which teaches that we are “saved” or “justified” by faith ONLY. And he has now twice denied that he ever said that we are saved by “faith only” but we will one more time point to the fact that he has lied about that. Look at his words which follow:
““Therefore we arrive at the Bible understanding of the Good News…. (notice that I have never said "faith alone" as it has been falsely stated)”
Now Mr. Hanson, in the above quote from him says “(Notice that I have never said “faith alone” as it has been falsely stated)”. Well brethren, if you will simply go to the thread entitled “Revival of an Old Discussion on Baptism” you will find the following remarks by Mr. Hanson, while discussing the exact same passage which he is now discussing. And therein you will find him clearly, emphatically and definitely saying what he NOW CLAIMS that he NEVER said as follows: “Moving on…you state… "The Lord did not say that one is saved by believing alone, now did he?" Well, yes, Mr. Saffold, Jesus has mentioned on numerous occasions one is saved by believing alone. John 5:24, John 6:47, John 7:38, John 11:25, John 12:46, John 12:46, Matt.26:28. -- Barry R. Hanson (obci2000@yahoo.com), May 10, 2001.”
Now you can go to that thread and read it, friends. Mr., Hanson did definitely say in response to my question “the Lord did not say that one is saved by faith only, now did he?” and he said in his response, “Well, yes. Mr. Saffold, Jesus has mentioned on several occasions that one is saved by faith alone”. And he gave the references that he falsely claimed represented Jesus as saying that which Jesus never said. All one need to do is read them and you will not find that Christ ever said in any of them that we are saved by “faith alone”, as Mr. Hanson falsely claimed. But now he wants you to believe that he has been “falsely” charged with saying “faith alone” but as you can see he is not telling the truth, now is he? Now we having provided irrefutable evidence here, Friends and Brethren, that Mr. Hanson is denying that he ever said “faith alone” and we have given you the exact thread with the exact date and place where he did in fact say “believing alone”. Now Mr. Hanson needs to come back in here and admit that he said those words and repent for having lied to us in claiming that he “never” said them, now doesn’t he?
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, June 11, 2001
E Lee writes:Mr. Hanson’s formula is:
“Grace + Faith = Redemption + Good Works.”
Christ said he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved”
Faith + Baptism = salvation
“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Acts 2:38).
Repent +Baptism = remission of sins
Romans 10:9,10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Now if a person believes in his heart and at that moment he receives everlasting life before he even opens his mouth to confess Christ, then how could he confess “unto salvation” if he had already received it the moment that he believed what he would only later confess. For one cannot confess that which he has not first concieved and believed. But be that as it may the essense of this verse would be:
Faith +confession = salvation
Taken all together from God’s word we get
Grace +faith + repentance + confession + baptism =salvation
CG says:
Grace +faith + repentance + confession + baptism =salvation
Is putting things together which the Scriptures do not put together in this sequence or in any one passage. There is only one way of Salvation--through Christ Jesus, but not all of the descriptions of how it is obtained can be harmonized. That is why this debate exists in the first place. Why not take the lack of harmonization and just trust the Lord and relax with it?
-- Anonymous, June 11, 2001
CG:You have said:
“CG says: Grace +faith + repentance + confession + baptism =salvation Is putting things together which the Scriptures do not put together in this sequence or in any one passage.”
I agree with you partially in what you have said, CG. The reason that I stated the matter this way was in response to Mr. Hanson’s method of “putting things together” as you say. My argument basically was that if we are going to “put things together” in this way. Then let us make sure that we do not leave anything out. But I am interested to know why you did not object to this type of argument when it was used in favor of a position that you appear to favor? For you did not notice that Mr. Hanson is the one who began talking in this way and it did not occur to you that it was in anyway unacceptable until the same method of argument was used to counter your favored position.
Then you say:
“ There is only one way of Salvation--through Christ Jesus, but not all of the descriptions of how it is obtained can be harmonized”
Now, just here, it is regrettable that I must disagree. I do indeed agree that salvation is only through Jesus Christ. And that is the very reason that the scriptures make it quite clear that “Neither is there salvation in any other for there is no other name under heaven whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). And that is the reason that we are told that he is the “author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him” (Heb. 4:12). And unless we submit to his lordship and obey him we will not be saved. (Luke 6:46; Matt. 7:21).
But the things, which he told us to do, are not in the least bit out of “harmony”. Therefore they do not have any need to “be harmonized” as you claim. The reason that we see through out the New Testament examples of conversion to Christ a different answer given to various ones was because of their differing conditions. One who did not yet believe in Christ would be told to believe and be baptized such as the Philippian Jailer. But ones who already believed would be told to “repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins"”(Acts 2:38). For since he already believed there would be no need to tell him to do that which he already had done. An example would be those on the day of Pentecost and the Ethiopian eunuch. The preachers of the gospel in the New Testament took people from where they were to where they needed to be. Paul’s sermon on Mars Hill was different in its approach than Peter’s sermon on Pentecost or Stephen’s sermon in Acts 7. But when they are put together, which they are not naturally “put together” in the scriptures they do harmoniously preach the same gospel without any variation whatsoever.
But it was because Mr. Hanson had presented a “derived” formula for salvation by “putting together” the things from the New Testament that he liked. And leaving out the things mentioned in the New Testament that he did not like that I responded by showing that if Mr. Hanson had included all that the scriptures teach concerning salvation his “derived” formula would look quite different. Sometimes such response is necessary in debate when the opponent reduces his argument to the ridiculous. But I do agree with you that no such “derived” formulas exist in the word of God. But we must take all that the word of God teaches about our salvation and not just the things that we favor. You could have corrected Mr. Hanson for making such a ridiculous argument and I would not have responded in that way. But instead you wait until I show his argument to be absurd and then you are critical of the response to it while favoring the initial use of it because it was used to defend a position that you favor. And this does not indicate that you are attempting to view this subject in a fair and objective way, now does it?
Now, the “lack of harmony” in this discussion is not found in the word of God but rather in the perversions of it by those who do not want to OBEY Christ and follow the truth of the gospel. The word of God is in perfect harmony and because the perversions of it do not harmonize proves only that men have deliberately misunderstood it. It does not mean that the word of God is in the least bit out of sync with itself. Before you can claim any lack of harmony in God’s words you must point to conflicts between the very words of God themselves rather than the differing opinions of men concerning the meaning of God’s word.
Then you say:
“ That is why this debate exists in the first place.”
I do not agree CG. This is not the reason this debate exists in the first place. This debate exists because men do not want to obey Christ. They want to simply “believe” in him and that without being in the least bit obligated to submit to him as LORD and obey his commands. They want to think that all that is essential to our salvation is offering the platitude of some mere mental assent to the facts concerning Christ. But when it comes to obeying the command of Christ to “repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38) that is just too much for them to bear. But Christ said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved:” (Mark 16:16). And the Hebrew writer says that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him” (Heb. 5:8,9). He did not say, “to all them that merely “believe” on him.
Then you asked:
“ Why not take the lack of harmonization and just trust the Lord and relax with it?”
The reason is that there is no lack of “harmonization” as you falsely claim. We will not “take” or accept that which is false from anyone! And we do trust in the Lord and because he is LORD we do not sit back and “relax” and demand that the Lord serve us! WE arise and serve him while it is day for the night cometh when no man can work. We are not seeking a “comfortable” relaxed life, CG. We are serving the Lord and will do his will in all things.
Another reason is that we are not in agreement with Neo – Orthodox theologians such as “Barth” who did not even believe in the actual resurrection of Christ because they do not really believe that God was able to inspire men to deliver His word without perverting it before it was even delivered. Now, you do not claim to deny the resurrection but you agree with the Neo-orthodox position concerning inspiration of the scriptures as taught by those who deny the resurrection of Christ. And Mr. Bledsoe, who you claim to have been influenced by, is one who follows “Barth”. Now I have not had time to respond to our discussion on inspiration. I am preparing something for that now. But you cannot expect that those of us who do not accept the Neo- orthodox view of inspiration to be willing to find a lack of harmony in God’s word where none ever existed in the first place.
For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,
E. Lee Saffold
-- Anonymous, June 12, 2001
CG,It is true that we must be in Christ, thus the figure that Peter gives us of the flood and the similar figure of water baptism. When we are in Christ we will be water baptized - just as Noah was in the Ark in order to pass through the flood!
First we enter Christ, and then we enter into good works! To enter good works before we enter Christ is complete nonsense - our works before we enter Christ could never possibly be considered or defined as "good".
Grace + Faith = Redemption + Good Works.
The problem that many on this forum have is their formula of "salvation".
Grace + Faith + Water Baptism + Confession + Repentance + Obedience + Good Works + ……… = Salvation.
I still haven't gotten an exhaustive list from anyone on this forum as to every single work that is required before God's free gift is given to us! I believe this is due in part because they do not have such a list and any list that is compiled would be incomplete as someone could come up with some other "good work" and therefore cast doubt upon their salvation. How is one ever confident they have passed from death to life if it depends upon our good works? What then would be the purpose of Christ's death - we would simply be living under the Old Covenant if we reverted back to this works based mentality. CG we are under a much better covenant!
Grace + Faith is superior to Grace + Faith + Good Works , thank the Lord we do not have to earn His FREE gift. Think about it, having to earn a free gift? This a complete contradiction in terms. When a gift is free, just receive it - don't work for it!
Romans 3
"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; 22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: 23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; 24 Being justified FREELY by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: 25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; 26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? OF WORKS? NAY: but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith." (emphasis mine)
In Christ's Love,
-- Anonymous, June 12, 2001
Repost to comment:Another reason is that we are not in agreement with Neo – Orthodox theologians such as “Barth” who did not even believe in the actual resurrection of Christ because they do not really believe that God was able to inspire men to deliver His word without perverting it before it was even delivered. Now, you do not claim to deny the resurrection but you agree with the Neo-orthodox position concerning inspiration of the scriptures as taught by those who deny the resurrection of Christ. And Mr. Bledsoe, who you claim to have been influenced by, is one who follows “Barth”. Now I have not had time to respond to our discussion on inspiration. I am preparing something for that now. But you cannot expect that those of us who do not accept the Neo- orthodox view of inspiration to be willing to find a lack of harmony in God’s word where none ever existed in the first place.
--------------------- Lee,
Some corrections:
1--When you say,
Another reason is that we are not in agreement with Neo – Orthodox theologians such as “Barth” who did not even believe in the actual resurrection of Christ because they do not really believe that God was able to inspire men to deliver His word without perverting it before it was even delivered.
That is not what I am saying. The problem is not with the ability of God to deliver His word. The problem is that, God's unlimited abilitty notwithstanding, no human is so able to HEAR God's word as to preserve it without error. The neo-orthodox position is n ot based on a lower view of God, but a more accurate view of man.
2--You write
Now, you do not claim to deny the resurrection but you agree with the Neo-orthodox position concerning inspiration of the scriptures as taught by those who deny the resurrection of Christ.
Yes, but the reason for that is...regardless of the view of the resurrection, (and I do believe in Jesus' literal, bodily resurrection), AS A METHOD OF BIBLE STUDY, Neo-Orthodoxy is better than any alternative. It is not necessary to agree with every jot and tittle of a theology to see the value of its study method.
3--Finally you say,
And Mr. Bledsoe, who you claim to have been influenced by, is one who follows “Barth”. Now I have not had time to respond to our discussion on inspiration. I am preparing something for that now. But you cannot expect that those of us who do not accept the Neo- orthodox view of inspiration to be willing to find a lack of harmony in God’s word where none ever existed in the first place.
It is Bloesch, not Bledsoe.
And whether one is willing to find a lack of harmony in the Bible or not, it is there. My point is that on a human level it cannot all be reconciled, and if it could, there would be no need for faith. In some places it says, "he who believes", others "he who believes and is baptized." In some places it says we are justified by faith, others we are justified by faith and works. Some places it says "whosoever will may come", other places it says, "no one may come unless the Spirit draw him."
Now some of these things can be reconciled, but not all.
I liken the views of Scripture to the views of the humanity/deity of Christ. The liberals, which I am not, only view the Scripture as a human document. That is like the Ebionites, who claimed Jesus' full humanity and rejected His divinity. Bishop Spong and Marcus Borg would be in this camp, and they are wrong.
The "conservative" view, which believes in literal inerrancy, would be like Doceetism. which affirmed Jesus' full divinity and denied his humanity. We do the same thing if we insist the Scripture is error- free. Francis Schaeffer, Paige Patterson, and most of this forum hold this view and it is just as wrong as the Ebionite view.
The truth is Jesus was fully human and fully divine, and with regard to the Scriptures the truth is they are the word of God and the word of humans at the same time. We err to deny either. Neo-Orthodoxy is valuable mainly because it emphasizes this point.
-- Anonymous, June 12, 2001
CG, You said, "Grace + Faith is superior to Grace + Faith + Good Works , thank the Lord we do not have to earn His FREE gift. Think about it, having to earn a free gift? This a complete contradiction in terms. When a gift is free, just receive it - don't work for it!"I realize that this is a concept that continually gets misstated over and over again. Those of us on this forum who believe that faith without works is dead, have NEVER EVER stated that we must earn our salvation. Frankly, I am disappointed that even after denying over and over again, you make this particular statement as though this is something that we believe. This concept of earning one's salvation is false, and has never been espoused (to my knowledge) by myself or others who believe that faith without works is dead.
I will try to be as brief as possible here. The Bible teaches, without equivocation, (if you are willing to accept the entire Word) that Faith, Repentance, Confession, Baptism, and a life of Obedient Faith are all part of one's being saved.
I believe Romans 9 completely. And I add that the context teaches obedience. I also believe Acts 2: 38 - repent and be baptized, I also believe Mark 16:16 believe and confess. I do not understand your denial that these passages are all connected with salvation. They are all plainly stated. Each one is direct and simple. The manner in which they can all coexist and be perfectly consistent one with the other, is when we understand what James says in regard to the difference between living faith and dead faith. This is what the Bible clearly says, you have read it over and over and over again. The book of Romans teaches obedient faith, from beginning to end.
How is this statement not true? How can a faith that is without works save anyone? I remind you, I am NOT SAYING that works earn salvation, what I am asking is this (in essence), Who does the will of the father, The one who simple and only believes or the one that obeys the father? You have stated that you believe that to attach obedience to faith is equivelant to saying our obedience is earning our salvation. But consider this, God has definately placed conditions upon his gift of eternal life (His grace). I realize that there is in some people's mind that to place a condition on a gift is no free gift at all. However, God is no fool that He would simply pass on eternal life to those who would ONLY BELIEVE with their mind.
Do you believe that God will save those to whom He is not LORD? And how can He be LORD without obedience. Yes, I believe, based upon the mentioned Scripture passages,(plus many more) that God as truely placed conditions upon the gift of eternal life. And, I submit that it is more rational to realize this as truth, then to believe that God would give eternal life to those who simply make a mental assent to the fact that God is God and Jesus is His Son. God is a jealous God, and He demands our obedience, before and after salvation is given. In light of the teaching of Paul and James, as well as Jesus Himself, how can we contend with God and demand of Him to save people who will just believe only?
There is just to much Scripture that supports the conditions of Repentance, Confession, Baptism to simply consign them to the area of: its ok if you don't, God knows your heart and He will save you if you just pray this prayer of belief. The Bible does not say that God will save you if you don't do A, B, C... But the Bible, as we have shown in many previous posts, that God will save those who believe, God will save those who repent, God will save those who confess Him, God will save those who call upon His name, God will save those who are baptized according the truth. These have been abundantly made clear with much evidence. How can we deny these clear passages by just emphasizing some of them? I, for one, cannot deny them. I must realize that Faith without Works is dead. And dead faith cannot save. Therefore, I MUST have living faith in order to be saved. The only way that I can have living (saving) faith, is to obey what God has said.
You may ask again, well, so how many 'things' must I do to be have a living faith, and therefore be saved? Where does the list end? To say that you do not know the entire list, or to say that I do not know the entire list, does in no way prove that there is no such "list." We have shown by clear Biblical evidence that God has certainly promised to those who believe, repent, confess and are baptized according to the Scripture, that they have the promise of eternal life. Therefore there are at least these that God Himself has seen fit to reveal to us. For us to know this (and being from God, they are good) and do not do them, to us it is sin. If we then continue in our sin, how is it that we can be saved?
Well, I am getting long winded, so I shall cease for the time being, yet I restate for all to read, I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT TO BE OBEDIENT TO GOD EARNS ONE SALVATION!!!!!!!! NOR DO I BELIEVE IT!!!!! ON THE CONTRARY!!! I HAVE SHOWN AMPLE REASON TO PROVE (for me) THAT WHILE IT IS NECESSARY TO OBEY GOD BEFORE GOD CHOOSES TO SAVE US, THAT OBEDIENCE IN NO WAY EARNS ONE SALVATION, BUT RATHER SIMPLY FULILLS THE REASONABLE DEMAND OF GOD.
Still at it
-- Anonymous, June 18, 2001
David you write:CG, You said, "Grace + Faith is superior to Grace + Faith + Good Works , thank the Lord we do not have to earn His FREE gift. Think about it, having to earn a free gift? This a complete contradiction in terms. When a gift is free, just receive it - don't work for it!"
CG writes:
I never said that. That is E. Lee's summation of what i said.
David writes:
I will try to be as brief as possible here. The Bible teaches, without equivocation, (if you are willing to accept the entire Word) that Faith, Repentance, Confession, Baptism, and a life of Obedient Faith are all part of one's being saved.
CG writes:
I completely agree! I have abundantly said so. My point is that the baptism which saves has nothing to do with water. 1 Pet. 3:21 makes that clear "without equivocation."
-- Anonymous, June 18, 2001
CG,CG writes
"I completely agree! I have abundantly said so. My point is that the baptism which saves has nothing to do with water. 1 Pet. 3:21 makes that clear "without equivocation." "
Thank you for confirming your agreement that Faith, Repentance, Confession and Baptism all are necessary. We agree there is no valid arguement against this.
I would, however, take exception with your final statement, and the reason will follow the reprinting of your statement.
"My point is that the baptism which saves has nothing to do with water. 1 Pet. 3:21 makes that clear "without equivocation." "
What makes this statement a false statement is the "fact" that the context is all about water! Peter makes that clear when he chooses his subject "Noah". The story is how that they were saved by "WATER". Peter points out clearly that it is not the washing of the body with that "water", but it is the answer of a clear conscience toward God. It is when (as we have already agreed upon) faith, repentance and confession come together at the point of "Water Baptism" as we see contextually in I Peter, that God then bestows that gift of the Holy Spirit and forgives us our sin (Acts 2:38) that we might be saved at the final judgement. There is much other evidence in the book of Acts that confirm that the early church baptized in water consistently as one's faith led them to repent and confess Jesus as Lord. (The Philippian Jailor, Paul, The household of Cornelius, Apollus, the Eunich) These examples are more in keeping with the context of "water baptism" in I Peter than a baptism that was only spiritual.
Therefore, I submit to you that to say "My point is that the baptism which saves has nothing to do with water. 1 Pet. 3:21 makes that clear "without equivocation." " is not truthful. For the context of I Peter 3 itself takes exception to your statement.
You, the Bible and I agree with my statement of "without equivocation", and here I have shown that the Bible and I do not agree with your "without equivocation", therefore, your statement is not "without equivocation".
Still studying dilegently
-- Anonymous, June 19, 2001
CG,A short follow-up...
To say that the statement, "the answer of a clear conscience toward God" negates water baptism - is not true. Rather, this statement clarifies the point that we have tried to be consistent in making. That is, that there is more to water baptism than just getting wet. The context proves water as the subject being discussed. The above statement proves that there is more to it than 'only' water.
Still studying,
-- Anonymous, June 19, 2001
David,I would like to respectfully reply to your message.
I Peter 3 specifically states that water baptism is a figure similar to the flood. The flood was a figure of the death and burial of Jesus, thus, water baptism is a similar figure of the death and burial.
The death and burial is the reality, the flood is a figure and water baptism a similar figure.
How do you claim that obedience to water baptism saves when it is merely a figure of a reality?
Also to answer your point about there being more to water baptism than just getting wet, you are right. Water baptism is a command - as a command we must dutifully carry out this act of obedience. If we were not to work this out our conscience would trouble us as we would be walking in rebellion to a clear command of Christ. Once we have carried out our obligation we have, as the Scriptures indicate, a clear conscience.
An important point to make in my opinion, a non-believer will not have a troubled conscience over his lack of obedience. He is by definition a child of disobedience and not in the least concerned about water baptism. Once born again, however, he will have a strong desire to please Jesus and obey His commandments. To anticipate non-believers believing they must be water baptized is a paradox. They are non-believers they don't believe and thus will not be obedient, only until after one believes will they desire to be obedient. This is only logical IMHO.
In Christ's love,
-- Anonymous, June 19, 2001
DavidThe part about the answer of a clear conscience is not what negates the water part...it is the "not the removal of filth from the flesh" part. That makes it clear that Peter is using water is a figure and baptism is not water.
-- Anonymous, June 19, 2001
Barry,You said,
"I Peter 3 specifically states that water baptism is a figure similar to the flood. The flood was a figure of the death and burial of Jesus, thus, water baptism is a similar figure of the death and burial.The death and burial is the reality, the flood is a figure and water baptism a similar figure. How do you claim that obedience to water baptism saves when it is merely a figure of a reality?"
Barry, I appreciate your response. I would submit to you that, in my understanding, this also does not negate the relevance of water baptism. However, I would add that it would give more credibility for water baptism. As in the opening verses of Romans chapter 6 we have this comparison of baptism to the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, the only thing that illustrates this fact is water baptism. There is no way that a "spiritual baptism" illustrates the death, burial and resurrection of Christ.
You said,
"Also to answer your point about there being more to water baptism than just getting wet, you are right. Water baptism is a command - as a command we must dutifully carry out this act of obedience. If we were not to work this out our conscience would trouble us as we would be walking in rebellion to a clear command of Christ. Once we have carried out our obligation we have, as the Scriptures indicate, a clear conscience."
I would answer these thoughts with a question. How is it that one who is walking in rebellion can be saved?
You said,
"An important point to make in my opinion, a non-believer will not have a troubled conscience over his lack of obedience. He is by definition a child of disobedience and not in the least concerned about water baptism."
That is why a non-believer must hear the truth and brought to the point of belief that they might repent of their rebellion. It would seem that to say, a believer without repentance, is not saved almost too obvious. There have been examples of such already mentioned within this thread.
You said,
"Once born again, however, he will have a strong desire to please Jesus and obey His commandments."
I submit to you that one who only believes is not born again. I refer you back to the examples mentioned within the thread that believe yet are unwilling to repent, and therefore remain in their rebellion even while believing.
You said,
"To anticipate non-believers believing they must be water baptized is a paradox. They are non-believers they don't believe and thus will not be obedient, only until after one believes will they desire to be obedient. This is only logical IMHO."
I would simply repeat what I said before. Without repentance, they will not obey, even if they believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God.
(I just reread my words. Barry, you wrote "How do you claim that obedience to water baptism saves when it is merely a figure of a reality?" I believe that if you reread my previous post, you will find that I do not believe that baptism is "merely a figure". The term merely, suggests that water baptism is the "only thing". You had already stated an agreement with me to that very fact. Therefore, your complete statement is not a valid arguement in response to my submitted thoughts)
Whitecg,
You said,
"The part about the answer of a clear conscience is not what negates the water part...it is the "not the removal of filth from the flesh" part. That makes it clear that Peter is using water is a figure and baptism is not water."
I believe that my comments to Barry cover your statements as well. These words confirm the fact that there is more to baptism than just getting wet. They do not negate water baptism as a part of God's chosen manner in which to forgive man his sin, and grant unto him the gift of His Holy Spirit."
I again cannot find a reasonable way to exclude what God has said time and time again regarding our salvation. For the sake of brevity, I again refer you both back through this thread that you might read all those passages that have been quoted wherein the Bible says that we are saved through faith, repentance, confession and baptism. Who am I to attempt to negate any one of them? I cannot, therefore I must continue to teach that all of these one must participate in to be assured they have obeyed God in as much as God has commanded.
Are there commands of God for the one who has already become a Christian? Most certainly! One might ask, well, what happens if one fails in one or more of these commands following his becoming a Christian. I am hoping that we would all agree that "IF" we repent and pray for forgiveness, that God will forgive us our sin, as He promised. But I digress to another subject. :)
If God says somethings saves us,,, then I will teach just that. I will not attempt to dilute it/ rationalize it/ argue with it. I will simply teach it all, and work on the understanding of it all as study continues.
Still studying
-- Anonymous, June 20, 2001
David,I am enjoying our conversation any opportunity that challenges me to grow I take on with great enthusiasm. I, however, do not want to argue and if you feel that the line gets crossed please let me know. I am also under the impression that no amount of discussion is going to dissuade either of us from our position so this may be an exercise in futility.
I suppose I would like to post one more response and allow you to have the final word unless you would care to carry on the conversation further.
In response to your question…
"How is it that one who is walking in rebellion can be saved?"
You have then basically answered your own question with a following comment…
"That is why a non-believer must hear the truth and brought to the point of belief that they might repent of their rebellion."
A person walking in rebellion must hear the truth. When they hear the truth they have a decision to accept or reject that truth. If they choose to reject it they will simply continue on living in sin. If they choose to believe the truth the grace of God redeems them and they move forward in their faith to good works, confession, repentance, etc…. I gather this understanding from the overall context of the Holy Scriptures. The references being too numerous to list here I can only give a very small example of the doctrine of redemption. However, this evidence far outweighs the very few verses that seem to contradict the very clear teaching that we are born again by grace through faith. Therefore I must reconcile this apparent contradiction, because Scripture does not contradict itself, there must be a way to reconcile my understanding with the apparent discrepancy. Either redemption is a free gift to be received or there are strings attached and it must be earned through good works, it cannot be both as that would be a paradox.
Acts 4:4 "Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand."
Acts 8:36,37 "And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
Acts 9:42 "And it was known throughout all Joppa; and many believed in the Lord."
Acts 10:43,44 "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. 44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word."
Acts 11:17 "Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?"
Acts 13:12 "Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord."
Acts 13:48 "And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed."
Acts 14:1 "And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed."
Acts 15:7 "And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe."
Acts 16:30,31 "And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."
Acts 17:4 "And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few."
Acts 17:12 "Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few."
Acts 17:34 "Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them."
As I do not want to be linger the point, as we can see throughout the early church the gospel message was to believe - and only after conversion were disciples then water baptized. This is the New Testament pattern, in fact, 99% of the above Scriptures do not even mention water baptism and the couple which do mention this action are qualified by first believing. I also wanted to provide a very small sampling of the vast majority of Scripture that declares we are redeemed when we believe. This evidence far outweighs the few verses that seem to indicate salvation through works or water baptism.
1 John 5:1 "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him."
Ephesians 2:8,9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast."
John 5:24 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."
John 6:47 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."
Romans 4:4,5 "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."
1 Cor. 1:21 "For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."
1 John 5:10-12 "He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life."
References such as, "He that believeth on me hath everlasting life", "Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God", and, "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" are not future tense but stated as present, at that moment. These references in no way state, if you believe you will be saved, they are stating that when you believe you will be saved, present tense. Redemption occurs the moment you believe according to the Scriptures. After a sinner believes the truth the grace of God saves him and he moves forward in obedience bringing forth the fruit of righteousness. His works bearing witness that his faith is alive and he is a child of God.
One of the very first works of obedience is water baptism. This is a figure of what has already taken place in the life of the believer. Colossians 2:11,12 make it very clear that our baptism into Christ happens "without hands".
"In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead."
We are risen through the faith of the operation of God, in my opinion, this verse makes it clear that we are not risen through faith in the operation of man in water baptism - but rather through faith in the operation of God when He raised Him from the dead. 1 Peter 3 backs this up by stating that water baptism is a figure of this very operation of God through faith.
I look forward to your thoughts in this regard.
Faithfully His,
-- Anonymous, June 20, 2001
BarryUsing your method of interpreting these, (believe) scriptures as all that is necessary for salvation, what happened to repenting? And if we must assume repentance to be forgiven why can we not assume baptism?
Considering your explanation of,(believe) for salvation would you explain your view concerning,(even the demons believe).
I have no doubt that you believe one must repent. But with the logic you have used in this case it seems to deny it.
With this in mind I do not see any basis for arguing against baptism or repentance with the scriptures you have listed. In fact they seem to reinforce what has been said many times before. Hear, believe, confess, repent, be baptized. All for the forgiveness of your sins.
Also. Reference the investigation that was ongoing a few days ago. The bad guy is locked up. He may now receive his just punishment. And I do agree with GWB.
-- Anonymous, June 20, 2001
Faris,Thank you for your response.
I am sure many will not agree with me here, but before I proceed let me put it this way.
A thief before he is caught is bold, brash, arrogant and boastful. Let us say he is caught and he knows they have the evidence to convict him and he is going away for 15 years, unless he can persuade the court for mercy and get the sentence reduced. He walks into the courtroom, humble, meek, "repentant", and even in tears. Admitting he was sorry and that he would never do it again. Here is my question….
Is he truly repentant?
My point is this, a person is truly repentant when in the privacy of their own life without being coerced from exterior forces they conclude they will turn from what is wrong. After being "caught", so to speak, the motivation for change is purely selfish. A sinner caught in his sin will repent if he thinks it is going to benefit himself, bottom line.
Now, this is my thinking, a sinner hears the truth of the gospel and either rejects it or believes it. If he rejects it he obviously is not going to repent. If he believes the truth he is going to repent, however, my previous message has already outlined that once he believes the grace of God redeems him.
Therefore, he is not repenting out of selfish ambition as a sinner attempting to escape punishment, he is a born again Christian experiencing the love and forgiveness of God that motivates him sincerely to turn from (repent of) his sin. As you can now see the complete difference in my outlook.
Repentance, is a fruit of righteousness, which we are called upon to produce as disciples. As I have stated in the past, a child of disobedience is not interested in anything to do with the things of God much less water baptism, repentance, living holy, good works, etc…. These are relegated to people who care and understand and love the Lord - people who believe. Faith, if it is saving faith will prompt one to good works, as James said faith without works is dead. Good works follow faith.
James did not say he would show his good works by his faith! He said he would show his faith by his good works!
Faith first, good works follow.
Once in faith - good works result.
This is the difference between saving faith and how the demons believe (to answer your question). True saving faith will produce good works, the demons believe but never act upon that belief. As we can clearly see it is not the good works that save, they are merely the evidence of true faith. Therefore, according to Scripture it is possible to have faith independent of works. I have heard that if one does not have works they do not have faith, this is false. What differentiates a true believer and demons that believe is that good works will follow. Good works do not precede faith they follow saving faith.
Finally, I have never argued "against" water baptism, repentance, good works, etc… I have always preached obedience and holiness, but not to sinners! To me this is illogical. To illustrate, it is like telling a plane not to fly, or a ship not to float, that is what they do. Sinners sin, that is what they do. Murders murder, thieves steal, and liars lie. If a murderer, thief or liar have a desire to repent, it is because they have heard the gospel and made a decision to believe - which I have already explained. I preach redemption through Jesus Christ the only way to God - once they believe, I instruct these believers in righteousness.
Christianity is not just some other form of Buddhism, Islam or any other religion you can name that requires good works for salvation. This is good news, not old, rehashed and recycled bad news! Christ did the work, come as you are, you will find forgiveness for your sin. You do not have to do it yourself, in fact you cannot! Your own attempts for justification are "filthy rags" this is the whole purpose of Jesus' death! To make a way for us, believe it!
Once you believe and the Holy Spirit comes to live in your life you have the godly desire to please Him, motivated now by love and not self justification or preservation. You are saved and set free from the sin of murder, theft, lying, etc, that you could not escape on your own to begin with. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. Once redeemed, you will be water baptized, repent, obey etc….not before.
You stated…
"Hear, believe, confess, repent, be baptized. All for the forgiveness of your sins."
I believe; confess, repent, and be baptized, all because of the forgiveness of your sins.
In Christ's Love,
-- Anonymous, June 21, 2001
Sorry, but I have learned not to take anything for granted on this forum.It must also be noted that it is not faith that saves, it is the grace of God through faith. Therefore, even if it were possible for the devils to produce good works the grace of God is not extended to them. I would also take this opportunity to again point out the incorrect representation of my position of "faith only" just as it would be for me to characterize this forum as teaching we are "saved by works".
Perhaps we may find some middle ground yet.
In Christ's Love,
-- Anonymous, June 21, 2001
BarryFirst let me apologize up front for to brief an answer to your post. Not enough time right now.
In your illustration of the thief's repentance, I agree this may be the case in a human court of law. But with God sinner's are already CAUGHT. This again reminds me of the jew's on the day of pentecost. They were CAUGHT, they believed, but still asked, what can we do. They belived and were caught but still had to, repent, be baptized in Christ name for forgiveness of their sin's and at that time receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. You have said, "once you believe and the Holy Spirit comes to live in your life you have the Godly desire to please him. It is my opinion that Act's 2.38 tells us how and when he arrives to live in us.
I said, hear, believe, repent, be baptized all for the forgiveness of your sins. (I should have included confess).
You said, confess, repent and be baptized, all because of the for giveness of your sin's.
Peter said, repent and be baptized, everyone of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, FOR the forgiveness of your sin's and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
I am echoing Peter when I say, (for the forgiveness of). Am I wrong?
You stated,"repentance is a fruit of righteousness". I believe righteousness is a fruit of salvation. Our righteousness comes through Christ. Something was said about filthy rag's. How could one be righteous before being forgiven?
A lot of our differences hinge upon, baptism, a work or obedience. It has been discussed a lot but maybe we should revisit it in the future.
Barry, no doubt it is obvious that I am one of the least qualified CC members to enter into these discussions with you. I certainly do not believe I have all the answers. I don't say this to try to appear humble but just honest. But I do try to live up to 2 Tim 2.15. I do enjoy the discussion even though we have not found much we agree on. I believe that Jesus Christ is God's only begotten son. Can we agree on that.
-- Anonymous, June 21, 2001
Faris,Absolutely no apology needed, in fact I prefer shorter posts as they indicate one is remaining focused on the issue. I apologize for having such a lengthy post.
I want to address your last message and I know we will disagree but I at least want to provide an opinion that is as well thought out as any other and yet contrary to the one held by this forum. Sometimes we get stuck in a little box and believe we are the only people who are right and along comes someone who thinks differently and we realize we hadn't examined all the evidence exhaustively. I know this forum has challenged me to think and meditate more deeply.
Here goes…
Acts 2:38 is a specific phrase spoken by Peter to a specific audience. Some may argue this point and guess I wouldn't expect anything less, but I physically did not crucify the Lord Jesus and thus, this is not my particular sin to have to repent from. Which was, in part, the context of this admonition by Peter. However, in the total context of this statement by Peter he is specifically telling them how to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, not how to be born again.
The context of the entire message is against the backdrop, first, the feast of Pentecost (the latter rains) and second, the gift of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit evidenced by tongues. This crowd in particular is wanting to know how to receive this gift, "what must we do?"
Now I understand Peter has just finished explaining that they crucified Christ and they are obviously feeling something, guilt, condemnation…? And to remove this feeling what must they do? Some will undoubtedly argue this is applicable to each of us as well, yet I question that this message is specifically for me. I am not a Jew, I did not live 2000 years ago, and I did not crucify Christ.
It is my position that the Jews asking this question were only cut to the heart because they believed what Peter was preaching. And (you know what is coming "grin") being that they believed, they were already born again. Peter is simply instructing them what they should now do as believers, thus while walking in obedience should fully expect to receive the gift or baptism of the Holy Spirit.
I believe that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is for all people for all time, yet the message concerning their specific actions against Christ are not for all people for all time. I am open to discussion on your viewpoint.
Finally, indeed, part of the gospel is that we are "caught" in sin, but that is only half the gospel. The other half is that Christ has forgiven us our sin. This is the good news not that we are sinners but that we are forgiven!
Outstanding! Indeed I believe that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God! Some common ground, praise the Lord!
In Christ's love,
-- Anonymous, June 22, 2001
BarrySome of what you have said in your last post we have stated our views concerning before. Therefore I won't cover that ground again.
Some of the following is based on my assumption of what you have said. If I'm wrong in my assumption I apologize.
First concerning the baptism of the Holy Spirit. I'm pretty much straight RM on that one with some exceptions. Also, I do not pretend to know all that the Holy Spirit will, won't, can or can not do. What man know's the mind of God? My conclusions are drawn from my understanding of scripture.
My question is based on the assumption that the following is what you are telling me is found in Act's 2. Something like this. Because of Peter's preaching they were cut to the heart. And because of this they believed and were born again. They then asked Peter what to do to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. He said, repent and be baptized, everyone of you, in the name of Jesus Christ in order to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
If I am correct in my assumption:
1. If they had been born again moments before, where did the sin come from of which they must now be forgiven?
2. If Peter was instructing them how to receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit why does he say, AND you will receive, rather than, IN ORDER to receive?
3. Cornelious was not a jew. after all the amazing happenings he was still baptized. The eunuch? Saul on the road spoke with and believed in Christ. Still had sins a few days later. The great commission, ALL the world. Mk 16, to all.
I see i'm starting to cover old ground so I will quit for now.
Again, If I am wrong in my assumption I do apologize.
-- Anonymous, June 22, 2001
Faris,I am not sure I am following you with your questions, I will try my best.
If they had been born again moments before, where did the sin come from of which they must now be forgiven?
I take you to mean that Peter is telling these new believers they need to repent, and you are asking, if they have already been forgiven why do they need to repent? Repentance, as you know, is a turning from sin. Not only these Jews, but all people, even after being forgiven, must still turn from their proclivity to sin. In other words, Jesus has forgiven us for our sin, don't go back to it! Repent of it and proceed onto good works. I hope this answers your question.
If Peter was instructing them how to receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit why does he say, AND you will receive, rather than, IN ORDER to receive?
I am not sure I understand your question. I will put it this way. There is no set steps to receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. The Baptism is a promise, all one need do is believe the promise and receive. Peter is laying out basic steps of obedience that all believers are to follow and as a believer walks in obedience Jesus will Baptize them with the Holy Spirit. All believers have this promise made to them, however, not all believers want to receive this promise. Why a believer would not want all the Lord has for them is a wonderment to me, nevertheless, I have met them. I am not sure if I have addressed your question completely, please let me know.
Cornelious was not a jew. after all the amazing happenings he was still baptized.
This instance here you bring up, to me, has developed a question in me for quite some time that I really would like answered by someone in this forum. The Holy Spirit Baptism is for the Christian, yet to believe one is not a Christian until they are water baptized - how is Cornelious and friends Baptized with the Holy Spirit before they are water baptized?
To me this is one of the greatest pieces of evidence one is not born again at water baptism. Cornelious and friends are Spirit Baptized and talking with tongues (which only Christians can do) BEFORE they are water baptized. Thus they are only water baptized after they are born again and speaking with tongues.
The eunuch?
Again this story clearly shows us that belief must precede water baptism. Once one believes, they have been born again (by grace through faith). Philip specifically tells the eunuch, they only thing that would prohibit you from being water baptized is if you are not a believer. If a believer, then a Christian. Only Christians are concerned about walking in obedience to the command of Christ to be water baptized. A Non-believer is not interested in walking in obedience.
Saul on the road spoke with and believed in Christ. Still had sins a few days later. The great commission, ALL the world. Mk 16, to all.
Saul was converted on the road, and a few days later still has need to repent. I am not sure of the point. Even as Christians for years of following Christ are still in need of confessing their sin, repentance.
In Christ's Love,
-- Anonymous, June 23, 2001