It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sola fide: Quick question to those who believe in salvation by faith alone

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60

Please explain how having faith is work in any sense of the word?

Work requires action... Faith does not, and simply going to church is certainly not a work

especially since Jesus explains specifically that church is not required in his sermon on the mount





posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: jmdewey60
There is no "grey area, theologically". There is a failure to recognize the difference in how James and Paul are using the word, "works".
Paul was using it to describe the demands of the old covenant, and James was using it in the ordinary sense of "doing things".


How are you determining this exactly? Can you show me what context clues you are going off of in the actual verses, or however else you're figuring this?



Salvation was generally a political term more than a theological one, and meant to be under the protection of a government.
Israel was saved in the Exodus story by YHWH separating the Red Sea so that they could pass from being attacked by Pharaoh's army, and to enter the Sinai wilderness.


If "salvation" means to be under the protection of a government, I think we would have seen this explained in the Bible itself, in so many words. Not like a puzzle for us to have to figure this out despite the NT itself not making this point. And if salvation means to be under the protection of a government, then the Hebrews fleeing from the government of Egypt and running out into a barren wilderness wouldn't fit that either.

In Matthew, salvation is equated to entering into the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God to me means an internal peace, faith and compassion for others. These are the things that reflect that someone is following what Jesus actually taught, and when these internal things are reflecting in one's activities, these are the "works" James was referring to, that are natural extensions of faith (salvation).



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

“Life is either a daring adventure or nothing at all!” – Helen Keller

Enjoy the adventure



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 10:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Please explain how having faith is work in any sense of the word?
Go back and read Romans.
Abraham had faith, and how we know that he had faith is that he did as he was commanded by YHWH.
Paul says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Which is a quote from Genesis 15:6.
The following verse is,

7 He also said to him, “I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to take possession of it.”

What Abraham was doing right then in the story was not demonstrating belief, the "belief" had to be a reference to the action taken that is being referred to in the next verse, that Abraham had earlier demonstrated his belief in YHWH by coming out of Ur, which is an actual physical work.

Work requires action... Faith does not, and simply going to church is certainly not a work
Do you think being a Jew back then required works?
The answer should be, Yes, that to be considered a Jew back then required a lot of works, then you would be considered as righteous, because you had fulfilled the requirements of the Law that defines what a Jew is.
The NT is presenting the new status, not of being a Jew, but something comparable, which is being a Christian, which means membership in the church, and that is also by meeting certain standards (being "right", or righteous), which is to be by definition as a Christian, Christ-like.

especially since Jesus explains specifically that church is not required in his sermon on the mount
I don't think so, since the church did not exist yet then.
edit on 12-8-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2014 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

How are you determining this exactly? Can you show me what context clues you are going off of in the actual verses, or however else you're figuring this?
Look at list of verses that use the word, "works".
Now look up the Greek word for all those instances of "works".
You should notice that they all are the same Greek word.
The NT writers had a limited choice of words to work with.
If Paul commits that one word to mean the works of the Law, then when he is talking about another sort of work, then to prevent confusion, he has to figure out another way to refer to it so he sets up a new term and defines it, law of faith, then uses "faith" to mean works of righteousness apart from the Law of Moses.

If "salvation" means to be under the protection of a government, I think we would have seen this explained in the Bible itself, in so many words.
There would not have been the need to define it since it was understood at the time that the NT was written.
What has developed since then is a modern pop-culture religion use of the word that did not exist back then.

Not like a puzzle for us to have to figure this out despite the NT itself not making this point.
People have made it a puzzle by creating a lot of bad doctrines by misusing Bible verses out of context.

And if salvation means to be under the protection of a government, then the Hebrews fleeing from the government of Egypt and running out into a barren wilderness wouldn't fit that either.
It does because as soon as they got to the mountain in Sinai, YHWH gave the commandments and Moses wrote down the covenant which was the constitution of a government.

In Matthew, salvation is equated to entering into the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God to me means an internal peace, faith and compassion for others. These are the things that reflect that someone is following what Jesus actually taught, and when these internal things are reflecting in one's activities, these are the "works" James was referring to, that are natural extensions of faith (salvation).
OK, you just made up your own definition, ignoring what "kingdom" means.

edit on 12-8-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 12:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: jmdewey60
Look at list of verses that use the word, "works".
Now look up the Greek word for all those instances of "works".
You should notice that they all are the same Greek word.
The NT writers had a limited choice of words to work with.
If Paul commits that one word to mean the works of the Law, then when he is talking about another sort of work, then to prevent confusion, he has to figure out another way to refer to it so he sets up a new term and defines it, law of faith, then uses "faith" to mean works of righteousness apart from the Law of Moses.


You mean instead of Paul just saying "works of faith," if that's what he meant, then he just says the word "faith" and we're supposed to be able to read his mind and know that he really meant works based on faith and not just faith itself like he actually said.

I'm not sure I understand what you are actually proposing that the NT says on this subject. You believe that we are still bound to works to be saved, but just a different set of works than the OT describes?

Titus 3:5 - "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"

Romans 11:5-6 - "5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. 6 And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace."

Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God"

Galatians 2:21 - "I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness [come] by the law, then Christ is dead in vain."

John 3:18 - "He that believeth on him is not condemned"

Romans 10:9 - "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."



If "salvation" means to be under the protection of a government, I think we would have seen this explained in the Bible itself, in so many words.
There would not have been the need to define it since it was understood at the time that the NT was written.


If you actually read the NT it breaks down very basic ideas and repeats them over and over and over again, like you see in the quote above about how if grace is by works then it's no longer grace. That's a pretty obvious statement, pretty much self-obvious, but the NT breaks it down so no one will confuse it anyway. But it doesn't mention anywhere that salvation means by a government authority. Jesus says instead to give back to Caesar what is Caesar's, but to give things of God back to God. I could equally make the argument that John was a clown and no one ever mentioned this in the Bible because everyone who read it was assumed to already know that John wore big red floppy shoes and white face paint, but don't you think one of the NT writers would mention that somewhere along the line?


When you say the Bible means something that it never says, you know, there are a billion other theologians such as yourself who come to all kinds of conclusions that are ultimately based on .... nothing that's actually in the Bible itself.


]OK, you just made up your own definition, ignoring what "kingdom" means.


"20 Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, 21 nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.”[c]"

Kingdom of God, not the Roman Empire or the nation of Israel which didn't exist at that time.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60


Go back and read Romans.
Abraham had faith, and how we know that he had faith is that he did as he was commanded by YHWH.
Paul says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
Which is a quote from Genesis 15:6.
The following verse is,

7 He also said to him, “I am the Lord, who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to take possession of it.”

What Abraham was doing right then in the story was not demonstrating belief, the "belief" had to be a reference to the action taken that is being referred to in the next verse, that Abraham had earlier demonstrated his belief in YHWH by coming out of Ur, which is an actual physical work.


He had Faith in the voices in his head... which ended up almost costing his son his life, IF it wasn't for an "angel" stopping him...

And a "work" would be something selfless would it not?

This voice told him he would be a superstar if he left his people to pursue other interests...


Do you think being a Jew back then required works? The answer should be, Yes, that to be considered a Jew back then required a lot of works, then you would be considered as righteous, because you had fulfilled the requirements of the Law that defines what a Jew is.


Didn't you tell me Jews didn't exist back then in another thread?

Or was it someone else?


The NT is presenting the new status, not of being a Jew, but something comparable, which is being a Christian, which means membership in the church, and that is also by meeting certain standards (being "right", or righteous), which is to be by definition as a Christian, Christ-like.


So we've established that Abraham was righteous because he believed in a voice in his head he "believed" was "god" who told him to conquer the land, and eventually sacrifice his own son... Paul say's this is righteousness according to "god"... and we should have "faith" in this god...

On the other hand Jesus said I learned from My Father... IF you believe in me you also believe in My Father because I do the WORK of my Father...Do what I tell you, I am your example.... and I didn't see any conquering, killing, or sacrificing people or animals happening when Jesus was around


I don't think so, since the church did not exist yet then.


Synagogue's and or Temples did I believe...


edit on 13-8-2014 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 01:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
Didn't you tell me Jews didn't exist back then in another thread?

Or was it someone else?


Definitely someone else, so I see your memory is selective at best. Think this carries over into other things besides who posts what on ATS?


So we've established that Abraham was righteous because he believed in a voice in his head he "believed" was "god" who told him to conquer the land, and eventually sacrifice his own son... Paul say's this is righteousness according to "god"... and we should have "faith" in this god...


I'm just arguing what the Bible itself says. I'm not saying I agree with everything in the Bible, because the Bible itself doesn't agree with everything that the Bible says. This goes back to who wrote and edited the different books of the Bible and what their motivations were. But my point, is simply what the Bible says. Not whether you should believe it or not, or your interpretation of it outside of what it says explicitly.



I don't think so, since the church did not exist yet then.


Synagogue's and or Temples did I believe...



Neither of these were nations that would protect people and offer them "salvation." In fact the Romans sacked the Jewish temples regularly, leading up to what happened in 70 AD. In the OT God chastises the Jews for thinking that their temples or even the Ark of the Covenant would save them. The Philistines even captured the Ark at one point, after the Jews arrogantly carried it into battle against them. And then, like I said, 70 AD....

I still really don't understand exactly what you are trying to say that the Bible is saying about salvation and works.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 01:35 AM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

Dude... read who I was replying to...





posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 03:14 AM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

You mean instead of Paul just saying "works of faith," if that's what he meant, then he just says the word "faith" and we're supposed to be able to read his mind and know that he really meant works based on faith and not just faith itself like he actually said.
The fact that you do not get the Letter to the Romans is not the fault of Paul.
People back then (when Paul wrote) were pretty literate since they did not spend their time playing video games, watching TV, and listening to MP3 files on their cell phones.
Rhetoric was the entertainment for the intelligentsia.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 03:20 AM
link   
a reply to: jmdewey60

it seems most scholars disagree with that... most people were illiterate

which included most, if not all of the apostles... perhaps excluding matthew


edit on 13-8-2014 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 03:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

He had Faith in the voices in his head... which ended up almost costing his son his life, IF it wasn't for an "angel" stopping him...
That is your opinion, and why you don't understand the Bible, because you can't get past your feelings to do actual mental exercise to get into the head of the writer, in this case Paul.
Paul is using the ideal of Abraham in the mind of the Jews as a rhetorical device.

Didn't you tell me Jews didn't exist back then in another thread?
The term, Jews, but it does now, in today's language, which I am writing in.


edit on 13-8-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 03:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

it seems most scholars disagree with that... most people were illiterate

which included most, if not all of the apostles... perhaps excluding matthew
2. a : versed in literature . . .
www.merriam-webster.com...

Those not fitting definition 1 would fit definition 2.
Those who could read, read.
Those who didn't, listened to others read, or listened to rhetoricians in the square, or debates.
The point being that they were immersed in a type of discussion that we are not generally exposed to in the world of dumbed down to a 5 year old level TV.

edit on 13-8-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

I'm not sure I understand what you are actually proposing that the NT says on this subject. You believe that we are still bound to works to be saved, but just a different set of works than the OT describes?

Titus 3:5 - "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"
This is just reiterating what Ephesians said, but in a really compressed fashion.

"not by works in righteousness that practiced we"

it says literally. Who is the "we" being referred to here?

"but according to his mercy he saved us"

the second clause literally says. Who is the "us" being referred to here?

"through [the] washing of regeneration and renewing of [the] Spirit Holy"

the third clause literally says.

Which is the process of bringing the members into the church, through repentance and baptism.

We, the church, were not formed into the church by following written laws, but were created as a church through another way of righteousness.

It is not the writer of Titus describing how he was as an individual "saved" in the modern sense of what saved means to people in the free grace cult of once-saved-always-saved.

Why don't you go ahead and expound a bit on how you are regenerated, how that somehow has nothing to do with being righteous, or how righteousness can be attained without actually doing anything righteous, or by actually doing unrighteous acts?
edit on 13-8-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

Romans 11:5-6 - "5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. 6 And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace."
"So too" means, "In this manner therefore", which is referring to the 7,000 being a remnant.
In that same way, which was a work of God, preserving that remnant.
So there would be a symbolic "seven thousand" Jews who had followed God's desire for people to believe in His son.
That result would be based on a power that God has to fulfill His desired goals.
"The present time" is critical as the dawn of the messianic age that Paul was in and the witness to.
"Remnant" had become an eschatological term by its use by the Prophets to describe those who survived through miraculous means, the general destruction of Israel and Judea by the Assyrians and the Babylonians.
They were the ones who would populate the kingdom when it was time to be restored.
Here Paul is using that understanding to show how that sort of expectation could be used to describe the genesis of the church.
"Chosen by grace" means that the honor being bestowed on this "remnant" (becoming the elect) was not based on how well they followed the laws in the book of Moses.
If it was based on those works, God would have been pouring blessings onto the very people who killed Jesus, the teachers of the Law, and the temple leadership.
Instead, God blessed those who had no earthly credentials of godliness that comes from following the letter of the Law.
edit on 13-8-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God"
"Ye" and "yourselves" are in the plural.

Chapter 2 starts out saying, "As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world . . ." so this explains who the "ye" is.

This follows the explanation at the end of chapter 1, "And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way."

This is the government.
The writer of this letter is saying those formerly just loose out in the world following the evil spirits that guided them to sin, were now taken into the protective custody of this government, to lead righteous lives.

Verse 10 says, "For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do", here including the collective "we" to the specific "ye" (the Ephesians), to talk about the church as a whole, all those under the government of Christ.

By grace, those sinners were taken in, not because they were following the Law, but "were by nature deserving of wrath".
"God prepared in advance for us" this rule for us to be under that is based on faith but becomes a law to us for righteousness.
edit on 13-8-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

Galatians 2:21 - "I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness [come] by the law, then Christ is dead in vain."
to re-quote this with a little bit of context:

The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”

(2011 NIV)

Here Paul is formulating this idea of works "to live by faith", without using the one Greek word available in his vocabulary for "works", which he reserves to be used as a term to describe things people do to be in compliance with the hundreds of laws in the Book of Moses.

When Paul says, "that we may be justified by faith ind Christ and not by the works of the law", he is making a comparison between the two things as ways to live your life.
Through the method of Christ, joining in the church, one can become just (justified) in a true sense, through the spirit.
Through the following of the dead letter of the Law, one cannot become just (justified) in a true sense, since the spirit is not in those letters.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

John 3:18 - "He that believeth on him is not condemned"
Which is explained in verse 21,

But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.
(2011 NIV)

they do what is right, guided by the truth that comes to people once they accept "the light of the world".

Romans 10:9 - "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."
Your mouth and heart are the body parts connected to salvation, not your foreskin, which seems to be the body part concerned with in becoming a Jew.
You can become a Christian without regard to the current status of your foreskin.


edit on 13-8-2014 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 08:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
Dude... read who I was replying to...


So it wasn't me after all, right?


I'm just joking with you. XD


Anyway, dewey, if I wanted to argue with someone who adds words to the Bible that aren't actually there, and says that even though the words aren't there that's what the Bible authors meant anyway, then there are plenty of mainstream Christian denominations I could look up and call up their pastors.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: BridgebyaFountain

. . . someone who adds words to the Bible that aren't actually there, and says that even though the words aren't there that's what the Bible authors meant anyway . . .
OK, then, explain what this means.

It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.
For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.
Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also?
Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith.
Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.
(English Standard Version)
What law is Paul saying they were upholding, since it doesn't seem to be the law of the Jews, which he says is excluded?
I would say that he means what he calls a "law of Faith".
Paul is calling God "the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."
By being "justified", Paul has to mean that people are coming into conformity with a godly standard.
The standard is not the one that the Jews possessed for themselves, but one that was able to come into being through Jesus and his being the Christ, who now rules over the church as its head, being its creator, and able to establish law as Moses was able to establish law under his rule as the head of Israel in the Sinai wilderness.



new topics




 
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join