How does "Faith" save?

reply to post by ghostfacekilah00

I've heard this very argument before. The thief consciously choosing to turn from his wicked ways, cry out against the injustice of crucifying an innocent man, and believing that Jesus is the Son of God is, by definition, a work. Like I said, Catholics don't believe that we disagree on the matter.

I must be missing your point. I don't understand what any of my post had to do with an agreement or disagreement with Catholicism. ???

reply to post by ketsuko

There were two thieves with Christ. One was saved and the other was not. The one who was saved not only had faith, but he was also led to penitence through it. Because he truly believed (had faith) he also saw that what he had done in life was wrong and he took accountability for it. You can see this because of how he chides the other thief who did not have faith and did not accept responsibility for what he had done.

Agreed. Was there something I said that made you think I didn't understand or agree with your statement? Or were you just expounding for clarity?

Klassified
The thief on the cross was saved by faith alone.

Jesus did not say, unless you do good works, you won't be saved. He said except you believe in me, you shall die in your sins.

That's true. I think Jesus understood that if we allowed him and his love into us, based on faith in him, that everything else would quite naturally follow. He himself did all the heavy lifting know full well our limitations.

Good point.

ketsuko
reply to post by Klassified

 

There were two thieves with Christ. One was saved and the other was not. The one who was saved not only had faith, but he was also led to penitence through it. Because he truly believed (had faith) he also saw that what he had done in life was wrong and he took accountability for it. You can see this because of how he chides the other thief who did not have faith and did not accept responsibility for what he had done.

39 One of the criminals who were hanged there was hurling abuse at Him, saying, "Are You not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!" 40 But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 "And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." 42 And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!" 43 And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

Luke 23: 39-43

That hardly qualified as a "work", although it's a good deed of sorts to rebuke the other thief I suppose. I don't know, kinda hard to do much "work" from his position. Nope I don't think he was given a place in God's kingdom for his good works, but it was achieved by faith alone, and simple, straightforward, honesty, nothing more.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Perhaps this thief may have been the exception to the rule... Somehow i doubt we can lead a life of sin and then repent just before death and all will be forgiven. He may have been the only exception in fact...

Unlike everyone else he had the opportunity to ask Jesus to "remember him" in person...

Jesus also said "ask anything in my name and i will do it"

We are not so blessed as to have him in our presence as this man was

Double

Akragon
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

We are not so blessed as to have him in our presence as this man was

Yeah, lucky him.

reply to post by Klassified

They each spoke from their perspective.

This is very important. Many will take what they wrote down as Father saying this is what you must do. No, this was simply the writers viewpoint of how they perceived all.

reply to post by Akragon

Belief needs an outward expression... or it is nothing

An outward expression towards whom?

Can on not be here, and commune and fellowship with Father only without anyone else knowing of it?

When tests and struggles are brought on, it is for self, not for others. Why do you say belief requires an outward expression?

reply to post by Akragon


You save yourself or not it's always been about the power of choice.

reply to post by Akragon


I think you and NewAgeMan are both right.

If that theif KNEW Jesus before, ignored him, and then only cared to repent because he was about to die maybe Jesus would have said something different.


Most people claim to be Christians but don't care about Christ until something bad happens, not only are they FAKE ( or as Jesus would say wolves in sheep's clothing), but they are also hypocrites because they only care about the bible when they can use it as an opportunity to judge others.

reply to post by jhill76

An outward expression towards whom?

I would say everyone...

Can on not be here, and commune and fellowship with Father only without anyone else knowing of it?

Of course... In fact that is how HE said one must do it

In private... (Mat 6)

When tests and struggles are brought on, it is for self, not for others. Why do you say belief requires an outward expression

IF one believes in Jesus, and has faith in him... That means said person trusts what HE said...

HE said to love thy Neighbour... And how can one show love without an outward expression of love?

If you walk up to someone in need and say "i love you brother"... How does that help him or do any good at all if said person remains in need?

Words mean nothing is there is nothing to back them up

How can one show their "love" without action?

Can this be done without an "outward expression"?

27 But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,

28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.

29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.

30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.

34 And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.

35 But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.

36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.

37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

Perhaps some of it... But is that enough?

reply to post by Akragon


I see and understand your notion.

But, can one believe without showing it outwardly to others? But, there intentions are that of belief?

reply to post by Akragon


Love is Patient. Love is Kind. Love holds no records of wrongdoings and does not boast.


If you are not ACTING with patience, mercy, and kindness then it isn't love.

If you don't like Paul, take Jesus' s example. He says, there is no greater love than for a man to lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13)

To Jesus Love was GIVING so yes, from Jesus definition ACTION or at least the intention to act/give is highly important.


Akragon, if you haven't read it already I think you would like Didache , it's teachings of Jesus written by His Apostles and it isn't that long to read.

Re the thief on the cross who repented and Jesus acknowledged,

recently I watched Dead Man Walking again a couple of times.


It speaks directly to the idea of death-bed repentance and its power to heal.

Other than that, I do think that 'faith' itself creates what it 'envisions' via quantum mechanics; and that 'works' are necessary (whether anonymously or directly provided).

reply to post by Akragon


Akra

I think you don't understand Paul or Jame, or Peter for that matter either.

Paul was not a legalist, most of what Paul taught was against legalism. He said you can't keep the law and if you could keep the law, then good for you, but Paul was preaching to Gentiles and Jews alike, in fact Peter and Paul had a feud about legalism and why the Gentiles were not obligated to keeping Jewish law. I think you probably need to read more about what Paul actually did say.

Let me give you an example of Paul's teaching..

Romans 14 :1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. 2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

Here is Paul, setting up against the kosher laws, one who believes MAY eat all things, but one who is weak, eats herbs, why? Because he is not yet firmly rooted in his faith, which is not in working in this case. So Paul is not a legalist here. If Paul were a legalist, then you are lost even if you do have faith and works.

3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

In other words, law or no law, God has received both. Paul is not legalist in this verse either.

4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

Again, the sharp step aside from legalism, Paul was saying here that who your master is and who my master is, we can't judge each other for that. But God is the one who lifts us each up. This again, no legalism on Paul's part.

5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

Paul then throws it back to the believer, it is the believer who must be persuaded in his own mind of God. One may keep the holy days, or not, it is up to the individual. This clearly is not legalistic in any way. You don't have to keep days, you can keep whatever days you want, that's the point Paul was making.

6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.

Whatever day you regard as holy, just keep it. It's your day that you regard. But whatever day you regard, just do it for the Lord, and don't expect others to have to keep the day you regard. I don't know why people keep saying Paul was a legalist, when he clearly was not.

14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.

Paul was basically saying here.."look, you don't have to keep kosher to please God, but if one must keep kosher, then do so, but not everyone has to keep kosher".

Perhaps it is better if you study more about what Paul said, rather than what some website told you what Paul taught? Paul was far from being a legalist, in fact, the feud between him and Peter was over circumcision. Paul said no one had to be circumcised any more to prove their relationship with God. Paul, a circumcised Pharisee, said you don't have to be circumcised.

Paul also said in

1 Corinthians 13:1 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. 2 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. 3 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.

Paul, the non-legalist, is saying "Look, you do all of these things, but if you don't do it with charity, or love, then no matter what you do, it is vain. Even if you worked like Jesus and James taught about faith, without charity it is all in vain. Even Jesus and James teaches that.

No love, so what's the point?

So how does Paul lead people into judgement when he says that you need to have love?

reply to post by Akragon

I'm not a fan of Paul either.

That being said ... I think BOTH 'faith without works is dead' and 'faith alone saves' are true. It just depends on the person as to which God will apply to them.

For those that are able ... if they have faith then they will show it in their actions. They will want to help others if possible ... either through physical means or at least prayerful means. They will make an effort to be 'like Jesus' or to do the right thing .... etc etc

For those at are unable to 'do works' ... if they have faith in God then that's enough.

I don't know if that's accurate, but that's how I'd see a 'just and loving' God. More would be expected of those 'that can do' ... and 'faith' is all that would be required of those that 'can not do'. (like the chronically ill or those in hospitals or those with mental health challenges ..... )

I have nothing to back any of that up with. It's just my thought in the area.
It makes sense to me.

wildtimes
Re the thief on the cross who repented and Jesus acknowledged,

In the Catholic faith, he's known as St. Dismas. He's one of my more favorite saints.
I have this book - Life of the Good Thief .
It's really good. Even though there is very little written about St. Dismas, how he died on the
cross next to Jesus was a lesson for us all. St. Dismas couldn't do big 'good works' .. but his faith in
Jesus and his simple prayer to Jesus 'remember me when You come into Your kingdom' gave Jesus
some level of comfort while He died on the cross. To the world, what St. Dismas said and did in
those few hours was nothing. To Jesus, it was affirmation that He was doing the right thing and
that He had saved people. In the screaming pain of the crucifixion, St. Dismas gave Jesus a
small consolation. And you betchya Jesus remembered it when He went to Heaven.

That's faith .. with a 'good work' ... it's as much as he could do.
And I'm sure to Jesus it was a lot.

Everything is relative. God sees what we don't.

reply to post by WarminIndy


Do me a personal favor...

Don't tell me I need to read the bible... Its rather annoying

So how does Paul lead people into judgement when he says that you need to have love?

By giving examples to the reader of his own judgement of others... that's a good start

Perhaps you need to read more of Paul yourself...

I've read his work over and over... and I've had quite enough of it

1 Cor. 6:9-10
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God

In this thread we've already covered "the thief on the cross" who was given a place in the kingdom of God... He would also classify as "greedy"... likely a swindler as well...

Jesus said nothing about homosexuality... Paul is merely relying on his so called previous life as a Pharisee and the hatred promoted in the OT

And according to Jesus there is only one unforgivable sin...

So i'll hold to my initial statement... I have no use for Paul

FlyersFan
reply to post by Akragon

 

I'm not a fan of Paul either.

That being said ... I think BOTH 'faith without works is dead' and 'faith alone saves' are true. It just depends on the person as to which God will apply to them.

For those that are able ... if they have faith then they will show it in their actions. They will want to help others if possible ... either through physical means or at least prayerful means. They will make an effort to be 'like Jesus' or to do the right thing .... etc etc

For those at are unable to 'do works' ... if they have faith in God then that's enough.

I don't know if that's accurate, but that's how I'd see a 'just and loving' God. More would be expected of those 'that can do' ... and 'faith' is all that would be required of those that 'can not do'. (like the chronically ill or those in hospitals or those with mental health challenges ..... )

I have nothing to back any of that up with. It's just my thought in the area.
It makes sense to me.

Exactly..some people cannot produce good works, they are disabled, etc..
So I guess it can be both..faith and/or works.