How does "Faith" save?

Your postulation is not true because it is formed from a false premise.To be saved (salvation) is not being exempt from a "judgement" or not receiving salvation is being judged and sentenced. That is not what salvation means at all.Salvation means deliverance.It is not an event like the judgement trial that is usually depicted it is a process with many aspects of the process. The scripture ...You are saved BY grace THROUGH faith not of your works it is a WORK of God....has a lot of info.

Grace is the catalyst in which salvation is enacted.Since salvation is a process(an infinite process) and much of it (especially here in the physical realm) is unknown it is received through faith.That scripture outline God gives/causes the grace with faith to cause the work.It is ALL by Gods action.Not mans. Salvation is not dependent on moral or ethics.They are dealt with in another "process" of salvation judgement..which is NOT like a court .

There is a reason Yahoshua has his name.It means God is salvation.A name is the nature of the thing or person it names.Yahoshua IS salvation.That is what "in Yahoshua(not jesus) name means.It isn't a magic incantation.It is a proclamation of what is.When the disciples "healed someone they said it was done in the nature of Gods salvation(in the name of Yahoshua).They didn't mean "jesus" the spirit magically healed them when they "called (incantated) his "name"...that is religious foolishness.The apostles had no idea "how" it happened.They didn't do anything.They were "witnesses".The apostles didn't perform miracles God did...

back to salvation.

One process of being "saved" salvation is being delivered from the "valley of the shadow of death".The physical realm.Everything that is born into it ..dies.The creator God is delivering ALL of mankind from this death realm by Gods salvation....Yahoshua.God is not making it "known" how that really works because ..it can't be known...just as your dog can't ever know the theory of relativity.It is pointless to try to explain it to him(even though you are free to try).

In one sense mankind is being "delivered".( A beautiful play on words by the Creator God).Mankind is in a womb (a matrix if you will) the physical universe..the "earth".Just as mankind(Adam) was conceived and born in the physical realm ALL of mankind is(or will be) conceived and then born into the spirit realm.Yahoshua is the seed(spermatozoon) man is the soil(egg).When they are "joined" they become a zygote(zygote means to yoke or join together..marriage).Then man goes through the stages of conception until the fetus is born. This is the parable of the soils (mankind.. the egg) and the seed (Yahoshua).

That is the basics.There is much religious rhetoric that all centers around morals and ethics and who is good or bad blah blah woof woof...that is all periphery in relation to salvation.

reply to post by Rex282


That's extremely convoluted, no offense to you. The truth is simple, not hard to understand.

The simplest explanation is that we are all saved from death, that is what a truly loving God would do, save everyone regardless of faith OR works. What situation you end up in in your next life may be dependent upon your works, but salvation is not.

We have all already been saved based on the fact that we are alive right now. It's possible that this Earth is a consequence of what we have done in past lives since we have been born onto it. What goes around comes around.

Rex282
Your postulation is not true because it is formed from a false premise.To be saved (salvation) is not being exempt from a "judgement" or not receiving salvation is being judged and sentenced. That is not what salvation means at all.Salvation means deliverance.It is not an event like the judgement trial that is usually depicted it is a process with many aspects of the process. The scripture ...You are saved BY grace THROUGH faith not of your works it is a WORK of God....has a lot of info.

Grace is the catalyst in which salvation is enacted.Since salvation is a process(an infinite process) and much of it (especially here in the physical realm) is unknown it is received through faith.That scripture outline God gives/causes the grace with faith to cause the work.It is ALL by Gods action.Not mans. Salvation is not dependent on moral or ethics.They are dealt with in another "process" of salvation judgement..which is NOT like a court .

There is a reason Yahoshua has his name.It means God is salvation.A name is the nature of the thing or person it names.Yahoshua IS salvation.That is what "in Yahoshua(not jesus) name means.It isn't a magic incantation.It is a proclamation of what is.When the disciples "healed someone they said it was done in the nature of Gods salvation(in the name of Yahoshua).They didn't mean "jesus" the spirit magically healed them when they "called (incantated) his "name"...that is religious foolishness.The apostles had no idea "how" it happened.They didn't do anything.They were "witnesses".The apostles didn't perform miracles God did...

back to salvation.

One process of being "saved" salvation is being delivered from the "valley of the shadow of death".The physical realm.Everything that is born into it ..dies.The creator God is delivering ALL of mankind from this death realm by Gods salvation....Yahoshua.God is not making it "known" how that really works because ..it can't be known...just as your dog can't ever know the theory of relativity.It is pointless to try to explain it to him(even though you are free to try).

In one sense mankind is being "delivered".( A beautiful play on words by the Creator God).Mankind is in a womb (a matrix if you will) the physical universe..the "earth".Just as mankind(Adam) was conceived and born in the physical realm ALL of mankind is(or will be) conceived and then born into the spirit realm.Yahoshua is the seed(spermatozoon) man is the soil(egg).When they are "joined" they become a zygote(zygote means to yoke or join together..marriage).Then man goes through the stages of conception until the fetus is born. This is the parable of the soils (mankind.. the egg) and the seed (Yahoshua).

That is the basics.There is much religious rhetoric that all centers around morals and ethics and who is good or bad blah blah woof woof...that is all periphery in relation to salvation.

edit on 24-11-2013 by Rex282 because: (no reason given)

Rex,

Why does the Bible say "His name shall be called Emmanuel"? Why aren't we calling Him that?

It would seem to me to be a different meaning if we were to say Emmanuel (God is with us) than Yahoshua (God is salvation). And on that, there are two different gods mentioned, El and Yah. So which would be the proper name?

reply to post by WarminIndy

As you asked what the Bible says, it implies God as never being separate in mercy and judgment.

I didn't ask what the bible says...

I know what it says... I just don't agree with "everything" that is written in it...

Or Christian interpretation of it either in many cases

WarminIndy

Rex,

Why does the Bible say "His name shall be called Emmanuel"? Why aren't we calling Him that?

It would seem to me to be a different meaning if we were to say Emmanuel (God is with us) than Yahoshua (God is salvation). And on that, there are two different gods mentioned, El and Yah. So which would be the proper name?

Your example is from Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Then in Matthew 1:

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, son of David, fear not to take unto you Mary your wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.

And she shall bring forth a son, and YOU shall call his name Jesus:[Yahoshua] for he shall save his people from their sins.
Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and THEY shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
------------------------
The creator Gods "name" nature is not "one nature".Yahoshua is Yahweh is salvation,God with us,everlasting Father,Prince of Peace...and many many more.

Yahoshuas purpose was as ...Gods salvation.That is the "name"every one called him by(no one called him Jesus).I am not saying in the least everyone MUST call him Yahoshua or they will suffer some dire consequence or benefit if they do..etc etc...the same with the creator God name..God,Lord etc are not even names just extrapolated titles of identification.

I occasionally say Jesus also but I seldom ever write or talk about Jesus the "dude"...Joseph and Marys son.I say and write Yahoshua because I am mostly referring to his name/nature.. it is beyond a "name tag".

I never compel anyone to do as I do.You can call him #head for all I care.I doesn't mean anything to me.

Rex282

WarminIndy


I never compel anyone to do as I do.You can call him #head for all I care.I doesn't mean anything to me.

After you just gave us a long exposition about Yahoshua's salvation and grace, you end with this?

I may call the one who gives salvation and grace.....this name?

For those who don't know the actual words, go to reply and see the actual word.

Methinks you don't know salvation and grace if this is what you feel comfortable with saying. I would never do that, and it amazes me that you would associate the one with salvation and grace, with that.

reply to post by WarminIndy


Pretty sure Jesus wouldn't have minded. I mean, I thought we'd established that Jesus was the loving and understanding one? It's God who is the....well, you come up with the obscene expletive and it probably fits.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

Pretty sure Jesus wouldn't have minded. I mean, I thought we'd established that Jesus was the loving and understanding one? It's God who is the....well, you come up with the obscene expletive and it probably fits.

AfterInfinity

The point is not about calling Jesus anything, but the level of respect we display to others about Him. I don't believe the Buddha either, but I would not say names like that either.

But Rex seems to be a believer and didn't present respect toward the one he proclaims, and that's my point. So if Rex, a believer, can show disrespect for the one he believes in, then how can it make his points credible to you?

reply to post by WarminIndy

But Rex seems to be a believer and didn't present respect toward the one he proclaims, and that's my point. So if Rex, a believer, can show disrespect for the one he believes in, then how can it make his points credible to you?

Consistency has never been a priority where Christianity is concerned.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

But Rex seems to be a believer and didn't present respect toward the one he proclaims, and that's my point. So if Rex, a believer, can show disrespect for the one he believes in, then how can it make his points credible to you?

Consistency has never been a priority where Christianity is concerned.

edit on 25-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

And not in any ideology that humans are involved in.

So did Rex making that statement and my reply cause you to have more or less respect for Jesus, instead of Rex and WarminIndy?

Did Rex saying that cause you to believe a little more in Jesus or not?

And would I be showing any respect for your thought system if I said "you can call atheism ......, for all I care". Rex didn't present salvation and grace, just a lot of empty, shallow words in text, that ended with no respect for the very one he claims, that has nothing to do with consistency of Christianity, because now you found another charge, provided by Rex, to distance yourself further. See my point?

Do you have respect for Jesus now?

This Christian is consistent, but can you see how this Christian was offended by the one preaching the merits of salvation and grace, then to say that? Rex didn't offend me personally, he offended the message of grace and salvation. He offered to you a message of salvation, then ended it with disrespect toward the very one he was telling you about. That's not the Christian message and I would think you should know the difference by now.

reply to post by WarminIndy

So did Rex making that statement and my reply cause you to have more or less respect for Jesus, instead of Rex and WarminIndy?

It's kinda like watching kids fight over who Santa Claus likes more.

This Christian is consistent, but can you see how this Christian was offended by the one preaching the merits of salvation and grace, then to say that? Rex didn't offend me personally, he offended the message of grace and salvation. He offered to you a message of salvation, then ended it with disrespect toward the very one he was telling you about. That's not the Christian message and I would think you should know the difference by now.

I'm not concerned with the consistency of ONE CHRISTIAN. There are 4,000 different variations of the one absolute truth. 4,000 different shades of subjugation and denigration of mankind. 4,000 different cults determined to destroy itself in a bid for unearthly transmutation. They don't want to be human. They don't want to be earthly. They don't want to be here. They want what they think they deserve, but not what they already have.

The one thing they have in common is that each, alone, is special. Each cult is the best cult. And they are all right. And they are all superior. And they are all the favored children of their God.

In my eyes, they are disgusting. They are ungrateful, they are shallow, and they are ignorant. There is nothing wrong with looking for an answer. There is, however, something appallingly wrong with teaching everyone the answer to a question you haven't begun to ask yourself. I don't trust the human species to know anything about damnation or salvation. We don't even know who we are, let alone what we're running from or where we hope to find the cure. We're just talking in the hope that at some point, something worth pretending to believe in will spill out and we can continue putting our energy into the illusion of progress when all we're doing is racing frantically in circles.

Frankly speaking, I feel that most religion is a waste of time. People are practicing it in the wrong ways for the wrong reasons, because that's why religion was developed. Religion is as useful as anything else, but also as pointless as its master. Same as with guns and chemicals. And the people who are making the most out of religion are the ones doing the most damage with it.

You asked me several questions, and I answered them all in one fell swoop. I hope you're not disappointed, but it won't break my heart if you are.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

So did Rex making that statement and my reply cause you to have more or less respect for Jesus, instead of Rex and WarminIndy?

It's kinda like watching kids fight over who Santa Claus likes more.

This Christian is consistent, but can you see how this Christian was offended by the one preaching the merits of salvation and grace, then to say that? Rex didn't offend me personally, he offended the message of grace and salvation. He offered to you a message of salvation, then ended it with disrespect toward the very one he was telling you about. That's not the Christian message and I would think you should know the difference by now.

I'm not concerned with the consistency of ONE CHRISTIAN. There are 4,000 different variations of the one absolute truth. 4,000 different shades of subjugation and denigration of mankind. 4,000 different cults determined to destroy itself in a bid for unearthly transmutation. They don't want to be human. They don't want to be earthly. They don't want to be here. They want what they think they deserve, but not what they already have.

The one thing they have in common is that each, alone, is special. Each cult is the best cult. And they are all right. And they are all superior. And they are all the favored children of their God.

In my eyes, they are disgusting. They are ungrateful, they are shallow, and they are ignorant. There is nothing wrong with looking for an answer. There is, however, something appallingly wrong with teaching everyone the answer to a question you haven't begun to ask yourself. I don't trust the human species to know anything about damnation or salvation. We don't even know who we are, let alone what we're running from or where we hope to find the cure. We're just talking in the hope that at some point, something worth pretending to believe in will spill out and we can continue putting our energy into the illusion of progress when all we're doing is racing frantically in circles.

Frankly speaking, I feel that most religion is a waste of time. People are practicing it in the wrong ways for the wrong reasons, because that's why religion was developed. Religion is as useful as anything else, but also as pointless as its master. Same as with guns and chemicals. And the people who are making the most out of religion are the ones doing the most damage with it.

You asked me several questions, and I answered them all in one fell swoop. I hope you're not disappointed, but it won't break my heart if you are.

edit on 25-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

I am not disappointed at all.

You have said what the human flaw is, and that is arrogance in thinking they know when they don't. You are right, people are practicing it for the wrong reason, but not only Christianity, all religions have that problem. And it isn't fighting over Santa Claus, we all know that Santa isn't real, but the spirit of giving is what the message is about.

You are right, it is damaging, of which this Christian pointed out to another religious person. If the one who gives the message can't be respected, then how can the message?

There are many different religions, ideologies and world views, even you have a world view, but if someone said "You can call AfterInfinity a....for all I care", then that is quite dismissive and wrong against you. I would never, but suppose it was someone who shared your world view, then it does become damaging to your world view.

How can someone then embrace your message if it becomes nothing more than shallow and superficial, no matter how deep it looks at the surface. Even ice floes might be safe for the seal, but the Killer Whale lurks below the surface.

reply to post by WarminIndy

You have said what the human flaw is,

But that's just it. What disgusts me most is their dissatisfaction with being human. As though being human were as bad as being a steaming pile of dog turds or something. Is being human not enough? Is being human not worthwhile? Is being human not a journey worthy of admiration and awe?

Apparently, they would rather live the so-called "perfect existence" of absolute bliss and gluttony and monotonous stagnation than experience what it is to truly be alive. And that disgusts me.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by WarminIndy

 

You have said what the human flaw is,

But that's just it. What disgusts me most is their dissatisfaction with being human. As though being human were as bad as being a steaming pile of dog turds or something. Is being human not enough? Is being human not worthwhile? Is being human not a journey worthy of admiration and awe?

Apparently, they would rather live the so-called "perfect existence" of absolute bliss and gluttony and monotonous stagnation than experience what it is to truly be alive. And that disgusts me.

edit on 25-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being human. But sometimes humans in desperate situations find comfort in knowing something that gives them hope. For some it is escapism.

It's looking at others with no sense of the sanctity of their lives. Life is sacred, and that has been the message that I have received. If others don't think life is sacred, then it has nothing to do with religion, but a lack of religion, because both atheists and religious people alike are guilty of that.

WarminIndy

Rex282

WarminIndy


I never compel anyone to do as I do.You can call him #head for all I care.I doesn't mean anything to me.

After you just gave us a long exposition about Yahoshua's salvation and grace, you end with this?

I may call the one who gives salvation and grace.....this name?

For those who don't know the actual words, go to reply and see the actual word.

Methinks you don't know salvation and grace if this is what you feel comfortable with saying. I would never do that, and it amazes me that you would associate the one with salvation and grace, with that.

WII,
I appreciate when you bring your knowledge of different religion beliefs and their history into a discussion to illuminate what is not true.That's very important.As I said in another thread your weakness is when you attack people with your condescending digs and false accusations and by trolling loaded questions and then attack the person with their answer.

I wrote a response to what salvation is and isn't.You said zero in response to it but decided to cherry pick what I wrote and focus in on my writing the name of Yahoshua.I know you know that is his name.Yes it has a variation of spelling and pronunciations and it is transliterated into modern English.I'm glad you didn't get into that argument because it is even more futile than what you were trolling me for.

I made a "point" to you that I know you are trolling me and to..kindly be more thoughtful in your response.You say you aren't offended by the word #head(which is hardly the scatological obscenity you believe it is) yet you then use it as an ad hominem argument to attack my character directly to discredit all what I write.

I didn't call Yahoshua a #head.I simply stated that you can and I could care less.Just as I could care less that you call him Jesus when that is clearly not his name either.I know that you are an intelligent person and you understand what I meant yet you choose to attack my credibility.That is very unbecoming and unethical.I will be point blank this time.I suggest you not attack my character again.

However I'm not offended and I'm sure neither is the creator God who is impossible to offend.If you are fortunate you will see that your methods of argument when you are reduced to "name calling" and accusations and character assaults aren't beneficial to anyone especially you.I 'm sure I'm not the only one that sees you as being very adversarial with your barrage of sidetracking questions that aren't honest questions at all.I was expecting it to grow as tedious to you as it is to me however it appears it isn't.My suggestion is to examine you methods.I guarantee they aren't working when you resort to the sly digs and adversarial questions that only can lead to unproductive arguments.

reply to post by Rex282

However I'm not offended and I'm sure neither is the creator God who is impossible to offend.

Then there is no hell. Which means I need not worry about having faith. Muahahaha!

AfterInfinity
reply to post by Rex282

 

However I'm not offended and I'm sure neither is the creator God who is impossible to offend.

Then there is no hell. Which means I need not worry about having faith. Muahahaha!

Then there you go Rex.

AfterInfinity just gave you the answer he waiting for you to open the door to, so AfterInfinity could walk through.

AferInfinity just found the loop hole, through your hard efforts to convince him otherwise. So yes, WarminIndy was a troll for taking you around and across the bridge.

AfterInfinty just won that debate, hands down. Way to go, Rex. Kudos to you for your hard efforts, but the door was opened by you, but not by me. AfterInfinity has a lot of patience.

WarminIndy

AfterInfinity
reply to post by Rex282

 

However I'm not offended and I'm sure neither is the creator God who is impossible to offend.

Then there is no hell. Which means I need not worry about having faith. Muahahaha!

Then there you go Rex.

AfterInfinity just gave you the answer he waiting for you to open the door to, so AfterInfinity could walk through.

AferInfinity just found the loop hole, through your hard efforts to convince him otherwise. So yes, WarminIndy was a troll for taking you around and across the bridge.

AfterInfinty just won that debate, hands down. Way to go, Rex. Kudos to you for your hard efforts, but the door was opened by you, but not by me. AfterInfinity has a lot of patience.

It's unfortunate that you are not perceptive enough to know you are the one he is mocking. You are still be condescending and accusatory. and you've exposed your motives of an adversary.You believe it is all about "debate" that can be won or lost and shift blame around as you see fit..

I was not and am never trying to convince anyone of anything.That is not my job.Only God can do that.My purpose is very simple.Proclaim the truth and in harmony with the motto where I am doing it... at ATS ....deny ignorance.This isn't my bully pulpit where I duke it out with an opponent and convince them of the truth.Thats what other people try to do.

The fact is you act as if God is very small (void)and you prove it by what you say and the way you act online.If you truly believe AI is now lost because of what I said you are way more delusional than you believe he is.I can neither cause him to be lost or found especially in the context which you believe because it is a fallacious concept(heaven and hell).

I agree with very little of what AI believes however he has moments of clarity and speaks the truth.That I agree with.AI beliefs mean nothing to me.That is his religion.You would be wise to listen more closely to when he speaks the truth than being his adversary and arguing about nothing.

I know exactly why AI has no faith of God...because God hasn't given him any.He may get some in the physical realm he may not that is nothing I can do to cause God to give him faith or cause him to lose it.I have no argument with AI or anybody.Arguments are useless and futile to me.I'm only interested in the truth.

The things you now continue to say about me are very untrue.Your condescending accusatory mocking doesn't effect me in the least however I am positive it does adversely effect you greatly.I've already suggested you discontinue doing it however you can't hear.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by Rex282

 

However I'm not offended and I'm sure neither is the creator God who is impossible to offend.

Then there is no hell. Which means I need not worry about having faith. Muahahaha!

AI I suggest you not worry about anything..especially hell.You have enough on your plate...(I've never had Muahahaha is it Indian?)

Akragon

OptimusSubprime

wildtimes
reply to post by OptimusSubprime

 

If Paul's teachings were wrong they wouldn't be in the Bible.

*clears throat*

*wipes hands on pants*

WHAT? By what rules????

Holy Moly.

By God's rules (see the verse that I quoted). Now I do realize that you may say that I am making a circular argument, and to someone who does not believe in God or at least God in the context of the Bible, it is an impossible conversation.

But you see my friend.... Its only impossible if you believe Pauls own circular logic...

he was the one that said "all Scripture is God breathed"... Which IRONICALLY got all his writing into the bible...

Yet even the church didn't obey this nonsense... they decided to include some "scripture" and exclude others...

What is the intent of the saying?

"ALL SCRIPTURE IS GOD BREATHED."

What is scripture? What is this scripture Paul is referring to? What does it mean to be God-Breathed? Does this phrase convey the same expression in modern vernacular that it did in the context of the times?

In a sense, all scripture is God breathed... Inconsistencies are there for a reason.

And Paul was very careful to separate his own opinions and God's commands. For example, Paul practiced celibacy and exhorted others to do the same because to him, it brought him closer, but he also said that this path was not for everybody and God has a plan for everyone.

Another thing: I want a draw a parallel from what Jesus said about Moses's commands and Paul's own commands.
Matthew 19:8 regards divorce and why Moses allowed divorce. Does not Paul follow the same type of discourse Moses does when issuing laws? Because people decide to take a course of action, does not God allow some leeway for humanity's benefit?

The thing is... These writers are going through a human experience. They will have their own opinion and mindset; they experience what it is to be human.

So if something is "wrong," does it not help in reaching the truth? Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
Example, isn't falling down a part of getting back up, or vice versa?

Understand these people and read in between the lines with God to fill in the blanks.