What Noah Could Have Said But Didn't

[Fisher of Men]

There is the problem. No one is trying to separate works from faith. We are separating works from salvation.

You can't see that you just contradicted yourself.

Since faith is necessary for salvation how can you say works aren't if you are not making a separation between faith and works?

I want to be compassionate here because I understand that you have been led to believe what you do and are not aware of the inherent instability and seducing spirit and doctrine of devils from which it comes.

It is plainly unstable to say you are not separating works from faith and then in the next breath separate works from faith.

2 Pet. 3 "unlearned and unstable"

[nebula]

OK, Fisher -

How about this?

Is it the Lord who saves us?

Or is it ourselves who save us?

[Guest shiloh357]

There is the problem. No one is trying to separate works from faith. We are separating works from salvation.

You can't see that you just contradicted yourself.

Since faith is necessary for salvation how can you say works aren't if you are not making a separation between faith and works?

I want to be compassionate here because I understand that you have been led to believe what you do and are not aware of the inherent instability and seducing spirit and doctrine of devils from which it comes.

It is plainly unstable to say you are not separating works from faith and then in the next breath separate works from faith.

2 Pet. 3 "unlearned and unstable"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There is no contradiction.

There is no contradiction. I am not separating works from faith, because we assert works and faith are inherently in sepreable once a person comes to faith in Christ. Works are the outgrowth of faith. Therefore the two cannot be separated.

We we are saying that works are separate from salvation because justification is based upon blood of Jesus, faith, and grace according to the New Testament. Those are the only things upon which we can base our rightstanding before God. We are saved apart from works, both before and after salvation. Salvation from beginning to end is the sole work of God to accomplish. He is the Author of our faith and he is the Finisher as well. Nothing we do helps it or makes of worthy to enter the Kingdom. We are already in the Kingdom. We already have eternal life, and all of it is a gift of grace.

[EricH]

There is the problem. No one is trying to separate works from faith. We are separating works from salvation.

You can't see that you just contradicted yourself.

Since faith is necessary for salvation how can you say works aren't if you are not making a separation between faith and works?

I want to be compassionate here because I understand that you have been led to believe what you do and are not aware of the inherent instability and seducing spirit and doctrine of devils from which it comes.

It is plainly unstable to say you are not separating works from faith and then in the next breath separate works from faith.

2 Pet. 3 "unlearned and unstable"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is actually a question of logical relationships.

1. Ephesians 2:8-10 clearly states the logical relationship between faith, works, and salvation

Premise 1: We have been saved by God's grace (verse 8)

Premise 2: The way we enter into this act of grace is through faith (verse 8)

Premise 3: We have not been saved by anything we do. It is not a result of works

(verse 9)

Premise 4: The purpose of this salvation (from God's perspective) is for us to

engage in works that He has determined from the foundations of the

earth (verse 10)

So here is the logic of the passage: Savation is an act of God's grace that we enter into by faith and not works. Once we enter into it there are good works that are now possible for us and expected of us.

So yes faith and works are related. But works are not a cause but a result. So we are not saved by them. We are saved by God's grace through faith. The works are a result. To say that we are saved by them violates the logical relationships laid down in the passage. If works are missing in a person's life, the most one could ask is if genuine faith was exercised. Because it is faith that is listed as the cause

For instance lets assume that a specific germ causes a disease. The disease has only one symptom that occurs in 100 percent of the cases to varying degrees. This symptom is also unique to this disease. Also unless one is a doctor and can test the persons blood, the only way they have to evaluate the presence of the disease is to look for the symptom.

So if a person says they have the disease, but not the symptoms, we as lay people question whether thay have the disease. But we are not free to assume because the disease and symptom are closely related, that the symptom caused the disease (even though the symptom always occurs). The germ is the cause of the disease, the symptom is a result of the disease. You are correct that the concepts cannot be separated, but neither can the logical relationships between them be changed.

Now lets look at the James passage using the above analogy. Suppose 500 people had been exposed to the germ, and maintained that since they had come into contact with the germ, they have the disease. However, many of the people who claim they have the disease have absolutely no symptoms.

Now in the case of these people it may be true that they do have the disease, but that they are currently asymptomatic (that is the disease has not yet incubated). Only the doctor can know by testing the blood. But for us as lay-people, the absence of the symptom tells us no disease. So we may say to the people, "You claim you have the disease because of the germ, but we say, show us your symptoms. For us, a person with out the symptoms does not have the disease.

It is the same with our salvation. Gods grace through faith is the germ. Salvation is the disease. Works are the symptom. God is the doctor who can do the test we can't. We are the lay-people who can only look for the symptoms. If someone claims to have the disease (salvation) they must eventually demonstrate symptoms.

[Fisher of Men]

Your premise 3 is incorrect. We ARE saved by the works that he does through us. Without those works we will be damned because other works will replace His which will be of the flesh and we are assured that those works will result in damnation.

Also your definition of grace lacks the definition we see in Tit. 2:11-14 and 1 Cor. 15:10.

Using that definition I agree that we are saved by grace. We are saved by the power given to us (grace) to not yield to the lust of the flesh.

Also your definition of saved needs to line up with how Paul is using it in Eph. 2.

"Saved" here means living a life away from the works of the flesh. Eph. 2:1-3,5.

I offer here a document showing how Eph. 2:8,9 are taken out of context and perverted to mean to say that what we do has no bearing on where we go eternally.

SAVED BY GRACE, NOT OF WORKS, REALLY?

    The commonly repeated statement, We are saved by grace, not of works, is taken out of context and is used as a gross misrepresentation of what the Apostle Paul actually wrote and meant.  The Apostle Peter spoke of Paul

[EricH]

Your premise 3 is incorrect. We ARE saved by the works that he does through us. Without those works we will be damned because other works will replace His which will be of the flesh and we are assured that those works will result in damnation.

Also your definition of grace lacks the definition we see in Tit. 2:11-14 and 1 Cor. 15:10.

Using that definition I agree that we are saved by grace. We are saved by the power given to us (grace) to not yield to the lust of the flesh.

Also your definition of saved needs to line up with how Paul is using it in Eph. 2.

"Saved" here means living a life away from the works of the flesh. Eph. 2:1-3,5.

I offer here a document showing how Eph. 2:8,9 are taken out of context and perverted to mean to say that what we do has no bearing on where we go eternally.

My premise 3 is directly supported frm Ephesians 2:8-10. Your definition of saved is not supported in these texts. Actually in the verses you quoted salvation is the resuing from the sentencing of death. Ephesians 2:5 says that we wrer dead because of our sins, and while we were still living in that condition (i.e. living in sin) God saved us according to his grace. You are actually reading your definition onto the text and ignoring the logical relationships that are celarly stated in the passage (in fact you are ignoring them)

Your defintion of grace is also faulted. In Titus 2:1-14 it does not say that grace is the power to not sin. It says that Gods grace (unmeritied favor) intructs us that we should live righteously. It is a result of and response to the actof grace. Again your exegesis is not correct here as you are ignoring the logical indicators in the passages

All 1 Corinthians 15:10 says is that it was God's unmerited favor that allowed Paul to become who he was. God's grace enables many things in our lives. But grace is still his unmerited favor

[RGR]

What works did the thief on the cross perform?

[Fisher of Men]

OK, Fisher - 

How about this?

Is it the Lord who saves us?

Or is it ourselves who save us?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The problem lies with the definition of "saves".

The limited definition of "saved' meaning the escape from hell without its true and correct attached definition of being saved from committing sin creates a demonic gospel. One where ongoing obedience isn't necessary for maintaining salvation.

You can be freely given a large mansion, and the necessary work of going to the bank to fulfil your obligation (signature, paperwork etc.) concerning what has been freely given to you would not be considered work. you would never agree to someones claim that since you had to fill out legal forms, sign papers etc meant that you earned the large mansion.

Also, the obligation of paying the taxes and maintaining the property so as the state doesn't confiscate it for neglect would also not be considered work whereby you were entitled to initially come into possession of the house. It would be regarded as your reasonable service in order to keep that which was freely given to you.

Grace/salvation from sinhas been given to us through Christ's death and resurrection. It happens to take effort, like the person going to the bank to fulfil the necessary signing of papers etc, to enter into that which has been given us.

What effort does it take? Faith, self examination, repentance, prayer, and baptism.

Doing these things is like the person going to the bank to fulfil his obligations concerning that which was freely given to him.

Do we hear anyone saying that doing those things means the person has earned their salvation even though those things are required before the receiving of the free gift is finalized?

So now you move into the house.

You've received the Holy Ghost sometime after repentance and of course your heart has been changed so that you don't want to do what you had previously been bound to do against your own conscience. You were bound to sin and were opposing yourself. You have since, after receiving the Holy Ghost, experienced freedom from the bondage to sin and have found great joy in doing those things that you know please God. You have been set free and are at the beginning of growth in the Lord.

Do we hear anyone saying that this change in your life is something you have earned? This change is part of the riches of his grace. Eph. 2:7, 1-3,5. Do we hear anyone saying that abiding in this freedom by yielding to his grace that works mightily in us to both to will and to do of his good pleasure is trying to save ourselves?

Or is it more scripturally accurate to say, they are not trying to save themselves after the slanderous connotation in that accusation, but are rather allowing God to save them by not grieving and quenching the Spirit and by not frustrating, falling from or failing of the grace given them by not allowing that grace to fulfil in them that which is necessary to maintain that which has been started? Noah allowed God to save him by yielding to do that which God said was necessary for him to do in order to be saved. Should we accuse Noah of trying to save himself?

It is an absolute shame that those calling themselves by his name will accuse those making the necessary effort, [which is their reasonable service, to continue in the good works that have been freely given them] in order to continue in salvation of trying to save themselves and will ask accusatory questions such as:

Is it the Lord who saves us?

Or is it ourselves who save us?

Since the wages of sin is death, Jesus saves us first of all by being the substitute payment for our past sins and secondly by ensuring our safety from the wages of sin by granting us access into the same grace he walked in to live righteously in this present world as per Tit. 2:11-14. (Rom. 5:1)

Saved from hell and saved from committing sin are as inseparable as are faith and works.

And if we do sin after this?

Well he is merciful and we can be forgiven again as He is our Father and advocate. But sinning is shameful and an affront to him who died for our sins. So the mercy to forgive for error as a father to his son is used as a subtle form of taking sin lightly when in reality it is shameful and backsliding and a show of not loving God after what he has done for us. And a continuation of this can result in the taking away that which was freely given to us the same way a house may be taken away for neglect to maintain it. We see this reflected in the parable of the talents as well as numerous other places:

Rom.11:

20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:

21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.

22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.

Before any discussion can take place on this, agreements as to the basic definitions of words has to be established:

saved

grace

imputed

righteousness by faith

justification by faith

After each side has presented their definitions and each side is unwilling to move from their definitions and the definitions are contradictory, then it is hopeless to come to any mutual agreement on what is the truth on this subject.

Any serious attempt to agree on the truth of the scriptures hinges on whether or not honest discussion can be had to allow the scriptures to define the above words.

Without this willingness to approach this from the foundation, then these discussions are vain.

[Fisher of Men]

What works did the thief on the cross perform?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Did we see the disciples standing at the cross telling the other thief who was railing on Jesus to shut up?

But the humble thief who was more justified by beating on his breast, so to say, and saying God be merciful to me a sinner, stood up for Christ against the thief reproaching Him. He also brokenly admitted to being worthy of death for his sin; he was repentant.

He also expressed a genuine and strong faith in who Jesus was. This was accredited or imputed to him for righteousness and Jesus trusted that he would fulfil that which had been imputed to him [as Abraham also fulfilled it with good works James 2] if given the chance.

That faith brought about a change of heart.

These numerous works moved God so as to say "this day shalt thou be with me in paradise". Christ's death brought forth the beginning of good fruit it was designed to bring forth in the life of the poor thief because he believed. He didn't get a chance to be baptised. Jesus trusted he would if given the chance. Jesus imputed righteousness to him.

James 2:

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

23 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.

Honestly looking at this in context we must admit that his literal doing of what was right was a fulfilment of righteousness being imputed to him.

[EricH]

OK, Fisher -