In context: Romans 4:4-5

[kepha]

Atwood sez:

Interesting, isn't it, how the Campbellite heretics are much in agreement with the papist heretics on salvation, wanting to add on "baptism" to whosoever believes. But in reality the Campbellites define baptize as immerse in water, which the papists don't do. Thus though on the surface it may look like they agree, logically the Campbellites would damn the papists & Presbyterians for sprinkling.

Must you be so insulting? "papist" is derogatory and uncalled for. Tell ya what, Atwood. Don't refer to Catholics as "papists" and I won't call you an ignorant anti-Catholic bigot, or a frothing-at-the-mouth funnymentalist, or a bible-worshipping pharisaical hair-splitter.

Deal?

Why don't you tell us the name of your church, group, or bless-me-club and give equal opportunity for me to rip it to shreds? You wouldn't like that very much. Not that I would do that but a waterless baptism is quite bizarre, even for most Protestants.

Both may want to argue that sprinking or immersing (respectively) saves from the Ananias story in Acts, both not noting that water is not mentioned, & the baptism there may be Spirit baptism.

It's water and spirit. Take it up with Jesus.

" But the Lord said unto him [Ananias], Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of Israel: 16 for I will show him how many things he must suffer for my name’s sake. 17 And Ananias departed, and entered into the house; and laying his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who appeared unto thee in the way which thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mayest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit. "

But Saul/Paul was probably already saved. Note that he was already chosen. How does that square with you free-willers? And he already must suffer for Christ's name sake. So you think he wasn't already saved at that point?

These instructions are not for Paul's salvation, but for his receiving sight & being filled with the Spirit (a matter distinct from salvation). The Ephesians are commanded to be filled with the Spirit, though already saved.

2nd passage:

2 And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, well reported of by all the Jews that dwelt there, 13 came unto me, and standing by me said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And in that very hour I looked up on him. 14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath appointed thee to know his will, and to see the Righteous One, and to hear a voice from his mouth. 15 For thou shalt be a witness for him unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. 16 And now why tarriest thou? Having arisen, be baptized. And wash away thy sins (by) having called on his name.


ἀναστὰς βάπτισαι.
καὶ ἀπόλουσαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας σου ἐπικαλεσάμενος τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ.

The sins are washed away only by the calling on Christ's name in faith, as in Romans 10:13: "For whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved."
And how can they call on him in whom they have not believed?

Apparently Ananias is not prophesying here, thus it is doubtful that Ananias is uttering God's word, rather he is giving directions on how to be saved. I think Paul was already saved, but evidently Ananias did not know that. But whatever Ananias thought, the Aorist participle "having called on his name" is regularly used to indicate action prior to the main verb "wash away." If you think Ananias is prophesying (text doesn't say it), then you would postulate that Paul was not yet saved, and he was offered salvation for a call of faith as in Rom 10:13-14.

"be baptized. And wash away thy sins" without water? That's a twist.

 

[Jackson123]

So my question remains unanswered: Per Eph 2:10 - Can one who becomes a Christian today NEVER do any good works yet still be saved anyway ?

(It appears you are looking for ways to get around answering a simple question)

That example is the answered. Yes, salvation is by faith in Jesus alone, not by work. So if one accept Jesus and die in the same second before helping the needy or testified he save and go to heaven.

 

[Calminian]

James said a man is justified by works James 2

I agree. Man's claim to faith is justified by works.

Paul is saying a man is not justified by works, Rom 4

Paul is right. Men are not justified by works before God.

James point is you cannot prove you have faith without works. It is the works that proves one has faith. So the implication is:
no works = proof one does NOT have faith.

This is the protestant position, yes. You could also put it, you cannot justify that you have faith without works.

Both Abraham and Rahab were justified before God for it was God Who justified them due to their obedient works.

No, they were not in the works hall of fame, but rather the faith hall of fame. But their deeds vindicated (justified) them before men.

SeaBass, I know you're passionate about your view, but please consider the consequences. If you're trusting in your works, you're facing a tragic day. I pray you reconsider.

 

[Jackson123]

Originally Posted by SeaBass

James point is you cannot prove you have faith without works. It is the works that proves one has faith. So the implication is:
no works = proof one does NOT have faith.


Jackson:

work indicator faith if the man who have faith life some time after. But not the requirement for salvation.


Work is fruit of faith.

Prove/fruit/indicator is and requirement doesn't have the same meaning.

 

[Jackson123]

Originally Posted by SeaBass

James point is you cannot prove you have faith without works. It is the works that proves one has faith. So the implication is:
no works = proof one does NOT have faith.


Jackson:

work indicator faith if the man who have faith life some time after. But not the requirement for salvation.


Work is fruit of faith.

Prove/fruit/indicator and requirement doesn't have the same meaning.

 

[SeaBass]

That example is the answered. Yes, salvation is by faith in Jesus alone, not by work. So if one accept Jesus and die in the same second before helping the needy or testified he save and go to heaven.

I am not talking about anyone that becomes a Christian and then dies that very second. You are simply looking for away to get around the fact a Christian is one who MUST do good works...has no choice in this matter.

Eph 2:10 shows one cannot be a Christian yet not do good works...God before ordained Christians walk in good works.

So if one who calls himself a Christain is not doing good works then 1) he was never converted to Christianity to begin with or 2) he was a Christian that did good works but quit becoming an apostate.

 

[SeaBass]

I agree. Man's claim to faith is justified by works.



Paul is right. Men are not justified by works before God.

James said men are justified by works.
in Rom 4:2 Paul is saying a man is not justified by works.

Man cannot be both justified and not justified by works at the same time, for that is a contradiction. It becomes evident by CONTEXT that bith men are NT talking about the same type of work. In Rom 4:2-5 Paul is talking about works of merit and James 2 James is talking about obedient works.

The same Paul that was saying man is not justified by (meritorious) works shows in Rom 6 that works justify:

Rom 6:16 "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?"

Paul says you serve either one of two masters: You serve either:

1) sin unto death

or

2) obedience unto righteousness

I serve #2. WHich do you serve?

Paul goes on to say:

Rom 6:17 "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."
Rom 6:18 "Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness."

Note the order of events:
1) servants of sin
2) obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine
3) then made free from sin (justified)

Paul puts obedience BEFORE free from sin/justified.

This is the protestant position, yes. You could also put it, you cannot justify that you have faith without works.



No, they were not in the works hall of fame, but rather the faith hall of fame. But their deeds vindicated (justified) them before men.

SeaBass, I know you're passionate about your view, but please consider the consequences. If you're trusting in your works, you're facing a tragic day. I pray you reconsider.

James 2:18 "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' point is prove your faith without works and I will prove my faith by my works. The point being if one has NO WORKS he cannot prove he has faith. The lack of works keeps him from having a saving faith.



Heb 11:8 "By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went."

By faith he OBEYED, so he is an example of an obedient faith

Heb 11:17 "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,"

Again, by faith Abraham offered up Issac > an obedient faith.

The Hebrew writer goes on to tell us about these "hall of famers" that they "..... through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions," verse 33.

Their faith worked righteousness. Without "working righteousness" they all would have had a dead, worthless faith only.

James 2:25 "Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works...." Rahab was justified by works just as Paul points out in Rom 6:17,18 those Romans were justified by "obeying from the heart"

So Paul and James are in total agreement men are justified by OBEDIENT WORKS not justified by works of merit.


Those WITHOUT obedient works are lost, without God...."whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God" 1 Jn 3:10.

Both verbs "doeth" and "is" are Greek present tense having the verse saying "he that CONTINUES in NOT doing righteousness CONTINUES to NOT be of God" The implication is one MUST work righteousness to be of God, accepted with God > Acts 10:35...."But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him"

Those following the man-made faith only had better consider their ways for faith only leaves one "not of God".

 

[SeaBass]

work indicator faith if the man who have faith life some time after. But not the requirement for salvation.


Work is fruit of faith.

Prove/fruit/indicator and requirement doesn't have the same meaning.

James ties faith so closely to works that faith itself is a work so no work = no faith.

Lev 17:11 "For the life of the flesh is in the blood:..."

Likewise the life of faith is in the works. And as the flesh is dead WITHOUT blood so also is faith dead WITHOUT works. A dead faith only therefore cannot save.

 

[Calminian]

James said men are justified by works.
in Rom 4:2 Paul is saying a man is not justified by works.

Again, I agree. Once you learn the range of the word justification, you'll understand those two passages. What I see happening here is you avoiding this word like the plague.

Man cannot be both justified and not justified by works at the same time, for that is a contradiction....

A little logic training would do you well here.

Something cannot be both A and non-A at the same time in the same sense.

If you had ever studied formal logic you'd know this rule. What you're doing is make an equivocation error with the word justification.

equivocation -- Sometimes referred to as "amphiboly". A fallacy that stems from the ambiguous meaning of certain words. For example, 1. Only man is logical. 2. No woman is a man. 3. Therefore, no woman is logical. "Man" in the first sentence really means "mankind," "humankind," "homo sapiens". "Man" in the second sentence means "maleness". The syllogism appears to be valid, but in fact is fallacious because of the subtle shift in meaning.​

The reason you're stumbling on this word is because you've narrowed it's meaning to a theological definition. You don't realize how language works, and how words can have multiple meanings based on their context. I pointed out Romans 3:4 in which the theological definition of justification could not possibly apply unless you hold that God was once a sinner. You ignored this, which proves you have nothing to say.

 

[Jackson123]

I am not talking about anyone that becomes a Christian and then dies that very second. You are simply looking for away to get around the fact a Christian is one who MUST do good works...has no choice in this matter.

Eph 2:10 shows one cannot be a Christian yet not do good works...God before ordained Christians walk in good works.

So if one who calls himself a Christain is not doing good works then 1) he was never converted to Christianity to begin with or 2) he was a Christian that did good works but quit becoming an apostate.

Ya, one profess have a faith in Jesus and not change, is lie.

Real faith must change his or her life. But work is not the requirement. work is just a fruit of the Spirit/ Capital S mean Holy spirit.

 

[newbirth]

Ya, one profess have a faith in Jesus and not change, is lie.

Real faith must change his or her life. But work is not the requirement. work is just a fruit of the Spirit/ Capital S mean Holy spirit.

work is required to show your faith....faith without works is dead....can that faith save?......

Acts 26:17-22Names of God Bible (NOG)
[SUP]17 [/SUP]I will rescue you from the Jewish people and from the non-Jewish people to whom I am sending you. [SUP]18 [/SUP]You will open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light and from Satan’s control to God’s. Then they will receive forgiveness for their sins and a share among God’s people who are made holy by believing in me.’
[SUP]19 [/SUP]“At that point I did not disobey the vision I saw from heaven, King Agrippa. [SUP]20 [/SUP]Instead, I spread the message that I first told to the Jewish people in Damascus and Jerusalem and throughout the whole country of Judea. I spread the same message to non-Jewish people. Both groups were expected to change the way they thought and acted and to turn to God. I told them to do things that prove they had changed their lives. [SUP]21 [/SUP]For this reason the Jews took me prisoner in the temple courtyard and tried to murder me.

[SUP]22 [/SUP]“God has been helping me to this day so that I can stand and testify to important and unimportant people. I tell them only what the prophets and Moses said would happen.

 

[Jackson123]

James ties faith so closely to works that faith itself is a work so no work = no faith.

Lev 17:11 "For the life of the flesh is in the blood:..."

Likewise the life of faith is in the works. And as the flesh is dead WITHOUT blood so also is faith dead WITHOUT works. A dead faith only therefore cannot save.

Yes work is evident of faith, but not requirement of salvation.

Jesus said you tell the tree by it fruit. It is figurative. Good tree is represent a man with faith in Jesus.

If a man have genuine faith in Jesus he must bear good fruit. Fruit just indicator not requirement for salvation.

I believe Jame try to explain what is faith really mean. Faith in not only believe that Jesus exist, if so devil have a faith because devil not only believe the existence of Jesus, more then that devil trembling to hear His name. Yet it not call faith. Faith is entrust, or submit to Jesus, than it will bear good fruit. That is the requirement of salvation.

 

[Calminian]

....Both groups were expected to change the way they thought and acted and to turn to God. I told them to do things that prove they had changed their lives. ....

No one disputes this. The questions is, are the works just the fruits of faith? Or do the works add to faith in the justification process?

If the latter, the question becomes how much work is sufficient? Perfection? Or just a couple deeds over the course of a lifetime? A complete noticeable transformation? By who's standard? How much works must we contribute to make our faith a saving faith?

 

[Jackson123]

work is required to show your faith....faith without works is dead....can that faith save?......

Acts 26:17-22Names of God Bible (NOG)
[SUP]17 [/SUP]I will rescue you from the Jewish people and from the non-Jewish people to whom I am sending you. [SUP]18 [/SUP]You will open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light and from Satan’s control to God’s. Then they will receive forgiveness for their sins and a share among God’s people who are made holy by believing in me.’
[SUP]19 [/SUP]“At that point I did not disobey the vision I saw from heaven, King Agrippa. [SUP]20 [/SUP]Instead, I spread the message that I first told to the Jewish people in Damascus and Jerusalem and throughout the whole country of Judea. I spread the same message to non-Jewish people. Both groups were expected to change the way they thought and acted and to turn to God. I told them to do things that prove they had changed their lives. [SUP]21 [/SUP]For this reason the Jews took me prisoner in the temple courtyard and tried to murder me.

[SUP]22 [/SUP]“God has been helping me to this day so that I can stand and testify to important and unimportant people. I tell them only what the prophets and Moses said would happen.

Yup, the tree seen from it fruit.

It is not requirement but it is naturally happen if the good tree bear good fruit.

But faith in Jesus is requirement for salvation.

If a man claim to be Pastor or Christian or Pope, or else, and he is a killer, than don't believe that he have a faith in Jesus.

 

[SeaBass]

Again, I agree. Once you learn the range of the word justification, you'll understand those two passages. What I see happening here is you avoiding this word like the plague.


A little logic training would do you well here.

Something cannot be both A and non-A at the same time in the same sense.

If you had ever studied formal logic you'd know this rule. What you're doing is make an equivocation error with the word justification.

equivocation -- Sometimes referred to as "amphiboly". A fallacy that stems from the ambiguous meaning of certain words. For example, 1. Only man is logical. 2. No woman is a man. 3. Therefore, no woman is logical. "Man" in the first sentence really means "mankind," "humankind," "homo sapiens". "Man" in the second sentence means "maleness". The syllogism appears to be valid, but in fact is fallacious because of the subtle shift in meaning.​

The reason you're stumbling on this word is because you've narrowed it's meaning to a theological definition. You don't realize how language works, and how words can have multiple meanings based on their context. I pointed out Romans 3:4 in which the theological definition of justification could not possibly apply unless you hold that God was once a sinner. You ignored this, which proves you have nothing to say.

Justification means justification and both Paul and James use it the same way. So the difference is not in the meaning of justification but in the type or works, with Paul saying man is not justified by works of merit and James saying a man is justified by obedient works.

Rom 3:4 "God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged."

This verse does not mean God was a sinner who needs justified. Paul is saying God is always right/justified in what He says/does. Paul quotes David from Psa 51:4. David admitted he had sinned and God would be right/justified in how God would deal with him.

 

[SeaBass]

Ya, one profess have a faith in Jesus and not change, is lie.

Real faith must change his or her life. But work is not the requirement. work is just a fruit of the Spirit/ Capital S mean Holy spirit.

God BEFORE ORDAINED Christians walk in good works.

No who can change, undo, thwart what God has preordained Christians to do? No one.

So one cannot be a Christian without doing good works.

 

[SeaBass]

Yes work is evident of faith, but not requirement of salvation.

Jesus said you tell the tree by it fruit. It is figurative. Good tree is represent a man with faith in Jesus.

If a man have genuine faith in Jesus he must bear good fruit. Fruit just indicator not requirement for salvation.

I believe Jame try to explain what is faith really mean. Faith in not only believe that Jesus exist, if so devil have a faith because devil not only believe the existence of Jesus, more then that devil trembling to hear His name. Yet it not call faith. Faith is entrust, or submit to Jesus, than it will bear good fruit. That is the requirement of salvation.

If one does not have works then he does not have a saving faith. Faith is dead without works as flesh is dead without blood. The bible therefore makes works and faith inseparable.

Who can be saved by a dead faith? No one. The devils have belief only and will not save them for they will not act on that belief.

 

[Jackson123]

God BEFORE ORDAINED Christians walk in good works.

No who can change, undo, thwart what God has preordained Christians to do? No one.

So one cannot be a Christian without doing good works.

We are not talking about Christian must doing good, we are talking about the requirement of salvation, or the requirement of being Christian.

No body able to produce good deed of itself. Branch can't bear fruit of itself.

If the requirement to be save is doing good, than no body save.

Have a faith in Jesus than Jesus will help us doing good work.

Faith/abide in Him >>>> save and good work.

Good work is product not producer.

 

[Jackson123]

If one does not have works then he does not have a saving faith. Faith is dead without works as flesh is dead without blood. The bible therefore makes works and faith inseparable.

Who can be saved by a dead faith? No one. The devils have belief only and will not save them for they will not act on that belief.

No body does good work without faith in Jesus.

Faith in Jesus then save and doing good work.

 

[Cassian]

Yup, the tree seen from it fruit.

It is not requirement but it is naturally happen if the good tree bear good fruit.

But faith in Jesus is requirement for salvation.

If a man claim to be Pastor or Christian or Pope, or else, and he is a killer, than don't believe that he have a faith in Jesus

You have a huge contradiction in your understanding of faith/works.
In your previous post you also stated.....

"Yes work is evident of faith, but not requirement of salvation.

Jesus said you tell the tree by it fruit. It is figurative. Good tree is represent a man with faith in Jesus.

If a man have genuine faith in Jesus he must bear good fruit. Fruit just indicator not requirement for salvation" also a huge contradiction.

If we are being saved through faith, and works is the evidence or content of our faith, then those works are mandatory otherwise you have a dead faith or no faith. One cannot be saved by faith alone, apart from the works. They are an inseparable tandem in scripture whether OT or NT.