Believing on his name

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

JBTN

Active member
Feb 11, 2020
224
83
28
If that’s your authority, then you are WITHOUT authority for your practice.
If a psalm is scripture set to music, then aren’t we told to use instruments in Colossians 3:16:

“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭3‬:‭16‬ ‭KJV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/1/col.3.16.KJV

We are told to use psalms to teach and admonish one another. If you have another definition for a psalm than the one above, would you say that the Book of Psalms is ok to use? If so, then think about the lesson that Psalms 150 teaches.

“Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary: Praise him in the firmament of his power. Praise him for his mighty acts: Praise him according to his excellent greatness. Praise him with the sound of the trumpet: Praise him with the psaltery and harp. Praise him with the timbrel and dance: Praise him with stringed instruments and organs. Praise him upon the loud cymbals: Praise him upon the high sounding cymbals. Let every thing that hath breath Praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD.”
‭‭Psalm‬ ‭150‬:‭1‬-‭6‬ ‭KJV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/1/psa.150.1-6.KJV
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
Like when you referred to me as a Calvinist?

It amazes me how I have explained to you multiple times that I do not teach salvation by "faith only" per James 2:24 (empty profession of faith/dead faith that remains alone) - "barren of works." (James 2:14) I teach salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone. The "alone" part means I am trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9) and not that my faith remains alone - "barren of works." You just can't get this through your head! o_O
I’m sure you would like to make a distinction of all different kinds of “faith only” in order to save your Calvinistic doctrine, but the Bible makes no such distinction. “Faith only” as named in the book of James is the same as the demons faith and any other faith that believes you are saved by faith alone and nothing else. God does not make ANY distinction nor does he qualify it in any way.

1 Corinthians 4:6 tells us “NOT TO THINK BEYOND WHAT is WRITTEN.” You are assigning meanings and definitions to God’s words that He has not written.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,724
13,665
113
59
There are lots of things in the Old Testament law that was approved by God then that are not approved under the new law of Christ. An “eye for an eye” vengeance was approved under the Old Testament law but not under the new law of Christ. Matt. 5. Circumcision was an approved law for them, but not for us under the new law of Christ. God approved animal sacrifices for them, but not for us under the new law of Christ. In fact, the whole chapter of Matthew 5 is about God changing laws that were approved in the Old Testament but not in the new law of Christ. the laws on Divorce is another example of something that he changed. I fail to understand how you find this “strange
There is nothing “strange” about that.
Although there were changes made from the old covenant of law to the new covenant, musical instruments being forbidden is not one of those changes. The church of Christ has taken a legalistic approach to forbidding musical instruments in the NT, which is strange indeed.

The Holy Spirit says to make melody IN YOUR HEART—not musical instruments. And whatever making melody means, it is to be done in the HEART.
In Ephesians 5:19, the Holy Spirit says - speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord. In Colossians 3:16, the Holy Spirit says - Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. Once again, the word "psalm" in the Greek dictionary, definition (#5568): "A set piece of music, i.e. a sacred ode (accompanied with the voice, harp, or other instrument)." The root word of psalm means "to twitch, twang or pluck," such as pluck a string of a musical instrument."

Strong's Concordance
psalmos: a striking (of musical strings), a psalm
Original Word: ψαλμός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: psalmos
Phonetic Spelling: (psal-mos')
Short Definition: a psalm
Definition: a psalm, song of praise, the Hebrew book of Psalms.
HELPS Word-studies
5568 psalmós – a psalm ("Scripture set to music"). Originally, a psalm (5568 /psalmós) was sung and accompanied by a plucked musical instrument (typically a harp), especially the OT Psalms.

[The Psalms of the OT were often sung and were accompanied by sophisticated musical arrangements].

NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from psalló
Definition
a striking (of musical strings), a psalm
NASB Translation
Psalm (1), psalm (1), Psalms (3), psalms (2).

The words "making melody" are also used in Ephesians 5:19, but "how" this is done is found in Isaiah 23:16, and it is with a musical instrument:" - “Take a harp, go about the city, you forgotten harlot; Make sweet melody, sing many songs, that you may be remembered.” Also, Amos 5:23 speaks of "the melody of thy viols," which is also reference to a musical instrument. So, if "the Bible interprets itself," (and it does) these passages show "how" to make melody – with musical instruments.

So, according to the Holy Spirit we are authorized to use “psalms” in the NT. Your argument is biased, cunning and inconclusive.

On the contrary, there is much evidence that proves the old law that used musical instruments ceased. Just read the books of Hebrews and Galatians.
According to the church of Christ but not according to the Holy Spirit, as I just showed you once again. Will you listen this time? Or will you double down on your erroneous teaching in a desperate effort to accommodate your biased church doctrine at all costs? I can see that your church of Christ indoctrination runs very deep!

Hebrews 7 even states that the law was changed. I have posted many comments on CC about “rightly dividing the law of Christ” 2 Tim. 2:15, and the difference between the old law of the Jews and the New law of Christ for Christians. I refer you to those discussions if you want to debate this. You may cite all of the Old Testament laws and scriptures you like—but you are using OBSOLETE material as your authority as Hebrews 8:13 says. That law and those practices have “VANISHED AWAY.” it will do you no good. If that’s your authority, then you are WITHOUT authority for your practice.
The old covenant may have vanished away, but psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord has not vanished away. (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16) Just because the old covenant of law has been made obsolete does not mean that scripture in general in the OT is obsolete. (2 Timothy 3:16) Do you only read the NT and disregard to OT? Which translation of 2 Timothy 2:15 reads, "rightly dividing the law of Christ?" Certain translations say, "rightly dividing the word of truth" and others say, "correctly or accurately handling the word of truth." Are you trying to rewrite scripture?
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,724
13,665
113
59
I’m sure you would like to make a distinction of all different kinds of “faith only” in order to save your Calvinistic doctrine, but the Bible makes no such distinction.
I really do not appreciate your slander. I already explained to you that I am not a Calvinist (yet you continue to falsely accuse me of being a Calvinist anyway) and I also explained to you multiple times that I don't teach salvation by "faith only" per James 2:24, which is an empty profession of faith/dead faith that remains alone - "barren of works." (James 2:14) *Notice in James 2:14, "says/claims" to have faith but has no works. Can that faith save him? What kind of faith is that? It's not genuine faith but a bare profession of faith. I teach salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone. The "alone" part means I am trusting in Jesus Christ "alone" for salvation (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9) and not that the kind of faith that saves remains alone - "barren of works."

*You need to read James 2:24 in context. In James 2:24, James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3)

The Greek word for justified "dikaioo":

1. to render righteous or such he ought to be
2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered - *fits the context.
3. to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be

Man is saved through faith and not by works (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9); yet genuine faith is (evidenced) by works. (James 2:14-24).

*Jesus Christ saves us through faith based on the merits of His finished work of redemption "alone" and not based on the merits of our works. (Romans 3:24-28)

It is through faith "in Jesus Christ alone" (and not based on the merits of our works) that we are justified on account of Christ (Romans 4:5-6; 5:1; 5:9); yet the faith that justifies does not remain alone (unfruitful, barren) if it is genuine. (James 2:14-24) *Perfect Harmony*

“Faith only” as named in the book of James is the same as the demons faith and any other faith that believes you are saved by faith alone and nothing else. God does not make ANY distinction nor does he qualify it in any way.
We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ alone (Romans 3:24-28; 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9) and not in Jesus Christ "plus something else" which would render Jesus Christ an IN-sufficient Savior. You are so confused. :(

"Faith only" in the book of James is an empty profession of faith/dead faith. James 2:14 is key to understanding the context. The faith of demons believes "mental assent" that "there is one God," (James 2:19) but the demons have not placed their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Big difference! You still don't understand the difference and you still cannot grasp a deeper faith that trusts in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9) It's no wonder you have so much faith in "water and works." The apostle Paul explains why people do not understand the things of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:11-14) and also why people do not believe the gospel. (2 Corinthians 4:3,4)

1 Corinthians 4:6 tells us “NOT TO THINK BEYOND WHAT is WRITTEN.” You are assigning meanings and definitions to God’s words that He has not written.
Straw man argument. I already proved you wrong on that in post #90.
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
If a psalm is scripture set to music, then aren’t we told to use instruments in Colossians 3:16:

“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.”
‭‭Colossians‬ ‭3‬:‭16‬ ‭KJV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/1/col.3.16.KJV

We are told to use psalms to teach and admonish one another. If you have another definition for a psalm than the one above, would you say that the Book of Psalms is ok to use? If so, then think about the lesson that Psalms 150 teaches.

“Praise ye the LORD. Praise God in his sanctuary: Praise him in the firmament of his power. Praise him for his mighty acts: Praise him according to his excellent greatness. Praise him with the sound of the trumpet: Praise him with the psaltery and harp. Praise him with the timbrel and dance: Praise him with stringed instruments and organs. Praise him upon the loud cymbals: Praise him upon the high sounding cymbals. Let every thing that hath breath Praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD.”
‭‭Psalm‬ ‭150‬:‭1‬-‭6‬ ‭KJV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/1/psa.150.1-6.KJV


No, a Psalm set to music does not mean with instruments but musical notation like “sheet music.”” It’s written with musical notes so you can sing a “tune.” The Psalms are one kind of a song, HYMNS are another kind of song, and spiritual songs are any song within a spiritual context. They are all songs. The melody is to be made IN YOUR HEART, not on an instrument.

If you do a Google search on the early church and the writings of the early church fathers, you will find no record of instruments of music in the early church—- NONE until the 8th century!! Why was that? It was because Jesus did not include musical instruments in church worship. They understood that they were not included in His new law. So history and tradition did not have them or use them for over 700 years after the Bible was written.

“The Lutheran church did not use instruments until 100 years after Martin Luther’s death. Congregational singing with an organ was not common practice until the early 18th century.” (Blaine Karois, MUSIC IN THE LUTHERN TRADITION 14 April 2015)

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)- “Our church does not use musical instruments as harps and psalteries to please God.”

Augustine )354-430) when Augustine describes the singing at Alexandria, “musical instruments were not used.” (Ernest Edwin Ryder, STORY OF OUR HYMNS.)

The Greek Orthodox Church split from the cCatholics in 1054. One of the disagreements was over instrumental music. ( G. I. Papadopoulos A HISTORICAL SURVEY)

It is a historical fact that most of today’s major denominations FORMAlly understood these principles and did not use mechanical instruments in their early history (e.g. the Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterians ).

Famous denominational scholars such as John Wesley, John Calvin, Martin Luther, Adam Clark and Charles Spurgeon and many others staunchly opposed man made instruments in the assembly.

These men are not anyone’s standard to follow but it is noteworthy that hey understood the above scriptural principles on this topic which have now been forsaken and forgotten by so many. (Info taken from Jason’s Bible Blog. Com)

So you see, not using mechanical instruments in worship to God was the “norm” until 200 years ago. The modern day church of Christ did not “come up” with this idea of acapella singing. It was the understanding and practice of the church of Christ from the 1st century. To the early 1800’s. It’s the modern day denominations who have left the teaching and tradition of the scriptures and the early church.

The Old Testament law for the Jews did use instruments in their worship and Psalms 150 is an example of this but we are not Jews nor do we practice the religion of Judaism. That law is not for Christian’s. We follow the New Testament law of Christ. There were no Christian’s and no Churches when Psalm 150 was written, so that has no bearing on Christian’s or the worship of the church of Christ. So what they did in the Old Testament is not authority for Christian church practices now.
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
I really do not appreciate your slander. I already explained to you that I am not a Calvinist (yet you continue to falsely accuse me of being a Calvinist anyway) and I also explained to you multiple times that I don't teach salvation by "faith only" per James 2:24, which is an empty profession of faith/dead faith that remains alone - "barren of works." (James 2:14) *Notice in James 2:14, "says/claims" to have faith but has no works. Can that faith save him? What kind of faith is that? It's not genuine faith but a bare profession of faith. I teach salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone. The "alone" part means I am trusting in Jesus Christ "alone" for salvation (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9) and not that the kind of faith that saves remains alone - "barren of works."

*You need to read James 2:24 in context. In James 2:24, James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3)

The Greek word for justified "dikaioo":

1. to render righteous or such he ought to be
2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered - *fits the context.
3. to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be

Man is saved through faith and not by works (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9); yet genuine faith is (evidenced) by works. (James 2:14-24).

*Jesus Christ saves us through faith based on the merits of His finished work of redemption "alone" and not based on the merits of our works. (Romans 3:24-28)

It is through faith "in Jesus Christ alone" (and not based on the merits of our works) that we are justified on account of Christ (Romans 4:5-6; 5:1; 5:9); yet the faith that justifies does not remain alone (unfruitful, barren) if it is genuine. (James 2:14-24) *Perfect Harmony*

We are saved by faith in Jesus Christ alone (Romans 3:24-28; 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9) and not in Jesus Christ "plus something else" which would render Jesus Christ an IN-sufficient Savior. You are so confused. :(

"Faith only" in the book of James is an empty profession of faith/dead faith. James 2:14 is key to understanding the context. The faith of demons believes "mental assent" that "there is one God," (James 2:19) but the demons have not placed their faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Big difference! You still don't understand the difference and you still cannot grasp a deeper faith that trusts in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9) It's no wonder you have so much faith in "water and works." The apostle Paul explains why people do not understand the things of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:11-14) and also why people do not believe the gospel. (2 Corinthians 4:3,4)

Straw man argument. I already proved you wrong on that in post #90.


I did a Google search to find out if I was wrong assigning faith-only to John Calvin. You seem to be so upset about it that I thought I better check. So I typed in the question: Did John Calvin originate the doctrine of faith-only? Here’s what I got.

“John Calvin a key figure in the Protestant Reformation ORIGINATED THE FAITH ONLY DOCTRINE. His theology as outlined in his “Institute of the Christian Religion” had a significant influence during that era. Calvin’s concept of faith was not mere assent, but also personal trust in one’s own salvation.”

I find that most interesting. He confirmed my understanding that the doctrine of “faith only” did, indeed, ORIGINATE” with a man—not God! He even admitted it which is something you still will not do. He also verified that it really was John Calvin that did this. As I understand it, “slander” is a FALSE statement damaging to a person’s reputation. My statement is NOT false. You believe in exactly the kind of faith only that Calvin came up with. His last sentence are almost your words exactly: “not mere intellectual assent but “personal trust”in one’s own salvation. That’s exactly what you said Now I know where you got that idea. So what I said about you can’t be slander because it is true.

But what I don’t understand is why you feel this would be damaging to your reputation? You are on record saying the exact thing, in the exact words as John Calvin And it was His doctrine— he is the one credited with thinking this up. So I don’t think it’s wrong or a misrepresentation to call it Calvinistic doctrine. I’m curious as to why you object to being called one of his followers when you say the same thing in the same way that he does. Are you ashamed or embarrassed by John Calvin? I would think you admire him. You certainly believe his doctrine.

As a curtesy to you, I will not call it Calvinistic doctrine, even though that is exactly what it is and by the man that ORIGINATED it. But you and I both know it did not originate with God; It originated with a man 1500 years AFTER the Bible was written. It could NOT be from God and everybody knows this even if they don’t say so.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,724
13,665
113
59
I did a Google search to find out if I was wrong assigning faith-only to John Calvin. You seem to be so upset about it that I thought I better check. So, I typed in the question: Did John Calvin originate the doctrine of faith-only? Here’s what I got.

“John Calvin a key figure in the Protestant Reformation ORIGINATED THE FAITH ONLY DOCTRINE. His theology as outlined in his “Institute of the Christian Religion” had a significant influence during that era. Calvin’s concept of faith was not mere assent, but also personal trust in one’s own salvation.”
I was recently in a discussion on a different Christian forum site with someone else who attends the church of Christ and when I shared the same information with him about salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone that I shared with you from post #106, he responded to me by saying - "Good sound protestant reformation doctrine. Martin Luther would be proud." So, apparently, some folks will argue that doctrine originated with Martin Luther and others argue that it was John Calvin. It is attributed to John Calvin to saying, "It is therefore faith alone which justifies, and yet the faith which justifies is not alone" and to Martin Luther to saying, "we are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone." Regardless of who said it first, it makes no difference because others before them have also said it.

Clement of Rome: "We also, being called through God's will in Christ Jesus, are not justified through ourselves, neither through our own wisdom or understanding, or piety, or works which we have done in holiness or heart, but through faith" (Epistle to Corinthians).

Polycarp: "I know that through grace you are saved, not of works, but by the will of God, through Jesus Christ (Epistle of Philippians).

Justin Martyr: "No longer by the blood of goats and of sheep, or by the ashes of a heifer...are sins purged, but by faith, through the blood of Christ and his death, who died on this very account (Dialogue with Trypho). "God gave his own Son the ransom for us...for what, save his righteousness, could cover our sins. In whom was it possible that we, transgressors and ungodly as we were, could be justified, save in the Son of God alone? ...O unexpected benefit, that the transgression of many should be hidden in one righteous Person and that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors" (Letter to Diognetus).

Athanasius: "Not by these (i.e. human efforts) but by faith, a man is justified as was Abraham."

Basil: "This is the true and perfect glorying in God, when a man is not lifted up on account of his own righteousness but has known himself to be wanting in true righteousness and to be justified by faith alone in Christ."

Ambrose: "Without the works of the law, to an ungodly man, that is to say, a Gentile, believing in Christ, his "faith is imputed for righteousness" as also it was to Abraham."

Origen: "Through faith, without the works of the law, the dying thief was justified, because...the Lord inquired not what he had previously wrought, nor yet waited for his performance of some work after he should have believe; but...he took him unto himself for a companion, justified through his confession alone."

Jerome: "When an ungodly man is converted, God justified him through faith alone, not on account of good works which he possessed not."

Chrysostom: "What then did God do? He made (says Paul) a righteous Person (Christ) to be a sinner, in order that he might make sinners righteous... it is the righteousness of God, when we are justified, not by works...but by grace, where all sin is made to vanish away."

Chrysostom: "Again, they said that he who adhered to faith alone was cursed, but he shows that he who adhered to faith alone, is blessed."

Augustine: "Grace is given to you, not wages paid to you...it is called grace because it is given gratuitously. By no precedent merits did you buy what you have received. The sinner therefore received this grace first, that his sins should be forgiven him...good works follow after a justified person; they do not go before in order that he may be justified...good works, following after justification, show what a man has received."

Augustine: "Now, having duly considered and weighed all these circumstances and testimonies, we conclude that a man is not justified by the precepts of a holy life, but by faith in Jesus Christ, --in a word, not by the law of works, but by the law of faith; not by the letter, but by the spirit; not by the merits of deeds, but by free grace."

Anselm: "Do you believe that you cannot be saved but by the death of Christ? Go, then, and ...put all your confidence in this death alone. If God shall say to you, "You are a sinner", say to him, "I place the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and my sin."

Bernard of Clairvaux: "Shall not all our righteousness turn out to be mere unrighteousness and deficiency? What, then, shall it be concerning our sins, when not even our righteousness can answer for itself? Wherefore...let us flee, with all humility to Mercy which alone can save our souls...whoever hungers and thirsts after righteousness, let him believe in thee, who "justified the ungodly"; and thus, being justified by faith alone, he shall have peace with God."

I find that most interesting. He confirmed my understanding that the doctrine of “faith only” did, indeed, ORIGINATE” with a man—not God!
Well, I just showed you that the doctrine of "faith alone" - faith (rightly understood) in Jesus Christ alone for salvation did not originate with John Calvin and it actually did not originate with man in general either but with God. The Bible makes it clear in many passages of scripture that man is saved through belief/faith - "apart from additions or modifications." (John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5-6; 5:1-2; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; 3:6-14, 26; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

Now you don't need to add the word "alone" next to "belief/faith" in each of these passages of scripture in order to figure out that the words, "belief/faith" stand alone in connection with receiving eternal life/salvation. Hence, FAITH ALONE. Do these many passages of scripture say belief/faith "plus something else?" Plus, baptism? Plus, works? NO. So, then it's faith (rightly understood) in Jesus Christ alone. *Not to be confused with "faith only" empty profession of faith/dead faith that remains "alone" - barren of works. (James 2:14-24)

He even admitted it which is something you still will not do. He also verified that it really was John Calvin that did this.
I really don't care what he admitted because salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation did not originate with John Calvin and plus, John Calvin also believes in unconditional election which turns predestination into fatalistic determination which diminishes God's foreknowledge in predestination in regard to knowing who will exercise their free will to respond to God's grace and place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. (Romans 8:29-30) God does not fatalistically choose who will and won't be saved, as if we have no choice in the matter.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,724
13,665
113
59
Beckworth said: As I understand it, “slander” is a FALSE statement damaging to a person’s reputation. My statement is NOT false. You believe in exactly the kind of faith only that Calvin came up with. His last sentence are almost your words exactly: “not mere intellectual assent but “personal trust” in one’s own salvation. That’s exactly what you said Now I know where you got that idea. So, what I said about you can’t be slander because it is true.
Regardless of what John Calvin said about "not intellectual assent but personal trust" he would not be the first person to ever say that and as I showed you in post #90 saving faith in Christ does involve "trust" and not mere intellectual assent. You denied it involved trust and you never did admit you were wrong about that.

Now as for faith involving trust, I proved you wrong below:

Strong's Lexicon
pistis: Faith, belief, trust, confidence, fidelity
Original Word: πίστις
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: pistis
Pronunciation: PIS-tis
Phonetic Spelling: (pis'-tis)
Definition: Faith, belief, trust, confidence, fidelity
Meaning: faith, belief, trust, confidence; fidelity, faithfulness.

Usage: In the New Testament, "pistis" primarily denotes a conviction or belief in the truth of something, often with the implication of trust and reliance. It is used to describe the faith that believers have in God and Jesus Christ, encompassing both intellectual assent and trustful commitment. "Pistis" is foundational to the Christian life, as it is through faith that believers are justified and live out their relationship with God. :)

Strong's Greek: 4102. πίστις (pistis) -- Faith, belief, trust, confidence, fidelity

But what I don’t understand is why you feel this would be damaging to your reputation? You are on record saying the exact thing, in the exact words as John Calvin And it was His doctrine— he is the one credited with thinking this up.
Well, John Calvin did not just think this up on his own as others before him taught it as well. Plus, John Calvin taught TULIP and the U is for unconditional election, which I don't agree with, and I am not a 5-point Calvinist, so to refer to me as a Calvinist is slander.

Even if John Calvin got it right about faith involving trust in Jesus Christ alone for salvation (as did numerous other folks before him) that still does not make me a Calvinist. Roman Catholics believe that you must be water baptized in order to be saved and so do you. Does that make you a Roman Catholic? Mormons believe that as well. Does that make you a Mormon? Roman Catholicism and Mormonism teach other doctrines that I'm sure you don't agree with so it would be inaccurate for me to refer to you as a Roman Catholic or Mormon, just because you all agree that you must be water baptized in order to be saved. I find it interesting that the church of Christ, Roman Catholicism and Mormonism ALL teach salvation by faith AND works. Difference in style, but same in substance - "works based false gospel." Red flag.

So, I don’t think it’s wrong or a misrepresentation to call it Calvinistic doctrine. I’m curious as to why you object to being called one of his followers when you say the same thing in the same way that he does. Are you ashamed or embarrassed by John Calvin? I would think you admire him. You certainly believe his doctrine.
The doctrine of salvation by grace through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9) originated with God and not with John Calvin. I'm neither ashamed or embarrassed and I came to place my faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation through reading Scripture and not through reading the writings of John Calvin. Now on the other hand, your general theology has originated with men, namely THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE. Did these men actually "restore" the gospel, the church, and true New Testament worship, as they claim, or did they simply create another sect bent on a more dogmatic sectarianism than others they renounced?

As a curtesy to you, I will not call it Calvinistic doctrine, even though that is exactly what it is and by the man that ORIGINATED it.
It's sad that you feel the need to resort to dishonesty just to win an argument at all costs.

But you and I both know it did not originate with God;
You believe it did not, but I know that it did.

It originated with a man 1500 years AFTER the Bible was written.
Roman Catholics make this same argument, but they are also wrong. False religions that promote salvation by works are motivated by PRIDE.

It could NOT be from God and everybody knows this even if they don’t say so.
You make a very good crafty lawyer for the enemy but you are not fooling me or any of my brothers and sisters in Christ on Christian Chat and try as you may, you will NEVER convince me to withdraw my faith from trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation and turning to supplements/works for salvation. You will NEVER covert me to Campbellism. Christ's finished work of redemption (Romans 3:24) is sufficient and complete to save believers. No supplements needed.

Here are a couple of statements from two different men who attend the church of Christ that I recently had conversations with, which show how that church teaches salvation by works, contrary to Scripture. (Romans 4:2-6; 11:6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9)

"It is works of obedience that help save us and just not works of the law or works of merit."

That is a false statement and an oxymoron. I did not realize that Christ needed our help to save us. That would render Him an IN-sufficient Savior.

"Under the NT law, God requires men to have a faith obedience in doing his best to obey the NT. The way one enters the strait gate is by striving to keep the NT as best as he can."

That is performance-based works salvation. Our best is still not God's best. (Isaiah 64:6; Romans 3:23; 6:23) That statement about doing our best reminds of what Mormons teach in 2 Nephi 5:23 from the Book of Mormon - for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do. In other words, do all you can or else the Lord will not be able to save you. That is works salvation.

Paul did not say that we are saved by grace through doing the best we can to keep the NT. Paul said we are saved through faith, and the object of our faith is Jesus Christ. His sinless, perfect life followed by His death, burial and resurrection is God's best (2 Corinthians 5:21; Philippians 3:9) and it is our faith that is accounted to us for righteousness and God imputes righteousness apart from works. (Romans 4:5-6) It's a shame that human pride will not allow works-salvationists to place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. Their hands are full of their works, and they will not let go in order to receive Christ through faith.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,724
13,665
113
59
The Church of Christ are legalists
As Bob L Ross points out in his article - Major Errors of Campbellism on Salvation that Campbellites deny the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation. In his article, he then asks this question: Is this not why, as so many have observed, Campbellite preaching is so dead, so staccato, and relies so heavily upon human “logic” and “legalism?” The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God (I Cor. 2:14).

Major Errors of Campbellism on Salvation / Bob L. Ross |
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
Although there were changes made from the old covenant of law to the new covenant, musical instruments being forbidden is not one of those changes. The church of Christ has taken a legalistic approach to forbidding musical instruments in the NT, which is strange indeed.
@Beckworth, you are a sharp student in the teachings of Christ, sister. I salute you.

In Ephesians 5:19, the Holy Spirit says - speaking to one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord. In Colossians 3:16, the Holy Spirit says - Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. Once again, the word "psalm" in the Greek dictionary, definition (#5568): "A set piece of music, i.e. a sacred ode (accompanied with the voice, harp, or other instrument)." The root word of psalm means "to twitch, twang or pluck," such as pluck a string of a musical instrument."

Strong's Concordance
psalmos: a striking (of musical strings), a psalm
Original Word: ψαλμός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: psalmos
Phonetic Spelling: (psal-mos')
Short Definition: a psalm
Definition: a psalm, song of praise, the Hebrew book of Psalms.
HELPS Word-studies
5568 psalmós – a psalm ("Scripture set to music"). Originally, a psalm (5568 /psalmós) was sung and accompanied by a plucked musical instrument (typically a harp), especially the OT Psalms.

[The Psalms of the OT were often sung and were accompanied by sophisticated musical arrangements].

NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from psalló
Definition
a striking (of musical strings), a psalm
NASB Translation
Psalm (1), psalm (1), Psalms (3), psalms (2).

The words "making melody" are also used in Ephesians 5:19, but "how" this is done is found in Isaiah 23:16, and it is with a musical instrument:" - “Take a harp, go about the city, you forgotten harlot; Make sweet melody, sing many songs, that you may be remembered.” Also, Amos 5:23 speaks of "the melody of thy viols," which is also reference to a musical instrument. So, if "the Bible interprets itself," (and it does) these passages show "how" to make melody – with musical instruments.

So, according to the Holy Spirit we are authorized to use “psalms” in the NT. Your argument is biased, cunning and inconclusive.

According to the church of Christ but not according to the Holy Spirit, as I just showed you once again. Will you listen this time? Or will you double down on your erroneous teaching in a desperate effort to accommodate your biased church doctrine at all costs? I can see that your church of Christ indoctrination runs very deep!

The old covenant may have vanished away, but psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord has not vanished away. (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16) Just because the old covenant of law has been made obsolete does not mean that scripture in general in the OT is obsolete. (2 Timothy 3:16) Do you only read the NT and disregard to OT? Which translation of 2 Timothy 2:15 reads, "rightly dividing the law of Christ?" Certain translations say, "rightly dividing the word of truth" and others say, "correctly or accurately handling the word of truth." Are you trying to rewrite scripture?



In all of your scriptures that you have cited on “faith”, not one of them says faith “ONLY” or “faith “ ALONE”. You are beating a dead horse. You and I are not in disagreement over whether or not faith saves us. We disagree on whether faith “ONLY” saves us. That means you must show, quote or cite scriptures from the Bible that says—not that we must “believe” ROMANS 4:5-8.-—but we “must believe “ONLY” or we we are saved by “belief ALONE.” It’s not there. You are ADDING a word that God has not added. The same with all of the other scriptures you gave as “proof” of your doctrine. ( notice I did not call it Calvinistic this time , but that doesn’t change anything)

What you need to show us is just one scripture that teaches we are saved by “faith ONLY, or faith “ALONE”. Will you do that? I don’t think so, because you can’t. You keep saying it, but all of the scriptures you keep holding up as proof only teach that faith saves us, not faith “only” or faith ALONE saves us. There is a huge difference between being saved by faith and being saved by faith ALONE. Faith DOES save us, but so does Baptism 1 Peter 3:21, and Repentance Acts 17:30, and CONFESSION Romans 10:10– not 1 scripture that says “faith ALONE. You will have to do better.

I am surprised that you find it strange that anyone would not use mechanical instruments of music in their worship
If you will do just a little investigation of church history and the writings of the early church fathers you will discover that they understood the Teaching of The New Testament did NOT include mechanical instruments of music in the worship of the early church and therefore instruments were not added to worship in the church until the 8th CENTURY!! For 700 years no instruments were used in the churches. It wasn’t until the early 1800’s that mechanical instruments were commonly used to accompany singing in the churches. Who left the teaching of the New Testament? You? Or me? I guess you believe all of the Christians who lived for 700 years were wrong. No one, for 700 years, understood Eph. 5;19 or Col. 3:16 correctly??

John Wesley said, “I have no objection to instruments of music in our worship as long as they are neither seen or heard.” And: “Music in the church is as ancient as the apostles but instrumental music is not!”

Charles Spurgeon one of the greatest Baptist preachers from your own church, had no trouble understanding that the New Testament did not teach instrumental music was acceptable. Perhaps you will listen to him, even though he believes the same as I do. He said, in referring to 1 Cor. 14:15, “I would as soon PRAY to God with machinery, as SING to God with machinery.” Spurgeon preached to 20,000 people every Sunday for 20 years in the Metropolitan Baptist Tabernacle and never were mechanical instruments of music used in his services.” (From God Breathed). Other Baptist historians felt the same way: “…Baptist in former times would have soon have tolerated the Pope of Rome in their pulpits as an organ in their galleries, and yet the instrument has gradually found its way among them.” “Fifty years among Baptist”, page 204-207, you don’t even know your own history. And you find us “strange”? The church of Christ today did not just “come up” with the idea of a cappella singing. Many, many people much smarter than you and me understood the teaching of the New Testament; that it did not authorize mechanical instruments of music. We have stayed true to the Bible; you are the one who has left the faith of the apostles teaching and the tradition of the early church. It’s not strange at all; if you know the scriptures and church history.

Oh, and as you are so fond of calling us “legalistic” and have stated that the “church of Christ has taken a legalistic approach in forbidding musical instruments in the New Testament”, then I suppose that likewise, the Baptist church was at one time “legalistic” and took “ a legalistic approach in forbidding musical instruments in the Testament.” I guess you find them “strange” also. That would make EVERYONE “legalistic” and “strange” for at least 700 years before the world became “enlightened” enough to realize how strange and “legalistic “ they all were to forbid musical instruments in their worship. You know what?? Now THAT is strange!!
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
@Beckworth, you are a sharp student in the teachings of Christ, sister. I salute you.[/QUOTe

Thank you. That is a great compliment but I don’t deserve it. I pray for wisdom often and especially when a I am trying to answer religious error. So, I believe it is all God using me to defend His Word. When He described the “word” as a sharp two-edged sword, it really is. It is effective and powerful. As David told Goliath, “ the battle belongs to the Lord.” I am just a messenger. Pray for me.
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
As Bob L Ross points out in his article - Major Errors of Campbellism on Salvation that Campbellites deny the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation. In his article, he then asks this question: Is this not why, as so many have observed, Campbellite preaching is so dead, so staccato, and relies so heavily upon human “logic” and “legalism?” The only explanation of this barren spirituality is the absence of the Holy Spirit. This likewise explains their lack of a proper understanding of the Word of God (I Cor. 2:14).

Major Errors of Campbellism on Salvation / Bob L. Ross |
I don’t know anything about what “Cambellism” believes. Mr. Ross’s opinion is just as good or bad as anyone else’s, I suppose. You know what they say about “opinions”? They are like belly buttons; everybody has one.
 

HeIsHere

Well-known member
May 21, 2022
7,130
2,846
113
In all of your scriptures that you have cited on “faith”, not one of them says faith “ONLY” or “faith “ ALONE”.

The Gospel of John uses the verb "believe" (pisteuō) nearly 98 times, which is about one-fourth of all uses of the word in the New Testament.

But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name.
John 20: 30-31

Faith (noun) comes from believing.

The real issue is not "alone" being stated, it does not need to be stated, because scripture does not teach faith + works saves.
No James does not make this assertion either.
 

GRACE_ambassador

Well-known member
Feb 22, 2021
3,376
1,758
113
Midwest
One of the things wrong with the “sinner’s prayer”, besides not being in the Bible and being a commandment of men is that they have you confessing that you are a sinner, as if that is the confession that God is talking about in Roman’s 10:10. Not so.
So, another accusation that there are at least TWO of us have done it wrong [ NOT "BEING In
THE BIBLE!"
], praying to God???:

1) opposite of the proud Pharisee, the humble publican prayed:

"And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto​
heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God Be Merciful to me a sinner.​
I [ JESUS ] tell you, this man went down to his house Justified..." (Luke 18:13-14 AV)​

2) me, basically the same thing, believing God's Gospel Of Grace, Of The Death, Burial, and
Resurrection Of The LORD Jesus Christ, And,
praying To God: "Please forgive me a sinner!"
I was already at home, "Justified By The Precious BLOOD Of The Lamb!!!" = ALL-Sufficient
ENOUGH For me:

"But God Commendeth His Love Toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners,​
Christ DIED for us. Much more then, being now Justified by His BLOOD, we​
Shall Be Saved From wrath Through Him." (Romans 5:8-9 AV)​

T'aint so, eh?

Amen!!

Praise And Thanks Be Unto God For ALL Of His Everlasting GRACE, MERCY, Peace And Love!
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
The Gospel of John uses the verb "believe" (pisteuō) nearly 98 times, which is about one-fourth of all uses of the word in the New Testament.

But these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name.
John 20: 30-31



Faith (noun) comes from believing.

The real issue is not "alone" being stated, it does not need to be stated, because scripture does not teach faith + works saves.
No James does not make this assertion either.


I can make the same argument but even stronger for baptism. Jesus plainly says that faith plus baptism saves us. Mk. 16:16. So every time a scripture on faith is used, we KNOW baptism is included. “IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE STATED because scripture does teach faith + baptism saves.” And I have proof Mark 16:16. Also 1 Peter 3:21. And proof that faith alone does NOT save, James 2;24. I think my proof is stronger than yours because I at least have a verse stating baptism plus faith saves. You do Not have a verse that says “faith alone” saves. Even worse—we have one that says it doesn’t.
 

Believer08

Active member
Jan 27, 2025
266
63
28
“Sometimes the word “faith” is a packaged term that includes all that you do to obey the gospel plan of salvation” — BJ Clarke
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
I was recently in a discussion on a different Christian forum site with someone else who attends the church of Christ and when I shared the same information with him about salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone that I shared with you from post #106, he responded to me by saying - "Good sound protestant reformation doctrine. Martin Luther would be proud." So, apparently, some folks will argue that doctrine originated with Martin Luther and others argue that it was John Calvin. It is attributed to John Calvin to saying, "It is therefore faith alone which justifies, and yet the faith which justifies is not alone" and to Martin Luther to saying, "we are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone." Regardless of who said it first, it makes no difference because others before them have also said it.

Clement of Rome: "We also, being called through God's will in Christ Jesus, are not justified through ourselves, neither through our own wisdom or understanding, or piety, or works which we have done in holiness or heart, but through faith" (Epistle to Corinthians).

Polycarp: "I know that through grace you are saved, not of works, but by the will of God, through Jesus Christ (Epistle of Philippians).

Justin Martyr: "No longer by the blood of goats and of sheep, or by the ashes of a heifer...are sins purged, but by faith, through the blood of Christ and his death, who died on this very account (Dialogue with Trypho). "God gave his own Son the ransom for us...for what, save his righteousness, could cover our sins. In whom was it possible that we, transgressors and ungodly as we were, could be justified, save in the Son of God alone? ...O unexpected benefit, that the transgression of many should be hidden in one righteous Person and that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors" (Letter to Diognetus).

Athanasius: "Not by these (i.e. human efforts) but by faith, a man is justified as was Abraham."

Basil: "This is the true and perfect glorying in God, when a man is not lifted up on account of his own righteousness but has known himself to be wanting in true righteousness and to be justified by faith alone in Christ."

Ambrose: "Without the works of the law, to an ungodly man, that is to say, a Gentile, believing in Christ, his "faith is imputed for righteousness" as also it was to Abraham."

Origen: "Through faith, without the works of the law, the dying thief was justified, because...the Lord inquired not what he had previously wrought, nor yet waited for his performance of some work after he should have believe; but...he took him unto himself for a companion, justified through his confession alone."

Jerome: "When an ungodly man is converted, God justified him through faith alone, not on account of good works which he possessed not."

Chrysostom: "What then did God do? He made (says Paul) a righteous Person (Christ) to be a sinner, in order that he might make sinners righteous... it is the righteousness of God, when we are justified, not by works...but by grace, where all sin is made to vanish away."

Chrysostom: "Again, they said that he who adhered to faith alone was cursed, but he shows that he who adhered to faith alone, is blessed."

Augustine: "Grace is given to you, not wages paid to you...it is called grace because it is given gratuitously. By no precedent merits did you buy what you have received. The sinner therefore received this grace first, that his sins should be forgiven him...good works follow after a justified person; they do not go before in order that he may be justified...good works, following after justification, show what a man has received."

Augustine: "Now, having duly considered and weighed all these circumstances and testimonies, we conclude that a man is not justified by the precepts of a holy life, but by faith in Jesus Christ, --in a word, not by the law of works, but by the law of faith; not by the letter, but by the spirit; not by the merits of deeds, but by free grace."

Anselm: "Do you believe that you cannot be saved but by the death of Christ? Go, then, and ...put all your confidence in this death alone. If God shall say to you, "You are a sinner", say to him, "I place the death of our Lord Jesus Christ between me and my sin."

Bernard of Clairvaux: "Shall not all our righteousness turn out to be mere unrighteousness and deficiency? What, then, shall it be concerning our sins, when not even our righteousness can answer for itself? Wherefore...let us flee, with all humility to Mercy which alone can save our souls...whoever hungers and thirsts after righteousness, let him believe in thee, who "justified the ungodly"; and thus, being justified by faith alone, he shall have peace with God."

Well, I just showed you that the doctrine of "faith alone" - faith (rightly understood) in Jesus Christ alone for salvation did not originate with John Calvin and it actually did not originate with man in general either but with God. The Bible makes it clear in many passages of scripture that man is saved through belief/faith - "apart from additions or modifications." (John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5-6; 5:1-2; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; 3:6-14, 26; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

Now you don't need to add the word "alone" next to "belief/faith" in each of these passages of scripture in order to figure out that the words, "belief/faith" stand alone in connection with receiving eternal life/salvation. Hence, FAITH ALONE. Do these many passages of scripture say belief/faith "plus something else?" Plus, baptism? Plus, works? NO. So, then it's faith (rightly understood) in Jesus Christ alone. *Not to be confused with "faith only" empty profession of faith/dead faith that remains "alone" - barren of works. (James 2:14-24)

I really don't care what he admitted because salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation did not originate with John Calvin and plus, John Calvin also believes in unconditional election which turns predestination into fatalistic determination which diminishes God's foreknowledge in predestination in regard to knowing who will exercise their free will to respond to God's grace and place their faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. (Romans 8:29-30) God does not fatalistically choose who will and won't be saved, as if we have no choice in the matter.


Perhaps the reason John Calvin is credited as being the “originator” of the faith only doctrine” is because he was the one who made it a “church“doctrine” (according to my sources). Perhaps there were others who believed it but John Calvin write a book about it and it became “doctrine.” I’m just guessing here and trying to put it all together to make some sense of it. I am quoting info I read and they do credit him for the doctrine, but it is not a point that I feel is important enough to spend time arguing about.
 

Beckworth

Well-known member
May 15, 2019
813
335
63
“Sometimes the word “faith” is a packaged term that includes all that you do to obey the gospel plan of salvation” — BJ Clarke
Exactly. And we have scripture that supports your point. Acts 16:30, the jailer asked “what must I do to be saved?”. In verse 31 they told him to believe, in verse 32 they taught him the gospel, in verse 33 he showed fruits of “repentance” ( washed their stripes) and was “baptized”. In verse 34, he rejoiced HAVING BELIEVED IN GOD with all his house. This is exactly what you are saying. “Believe” was a packaged term used to include ALL he did to be saved, including repentance and baptism which are also commanded by God through the scriptures.

Glad you pointed that out for us.