Not By Works

[EleventhHour]

Until a person can say they are the 4th type of soil they have no basis upon which to assert that the word of God will never be uprooted from their heart.

Absolutely horrible statement!!!

Jesus never made this assertion and you are adding personal dogma into the parable.

It quite disturbing how you raise the bar of salvation and make it something that has to be attained.

Your words are very upsetting, truth be told, because you add ideas that are not in scripture to suit some personal mission, you change the very definition of how we are saved.

Ephesians 2:8
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—

Notice there is no mention God uprooting anything nor mentioning what type of soil it is ... and the word is saved.

 

[VCO]

Do we need to have faith to be saved? YES
Do we need to love God by loving one another to be saved?
YES

In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands. And his commands are not burdensome,
1 John 5:3 NIV
https://1john.bible/1-john-5-3

You have said in response to Kolistus that, "therefore Obedience is PART OF THAT LOVE, and NEVER HAS BEEN PART OF SALVATION." Did Jesus told (taught) the apostles about this?

If I don't love my neighbor as I love myself, will I be saved according to the Scriptures?

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Matthew 25:45‭-‬46 NIV
https://bible.com/bible/111/mat.25.45-46.NIV

I am not sure you can understand this, and it might be just Foolishness to you.

1 Corinthians 2:4-16 (NIV)
4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power,
5 so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power.
6 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing.
7 No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began.
8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
9 However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"--
10 but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God.
11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.
13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.
14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:
16 "For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ.


Genuine FAITH, is not an intellectual acceptance of something that is TRUTH.

It is something the Holy Spirit Put into our Hearts, the Born Again Human Spirit.

Without it, you cannot understand Scripture correctly, because it is SPIRITUALLY DISCERNED.

And Spiritually Discerned IS ACTUALLY A DEEP DOWN in your HEART (our Human Spirit), which is Genuine FAITH.


Ephesians 2:8-9 (NIV)
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--
9 not by works, so that no one can boast.


That SAVING FAITH was put into our HEARTS, by the HOLY SPIRIT.

It is not something that happens between your ears.

 

[Guojing]

If you would just give me plain scripture, and not an argument based on conjecture, I would be on board.

Paul plainly said the Jews are also dead to the law, and that's good enough for me.

I already quoted acts 21 and you use your vivid imagination to somehow conclude that James was merely putting on appearances for the Jews

Scripture is clearly not good enough for you

 

[VCO]

I've met and talked to some truly awesome Catholics, and I'm being honest. But I detest the Catholic church system, but it is true that 'should' and 'have' really are in the subjunctive mood of possibility (not the mood of certainty).
Check it out for yourself here (click on the 'PARSE' button next to 'should' and 'have'):

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn/3/1/t_conc_1000016

I think you owe it to me to explain how you can interpret those verbs as being in the indicative mood, the mood of certainty, when we can see with our own eyes in the link to Strong's above that they are in the subjunctive mood, the mood of uncertainty.

And thank you for yet another nugget of truth in these passages that get blindly defined as osas passages. I'd never seen that before.


Yep.
Now explain how Paul can then say it 'might' happen in Titus 3:7.
Hey, I'm just asking.
What do you say?
I'll hold my thoughts about this apparent contradiction in scripture until I know your's.

ARE YOU A MORMON ? ? ?

 

[Nobodybutjesus]

Well I appreciate your very humbling response. You see, we know that “We all possess knowledge.” But knowledge puffs up while love builds up. Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know. But whoever loves God is known by God. We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. But if anyone obeys his word, love for God is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did. If anyone teaches otherwise and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, they are conceited and understand nothing. They have an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between people of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

Here's how Jesus lived that you should follow,

During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with fervent cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him. Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage; rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death— even death on a cross!

Do you have the same mind as Jesus? Would you suffer for a brethren? Would you humble yourself by becoming obedient to death or would you just claim a faith without works that seems like very easy, attractive and without the need to suffer for someone else?

Sorry bro but I prefer to serve my Lord Jesus and share in His sufferings while waiting for Him.

Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many; and he will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him.
Hebrews 9:27-28

Praise God!
All glory belongs to Him.

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

The JEWS LOWERED the LAW OF GOD, to where they COULD KEEP IT THEMSELVES, and thought they were RIGHT WITH GOD, Because they Could KEEP the Lowered Standard ritualistically, they stopped SEEKING a MESSIAH who could DO IT ALL.

Now we have another Generation, that have Stopped SEEKING a MESSIAH who could DO IT ALL, and think their LOWERED STANDARD, of KEEPING the LAW makes themselves, out of their own efforts, RIGHT WITH GOD. Anytime your WORKS have a MOTIVE of improving your SALVATION, IT IS FOOLISHNESS. You need to become 100% dependent on HIS MERCY and GRACE.

If you want your SINS washed as white as snow, REPENT, and stop thinking your deeds have made you right with GOD, and LEARN to rely on what JESUS DID ON THE CROSS. HIS MERCY, and HIS GRACE, will keep, your Sins already washed as White as SNOW. Then you will be free indeed, and then you can use that freedom to agapē LOVE GOD by striving to become Obedient out of PURE LOVE.

Until you do, you are in the same sinking ship as the JEWS that GOD described in Isaiah 1:13-18

This is actually a very good post VCO, thank you for blessing us with this.

One thing I would disagree with is “The JEWS LOWERED the LAW OF GOD, to where they COULD KEEP IT THEMSELVES” because Jesus himself told them that they could not keep the law (Talmud) anymore because of what they added to the law (Torah).

The way a Rabbi will explain it to you (don’t ask VCO LOL) is for example if the law said you cannot swim, the Jews went and put up a fence 5 meters from the swimming pool and said to the Jews, it is sinful to touch the fence to reach the pool. They made it impossible to keep their law (Talmud) by adding to the Torah.

That is why Jesus said:

Mat 23:2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat (Torah):
Mat 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say (Talmud), and do not.
Mat 23:4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.

If you sit in the seat of Moses, it means you move in his authority (law/Torah) but they tried to keep the added law (Talmud). The Talmud is the oral Torah and verse 3 is actually saying that they can’t keep up with what they say (Oral Torah/Talmud).

 

[lightbearer]

I've met and talked to some truly awesome Catholics, and I'm being honest. But I detest the Catholic church system, but it is true that 'should' and 'have' really are in the subjunctive mood of possibility (not the mood of certainty).
Check it out for yourself here (click on the 'PARSE' button next to 'should' and 'have'):

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn/3/1/t_conc_1000016

I think you owe it to me to explain how you can interpret those verbs as being in the indicative mood, the mood of certainty, when we can see with our own eyes in the link to Strong's above that they are in the subjunctive mood, the mood of uncertainty.

And thank you for yet another nugget of truth in these passages that get blindly defined as osas passages. I'd never seen that before.

Student of the Greek are you? Excellent! We all should be to one degree or another.

Great Post! I never noticed that before either. Have you ever seen J.P. Green's Literal version? It is my favorite. Here is John 3:16 from it.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing INTO Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. The one believing INTO Him is not condemned; but the one not believing has already been condemned, for he has not believed INTO the name of the only begotten Son of God.
(Joh 3:16-18 LITV)

Believe Me that I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me; but if not, believe Me because of the works themselves. Indeed, I tell you truly, the one believing INTO Me, the works which I do, that one shall do also, and greater than these he will do, because I go to My Father.
(Joh 14:11-12 LITV)

Abide IN me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
(Joh 15:4-5 KJV)

If ye abide IN me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.
(Joh 15:7 KJV)

That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art IN me, and I in thee, that they also may be one IN us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
(Joh 17:21-23 KJV)


Talk about an intimate relationship.

For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. THIS IS A GREAT MYSTERY: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
(Eph 5:30-32 KJV)

As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
(Joh 17:2-3 KJV)

What is Eternal Life in respect to this passage?

Knowing the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

We must have this aspect of Eternal Life to partake of the next in Heaven for all of Eternity.

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth into me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth into me shall never die. Believest thou this?
(Joh 11:25-26)

That we might know the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

How well shall we know them?

They all may be one; as thou, Father, art IN me, and I in thee, that they also may be one IN us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. THIS IS A GREAT MYSTERY: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. For without Him we can do Nothing. For it is HE that works in us BOTH to WILL and Do HIS good pleasure. Christ in us the Hope of Glory.

Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: Whereunto I also labour, striving according TO HIS working, which worketh IN me mightily.
(Col 1:28-29 KJV)

 

[mailmandan]

I gave you the link that shows 'become' is in the subjunctive mood, the mood of uncertainty. That means 'might' be made heirs, not 'definitely' made heirs. What does your doctrine do with that?

The nature of the construction (even though subjunctive mood) which is called the verb of doubt, in the context of the purpose/result clause, there is no doubt in the mind of the author as to whether or not the action will be accomplished. Notice, "according to the hope of eternal life." This hope is not a make a wish, uncertain kind of hope. Unlike the english word "hope," the N.T. word contains no uncertainty; it speaks of something that is certain. - Strong's #1680 elpís (from elpō, "to anticipate, welcome") – properly, expectation of what is sure (certain); hope. If we have saving faith in Christ then we have this hope. Faith is the substance of things HOPED for.. (Hebrews 11:1). So that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the HOPE of eternal life (Titus 3:7). What does your doctrine do with that?

I figger if you're going to use Romans 8:30 to show the certainty of the justified being saved you should have some explanation for this verse where the uncertainty of the justified being saved is shared by Paul. I think I know what you'll do with it. But I will let you go there first.

Uncertainly only occurs when the uncertainty of whether a person is actually justified in the first place or not is in question. Romans 8:30 clearly states ..and whom He justified, these He also glorified. Glorification is not uncertain for those who are justified, as Paul clearly stated. You need to properly harmonize scripture with scripture instead of pitting scripture against scripture.

Your argument about the subjunctive mood in Titus 3:7 reminds me of the Roman Catholic argument from John 3:16. As I previously stated, the NAB (Catholic Bible) translates it - For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life. Notice not one, but two "mights." Talk about sowing seeds of doubt as to whether or not those who believe in Him (Christ) will perish or not! In John 3:18 in the same Bible translation, we read - Whoever believes in him will not be condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. What happened to "might not" perish there? (Other translations of John 3:18 read - ..is not condemned. I've also heard Campbellites quote John 3:16 from the KJV and stress "should not perish" and imply, but still might. The NASB reads - "shall not perish."

 

[mailmandan]

I hope you're just sharing this for other's benefit, because I'm full on board with this.

The point is, even Paul taught that the faith that justifies is the faith that works.

Faith that justifies is faith that trusts in Jesus Christ alone for salvation and this authentic faith, which is alive in Christ results in producing works (Ephesians 2:5-10) unlike an empty profession of faith/dead faith that produces no works. (James 2:14)

 

[mailmandan]

Once again I ask you to post the scripture that teaches us that willfully sinning unbelievers in the church are made clean by the blood of Christ for contact and association with believers, like an unbelieving spouse is declared clean for the sake of a believer, so the believer and his children will not being made unclean by the unbelieving spouse.

If you do not produce this scripture I will assume you can not find one and my argument will stand.

I already clearly explained my position. Trying reading my posts again without the NOSAS bi-focals.
See posts #126,157 and #126,377 and #126,397.

 

[gb9]

I already clearly explained my position. Trying reading my posts again without the NOSAS bi-focals.
See posts #126,157 and #126,377 and #126,397.

as I said, some people will not accept any answer, they just keep firing off questions and demands, and respond to answers with more questions and demands.

but, that is what legalism is- questions and demands..

 

[mailmandan]

Absolutely horrible statement!!!

Jesus never made this assertion and you are adding personal dogma into the parable.

It quite disturbing how you raise the bar of salvation and make it something that has to be attained.

Your words are very upsetting, truth be told, because you add ideas that are not in scripture to suit some personal mission, you change the very definition of how we are saved.

Ephesians 2:8
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—

Notice there is no mention God uprooting anything nor mentioning what type of soil it is ... and the word is saved.

It's quite disturbing indeed! Only the 4th soil was referred to as "good ground" that produced fruit and there is NO MENTION OF CHOKING, WITHERING OR BEING UPROOTED THEREAFTER.

In Matthew 15:3, Jesus mentions the type of plants that will be uprooted. - "Every plant which My heavenly Father did not plant shall be uprooted. Reminds me of the parable of the wheat and the tares.

 

[mailmandan]

I've met and talked to some truly awesome Catholics, and I'm being honest. But I detest the Catholic church system, but it is true that 'should' and 'have' really are in the subjunctive mood of possibility (not the mood of certainty). Check it out for yourself here (click on the 'PARSE' button next to 'should' and 'have'):

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn/3/1/t_conc_1000016

I think you owe it to me to explain how you can interpret those verbs as being in the indicative mood, the mood of certainty, when we can see with our own eyes in the link to Strong's above that they are in the subjunctive mood, the mood of uncertainty.

I find it interesting that you detest the Catholic church system, yet they make the same argument about the subjunctive mood of possibility and strongly oppose OSAS, just as you do. It truly amazes me how that does not raise a red flag for you!

And thank you for yet another nugget of truth in these passages that get blindly defined as osas passages. I'd never seen that before.

Roman Catholics would agree with you.

Yep.
Now explain how Paul can then say it 'might' happen in Titus 3:7.
Hey, I'm just asking.
What do you say?
I'll hold my thoughts about this apparent contradiction in scripture until I know your's.

I don't hear Paul saying that being heirs according to the hope of eternal life might or might not happen for those who are justified (just like I don't hear John saying those who believe in Him might or might not receive eternal life in John 3:16) and even though it's subjunctive mood in Titus 3:7 in the context of the purpose/result clause, there is no doubt in the mind of the author as to whether or not the action will be accomplished. The NASB reads - so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life and this hope (Strong's #1680 elpís) is not uncertain, as I already explained.

 

[Judges1318]

In Matthew 15:3, Jesus mentions the type of plants that will be uprooted. - "Every plant which My heavenly Father did not plant shall be uprooted. Reminds me of the parable of the wheat and the tares.

This is called 'mixing of metaphors'.
The planting in the Parable of the Sower is the word of God, which is planted by God.

 

[Judges1318]

I find it interesting that you detest the Catholic church system, yet they make the same argument about the subjunctive mood of possibility and strongly oppose OSAS, just as you do. It truly amazes me how that does not raise a red flag for you!

This thinking is the exact reason we have so much divisiveness in the church today.
You have to stop instantly rejecting everything someone says just because you don't agree with them on one point.
You won't learn much until you stop doing that.
And you'll stay firmly stuck in the walls of your doctrinal box.

 

[Judges1318]

I don't hear Paul saying that being heirs according to the hope of eternal life might or might not happen for those who are justified (just like I don't hear John saying those who believe in Him might or might not receive eternal life in John 3:16)

So what do we do with the subjunctive mood then?

and even though it's subjunctive mood in Titus 3:7 in the context of the purpose/result clause, there is no doubt in the mind of the author as to whether or not the action will be accomplished.

Then what do we do with the subjunctive mood in the verse?

The NASB reads - so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life and this hope (Strong's #1680 elpís) is not uncertain, as I already explained.

You're still making the same mistake.
You're saying since the hope is sure (and it is), that means I can not lose it.
But what the Bible says is the hope itself is sure, not that your continued possession of it is sure.
Just because something is sure does not by definition mean you'll always have it.
It simply means the thing itself is sure.

If I gave you a flashlight that never stops shining does that mean you will always possess that flash light, or does it simply mean the flashlight will never stop shining?

In the passage below, why do I have to hold unswervingly to the hope I have if the sureness of 'hope' means I can't lose it?

22let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. - Hebrews 10:22-23

It's saying He who promised is faithful. That makes the hope sure. That's why you should hold on to it. The sureness is in the hope. Not in you always having that hope no matter what.

 

[mailmandan]

This is called 'mixing of metaphors'.
The planting in the Parable of the Sower is the word of God, which is planted by God.

May be different parables, yet still gets my point across and ONLY the seed that fell on GOOD GROUND was firmly rooted and established, produced fruit and persevered.

 

[Judges1318]

I already clearly explained my position. Trying reading my posts again without the NOSAS bi-focals.
See posts #126,157 and #126,377 and #126,397.

You have not addressed the issue of cleanness.
We know God will declare an unbelieving spouse clean for contact by the believing spouse. If he didn't then the children would be made unclean by the unbelieving spouse. We all get that.

Now, you have to show me the scripture that says God will declare a willfully sinning person in the church clean for contact by believers. This is what you have not done, but need to do to in order to prove that the sanctified person in Hebrews 10:29 is a sanctified/unsaved person and not a sanctified/saved person who is trampling on the blood of Christ that sanctified him. I have already showed you this supposed sanctified unsaved person you say Hebrews 10:29 is talking about doesn't exist. You have to address this point. Show me in scripture where he does exist. Talking about the unsaved but sanctified spouse doesn't address that point.

 

[Judges1318]

May be different parables, yet still gets my point across and ONLY the seed that fell on GOOD GROUND was firmly rooted and established, produced fruit and persevered.

That's right.
Only 4th type of soil has any reasonable boast of osas.
That rules out about 95% of the genuinely believing church.

 

[mailmandan]

So what do we do with the subjunctive mood then?

Then what do we do with the subjunctive mood in the verse?

Read it in context of the purpose/result clause.

You're still making the same mistake.
You're saying since the hope is sure (and it is), that means I can not lose it.
But what the Bible says is the hope itself is sure, not that your continued possession of it is sure.
Just because something is sure does not by definition mean you'll always have it.
It simply means the thing itself is sure.

Either we have saving faith in Christ and a hope that is sure or else we don't. If hope does not continue, then that person's hope was not firmly rooted and established form the start.

If I gave you a flashlight that never stops shining does that mean you will always possess that flash light, or does it simply mean the flashlight will never stop shining?

Your faulty human logic doesn't fit here.

In the passage below, why do I have to hold unswervingly to the hope I have if the sureness of 'hope' means I can't lose it?

22let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. 23Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. - Hebrews 10:22-23

Good exhortation and not all of these Hebrews were genuine believers throughout the book of Hebrews (Hebrews 3:8-14; 4:2-3; 6:4-9; 10:39; 12:15 etc..) which seems to trip up those in the NOSAS camp.

It's saying He who promised is faithful. That makes the hope sure. That's why you should hold on to it. The sureness is in the hope. Not in you always having that hope no matter what.

Genuine believers continue in sure hope. Make believers may start out with loud confidence and profession of hope, but later?