What must I do to be saved

[mailmandan]

Faith without works cannot save. You won't get what Latour is saying until this Biblical truth sinks in. For now you can only comprehend that as a works gospel and so you reject it.

In James 2:20, "faith without works is dead" does not mean that faith is dead until it produces works and we are saved by both faith and works. James is simply saying faith that is not accompanied by evidential works is dead. If someone says-claims he has faith but lacks resulting evidential works, then he has an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith (James 2:14).

 

[Ralph-]

In James 2:20, "faith without works is dead" does not mean that faith is dead until it produces works and we are saved by both faith and works. James is simply saying faith that is not accompanied by evidential works is dead. If someone says-claims he has faith but lacks resulting evidential works, then he has an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith (James 2:14).

If you truly believe the gospel and receive it and are justified but then go home and do nothing, and never do anything, you stopped believing. It's as simple as that. It's not a matter of you never 'really' believed. It's a simple matter of you fell back into unbelief almost as soon as you believed. This is the 2nd type of soil:

"when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he falls away. "-Matthew 13:20

Of course there is fake faith, but there is also weak, poorly grounded faith. Jesus himself used the seed planted and growing in the rocky soil to illustrate this.

 

[mailmandan]

If you truly believe the gospel and receive it and are justified but then go home and do nothing, and never do anything, you stopped believing. It's as simple as that. It's not a matter of you never 'really' believed. It's a simple matter of you fell back into unbelief almost as soon as you believed. This is the 2nd type of soil:

"when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he falls away. "-Matthew 13:20

Of course there is fake faith, but there is also weak, poorly grounded faith. Jesus himself used the seed planted and growing in the rocky soil to illustrate this.

James is talking about an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not falling back into unbelief. Faith that endures is rooted in good soil and is not some shallow, temporary belief that has no root, produces no fruit and withers away.

 

[Ralph-]

James is talking about an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not falling back into unbelief. Faith that endures is rooted in good soil and is not some shallow, temporary belief that has no root, produces no fruit and withers away.

He could be talking about either never having faith, or once having it but not having it now. What you are doing is projecting the predetermined thinking onto his teaching that he can only be talking about never having faith because you've already decided ahead of time that there is no such thing as failed faith, so that's how you interpret the passage. This tendency to look at scripture through the lenses of a predetermined doctrine is the cause of the famous circular reasoning of the 'once saved always saved' argument. Which is what you are doing--arguing using circular reasoning.

The bottom line is, to not do anything after you receive the gospel is to reject it in unbelief. It's that simple.

 

[mailmandan]

He could be talking about either never having faith, or once having it but not having it now. What you are doing is projecting the predetermined thinking onto his teaching that he can only be talking about never having faith because you've already decided ahead of time that there is no such thing as failed faith, so that's how you interpret the passage. This tendency to look at scripture through the lenses of a predetermined doctrine is the cause of the famous circular reasoning of the 'once saved always saved' argument. Which is what you are doing--arguing using circular reasoning.

The bottom line is, to not do anything after you receive the gospel is to reject it in unbelief. It's that simple.

James simply said claims to have faith but has no works in verse 14. James said nothing about once having faith and then losing it as you assume. It’s you who is projecting your predetermined thinking Into his teaching. The OP is what must I do to be saved and not can a Christian lose their salvation.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

latour


are you saying if someone sins

at any point (no matter which sin)

they arent saved in this moment

even if they are already a born again believer

bump

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Well you have simply misunderstood that Scripture. Those people did not have genuine saving faith.

Obviously. They weren't obedient to the spirit.

 

[Ralph-]

James simply said claims to have faith but has no works in verse 14. James said nothing about once having faith and then losing it as you assume. It’s you who is projecting your predetermined thinking Into his teaching.

Why can a claim of having faith without accompanying works only mean a person never had real faith to begin with? Where in the passage is James excluding the possibility that the person who says they have faith but no works used to really believe but doesn't now?

The OP is what must I do to be saved and not can a Christian lose their salvation.

What you must do to be saved: Trust in the blood of Jesus as the just payment of the penalty of your sin with a faith that works. And do that to the very end. Do not stop believing/trusting in the blood of Christ.

 

[Grandpa]

Faith without works cannot save. You won't get what Latour is saying until this Biblical truth sinks in. For now you can only comprehend that as a works gospel and so you reject it.

That's because it is not a biblical truth and of course should be rejected.

Ephesians 2:8-9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

 

[mailmandan]

Why can a claim of having faith without accompanying works only mean a person never had real faith to begin with? Where in the passage is James excluding the possibility that the person who says they have faith but no works used to really believe but doesn't now?

Where in the passage is James including the possibility that the person who merely claimed to have faith but no works previously had faith? I will stick with James actually said.

What you must do to be saved: Trust in the blood of Jesus as the just payment of the penalty of your sin with a faith that works. And do that to the very end. Do not stop believing/trusting in the blood of Christ.

Acts 16:30 - And he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31 So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household."

Saving faith in Christ is evidenced by good works and perseverance (Matthew All genuine believers are fruitful, but not all are equally fruitful (Luke 8:15; Matthew 13:23).

 

[Endoscopy]

LOL! There is no such thing.

As you were saying.

Reformed/Calvinism
TULIP
1. Total depravity
2. Unconditional election
3. Limited atonement
4. Irresistible grace
5. Perserverance of the Saints

Armenianism
1. Free will or Human ability
2. Conditional election
3. Universal Redemption or General Atonement
4. The Holy Spirit can be Effectually Resisted
5. Falling from Grace

For a deeper discussion of the differences go to this web site,

https://www.gotquestions.org/Calvinism-vs-Arminianism.html

 

[Ralph-]

That's because it is not a biblical truth and of course should be rejected.

Ephesians 2:8-9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

I understand perfectly that you do not believe what James teaches:

"14What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?"-James 2:14

You are only capable of understanding what he is saying as a works gospel so you reject it. I get it.

 

[Ralph-]

Where in the passage is James including the possibility that the person who merely claimed to have faith but no works previously had faith?

He did not exclude it. You are saying he did. Yet you aren't showing me where he did that in the passage.

I will stick with James actually said.

Show me where James said he is only talking about people who never believed.

Acts 16:30 - And he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31 So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household."

Even if a person 'really' believes and is justified, if they go back to their old lives that's them falling away from the word like a 2nd type of soil believer. Because the word is not deeply rooted in their hearts it is temporary and withers away quickly before it can produce any fruit. Temporary does not equal 'not real'. But that is the predetermined belief that you are projecting onto the 2nd type of soil to make it so that type of believer is not really saved.

Saving faith in Christ is evidenced by good works and perseverance (Matthew All genuine believers are fruitful, but not all are equally fruitful (Luke 8:15; Matthew 13:23).

That's right. That's why the person who gets justified by faith apart from works who then doesn't produce fruit and goes back to their old life is showing they don't have that justifying faith anymore.

 

[Danny1988]

Although true, it's more than just that. The older you get in the Lord the more you recognize the ugliness of our humanness and the futility of this life to the point you despise and reject it.



Instead of looking at it as a numbers game, realize that what's happening is you are changing, not just getting better at resisting sin. Your mind is literally being changed about sin. In time, sin is no longer the attractive thing you long to do but which God says you shouldn't do. Instead, you literally begin to see sin for what it is and you despise it.

Sin is an addiction, and like any addiction you aren't going to get over it until you hate it and what it does to you and those around you to the point of not wanting to touch it anymore. Contrast that to how you started your struggle with sin--you wanted to do it but you knew that you shouldn't. Just wanting to not sin is not enough. You have to grow to hate it. That takes time. It happens as the Lord lets you face many situations and circumstances and places and failures in life that bring you to a profound hatred of sin. That's what growing up in the Lord is.


That's right. The only thing that can cause you to forfeit your salvation is you turning away from the forgiveness of God in Christ in unbelief. Like the Galatians were doing.

Thanks for the encouragement, it is appreciated.

Before my conversion, I was heavily laden with all kinds of sin including drug addiction, alcoholism, fornication, violence, crime and I was heavily involved in the Occult. God liberated me from all of them and gave me a new heart and a hatred for sin in general.

Sins have a slow and painful death, they scream out to be fed but God gives us the power to starve them. We don't reach a state of sinless perfection in this life but the Bible tells us how to live victoriously without being overpowered by the temptation to sin.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

I think everyone would agree that the bible supports the righteousness of faith leading to the manifestation of the righteousness of God being upon the one who has faith in Christ.

Yes, I absolutely believe this. What you have just said here is this:
1 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

This is to say that through trusting(faith), we uphold the law.

But when men seem to be saying (to me) that there is some strange imputed righteousness and it covers unbelief, they have done away with the one thing God saves us through: by the kindness of God through trust (faith).

So they puzzle me because they appear to me to think there is no race of trust to run. And not only that, they seem to take exception at any thought that they are in a race of trust. And they seem to think there is no obedience of trust to learn.

In fact, they seem to me to be saying they believe they will live forever and so then Gods' hands are tied concerning any subsequent unbelief, (which seems a deal to cheat death to me that can't possibly stand). And yet the apostle makes very clear that we must not make any mistake about it - a righteous man DOES what is right (and yes, it is not through their own work but is the righteousness that comes through trust, the upholding of the law that comes through trust). And also, concerning any subsequent unbelief, he was also very clear when he said: who was God displeased with? Wasn't it those who He had saved who He became displeased with and swore: they will never enter My rest? And then he says: so take care that your own hearts do not become evil and unbelieving as theirs did. Yet men seem to be saying it is impossible for those who have been saved to become evil and unbelieving. And look, I have never seen such miraculous sights as they did like a wall of water standing straight up defying gravity, and I am a human just like them. So if they could see Him so miraculously save them and then fall into unbelief, and if the apostle warns me to see that my own heart doesn't become evil and unbelieving, then how do they say my subsequent unbelief will be any more acceptable than theirs (Israels) was??

It just doesn't add up to me. It's like they make being saved all about trust, which it IS, and then once they've gotten eternal life, they toss out trust or make it kind of...optional to continue and grow in that trust.

 

[lightbearer]

Show me where James said he is only talking about people who never believed.
t

The Devils believe and tremble. What kind of works and belief have they? Contextually a comparison being laid out between the devils and those to which he is speaking.

So within the passage we have two types of belief being introduce in regards to the people to which the letter is written.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Yes, I absolutely believe this. What you have just said here is this:
1 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

This is to say that through trusting(faith), we uphold the law.

That's a good explanation of that verse IMO.

That verse actually says (in Greek) that law (minus the definite article) is upheld through the faith; in other words the faith (the way) is not lawless, because though we are not under the law we are under law to Christ.

I have become like a Jew to the Jews, in order that I may gain the Jews. To those under the law I became as under the law (although I myself am not under the law) in order that I may gain those under the law. To those outside the law I became as outside the law (although I am not outside the law of God, but subject to the law of Christ) in order that I may gain those outside the law. 1 Corinthians 9:20-21​

 

[mailmandan]

He did not exclude it. You are saying he did. Yet you aren't showing me where he did that in the passage.

James did not include it. *All you have is speculation. You are not showing me where James said or implied that the hypothetical person in the passage who merely "claimed" to have faith but had "no works" previously had faith, but no longer has faith. Your obsession with that doctrine has led you to that assumption.

Show me where James said he is only talking about people who never believed.

Show me where James said he is talking about people who "previously believed, but no longer believe." *Pure speculation. *The burden of proof is on you.

In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims he has faith but has no works (to evidence his claim). That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith.

*James is discussing the proof/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) not the loss of faith and also not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God (Romans 4:2-3).

Even if a person 'really' believes and is justified, if they go back to their old lives that's them falling away from the word like a 2nd type of soil believer. Because the word is not deeply rooted in their hearts it is temporary and withers away quickly before it can produce any fruit. Temporary does not equal 'not real'. But that is the predetermined belief that you are projecting onto the 2nd type of soil to make it so that type of believer is not really saved.

In regards to the 2nd type of soil, even though this shallow ground hearer is said to have "believed," yet he is never said to have been "saved." How do we know that the shallow ground hearer was never actually "saved"? I will explain the reasons:

First, his heart condition is contrasted with that of the "good ground" hearer in the 4th soil, who's heart was "good" and "honest." Thus, his heart was not "good," being like the soil to which it corresponds, being "shallow" or "rocky," lacking sufficient depth. Such soil represents a sinner not properly prepared in heart. People who "believe" and "rejoice" at the preaching of the gospel without a prepared heart, and without a good and honest heart, and without having "root" in themselves, do not experience real salvation.

*Unlike saving faith, temporary shallow belief is not rooted in a regenerate heart. How can no depth of earth, no root, no moisture, no fruit, (Matthew 13:5-6; Luke 8:6; 13) represent saving belief? It's interesting to see how people who are quick to say "faith without works is dead" in James chapter 2 suddenly disregard that in this parable. Also the same Greek word for believe "pisteuo" is used in James 2:19, in which we read that the demons believe "pisteuo" mental assent that "there is one God," but they do not believe "pisteuo" on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31) and are not saved.

John has portrayed people who "believe" to some level but are clearly not saved. There is a stage in the progress of belief in Jesus that "falls short of genuine or consummated belief resulting in salvation." As we see in John 2:23-25, in which their "belief" was superficial in nature and Jesus would not entrust/commit Himself to them.

Also, in John 8:31-59, where the Jews who were said to have "believed in him" turn out to be slaves to sin, indifferent to the words of Jesus’, children of the devil, liars, accused Jesus of having a demon and were guilty of setting out to stone and kill the one they have professed to believe in. YOU CALL THAT SAVED?

That's right. That's why the person who gets justified by faith apart from works who then doesn't produce fruit and goes back to their old life is showing they don't have that justifying faith anymore.

Justified by faith, but never produces any fruit is an oxymoron. Don't forget, "faith without works is dead." Of those who are justified, how many of them will be glorified? Romans 8:30 - Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified. ALL of them. *Notice how Paul uses the past tense for a future event in order to stress it's certainty.

 

[Ralph-]

James did not include it. *All you have is speculation. You are not showing me where James said or implied that the hypothetical person in the passage who merely "claimed" to have faith but had "no works" previously had faith, but no longer has faith. Your obsession with that doctrine has led you to that assumption.

Show me where James said he is talking about people who "previously believed, but no longer believe." *Pure speculation. *The burden of proof is on you.

I'm saying James is talking about any person anywhere who says they have faith but does not have works. Obviously, that could be a person who never believed to begin with, or a person who stopped believing. I'm not pigeon-holing either one. You are the one who is narrowing the scope of the kind of person James is talking about and insisting it can only be talking about the person who never believed. I'm asking you to show me where James even implies that.

I'm simply agreeing with what James said: James is talking about the person who says they have faith but has no works. I don't need to prove what vs. 14 plainly states. How does a person who used to believe but doesn't anymore not fit into vs. 14? That is what you have to explain.

 

[mailmandan]

I'm saying James is talking about any person anywhere who says they have faith but does not have works. Obviously, that could be a person who never believed to begin with, or a person who stopped believing. I'm not pigeon-holing either one. You are the one who is narrowing the scope of the kind of person James is talking about and insisting it can only be talking about the person who never believed. I'm asking you to show me where James even implies that.

I'm simply agreeing with what James said: James is talking about the person who says they have faith but has no works. I don't need to prove what vs. 14 plainly states. How does a person who used to believe but doesn't anymore not fit into vs. 14? That is what you have to explain.

A person who used to believe but doesn't anymore is not being discussed in verse 14, but a person who merely says/claims to have faith, but has no works to evidence his faith. Plain and simple. You can speculate all you want otherwise, but the burden of proof is on you to prove otherwise. I don't have to explain anything. I already explained what James clearly said. I'm not interested in speculation beyond that.