SALVATION ONLY POSSIBLE WITHOUT WORKS!

[Elin]

then why cannot you and the other supporting this idea prove that it is actually the meaning of scripture. All I read from those who supposedly support this view, is non substantive assertions, a lot of misrepresentation, or more likely, just total ignorance of what scripture means regarding our individual salvation.

Oh, it has been done. . .ad nauseum. . .for those who can see

 

[Elin]

I wish I had the time to invest in that enterprise.
You do not treat the scriptures with the honesty of a born again believer and that bothers me greatly.

Well said.

And only the born again can see that.

And so round and round she goes. . .

 

[SarahM777]

Explain to me how I did that.

Very simple you responded to Elin

The gospel which is to be obeyed is "Repent and believe!" (Mk 1:15)

Your response

Matthew 10:38 (KJV) [SUP]38 [/SUP]And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

CONTEXT of the passage that you PULLED out of context

16 “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. 17 Be on your guard; you will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues. 18 On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. 19 But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, 20 for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.
21 “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22 You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 23 When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another. Truly I tell you, you will not finish going through the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes.
24 “The student is not above the teacher, nor a servant above his master. 25 It is enough for students to be like their teachers, and servants like their masters. If the head of the house has been called Beelzebul, how much more the members of his household!
26 “So do not be afraid of them, for there is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. 27 What I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs. 28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground outside your Father’s care.[b] 30 And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 So don’t be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.
32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven.33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn“‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’[c]

37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.
40 “Anyone who welcomes you welcomes me, and anyone who welcomes me welcomes the one who sent me. 41 Whoever welcomes a prophet as a prophet will receive a prophet’s reward, and whoever welcomes a righteous person as a righteous person will receive a righteous person’s reward. 42 And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones who is my disciple, truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward.”

The whole context of that passage is that Jesus is SENDING the DISCIPLES out to PREACH the Gospel NOT what the Gospel is. He telling them what they can EXPECT for PREACHING the Gospel.

 

[Cassian]

We already have the light...it is you and your works for salvation buddies that twist the scripture and walk in darkness...you should learn to trust into the perfect faith OF Jesus instead of your works before it is eternally to late!

You have had two threads to present some evidence, yet not a shred. Lots of innuendo, lots or misunderstandings, even more mischaracterizations but not a shred of evidence that "faith only" has been a scriptural teaching. Even given the fact that "faith ONLY, is given as a negative.

The devil comes as a Light also. He comes to deceive and you have been decieved by him through Luther who first instituted this false notion of being saved by faith only.

 

[Stephen63]

Very simple you responded to Elin

The whole context of that passage is that Jesus is SENDING the DISCIPLES out to PREACH the Gospel NOT what the Gospel is. He telling them what they can EXPECT for PREACHING the Gospel.

What Jesus said about taking up our cross & following Him speaks for itself........it requires something.....but then again you knew that. You are now on ignore.

BTW, say hi to yer "buddy" fer me.

 

[SarahM777]

What Jesus said about taking up our cross & following Him speaks for itself........it requires something.....but then again you knew that. You are now on ignore.

BTW, say hi to yer "buddy" fer me.

So what that you put me ignore? Big deal.

And no I won't.

 

[Elin]

Right on. Could not have stated it any better.
But you supporting that works are necessary to reconcile ones faith.

Works don't "reconcile" my faith.

"Reconcile" it to what?

Works are simply the spiritual results of my true faith.
They are not something I do to prove my true faith.
My true faith proves itself.

Your true faith can become unsaved because it becomes counterfeit

Whatever are you talking about?

Can my genuine $5 bill ever become counterfeit?

True faith cannot become counterfeit anymore than a goat can become a sheep.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

You distort the meaning of Biblical words, and
you overlay the Scriptures with your own false human notions.

That's how you can say in one breath that I have said it well
(translate: I have it Biblically correct),

and in the next breath say that I disagree with the Scriptures
(translate: disagree with your overlay on those same Scriptures).

 

[Cassian]

what does this have to do with timothy, who was a NT believer?

he was taught as a child from the OT. He was taught by Paul ORALLY. He did not have the NT scriptures. They did not exist.

No, Sola scriptura means scripture ALONE. Nice try, but you need to study.

yes, that is what it means. You take scripture as a text, extract it from its full content and meaning, and from its context, and then set about trying by deduction figuring out what it might mean.
News flash, It has had a meaning for 1500 years before the principle of "sola scriptura" even came along. And what it means, namely that Scripture is ones sole source of faith and practice, has been historically confirmed over the last 500 years that man has imposed his own meaning upon scripture, thus we get Lutheranism, Calvinism, Zwinglism, Wesleyism, and the list goes on and on and on to the present day and we have several thousands of denominations all with their peculiar personal gospels. Amazing they all put their names usually on their gospels.

Actually yes they did. Peter spoke of pauls letters and called it scripture. You should study real history some. They had paid scribes then who would make copies of all the letters and take them to all the churches.

Yet by the 4th century not all churches even had all the letters when scripture was Canonized.

Wrong. As shown above, People had scripture as it was written, It did not take 400 years for the bible to get to all the churches, as already shown, All the people who read peters letters (which was written to EVERY church) already had pauls letters. and they were already considered scripture.

NOt all the Churches. They used other writings as well, not just what you have contained in scripture. If not for the Gnostics, you might have never gotten a Canonized Bible.

Not to mention. Paul quotes a passage of Luke and calls it scripture.

But they did not have "scripture" as you have it. That is the point here and they did not need to interpret it as you are trying to do. The people were taught the Gospel as it was originally given.

1 Timothy 5:18

For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer is worthy of his wages

found here

Luke 10:7
[SUP]7 [/SUP]And remain in the same house, eating and drinking such things as they give, for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not go from house to house

.”[/quote] what has this to do with the topic?

How could these thing be considered scripture already read and understood by these people if scripture was yet 400 years from being completed?

Canonized does not mean completed. They were completed by the end of the first century, but the Church DID NOT HAVE A BIBLE AS YOU DO UNTIL THE 4TH CENTURY. They did not even have all the letters or the Gospels until the end of the century, so they could not have used them as you use them.

You mean the same teaching PAUL called scripture. PETER called scripture?

Yes, is that difficult for you to comprehend?

Your listening to men, They had to write these things in stone ONLY because scripture did not support their belif, they did the same thing the jews did. WHen men adds to the word of God. you should run, for if scripture supported their beliefs in whole. then they would not need to make anything outside the word of God, they could rely on scripture alone.

I know and understand that it is very difficult to understand how the Church functioned before the Reformation or maybe even before you were born. But man has never been able to add to the Gospel that the Apostles gave in the beginning. The Holy Spirit operating through the Body of Christ, has always prevented man from imposing his view upon scripture. If you think some man did so, cite the man, and the doctrine he added.

The same scripture like timothy had written by Luke which made him wise for salvation?

Yes, including the meaning. They did not need to interpret it to find out what it meant. They were taught what it meant as all Christians have been taught from the beginning.

Yes he was. If you would read his writings you would see this.

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, [SUP]17 [/SUP]that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

but they already knew what it meant. They did not need to spend 500 years like sola scripturist trying to figure out what scriptures meant before they could rightly divide it and use it correctly. You live in a milieu where after 500 years no one has yet figured out what it means. Everyone has a different opinion. Yet Christ promised that His Gospel would be unified as He is with the Father. That is Trinitarian. Hardly sounds like the chaos and confusion of sola scriptura.

Paul would not teach that scripture is fully capable of making a man of God complete and fully equipped for any good work if he did not teach scripture alone.

He taught scripture. Scripture alone is not even a remote possibility, He gave us the Gospel, Why would He teach something without the meaning. The Apostles also set up the practices of the Church.

Sola scriptura is a 4th century made up term because the roman church could not make scripture equal their own deformed and perverted doctrines, so they had to write things, and have things orally added to the word of god in order for their doctines to be believable.

not a 4th century concept. But it was the RCC that first employed it and created some additional doctrines after they split from the Church in the 11th century. But the word is actually a penned word of the Reformation. And it became the mantra of individual man to create his own interpretation of a text.

Then they used the iron fist of rome to force everyone to believe their way or else.

Well, I cannot vouch for Rome, but Christ did the very same thing. He said it a little differently thought. I am the way, the Truth and the LIve, NO MAN COMETH BUT BY ME! It is His way or your way.
I guess that you feel better to go your way, since you don't seem to want to follow His Gospel as He gave it and has preserved it. But that has been true for 2000 years as well. Many chose not to follow HIM as He demands.

 

[Cassian]

Maybe you should read and apply what you write as your statement is just as applicable unto you as unto anyone who posts on CC......So did you do enough works today to keep yourself in the grace of God?

First you need to actually prove that what scripture has always taught must not be correct. You need to prove that your interpretation is actually scriptural, and not a theory.
Unfortunately history has already proven it to be false since it was originated by Luther and not by the Apostles.

 

[Alligator]

Maybe you need to read the scriptures again, because they are pretty simple and pretty clear. If you do not obey the Gospel, you will be lost.

The gospel which is to be obeyed is "Repent and believe!" (Mk 1:15)

And confess Him, (Rom. 10:9-10); and be baptized (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:15-16)

 

[Cassian]

The Septuagint /ˈsɛptjuːəˌdʒɪnt/, /ˈsɛptuːəˌdʒɪnt/, /ˌsɛpˈtuːədʒɪnt/, /ˈsɛptʃuːəˌdʒɪnt/, from the Latin word septuaginta (meaning seventy), is a translation of the Hebrew Bible and some related texts into Koine Greek. The title and its Roman numeral acronym LXX refer to the legendary seventy Jewish scholars who completed the translation as early as the late 2nd century BCE
Yes, that is correct. It is this same text that Christ and the Apostles quoted from. It is also the same that the Church adoped as part of the Canon when scripture was Canonized in the 4th century.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

he was taught as a child from the OT. He was taught by Paul ORALLY. He did not have the NT scriptures. They did not exist.

[/B][/COLOR] yes, that is what it means. You take scripture as a text, extract it from its full content and meaning, and from its context, and then set about trying by deduction figuring out what it might mean.
News flash, It has had a meaning for 1500 years before the principle of "sola scriptura" even came along. And what it means, namely that Scripture is ones sole source of faith and practice, has been historically confirmed over the last 500 years that man has imposed his own meaning upon scripture, thus we get Lutheranism, Calvinism, Zwinglism, Wesleyism, and the list goes on and on and on to the present day and we have several thousands of denominations all with their peculiar personal gospels. Amazing they all put their names usually on their gospels.




Yet by the 4th century not all churches even had all the letters when scripture was Canonized.



NOt all the Churches. They used other writings as well, not just what you have contained in scripture. If not for the Gnostics, you might have never gotten a Canonized Bible.

But they did not have "scripture" as you have it. That is the point here and they did not need to interpret it as you are trying to do. The people were taught the Gospel as it was originally given.

what has this to do with the topic?


Canonized does not mean completed. They were completed by the end of the first century, but the Church DID NOT HAVE A BIBLE AS YOU DO UNTIL THE 4TH CENTURY. They did not even have all the letters or the Gospels until the end of the century, so they could not have used them as you use them.





Yes, is that difficult for you to comprehend?

I know and understand that it is very difficult to understand how the Church functioned before the Reformation or maybe even before you were born. But man has never been able to add to the Gospel that the Apostles gave in the beginning. The Holy Spirit operating through the Body of Christ, has always prevented man from imposing his view upon scripture. If you think some man did so, cite the man, and the doctrine he added.

Yes, including the meaning. They did not need to interpret it to find out what it meant. They were taught what it meant as all Christians have been taught from the beginning.



but they already knew what it meant. They did not need to spend 500 years like sola scripturist trying to figure out what scriptures meant before they could rightly divide it and use it correctly. You live in a milieu where after 500 years no one has yet figured out what it means. Everyone has a different opinion. Yet Christ promised that His Gospel would be unified as He is with the Father. That is Trinitarian. Hardly sounds like the chaos and confusion of sola scriptura.

He taught scripture. Scripture alone is not even a remote possibility, He gave us the Gospel, Why would He teach something without the meaning. The Apostles also set up the practices of the Church.




not a 4th century concept. But it was the RCC that first employed it and created some additional doctrines after they split from the Church in the 11th century. But the word is actually a penned word of the Reformation. And it became the mantra of individual man to create his own interpretation of a text.

Well, I cannot vouch for Rome, but Christ did the very same thing. He said it a little differently thought. I am the way, the Truth and the LIve, NO MAN COMETH BUT BY ME! It is His way or your way.
I guess that you feel better to go your way, since you don't seem to want to follow His Gospel as He gave it and has preserved it. But that has been true for 2000 years as well. Many chose not to follow HIM as He demands.

alot of fluff here. ALot of pride here in man and the church and not In God.

Yes they did not have it like I did, but they had access to read it any time they wanted. back then they memorized it, they knew it. how can you memorize scripture you do not have access to

Jesus and paul reasoned from scripture. to do this scripture must be used. Paul even demands all of us test each spirit using scripture to see if they are from God or not. How can one do this if they do not have scripture. He even praised a city who tested scripture and did not just take paul at his word. Something the roman church has always frowned on.

I am not going my way, I just refuse to listen to a church who twists the word of God to form their doctrines, And tells me that they should not trust the word, but trust them. They are evil. You refuse to admit the jews did the very things, used the same excuses you use, and you expect me to make the same mistake they did.

No thanks.

Take your doctrine of men, I will follow my God. He gave me the spirit, and he promised to help me understand, You not only deny the power of God to save people apart from their merit, You deny the power of the spirit, who was sent to teach us ALL things concerning him.

if you think you can blame those men for leading you astray and this will be an excuse for God to let you off. You are sadly mistaken, God holds YOU accountable to study to shew yourself approved, not the men who teach you.

 

[Cassian]

Not by works of righteousness which WE HAVE DONE.....DUDE you can get glasses at Wal-Mart for a few dollars and to equate Titus 3:5 and the works indicated to Jesus on our behalf is to deny what it actually states.....

So.....how many works are required today to keep you secure in your false salvation?

So now you even need to change this text to fit your false notions. You are one very confused person. You need a lot of study here. Now, you don't even believe that Christ fulfilled the law for us. You are all over the place with false ideas.

 

[Elin]

What in the world does that mean?

That "Scripture has always meant" something other than what it states?

NO, it has always had the same meaning, the same meaning as given to the Apostles originally. The Gospel was given Once to the saints. It has not changed since that beginning. Because it has never changed we can very easily today, 2000 years later, check against false teachings. A false teaching, always of men, have all originated after the Original Gospel.

We are not examining teaching originating after the gospel writings.
We are examining the gospel writings themselves.

How did you miss that?

That is absurd!

"Scripture has always meant" exactly what it states.

yes, it does. It always has had ONE meaning, the Original meaning.

What does that mean?

Is the "original meaning" different from what it actually states?

And what it states is what we are examining.

I am, but you are espousing a theory that originated by a man, Luther, at the Reformation 1500 years after the Original was given.

What theory?

The NT either shows what I say, or it does not.

What does "another man's theory" have to do with it?

Are you proposing an authority higher than Scripture which can authorize what Scripture does not state?

Yes, Christ as Head over His Church, and the Holy Spirit whose purpose is to guard both the Body of Christ and the Gospel entrusted to it.

And how do you know anything of what Christ was, said or did apart from the very Scriptures we are examining?

Apart from the Scriptures, there is no other source of knowledge regarding Christ.

You are talking in circles.

So what is this authority which can authorize what Scripture does not state?

The Church is the ground and pillar of Truth, I Tim 3:15.

The Church in 1Tim 3:15 is God's household, and that's all believers, all those in Christ; i.e., all God's people.

God's people are the ground and pillar of God's truth because as a body they hold forth the Scripture and doctrine of Christ, just as a pillar in those days held forth the proclamation which was attached to it (see Eph 3:10).

He guards it against false teachings that it does not teach.

Yes, he guards the Church against false teachings with his Word written in the Scriptures,
which are the plumbline against which all truth must be measured.

And your notions are not plumb, do not measure up.

Your religion is contra-Biblical and false.

You can argue with the Head, Christ. He seems to have a much different persective

The only way Christ's "perspective" can be known is from the Scriptures.

Everything else is just extra-Biblical teaching from the mind of man.

You've got some seriously contra-Biblical notions.

You are the picture of spiritual blindness, because you overlay God's truth with your own notions.

 

[Cassian]

alot of fluff here. ALot of pride here in man and the church and not In God.

Yes they did not have it like I did, but they had access to read it any time they wanted. back then they memorized it, they knew it. how can you memorize scripture you do not have access to

Jesus and paul reasoned from scripture. to do this scripture must be used. Paul even demands all of us test each spirit using scripture to see if they are from God or not. How can one do this if they do not have scripture. He even praised a city who tested scripture and did not just take paul at his word. Something the roman church has always frowned on.

I am not going my way, I just refuse to listen to a church who twists the word of God to form their doctrines, And tells me that they should not trust the word, but trust them. They are evil. You refuse to admit the jews did the very things, used the same excuses you use, and you expect me to make the same mistake they did.

No thanks.

Take your doctrine of men, I will follow my God. He gave me the spirit, and he promised to help me understand, You not only deny the power of God to save people apart from their merit, You deny the power of the spirit, who was sent to teach us ALL things concerning him.

if you think you can blame those men for leading you astray and this will be an excuse for God to let you off. You are sadly mistaken, God holds YOU accountable to study to shew yourself approved, not the men who teach you.

Just the opposite. But man, as you so well exemplify, needs to denigrate the Holy Spirit, so that he a man, can elevate himself above the Holy Spirit. It is actually blasphemous to assign the work of the Holy Spirit to that of the devil. I hope that some day you might see the error of your ways, and repent. You do it in ignorance but nevertheless it blasphemy.

The god you are following is yourself. You have developed a wholly personal gospel and incorporated Luthers notion of "faith only" into your personal gospel.
the Church you are denying is not Rome, but the Church Christ established at Pentecost and has existed since. Rome split off from that Church. But then you are not too enlighened on history either, so you might have missed that as well. You as well as a lot of other Protestants are still revolting against Rome. I would think that even with sola scriptura, a denomination could develop a gospel that would be positive and not anti-rome. Rome still has a lot more correct, than most protestant denominations.

 

[Cassian]

Elin,

We are not examining teaching originating after the gospel writings.
We are examining the gospel writings themselves.
How did you miss that?

Yes, I did not miss that. But the Apostles did not write down everything that they taught to the early Church. Do you have all the exact copy of all the teachings, sermons Paul preached, taugth in Corinth for three years before he wrote the first letter? Same for Ephesus. To actually know what these letters meant in the context of the whole Gospel given, the Oral teachings, we need the reports of the early Church. We need their explanations of what they were taught. After all, it was meant to be a Tradtion, something passed down from one generation to the next by teaching and preaching, not be written text. Christ never instructed the Apostles to say in Jerusalem and write out the Gospel and then by donkey/camel send it to Corinth or Ephesus.

What does that mean?
Is the "original meaning" different from what it actually states?

different than over several thousands of people trying to interpret it as to what it means apart from the source, the full content and context.
Maybe you can tell me what might be the meaning, is it Lutheranism, Calvinism, Davidson, Eddy, Smith, Russell, White, New Age, how many more and they are all different. Just amazing how many meanings scripture has.

What theory?
The NT either shows what I say, or it does not.
What does "another man's theory" have to do with it?

the theory under discussion is "faith only" in case you did not follow the thread.
Many men think as you do. they think that the scripture says what they say it means. It cannot be scripture because Scripture has ONLY one meaning, not thousands.
Another man's theory can easily be determined by the fact that scripture in the beginning did not hold to such a teaching. Many men tried but each time they were declared heretical or their teachings were declared heretical. Not a single man was ever able to impose his own teaching upon Christ's Gospel.

And how do you know anything of what Christ was, said or did apart from the very Scriptures we are examining?

because it was taught in the beginning to the early Church. That same teaching is still held today unchanged just as the Holy Spirit promised. The fact that it has not changed, and man has not imposed his own authority over it, is the historical witness to the power and validity of the work of the Holy Spirit.
Hardly like sola scriptura where man assumes authority over scripture, then proceeds to interpret it according to his best intellectual deductive skills. The result thousands of personal gospels, including Luthers, who adopted this notion of "faith only.

Apart from the Scriptures, there is no other source of knowledge regarding Christ.
You are talking in circles.
So what is this authority which can authorize what Scripture does not state?

No, scripture is part of a larger body of knowledge, the origianl Gospel, Holy Tradition, from which scripture originates. The authority is Christ and the Holy Spirit. They hold in unity the Gospel that was originally given to the saints.

The Church in 1Tim 3:15 is God's household, and that's all believers, all those in Christ; i.e., all God's people.
God's people are the ground and pillar of God's truth because as a body they hold forth the Scripture and doctrine of Christ, just as a pillar in those days held forth the proclamation which was attached to it (see Eph 3:10).

that is absolutely correct? Are you in His Church?

Yes, he guards the Church against false teachings with his Word written in the Scriptures,
which are the plumbline against which all truth must be measured.
And your notions are not plumb, do not measure up.

and how does your church guard against false doctrines, Your idea of sola scriptura has spawned doctrines, denonimations like amebas. It seems your version is not very good at it.
The one Christ established at Pentecost can show through history that Chist's Gospel has not changed. No man has asserted his authority over either the Church or the Gospel entrusted to it.

The only way Christ's "perspective" can be known is from the Scriptures.
Everything else is just extra-Biblical teaching from the mind of man.
You've got some seriously contra-Biblical notions.
You are the picture of spiritual blindness, because you overlay God's truth with your own notions.

when the Truth cannot be refuted, resort to non substantive assertions. Seems the typical scenerio of false teachers.

 

[Cassian]

Works don't "reconcile" my faith.

"Reconcile" it to what?

Works are simply the spiritual results of my true faith.
They are not something I do to prove my true faith.
My true faith proves itself.


Whatever are you talking about?

Can my genuine $5 bill ever become counterfeit?

True faith cannot become counterfeit anymore than a goat can become a sheep.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

You distort the meaning of Biblical words, and
you overlay the Scriptures with your own false human notions.

That's how you can say in one breath that I have said it well
(translate: I have it Biblically correct),

and in the next breath say that I disagree with the Scriptures
(translate: disagree with your overlay on those same Scriptures).

If you think so, please help your buddies who after two threads still have not come up with any evidence to show that faith only has always been the teaching of scripture. The best they can do is bring it back to Luther who started the idea. Can you cite any early Church writings where the Church actually taught and believed this theory.
You can disagree all you desire, but if no evidence it means very little.

 

[LT]

John 3:16, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life."
Rom. 3:22, "even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction."
Rom. 3:24, "being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;"
Rom. 3:26, "for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."
Rom. 3:28-30, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. [SUP]29[/SUP]Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, [SUP]30[/SUP]since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one."
Rom. 4:3, "For what does the Scripture say? "And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
Rom. 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness,"
Rom. 4:11, "And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also,"
Rom. 4:16, "Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all."
Rom. 5:1, "therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,"
Rom. 5:9, "Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him."
Rom. 9:30, "What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith."
Rom. 9:33, "just as it is written, “Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed.”
Rom. 10:4, "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes."
Rom. 10:9-10, "that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved; [SUP]10[/SUP]for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation."
Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace."
Gal. 2:16, "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified."
Gal. 2:21, “I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.”
Gal.3:5-6, "Does He then, who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? [SUP]6[/SUP]Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."
Gal. 3:8, "And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "All the nations shall be blessed in you."
Gal. 3:14, "in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."
Gal. 3:22, "But the Scripture has shut up all men under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe."
Gal. 3:24, "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith."
Eph. 1:13, "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise."
Eph. 2:8, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God."
Phil. 3:9, "and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith."
1 Tim. 1:16, "And yet for this reason I found mercy, in order that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience, as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life."



These verses give sufficient evidence of salvation by faith alone in the NT. There are hundreds of other examples, but these are very direct and clear. The Covenant given by Jesus Christ is fulfilled, and requires nothing of man to be complete, save faith in Christ.

Hebrews 11 shows us that even in the OT, salvation was always by faith.

Please take the time to read these verses, and Hebrews 11. It is the Word of God. Let us submit to the Spirit who breaths life into these words to make them The Word.

 

[Apostol2013]

Once saved allways saved is heretic and cannot be taught that is why the good Lord spoke and said i never knew you that worketh iniquity bottom line sin is the separation those who will trick their minds are only fooling themselvrs i myself know this my God shows me mysteries of things that are . And the Lord showed me a great number of nations going into perdition by many deceiving anti christ that say they are the church but really a very watered down version or denying even the holy Ghost thus falling away from the fauth for what God requires is holiness and the thief on the cross was a new convert didnt know nothing but jesus saved him because he didnt have time to learn but you that are on the earth know you have time yet worship not God who created all things as He ought to be worshiped in true sanctity this is true for the form that God had intended for us is a far too great purpose than just to live in vain ' God is Good it is the creation that choses evil upon themselves but all it takes is true faith the way God intended in His works not our Own that He be glorified foreverore amen

 

[Apostol2013]

15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16 All of you shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree brings forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit.

18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

19 Every tree that brings not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

20 Wherefore by their fruits all of you shall know them.

21 Not every one that says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in your name? and in your name have cast out devils? and in your name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, all of you that work iniquity.

24 Therefore whosoever hears these sayings (o. logos) of mine, and does them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

26 And every one that hears these sayings (o. logos) of mine, and does them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.