Contradiction of WORDS

[john832]

I have a question for all concerning the following quote from a Campbellite that uses this chat site...

WORKS DO NOT EARN GRACE

WORKS REQUIRED to receive GRACE

Is this a contradiction of WORDS and or a play on WORDS?
Where is this principle found in scriptures?

Grace means UNMERITED FAVOR so how can it be possible to earn or receive GRACE BASED UPON WORKS seeing how the very word means unmerited favor<--unearned favor?
To work for something means you EARNED IT!

My father made an offer to me when I was in my early teens. He said that if I did not smoke a cigarette before age 21, he would give to me my grandfathers gold pocket watch.

Now, did not smoking EARN the watch? No, my grandfather worked and earned the money to buy the watch. The watch would have been a free gift, it would cost me nothing and I didn't work to earn it. Were there conditions applied? Yes, I was not to smoke prior to age 21.

Can God put conditions on the receipt of gifts?

Act 5:32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

Does obedience EARN the Holy Spirit? No. Does God give it to just anyone? No. To whom does He give it? Those who obey Him.

 

[elf3]

You misunderstand my posts. I AM saying salvation IS a free gift to man as Jn 6:27 shows everlasting life is something Jesus GIVES, He does not charge for it, but He gives it for FREE. But Jesus said one must LABOR/work for this free gift He gives. So obviously the labor/work does not/cannot earn this free gift Christ gives.

If it is a free gift then why do we have to labor/work for it? If we have to work for it is is not free.

You just double talked yourself here. In one sentence you say it's a free gift then the next sentence you say we have to labor/work for it.

So is it free or do we have to work for it?

 

[Elin]

Sounds like work to me....

The good news is the truth of the word of God is not based on what it sounds like to you.

Nothing here in this post of yours either....no proof, no refutation at all.

As it should be when there is nothing to refute.

 

[SeaBass]

But there is your stumbling block...you still feel we have a price to pay. If Jesus already paid the price why would He require us to pay more? With our accepting of Jesus we need to be obedient..not pay more. Like I said before if we need to pay more for our salvation it means the price Jesus paid wasn't enough.

(1) Jesus said to "LABOUR FOR THE MEAT THAT ENDURES UNTO EVERLASTING LIFE"

(2) The faith onlyists says "no labour at is necessary for the meat that endures unto everlasting life"

Do you see the obvious difference between the two?

In Eph 2:9 when Paul said "not of works", if that excludes all works of all kinds from being needed to gain everlasting life then Paul and Jesus are at 100% disagreement over this issue for Jesus said to labor for it.

 

[Elin]

I asked: Would Naaman have received God's free gift of grace WITHOUT WORKS?

Your inability, unwillingness to give a straight up or down 'yes' or 'no' answer is very telling. You avoided the question.

Yep. . .above my pay grade.

 

[Elin]

If it's not an example of salvation, it cannot apply.

You are misapplying and mishandling the Scriptures.

It most certainly is an example of God's free grace having a condition of work (dipping) with the work (dipping) earning Naaman nothing. You simply cannot, have not refuted it.

Previously addressed above.

 

[SeaBass]

If it is a free gift then why do we have to labor/work for it? If we have to work for it is is not free.

Because free gifts can and do come with conditions. Yet working to meet those conditions do not earn anything.

In Jn 6:27 it says Jesus GIVES everlasting life, it's free for He gives it. Since He gives it for free why did He say to labour for it? Because Jesus is the gift giver and has the right to place conditions upon His free gift. There is nothing written anywhere that says Jesus must give His free gift UNCONDITIONALLY, Jesus has the right to put CONDITIONS upon His free gift.


Again, Naaman worked for his healing by going and dipping so does that means he earned his healing therefore grace had NOTHING to do with it?

 

[SeaBass]

As it should be when there is nothing to refute.

Nothing in this post either.

 

[Elin]

The bible tells us God put the condition of dipping upon the healing. God did not change His mind or make changes to the condition. Therefore Naaman had to dip (2 Kings 5:14) to be clean. It's YOU not God that is trying to find a way to get rid of the condition.

If it's not an example of salvation, it cannot apply.

 

[SeaBass]

Yep. . .above my pay grade.

It's not that it is above your "pay grade", but it's the man-made theology you have chosen to believe puts you in a tough position to answer the question straight up "yes" or "no'

 

[Elin]

I'm flatly denying that it is an example of salvation,

and flatly asserting that because it is not an example, it cannot apply to salvation,

and is a misapplication and mishandling of Scripture.

More AVOIDANCE to the issue.

It DOES NOT MATTER if it does or does not have to do with Naaman's salvation for is a clear, unambiguous example of God requiring a work to receive His grace yet that work earned Namman nothing.

Previously addressed above.

 

[SeaBass]

Previously addressed above.

Not biblically addressed/refuted above.

 

[SeaBass]

If it's not an example of salvation, it cannot apply.

Failed. Try again.

 

[SeaBass]

Previously addressed above.

Not biblically addressed/refuted above.

 

[Elin]

Jn 14:15 "if ye love Me, keep my commandments".

Jn 14:15 "if ye love Me, keep my commandments".

Many verses tie love to works/obeying.

Galatians 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision;
but faith which worketh by love.

 

[elf3]

Because free gifts can and do come with conditions. Yet working to meet those conditions do not earn anything.

In Jn 6:27 it says Jesus GIVES everlasting life, it's free for He gives it. Since He gives it for free why did He say to labour for it? Because Jesus is the gift giver and has the right to place conditions upon His free gift. There is nothing written anywhere that says Jesus must give His free gift UNCONDITIONALLY, Jesus has the right to put CONDITIONS upon His free gift.


Again, Naaman worked for his healing by going and dipping so does that means he earned his healing therefore grace had NOTHING to do with it?

Websters dictionary "free" "not subject to external constraints or domination." "Not having to be paid for."

Now yes God is Sovereign and He can do as He pleases but do you think that God would change a definition? If God changes then how can we believe in His immutability?

 

[elf3]

You misunderstand my posts. I AM saying salvation IS a free gift to man as Jn 6:27 shows everlasting life is something Jesus GIVES, He does not charge for it, but He gives it for FREE. But Jesus said one must LABOR/work for this free gift He gives. So obviously the labor/work does not/cannot earn this free gift Christ gives.

If I gave you something for free do you think I would also add a condition to it? If I added a condition it would no longer be free.

 

[Elin]

1 Thess 1:3 remembering your "WORK of faith"

1 Thess 1:3 - work modifies faith

Nope. . .your grammar needs some work.

Another post with NOTHING....no proof, no refutation.

Previously addressed above.

 

[Elin]

When Paul said "not of works" in Eph 2:9 does that phrase eliminate the good works in Eph 2:10 that God preordained the Christian to walk in?

It eliminates them as causal in salvation.

They are the result of salvation.

 

[Elin]

Its quite easy to offer acerbic comments Elin, not quite so easy to provide a legitimate defense of your position.

It is not an example of salvation, and cannot apply to salvation.