Conditional Salvation
- Thread starter SeaBass
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I already have proved it from Scripture which is from the beginning. What did you prove? NOTHING.
Regardless of your thoughts on Luther and Calvin, I came to believe the gospel through hearing the word of God, not through the writings of Luther and Calvin.
All I've been hearing from the opposition is "salvation by works." Even though they try to specify we are not saved by "works of the law" but then argue for salvation by good works. Same difference. Good works fall under the moral aspect of the law. It's still works salvation no matter how much the opposition tries to sugar coat it. No strawman here and works salvation is no salvation at all.
No gymnastics. I agree with Paul. I never said that faith was not active but passive and not continuous. That is a strawman argument. We "have been" saved from the penalty of sin through faith (Justification); we are being saved from the power of sin (ongoing Sanctification); we will be saved from the presence of sin (Glorification). These are the three tenses of salvation that you mix up. Therein lies your fallacy.
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. That is salvation. Do those who are not saved have peace with God through Jesus Christ? No! Notice the words "free gift" in Romans 5:15-18. Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death but the free gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 6:23). Yet you say that is not salvation.
A correct relationship with Christ is not possible if we are not saved. John 17:3 - And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. The term "know" implies intimate, experiential knowledge, through a relationship with Him, not merely theoretical knowledge. We are saved through faith, yet you say we are saved by becoming like Christ. Are you EXACTLY like Christ? Sinless, without fault or defect, flawless 100% of the time? Justified through faith/saved through faith SAME THING. When will you BELIEVE?
He certainly is addressing attaining eternal life. Polycarp used the word "SAVED" here. By grace you are saved, not works, just as Paul said in Ephesians 2:8,9. The entire world is not saved. Quit trying to dance around the truth.
It certainly is. Justified by faith/saved through faith = peace with God through Jesus Christ/saved.
Justification by faith is salvation through faith IN CHRIST ALONE. You follow salvation by works, so do Roman Catholics and Mormons, which is a "different" gospel.
How many different concepts of salvation by faith alone are there? Get real. "Justified by faith alone in Christ," as I quoted from men before the reformation. This means that we are justified by faith/saved through faith based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption ALONE and NOT ON THE MERITS OF OUR WORKS.
Same as I stated above. Quit fighting the truth!
The entire world is not automatically justified by grace through faith. Quit dancing around the truth and BELIEVE the Gospel.
You can assure me that you know exactly what he meant? Yeah right! You sound just like a Roman Catholic apologist.
Justified by faith is saved through faith and works are the evidence of faith, not the means of salvation. He said it right, but you twisted what he said by separating justified by faith from saved through faith.
Law of faith does not equate to salvation by works, so sola fide still stands.
Oh he "could" be but you are not sure. So you only use fallible writings of men that agree with your perverted gospel and you ignore the rest?
He said nothing here about both justifications. He clearly said, believe in thee, who "justified the ungodly"; and thus, being justified by faith alone, he shall have peace with God. This is what Paul was stating in Romans 4:5 and Romans 5:1. Take off the blinders and read it again.
Regardless of your thoughts on Luther and Calvin, I came to believe the gospel through hearing the word of God, not through the writings of Luther and Calvin.
All I've been hearing from the opposition is "salvation by works." Even though they try to specify we are not saved by "works of the law" but then argue for salvation by good works. Same difference. Good works fall under the moral aspect of the law. It's still works salvation no matter how much the opposition tries to sugar coat it. No strawman here and works salvation is no salvation at all.
No gymnastics. I agree with Paul. I never said that faith was not active but passive and not continuous. That is a strawman argument. We "have been" saved from the penalty of sin through faith (Justification); we are being saved from the power of sin (ongoing Sanctification); we will be saved from the presence of sin (Glorification). These are the three tenses of salvation that you mix up. Therein lies your fallacy.
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. That is salvation. Do those who are not saved have peace with God through Jesus Christ? No! Notice the words "free gift" in Romans 5:15-18. Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death but the free gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 6:23). Yet you say that is not salvation.
A correct relationship with Christ is not possible if we are not saved. John 17:3 - And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. The term "know" implies intimate, experiential knowledge, through a relationship with Him, not merely theoretical knowledge. We are saved through faith, yet you say we are saved by becoming like Christ. Are you EXACTLY like Christ? Sinless, without fault or defect, flawless 100% of the time? Justified through faith/saved through faith SAME THING. When will you BELIEVE?
He certainly is addressing attaining eternal life. Polycarp used the word "SAVED" here. By grace you are saved, not works, just as Paul said in Ephesians 2:8,9. The entire world is not saved. Quit trying to dance around the truth.
It certainly is. Justified by faith/saved through faith = peace with God through Jesus Christ/saved.
Justification by faith is salvation through faith IN CHRIST ALONE. You follow salvation by works, so do Roman Catholics and Mormons, which is a "different" gospel.
How many different concepts of salvation by faith alone are there? Get real. "Justified by faith alone in Christ," as I quoted from men before the reformation. This means that we are justified by faith/saved through faith based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption ALONE and NOT ON THE MERITS OF OUR WORKS.
Same as I stated above. Quit fighting the truth!
The entire world is not automatically justified by grace through faith. Quit dancing around the truth and BELIEVE the Gospel.
You can assure me that you know exactly what he meant? Yeah right! You sound just like a Roman Catholic apologist.
Justified by faith is saved through faith and works are the evidence of faith, not the means of salvation. He said it right, but you twisted what he said by separating justified by faith from saved through faith.
Law of faith does not equate to salvation by works, so sola fide still stands.
Oh he "could" be but you are not sure. So you only use fallible writings of men that agree with your perverted gospel and you ignore the rest?
He said nothing here about both justifications. He clearly said, believe in thee, who "justified the ungodly"; and thus, being justified by faith alone, he shall have peace with God. This is what Paul was stating in Romans 4:5 and Romans 5:1. Take off the blinders and read it again.
First step? I almost fell out of my chair when I read that! HAVE BEEN SAVED THROUGH FAITH (Ephesians 2:8) is not simply a first step to attaining eternal life. Those who believe HAVE eternal life as a present possession NOW. John 5:24 - "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. Faith saves. Christ's finished work of redemption is the all sufficient means of our salvation and faith in Christ is the instrumental means by which we receive eternal life. If you reject this truth, then how will you ever be saved? Salvation is clearly by grace through faith and is not by works. To believe anything else is to miss salvation.
Says you.
Now you sound just like a Roman Catholic. Why should I read the fallible writings of the Church Fathers when I have God's Word? When I received Christ through faith and was saved several years ago, it was me, the Bible and the Holy Spirit. I had no writings of the Church Fathers or the Reformers in the room with me.
Eternal life/salvation is a gift (Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:8) and not a reward that you work for and earn, even though that may tickle your ears.
Again, you sound just like a Roman Catholic. You just think that you understand as it was from the beginning. History can be manipulated through fallible writings, but GOD'S WORD STANDS FOREVER. You seem to be thoroughly indoctrinated into the theology of your church and can't seem to see anything beyond your church indoctrination.
Yeah right!
You are caught up in worldly wisdom and seem to think you and your church have all the answers. It's called PRIDE. Please read and meditate on 1 Corinthians 2:11-14.
Here we go. You are caught up in the "True Church" syndrome as if the True Church is a building with a name stamped on it (Orthodox church in this case) and only THEY have ALL the answers. Just like the Roman Catholic church. You have more in common with the Roman Catholic church than you realize. Roman Catholics make this same claim. What bondage!
Typical Roman Catholic sales pitch. Not all of these denominations are Protestant and not all of these people are genuine believers. I would rather listen to the Holy Spirit than have some church that claims to be the one and only True Church but teaches a false gospel interpret the Bible for me and keep me in bondage. Christianity is about a relationship with Christ and not legalistic religious bondage to a church.
You have your theories and I have God's infallible word, the Holy Spirit and assurance of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. Praise God!
The Scriptures are only PART of that Revelation? Where is the rest of it written? This is where you get into trouble, just like Roman Catholics. ADDING TO GOD'S WORD!
The Church, the Body of Christ (Colossians 1:18,24) is made up of all BELIEVERS (not a group of modern day Pharisees) and is not simply a building with the name "Roman Catholic or Orthodox" stamped on it.
Nothing defeats sola scripture. Are you saying that the Gospel you believe existed before the first letter was pinned is different than what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4? So what was this Gospel before the NT was written? What is this Oral Tradition that you have "added" to Scripture? Roman Catholics make this same claim about Oral Tradition.
Romans 16:25 - Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began.
Galatians 1:11 - But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
It sounds like you have been completely brain washed by your church.
I believed a man's interpretation when I attended the Roman Catholic church, yet when I came to repent and believe the Gospel, I believed what the Holy Spirit revealed to me through the word of God which has not changed from the beginning. Unfortunately, you have been duped by your church.
I'm not. You just don't have ears to hear the truth and have bought into the sales pitch of your church, just like Roman Catholics have bought into the sales pitch of their church.
Says you.
Now you sound just like a Roman Catholic. Why should I read the fallible writings of the Church Fathers when I have God's Word? When I received Christ through faith and was saved several years ago, it was me, the Bible and the Holy Spirit. I had no writings of the Church Fathers or the Reformers in the room with me.
Eternal life/salvation is a gift (Romans 6:23; Ephesians 2:8) and not a reward that you work for and earn, even though that may tickle your ears.
Again, you sound just like a Roman Catholic. You just think that you understand as it was from the beginning. History can be manipulated through fallible writings, but GOD'S WORD STANDS FOREVER. You seem to be thoroughly indoctrinated into the theology of your church and can't seem to see anything beyond your church indoctrination.
Yeah right!
You are caught up in worldly wisdom and seem to think you and your church have all the answers. It's called PRIDE. Please read and meditate on 1 Corinthians 2:11-14.
Here we go. You are caught up in the "True Church" syndrome as if the True Church is a building with a name stamped on it (Orthodox church in this case) and only THEY have ALL the answers. Just like the Roman Catholic church. You have more in common with the Roman Catholic church than you realize. Roman Catholics make this same claim. What bondage!
Typical Roman Catholic sales pitch. Not all of these denominations are Protestant and not all of these people are genuine believers. I would rather listen to the Holy Spirit than have some church that claims to be the one and only True Church but teaches a false gospel interpret the Bible for me and keep me in bondage. Christianity is about a relationship with Christ and not legalistic religious bondage to a church.
You have your theories and I have God's infallible word, the Holy Spirit and assurance of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. Praise God!
The Scriptures are only PART of that Revelation? Where is the rest of it written? This is where you get into trouble, just like Roman Catholics. ADDING TO GOD'S WORD!
The Church, the Body of Christ (Colossians 1:18,24) is made up of all BELIEVERS (not a group of modern day Pharisees) and is not simply a building with the name "Roman Catholic or Orthodox" stamped on it.
Nothing defeats sola scripture. Are you saying that the Gospel you believe existed before the first letter was pinned is different than what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4? So what was this Gospel before the NT was written? What is this Oral Tradition that you have "added" to Scripture? Roman Catholics make this same claim about Oral Tradition.
Romans 16:25 - Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began.
Galatians 1:11 - But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
It sounds like you have been completely brain washed by your church.
I believed a man's interpretation when I attended the Roman Catholic church, yet when I came to repent and believe the Gospel, I believed what the Holy Spirit revealed to me through the word of God which has not changed from the beginning. Unfortunately, you have been duped by your church.
I'm not. You just don't have ears to hear the truth and have bought into the sales pitch of your church, just like Roman Catholics have bought into the sales pitch of their church.
Exactly right eternally-grateful!
Notice how SeaBass ignores "servants of obedience-unto righteousness" (Romans 6:16) and simply stresses "obedience unto righteousness" as if works of obedience that follow faith are unto righteousness, as if we are saved by works.
There is a contrast here between servants/slaves. There are only two kinds of servants/slaves in this world, in the spiritual sense; servants/slaves of sin unto death (unbelievers), or servants/slaves of obedience unto righteousness (believers). When we place our faith exclusively in Christ for salvation/believe the gospel by trusting in His finished work of redemption as the all sufficient means of our salvation, we then become "servants of obedience unto righteousness." Being slaves of sin is put in the past tense. Paul goes on in Romans 6:18 - "You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness."
What did they obey from the heart that was obedience unto salvation? Romans 10:16 - But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our report?" Choosing to believe the gospel is the act of obedience that saves. Before they obeyed that form of doctrine by choosing to believe the gospel (Romans 1:16; 10:16), they had been slaves to sin. Notice in 1 Peter 1:22 - "Purified your souls in obeying the truth" and notice in Acts 15:9 - "Purified their hearts by FAITH." They obeyed that form of doctrine by choosing to believe the gospel.
Notice in Romans 10:10 - For with the heart one believes unto righteousness..
Notice in Romans 4:5 - But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith (not works) is accounted for righteousness.
Notice how SeaBass ignores "servants of obedience-unto righteousness" (Romans 6:16) and simply stresses "obedience unto righteousness" as if works of obedience that follow faith are unto righteousness, as if we are saved by works.
There is a contrast here between servants/slaves. There are only two kinds of servants/slaves in this world, in the spiritual sense; servants/slaves of sin unto death (unbelievers), or servants/slaves of obedience unto righteousness (believers). When we place our faith exclusively in Christ for salvation/believe the gospel by trusting in His finished work of redemption as the all sufficient means of our salvation, we then become "servants of obedience unto righteousness." Being slaves of sin is put in the past tense. Paul goes on in Romans 6:18 - "You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness."
What did they obey from the heart that was obedience unto salvation? Romans 10:16 - But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our report?" Choosing to believe the gospel is the act of obedience that saves. Before they obeyed that form of doctrine by choosing to believe the gospel (Romans 1:16; 10:16), they had been slaves to sin. Notice in 1 Peter 1:22 - "Purified your souls in obeying the truth" and notice in Acts 15:9 - "Purified their hearts by FAITH." They obeyed that form of doctrine by choosing to believe the gospel.
Notice in Romans 10:10 - For with the heart one believes unto righteousness..
Notice in Romans 4:5 - But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith (not works) is accounted for righteousness.
So the claim is made by Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Eddy, Smith, Hubbard, and many more.
Then you can add your name to the list. Personal interpretation does not constitute the meaning of the Gospel from the beginning. One would of necessity posit that the Holy Spirit got it wrong in the beginning, that He was incapable of preserving it for 1500 years, then realized His error and proceeded to give hundreds of meanings to a text that apparently just dropped out of the sky in the 16th century.
which is all based on your own false paradigm. I have heard no one state that they are saved by works. Part of your problem is that you also hold to the Anselmian concept of justification, meaning the "not guilty" idea that one is saved finitely thus you equate justification with salvation.
Your point to put blinders aside pertains to you. Justification is NOT salvation. There is no sola fide in scripture, it does not exist until Luther, and it has become so pervasive within the sola scriptura milieu that most don't even realize it is not scriptural.
which is solely a protestant misunderstanding.
This is another reason you are confused. Rom 5:18 has nothing to do with faith and the attaining of eternal life. The context begins in Rom 5:6-10 where Christ dies for sinners, that is every single human being. No man is without sin. Rom 5:12 tells us that the condemnation of death, which is passed on to all men is what Christ will defeat. Vs 15,17 tells us it is a gift. Vs 18 emphatically states that life was given to all men. If all men die because of the condemnation of death through Adam, then all men will have life through the Incarnation and resurrection of Christ. I Cor 15:12-22 states the very same thing. Christ was reconciling the world to God, not saving you as an individual, or the attaining of eternal life.
Your reference of Rom 6:23 is about eternal life which was the whole purpose of why Christ saved the world from death and sin. So, every man could freely join, which we do by faith, in order to share communion with God.
But it does not constitute salvation. I only means you have taken possession of it. Now it is all about living in that faith and that living is still all a choice by man. He can reject Christ at any time he so desires. God cannot force man to believe not force him to continue to believe. The faithful ones are the ONLY ones that will inherit eternal life. Faith alone is hell. It is the one who have faith and do His will and do it faithfully that will be saved.
so now you actually state the explicit denial of Christ's Incarnation and resurrection in that He saved the world from death and sin. John 4:42, You don't believe Christ defeated death, universal death, man and the world. Why do you think there will be a resurrection of the dead? Read again, I Cor 15:12-22. That word "saved by grace" in Eph 2:5 is addressing Christ's work as does the first two verses when all men were quickened with Christ at His resurrection. That part of our salvation is all Christ and man has no imput surely not any works of the law. Paul states clearly that if works could save man, then Christ is not needed. Because he is addressing believes the vs 6-8 are for them. They are also saved by grace but also through faith.
It means one has been put into the correct relationship with Christ so that the attaining of eternal life can take place and those that are faithful will inherit eternal life.
First that is your misunderstanding of the whole issue of grace, faith, and works. You have just above actually denied the salvation by grace part. The work of Christ makes it possible for man and God to be united now and for eternity.
False, You will never find any Church Father that hold to that sequence. You are using same words but applying them to a different paradigm. Even a Calvinist theologian, Schaffer, acknowledges that one will never find sola fide in the Church Fathers.
don't need to fight it. I have found the ONE True Faith,
Never stated it, never even implied it, and scripture does not teach it. Only in your complete ignorance of Christ's work could this even have been stated.
they do have some things correct as yet. But who knows what the Pope's decide to believe in the future.
I know you need it to say that, but sola fide is purely a Lutheran original that most Protestants have accepted. Yet it has never been held prior to Luther. If it was held by the Church, either Orthodox, Oriental and Catholic, then Luther would not be given credit for its development.
It equates to law of faith, but not sola fide. Sola fide is condemned by scripture. Which is why Luther wanted to jettison James. Its a thorn in the doctrine.
No, he is western and has some herecies attached to him as does Augustine as well.
Justify the ungodly (sinners) is Rom 5:6-10. That is every single human being, unless you can prove that some men have never sinned.
You proof text the Church Fathers just like you proof text scripture. No man has ever changed the Gospel as it was given in the beginning. Everyone who tried was declared a heretic or the teaching was heretical. I don't think that will change from now until the end of time.
Then you can add your name to the list. Personal interpretation does not constitute the meaning of the Gospel from the beginning. One would of necessity posit that the Holy Spirit got it wrong in the beginning, that He was incapable of preserving it for 1500 years, then realized His error and proceeded to give hundreds of meanings to a text that apparently just dropped out of the sky in the 16th century.
which is all based on your own false paradigm. I have heard no one state that they are saved by works. Part of your problem is that you also hold to the Anselmian concept of justification, meaning the "not guilty" idea that one is saved finitely thus you equate justification with salvation.
Your point to put blinders aside pertains to you. Justification is NOT salvation. There is no sola fide in scripture, it does not exist until Luther, and it has become so pervasive within the sola scriptura milieu that most don't even realize it is not scriptural.
which is solely a protestant misunderstanding.
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. That is salvation. Do those who are not saved have peace with God through Jesus Christ? No! Notice the words "free gift" in Romans 5:15-18. Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death but the free gift of God is eternal life in Jesus Christ our Lord (Romans 6:23). Yet you say that is not salvation.
Your reference of Rom 6:23 is about eternal life which was the whole purpose of why Christ saved the world from death and sin. So, every man could freely join, which we do by faith, in order to share communion with God.
But it does not constitute salvation. I only means you have taken possession of it. Now it is all about living in that faith and that living is still all a choice by man. He can reject Christ at any time he so desires. God cannot force man to believe not force him to continue to believe. The faithful ones are the ONLY ones that will inherit eternal life. Faith alone is hell. It is the one who have faith and do His will and do it faithfully that will be saved.
so now you actually state the explicit denial of Christ's Incarnation and resurrection in that He saved the world from death and sin. John 4:42, You don't believe Christ defeated death, universal death, man and the world. Why do you think there will be a resurrection of the dead? Read again, I Cor 15:12-22. That word "saved by grace" in Eph 2:5 is addressing Christ's work as does the first two verses when all men were quickened with Christ at His resurrection. That part of our salvation is all Christ and man has no imput surely not any works of the law. Paul states clearly that if works could save man, then Christ is not needed. Because he is addressing believes the vs 6-8 are for them. They are also saved by grace but also through faith.
It means one has been put into the correct relationship with Christ so that the attaining of eternal life can take place and those that are faithful will inherit eternal life.
First that is your misunderstanding of the whole issue of grace, faith, and works. You have just above actually denied the salvation by grace part. The work of Christ makes it possible for man and God to be united now and for eternity.
False, You will never find any Church Father that hold to that sequence. You are using same words but applying them to a different paradigm. Even a Calvinist theologian, Schaffer, acknowledges that one will never find sola fide in the Church Fathers.
don't need to fight it. I have found the ONE True Faith,
Never stated it, never even implied it, and scripture does not teach it. Only in your complete ignorance of Christ's work could this even have been stated.
they do have some things correct as yet. But who knows what the Pope's decide to believe in the future.
I know you need it to say that, but sola fide is purely a Lutheran original that most Protestants have accepted. Yet it has never been held prior to Luther. If it was held by the Church, either Orthodox, Oriental and Catholic, then Luther would not be given credit for its development.
It equates to law of faith, but not sola fide. Sola fide is condemned by scripture. Which is why Luther wanted to jettison James. Its a thorn in the doctrine.
No, he is western and has some herecies attached to him as does Augustine as well.
He said nothing here about both justifications. He clearly said, believe in thee, who "justified the ungodly"; and thus, being justified by faith alone, he shall have peace with God. This is what Paul was stating in Romans 4:5 and Romans 5:1. Take off the blinders and read it again.
You proof text the Church Fathers just like you proof text scripture. No man has ever changed the Gospel as it was given in the beginning. Everyone who tried was declared a heretic or the teaching was heretical. I don't think that will change from now until the end of time.
Last edited:
As long as you quote scripture you are correct. I don't understand why you are so shocked? You confirmed what I stated. it is a possession NOW. It is not finite, you have not inherited it as yet. Many believers fall by the wayside and will never inherit eternal life. There is much more to the meaning of the word, belief, faith, than you give it.
I notice you still confuse what Christ did with man's response as well.
Says you.
so every sola scripturist claims.. So what else is new that Calvinism, Lutheranism, Mormonism, Jehovah Witnessess are all scriptural and all had the Holy Spirit deliver their gospel to them. You fit them perfectly.
The reason we read those Church Fathers whose explanations where accepted by the Body, (the Holy Spirit) is because they were faithful to the original deposit. They were taught the Gospel. You have never been taught the Gospel, and you take a bare text and impose your interpretations upon it. Nowhere is all of scripture does scripture give individual man authority to interpret scripture.
which is incorrect and based upon your errant paradigm. You create this straw man as opposite of faith alone. Both are unscriptural.
If men, individual men, I would say yes. But no man has interpreted scripture as the sola scripturist employs the principle. Also. scripture has never been the ONLY Word of God.
I admit I have been indoctrinated by Christ, by the Holy Spirit. Christ is the Head of the Church, His Body, which is enlivened by the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit no longer exists, and Christ is no longer the Head, then you might have a point that history and man could deceive.
However, history shows that both the Church and the Gospel entrusted to it has been faithfully transmitted in time. That consistency is the authentic witness of the power and promise of the Holy Spirit. Something a sola scripturist cannot claim with thousands of variations of a text.
So you think that when Paul stated that his gospel is of Christ and that there is ONLY one Gospel of Christ it was pride? Is Christ being prideful in claiming that He is the ONLY way?
Actually Christ makes the claim. You need to believe that Christ is no longer the Head of the Church. Seems you and other sola scripturist have elevated themselves as the infallible interpreter of a text, and put themselves like Rome as Pope over their sectarian churches.
You also need to believe that the Holy Spirit is a myth and has no power to do what He claims in scripture.
but you have made it a legal, moral, one man religion. Obviously you have a different church since it was Christ that established His Church and it is Christ that makes the claim. You can follow Him or continue with you man made theories and self interpretation.
so you claim, yet nothing you say has any bearing on what that original Gospel stated and has always been believed with His Church.
You make the same claim as any other solo scripturists and they are all different. Your claim has no more validity than any other. It is your personal gospel which is applicable only to you first and foremost with some converts who agree with your interpretation, no different than any other denomination sect, group that uses scripture as their source of ideas.
Religion is mostly an idealogy notwithstanding the verbiage to the contrary.
That because you don't really believe and Trust Christ and the Holy Spirit. The concept of sola scripture is absurd. It like taking a sonnet of Shakespeare by denying his explanation of it, and accepting yours.
Why must it be written? It was not written for decades in the early Church. Obviously none of them are saved since they did not have the NT. Even at that, it took 70 years to write what eventually became the Canon. The Church used many other writings as well.
The only ones adding or subtracting are individual men since the Reformation.
Of course that is the Protestant version of it. A mythical, non existant reality, a philosophical concept that is devoid of anything that scripture ascribes to it.
Mostly the meaning of scripture that all sola scripturist deny when it does not align with their personal interpretation of a text. Scripture is added to Holy Tradition. It is impossible to add Tradition to scripture. God's revelation was not given by written text, but came by the Apostles verbally. Only some of that Holy Tradition, revelation, was eventually written down. That Revelation is what is preserved within the Body of Christ, His Church, which He established here on earth, not a mythical concept.
Paul did not write down everything he taught. He exhorts Timothy to hold to the tradition, as he also states in I Thess 2:15.
I have no problem submitting to Christ, the Head of His Church. Better than holding to man made traditions, secular, humanistic and idealogical.
You the believe is a duplicitous Spirit since He promised not to give to individual man revelation for private interpretation. He gave it once in the beginning, and promised to preserve it in His Body. I can assure you that what you believe is not of the Holy Spirit. At least not the one of the Bible since He gave ONLY one Gospel, it was in the beginning. If ones interpretation is not that of the beginning it is NOT of the Holy Spirit.
History attest both to the authenticity of the power of the Holy Spirit within His Body, but also shows that all the myriad interpretations espoused by individual men are not of the Holy Spirit.
The HOLY SPIRIT leads one to the Truth. One can accept it, or reject it. He does not make man believe. You can continue to hold to your man made theories and interpretations, there are hundreds of them, or the unchanged Gospel of Christ, preserved in His Body by the Holy Spirit.
I notice you still confuse what Christ did with man's response as well.
Says you.
so every sola scripturist claims.. So what else is new that Calvinism, Lutheranism, Mormonism, Jehovah Witnessess are all scriptural and all had the Holy Spirit deliver their gospel to them. You fit them perfectly.
The reason we read those Church Fathers whose explanations where accepted by the Body, (the Holy Spirit) is because they were faithful to the original deposit. They were taught the Gospel. You have never been taught the Gospel, and you take a bare text and impose your interpretations upon it. Nowhere is all of scripture does scripture give individual man authority to interpret scripture.
which is incorrect and based upon your errant paradigm. You create this straw man as opposite of faith alone. Both are unscriptural.
If men, individual men, I would say yes. But no man has interpreted scripture as the sola scripturist employs the principle. Also. scripture has never been the ONLY Word of God.
I admit I have been indoctrinated by Christ, by the Holy Spirit. Christ is the Head of the Church, His Body, which is enlivened by the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit no longer exists, and Christ is no longer the Head, then you might have a point that history and man could deceive.
However, history shows that both the Church and the Gospel entrusted to it has been faithfully transmitted in time. That consistency is the authentic witness of the power and promise of the Holy Spirit. Something a sola scripturist cannot claim with thousands of variations of a text.
So you think that when Paul stated that his gospel is of Christ and that there is ONLY one Gospel of Christ it was pride? Is Christ being prideful in claiming that He is the ONLY way?
Actually Christ makes the claim. You need to believe that Christ is no longer the Head of the Church. Seems you and other sola scripturist have elevated themselves as the infallible interpreter of a text, and put themselves like Rome as Pope over their sectarian churches.
You also need to believe that the Holy Spirit is a myth and has no power to do what He claims in scripture.
but you have made it a legal, moral, one man religion. Obviously you have a different church since it was Christ that established His Church and it is Christ that makes the claim. You can follow Him or continue with you man made theories and self interpretation.
You have your theories and I have God's infallible word, the Holy Spirit and assurance of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. Praise God!
You make the same claim as any other solo scripturists and they are all different. Your claim has no more validity than any other. It is your personal gospel which is applicable only to you first and foremost with some converts who agree with your interpretation, no different than any other denomination sect, group that uses scripture as their source of ideas.
Religion is mostly an idealogy notwithstanding the verbiage to the contrary.
That because you don't really believe and Trust Christ and the Holy Spirit. The concept of sola scripture is absurd. It like taking a sonnet of Shakespeare by denying his explanation of it, and accepting yours.
Why must it be written? It was not written for decades in the early Church. Obviously none of them are saved since they did not have the NT. Even at that, it took 70 years to write what eventually became the Canon. The Church used many other writings as well.
The only ones adding or subtracting are individual men since the Reformation.
Of course that is the Protestant version of it. A mythical, non existant reality, a philosophical concept that is devoid of anything that scripture ascribes to it.
Mostly the meaning of scripture that all sola scripturist deny when it does not align with their personal interpretation of a text. Scripture is added to Holy Tradition. It is impossible to add Tradition to scripture. God's revelation was not given by written text, but came by the Apostles verbally. Only some of that Holy Tradition, revelation, was eventually written down. That Revelation is what is preserved within the Body of Christ, His Church, which He established here on earth, not a mythical concept.
Paul did not write down everything he taught. He exhorts Timothy to hold to the tradition, as he also states in I Thess 2:15.
It sounds like you have been completely brain washed by your church.
You the believe is a duplicitous Spirit since He promised not to give to individual man revelation for private interpretation. He gave it once in the beginning, and promised to preserve it in His Body. I can assure you that what you believe is not of the Holy Spirit. At least not the one of the Bible since He gave ONLY one Gospel, it was in the beginning. If ones interpretation is not that of the beginning it is NOT of the Holy Spirit.
History attest both to the authenticity of the power of the Holy Spirit within His Body, but also shows that all the myriad interpretations espoused by individual men are not of the Holy Spirit.
The HOLY SPIRIT leads one to the Truth. One can accept it, or reject it. He does not make man believe. You can continue to hold to your man made theories and interpretations, there are hundreds of them, or the unchanged Gospel of Christ, preserved in His Body by the Holy Spirit.
C
What I find sad about all of this is that this separates Sister from Sister and Brother from Brother and Brother from Sister.
Those that liked you at first, won't even talk to you now, except maybe privately to their friends.
But we're not here/on this earth to "make friends" nor to get anyone to like us. We here to walk as He walked and go into all the world with His Word and let them know we're His disciples by our love for each other.
It's still all about love.
We love those who disagree with us and we love those who half agree with us and it's only because He loves through us - if we let Him .... and if we don't, we're not His 'according to the Scriptures'. Why can't we see those verses?
I appreciate those that can disagree and yet still give the impression or feeling in their words that they love the person.
Thanks to those that do love those they disagree with and those that are willing to post Scripture after they've examined the whole of His Word, even though they know that the opposing view-point people won't even read those verses, because they disagree with those verses in their heart.
But, halfing The Word of God/Word of Life is such an awfully gruesome thing to have on one's account, when those other books are opened with the Book of Life. Equally as bad as what the cat-of-nine-tails did to Jesus' back or pulling out of His beard or spitting on Him. And the same goes for not sincerely loving each other.
Time for us all is really much shorter than we think.
Those that liked you at first, won't even talk to you now, except maybe privately to their friends.
But we're not here/on this earth to "make friends" nor to get anyone to like us. We here to walk as He walked and go into all the world with His Word and let them know we're His disciples by our love for each other.
It's still all about love.
We love those who disagree with us and we love those who half agree with us and it's only because He loves through us - if we let Him .... and if we don't, we're not His 'according to the Scriptures'. Why can't we see those verses?
I appreciate those that can disagree and yet still give the impression or feeling in their words that they love the person.
Thanks to those that do love those they disagree with and those that are willing to post Scripture after they've examined the whole of His Word, even though they know that the opposing view-point people won't even read those verses, because they disagree with those verses in their heart.
But, halfing The Word of God/Word of Life is such an awfully gruesome thing to have on one's account, when those other books are opened with the Book of Life. Equally as bad as what the cat-of-nine-tails did to Jesus' back or pulling out of His beard or spitting on Him. And the same goes for not sincerely loving each other.
Time for us all is really much shorter than we think.
