K
From what I understand, that's not what he is saying (or trying to say). Rather, he is saying a true Christian will work. So he is making work a necessity of a true believer. So the work is not a requirement of salvation but is a necessity of a true Christian. I know its a subtle distinction but he is trying to say that it isn't a requirement to maintain or earn salvation but is a fruit of true conversion.
We, then, must argue that works are not a necessary result of conversion and are a possibility rather than a necessity. So if someone doesn't walk in these works, they are by no means less saved. We could point to the thief on the cross to show this, that it was simple faith in Jesus that got him into paradise. We are saved unto good works, but the works, whether done or not done, do not save us even if they are a result of who we now are and God working in and through us His perfect will.
Someone who believes and dies the next moment for example, does not have the time to do these works. Does it make them any less saved? No, they have faith in Jesus so they are saved. So while the fruit of conversion leads to good works, the good works that may or may not be done have no say in salvation. Yes, they follow as a result of true conversion, but if the opportunity for good works doesn't present itself due to imminent death we then have a clause. Good works may follow true conversion. That is, if given the opportunity.
The fact that there is a clause that negates the necessity of works means that ultimately works do not maintain salvation. I am sure KennethC agrees, as he says works do not maintain salvation. The problem, however, is to make works a necessity of true conversion, ignoring that there is a clause that the works can only be done if given the opportunity.
My question would be, "What if the opportunity does present itself to do good works, and then you do not do the work?" I am going to guess that KennethC would question the sincerity of that person's belief and whether they are truly converted. So it goes around in circles because its all about fruit inspection. The necessity for good works means you can determine if someone is a Christian by their conduct. The problem with this is that it doesn't consider that fruit takes time to bear, and so you have no place to judge others sincerity because maybe they haven't yet come to full fruition.
Do you see it? Its not that he is saying good works maintain salvation, or earns it. He is saying that a true Christian will have these things follow. I disagree, and think that a true Christian could (possibly) have these things follow. The necessity for good works is not presented as something we have to do, but that we will do as born-again Christians. If that makes sense. He is trying to define what a true Christian will do as a result of belief. His mistake is in thinking it is a necessity to walk in the fruit of true conversion, and isn't acknowledging that there are clauses to consider, that would make it to where one does not walk in these good works (such as death, being bed ridden, or a death bed confession).
I am trying to clear the air, and clear up confusion from misunderstandings. I think the problem here, the disagreement, is on the necessity for good works, and also sanctification (as I titled this thread). We are quick to define KennethC a Legalist, but he is basically just being a fruit inspector (no offense to him). He is calling for the necessity of the fruit of conversion. We are saying that although it is a fruit (the good works), it is not a necessary fruit and has no say upon ones salvation ultimately.
Hope that helps...
We, then, must argue that works are not a necessary result of conversion and are a possibility rather than a necessity. So if someone doesn't walk in these works, they are by no means less saved. We could point to the thief on the cross to show this, that it was simple faith in Jesus that got him into paradise. We are saved unto good works, but the works, whether done or not done, do not save us even if they are a result of who we now are and God working in and through us His perfect will.
Someone who believes and dies the next moment for example, does not have the time to do these works. Does it make them any less saved? No, they have faith in Jesus so they are saved. So while the fruit of conversion leads to good works, the good works that may or may not be done have no say in salvation. Yes, they follow as a result of true conversion, but if the opportunity for good works doesn't present itself due to imminent death we then have a clause. Good works may follow true conversion. That is, if given the opportunity.
The fact that there is a clause that negates the necessity of works means that ultimately works do not maintain salvation. I am sure KennethC agrees, as he says works do not maintain salvation. The problem, however, is to make works a necessity of true conversion, ignoring that there is a clause that the works can only be done if given the opportunity.
My question would be, "What if the opportunity does present itself to do good works, and then you do not do the work?" I am going to guess that KennethC would question the sincerity of that person's belief and whether they are truly converted. So it goes around in circles because its all about fruit inspection. The necessity for good works means you can determine if someone is a Christian by their conduct. The problem with this is that it doesn't consider that fruit takes time to bear, and so you have no place to judge others sincerity because maybe they haven't yet come to full fruition.
Do you see it? Its not that he is saying good works maintain salvation, or earns it. He is saying that a true Christian will have these things follow. I disagree, and think that a true Christian could (possibly) have these things follow. The necessity for good works is not presented as something we have to do, but that we will do as born-again Christians. If that makes sense. He is trying to define what a true Christian will do as a result of belief. His mistake is in thinking it is a necessity to walk in the fruit of true conversion, and isn't acknowledging that there are clauses to consider, that would make it to where one does not walk in these good works (such as death, being bed ridden, or a death bed confession).
I am trying to clear the air, and clear up confusion from misunderstandings. I think the problem here, the disagreement, is on the necessity for good works, and also sanctification (as I titled this thread). We are quick to define KennethC a Legalist, but he is basically just being a fruit inspector (no offense to him). He is calling for the necessity of the fruit of conversion. We are saying that although it is a fruit (the good works), it is not a necessary fruit and has no say upon ones salvation ultimately.
Hope that helps...
Why does our Lord Jesus say those who do not have this fruit will be cut off and thrown into the fire to be burned up ???
Lord Jesus is not talking about burning up works here, He is talking about what will happen to the person who lived a life in disobedience. There are a number of scriptures in the NT that speak on disobedience, and the outcome mentioned in those passages are not loss of rewards. The fruit of the Holy Spirit is definite marker to show a saved believer from the unsaved, unbeliever, and false teachers.
To say the fruit of the Spirit is only a possibility is pretty much the same as what Paul said in 2 Timothy 3:5 about having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. The fruit of the Spirit is expressed all throughout the bible making sure the readers can not ignore them, and Peter says by adding them to our lives we make our call and election sure and guarantee an entrance into heaven. (2 Peter 1:10-11)
I never tell another person they are not saved or headed to hell, nor do I ever condemn a person and tell them the Lord Jesus is not their Savior like a few have done to me on here. That is not proper nor is it what we are called to do with others.
We are called to bring the whole truth in the Word of God, and even though some do not like or believe that a person can fall away, depart from, or not continue in the faith and not end up with eternal life there is a number of scriptures that shows this teaching is biblically sound !!!
The fruit of the Holy Spirit is a function that will be evident in all true born again believers, for who can deny the working of the Holy Spirit in and through their life? Nobody should but unfortunately the bible speaks on those who will remain disobedient or return to a life of disobedience.
Now I know as you have said then you bring in the thief on the cross or a person who dies shortly after they have received the Lord. This is where His mercy comes into the equation and I believe these people are saved as the word of God shows, but again the bible also shows that examples such as that are not to be taken to allow disobedience.
(Galatians 5:3, Romans 6:1-15)
Remember in Jude 1:4 the Apostle Jude says anybody that teaches the grace of God allows sinful behavior to continue in peoples lives are teaching false doctrine and there condemnation was marked long ago. Apostle Paul says the same thing in Ephesians 4:20 that those who allow sinful behavior to remain in their lives have not learned Christ.
James 3:17
But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, andeasy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.