If we're saved by faith

[mailmandan]

How can one separate faith from trust and trust from obedience.

Faith/trust is the root of salvation and obedience which follows is the fruit. No fruit at all would demonstrate there is no root.

Abraham trusted God enough to follow His Instructions. The Bible called this obedience "Faith". Obedience is the one common thread through every example of a "Faithful" person mentioned in Heb. 11.

This is where works-salvationists get it wrong. *Faith is not simply defined as obedience/works. *Faith is believing, trusting, relying. *Obedience which follows is works and we are saved through faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8,9). Hebrews 11:1 - Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

In Hebrews 11, notice in all of these occurrences that is was "by" or "out of" faith, not faith is in essence, these acts of obedience/works. Their faith was genuine and it was shown by their actions (works) so all of these works accomplished in Hebrews 11 were done "by" or "out of" faith, but those works are not the essence of faith, but are the evidence (fruit) of faith. *That is absolutely critical to understand! We are saved through faith at it's origin and not at some time later, based on the merit of works.

Example: Noah had already "found grace" (Genesis 6:8), was "a preacher of righteousness" (2 Peter 2:5), and "walked with God" BEFORE he built the ark. His obedience was a DEMONSTRATION of his faith, not the origin of it.

Eve chose to trust her own mind, her own sight over God's instruction. Abraham did not trust his own mind over God's instructions.

In James 2:21, notice closely that James does not say that Abraham's work of offering up Isaac resulted in God's accounting Abraham as righteous. The accounting of Abraham's faith as righteousness was made in Genesis 15:6, many years before his work of offering up Isaac recorded in Genesis 22. The work of Abraham did not have some kind of intrinsic merit to save his soul, but it showed/proved or manifested the genuineness of his faith.

So James does not teach salvation by works and James is discussing the proof/evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18), not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God (Romans 4:2-3).

Heb. 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Everyone follows something, trusts in something. The Pharisees trusted their own Laws, had faith in their own creation. Zechariahs and Elizabeth didn't trust in the religious traditions of man, but in the instructions of God like Abraham.

It is the age old battle isn't it. Do we listen to God or religious man.

Works-salvationists listen to religious man and call that listening to God, then accuse believers who listen to God of listening to religious man. It's ironic.

Good post

Only to those who teach salvation by works.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

There are basically two very different interpretations of Acts 2:38.

1. The interpretation of the Church Fathers, the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Churches, the Anglican churches, the Lutheran churches, the Methodist churches, and the Presbyterian churches.

2. The interpretation of Churches which hold to Baptist theology.

in other words

1. Works based

vs

2. Faith based (and you can add more than baptist in there,)

 

[mailmandan]

This citation is incorrect! I have here on my desk Roberson’s A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, and such a quote does not appear on page 592, or any other page in that Grammar!

The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koin generally (Robertson, Grammar, p. 592). One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.

https://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/robertsons-word-pictures/acts/acts-2-38.html

 

[mailmandan]

If our theology will dictate our interpretation, whats to stop us from doing the same with your "plenty of other Scriptures that clearly say"?

Acts 2:38 is about as clear as it gets. If this verse is "confusing", all verses are open to this excuse.

Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18 is about as clear as it gets. *Scripture MUST harmonize with Scripture and your biased interpretation of Acts 2:38 does not harmonize with Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18 etc..

The only logical conclusion *when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture* is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

 

[OneFaith]

The ark represented being in Christ. The water represented death. Baptism is a death and burial. Long after Christ was water baptized by John He said “I have a baptism to undergo, and oh how I am greatly distressed until it is accomplished.” (Luke 12:50). No one is greatly distressed to get water baptized, He was speaking of His death and burial.

So to say we are saved through water means we are saved through death. During baptism we die to ourself, bury our sinful self in the watery grave of baptism, and are raised a new creature, alive in a Christ. “Don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ were baptized into His death? If we join Him like this in His death, then we will join Him in His resurrection.” (Romans 6).

The Israelites lead by Moses also were saved through water (death). Their enemies died and were buried in the water, but they came out alive. We also go through the water (death) in order to come out alive- by the miracle of God. “For I am crucified with a Christ (I joined Him in His death by way of water baptism) and yet I live- not I but Christ who lives within me.” So I truly did die during water baptism, but I Joined with Christ- Who cannot be held by death. “I will not let My Holy One see decay.”

Because of joining Christ in death, Christians will not see decay when they die. But back when Joseph interpreted a prisoners dream (that had come true), that prisoner saw decay before his soul was taken from his body. Birds pecked at his face and eyes, and he felt every bit of it. Yet the theif on the cross was with Christ in paradise that very day- he did not see decay. Because whether under the old covenant or the new, God’s holy ones do not see decay.

 

[DJ2]

Peter was a genuine disciple of Christ who had a temporary, weak moment because he was afraid, yet after the Holy Spirit was given, we find him boldly confessing Christ (Acts 2:14-24; 4:8-13). We know that prior to Peter's weak moment, he was a believer and genuine disciple of Christ who confessed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16). Where do we find the proof that prior to his crucifixion, the thief was a believer and a disciple of Christ? *You are grasping at straws.

You are missing the point. I do not find proof either way. That is why it is an assumption either way. How can you and others not see this??

 

[OneFaith]

(Something went wrong with my WiFi and I could not edit typos and such in post #145).

 

[mailmandan]

You are missing the point. I do not find proof either way. That is why it is an assumption either way. How can you and others not see this??

You are missing the point. The evidence weighs much more heavily in my favor. Why can't you see this? You have assumptions and absolutely no evidence.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You are missing the point. I do not find proof either way. That is why it is an assumption either way. How can you and others not see this??

If you can not find proof either way, This should give you pause, It means you may not be right, so you have to use other resources to come to your conclusion (ie the rest of scripture would help)

 

[Studyman]

=mailmandan;3423401]Faith/trust is the root of salvation and obedience which follows is the fruit. No fruit at all would demonstrate there is no root.

This is where works-salvationists get it wrong. *Faith is not simply defined as obedience/works. *Faith is believing, trusting, relying. *Obedience which follows is works and we are saved through faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8,9). Hebrews 11:1 - Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

I agree with this MMD. "Faith" is trusting, believing, relying. So God told Abraham to leave his fathers country, go sacrifice your son for me, and Abraham obeyed. What other choice did he have? He had two choices, YES? He could obey or not obey.

His choice would exposed his belief, his trust, and who he relied on. Is this not a true statement? We know he "trusted", believed in, relied on God, and not his own mind, because he trusted, believed, relied on God enough to follow His Instructions, as opposed to Eve, who rejected God's instructions and followed another voice.

So he chose to have Faith, trust, belief, and to rely on God and His Word even to the point of killing a son he never thought he would have to begin with. That is true faith indeed.

And Jesus, before becoming a man, wrote for our admonition, as an example for us, the following.

Gen. 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

It doesn't matter when God gave the instruction or even what the instruction was. God told Eve and Abraham to do something, one did as told and was blessed, the other chose someone else's instructions over God's and was cursed.

I'm not sure why you would preach against this seemingly Biblical fact. But I do appreciate your tone for the most part. We have fundamental disagreements about the same Bible. We can both be wrong, but we can't both be right. I believe it is good to have a civil discussion if that is even possible.

For me it's not about defending a religion or church doctrine, I don't care about any of those things. I just want to understand the truth about God and His word. I am simply "Seeking the Kingdom of God and His Righteousness" as Jesus instructed.

How am I wrong in the way I'm looking at Abraham?

 

[Studyman]

Yet prior to this, Matthew and Mark indicate the “thieves” (plural) reviled Jesus in the same way.

*Matthew 27:44 - ASV And the robbers also that were crucified with him cast upon him the same reproach.

AMP The robbers who had been crucified with Him also began to insult Him in the same way.

NKJV Even the robbers who were crucified with Him reviled Him with the same thing.

NASB The robbers who had been crucified with Him were also insulting Him with the same words.

RSV And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way.

*Mark 15:32 - ASV - Let the Christ, the King of Israel, now come down from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reproached him.

AMP - Let the Christ (the Messiah, the Anointed), the King of Israel, now come down from the cross, so that we may see and believe and trust [in Him]!” Those who were crucified with Him were also insulting Him.

NKJV - Let the Christ, the King of Israel, descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” Even those who were crucified with Him reviled Him.

NASB - Let this Christ, the King of Israel, now come down from the cross, so that we may see and believe!” Those who were crucified with Him were also insulting Him.

RSV - Let the Christ, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” Those who were crucified with him also reviled him.

We absolutely know that he repented, afterwards, but not in the beginning, as we saw in Matthew 27:44 and Mark 15:32.

John 20:31 - but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

Matthew 16:16 - Simon Peter answered and said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

Those who repent and believe the gospel have obeyed Him. Choosing to believe the gospel is the act of obedience that saves. Romans 10:16 - But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed our report?" Romans 1:16 - For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone who believes.

Acts 11:17 - If therefore God gave them the same gift (Holy Spirit) as He gave us (see Acts 10:43-47; 15:8,9) when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?”

Ephesians 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.

I've seen works-salvationists write a blank check with the word "obey" in Acts 5:32 then fill in whatever amount of works they feel are necessary to be saved and call that "obey Him." For some it's obey Him by getting water baptized, then you will receive the Holy Spirit and in your case, it appears to be obey Him by "loving Him with all your heart," then you will receive the Holy Spirit, yet both of these latter views are erroneous.

*Matthew 27:44 and Mark 15:32 state otherwise.

The one thief admitted his guilt, asked for forgiveness and it was not merely "lip service" because Jesus promised him that today he would be with Him in Paradise. Jesus knew his heart.

Jesus obviously did not grant repentance to a criminal that paid Him some lip service, but to a criminal who truly repented and believed in Him. It was a true death bed conversion.

You might be right MMD. Maybe we can all just live how ever we want then on our death bed, confess and repent and be saved. There are a lot of folks who do just that. To be fair there were "Malefactors" "Criminals" and "robbers" spoken about. you assume they are all the same two people. You don't know how long he was in prison before his sentence was carried out. You assume the repentant man never knew of Jesus before his sentence was carried out. You know nothing about him except a few sentences mentioning him and John's detail.

I also assume Jesus is no respecter of persons, that Salvation is the same for all. That it is likely this man had repented and turned to God before he was crucified. Like you are always preaching, He had faith first, then works of belief brought about because of his fath.

You can't prove "death bed" conversion using the whole Bible because there isn't anywhere else that supports this doctrine. Only your assumption about one sentence in the entire Bible can you create this doctrine. I'm not saying you are wrong, but there isn't enough information to prove either way in my opinion. I'm not going to teach my children that they can live how they want, then wait until their deathbed to repent and turn to God's way based on your interpretation of this one sentence.

You can if you want.

 

[mailmandan]

=mailmandan;3423401]Faith/trust is the root of salvation and obedience which follows is the fruit. No fruit at all would demonstrate there is no root.

I agree with this MMD. "Faith" is trusting, believing, relying. So God told Abraham to leave his fathers country, go sacrifice your son for me, and Abraham obeyed. What other choice did he have? He had two choices, YES? He could obey or not obey.

His choice would exposed his belief, his trust, and who he relied on. Is this not a true statement? We know he "trusted", believed in, relied on God, and not his own mind, because he trusted, believed, relied on God enough to follow His Instructions, as opposed to Eve, who rejected God's instructions and followed another voice.

Yes, By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. (Hebrews 11:8) which leads us to Genesis 15:5-6, where God brought him outside and said, "Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be." And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness many years before offering up Isaac in Genesis 22.

So he chose to have Faith, trust, belief, and to rely on God and His Word even to the point of killing a son he never thought he would have to begin with. That is true faith indeed.

Indeed it is. When Abraham performed the work offering up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22; he fulfilled the expectations created by the pronouncement of his faith in Genesis 15:6.

And Jesus, before becoming a man, wrote for our admonition, as an example for us, the following.

Gen. 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

God said, "I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and will give your descendants all these lands; and by your descendants all the nations of the earth shall be blessed" because Abraham obeyed Him, but it doesn't say that was the reason why Abraham's faith was accounted to him for righteousness. That is the main point I'm making. (Genesis 15:5-6; Romans 4:2-3).

It doesn't matter when God gave the instruction or even what the instruction was. God told Eve and Abraham to do something, one did as told and was blessed, the other chose someone else's instructions over God's and was cursed.

By following God's instructions, Abraham brought blessings to his descendants and all the nations of the earth, yet Abraham's faith was accounted to him for righteousness through faith, not works.

I'm not sure why you would preach against this seemingly Biblical fact. But I do appreciate your tone for the most part. We have fundamental disagreements about the same Bible. We can both be wrong, but we can't both be right. I believe it is good to have a civil discussion if that is even possible.

I preach against salvation by works, but not against salvation by grace through faith, not works (Ephesians 2:8,9). Works are the fruit, by product and demonstrative evidence of authentic faith, but not the essence of faith and not the means of our salvation. We are having a civil discussion right now.

For me it's not about defending a religion or church doctrine, I don't care about any of those things. I just want to understand the truth about God and His word. I am simply "Seeking the Kingdom of God and His Righteousness" as Jesus instructed.

How am I wrong in the way I'm looking at Abraham?

Where people cross the line is when they teach Abraham was saved by works. We are in agreement when we can both agree that Abraham was "accounted as righteous based on his faith" in Genesis 15:6 (and not his works - Romans 4:2-3) long before he offered up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22.

In James 2:24, James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is "shown to be righteous." James is discussing the proof/evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God (Romans 4:2-3).

 

[kaylagrl]

Just a thought here-----
Does a person's circumstance bear any weight to the Word of God? If God is not a respecter of person, is He a respecter of situation? Does our peculiar situation change what is required by God?
Think about that for a moment.

So if a person is unable to be baptized for medical reasons they are lost?! Give me a break with that nonsense. If a person becomes saved and on the way to the church to get baptized there is a terrible accident and they are killed they are going to hell?! Balderdash! smh

 

[kaylagrl]

If He truly is your foundation I suggest you listen to His words.

"Who ever believes and is baptized will be saved, whoever does not believe will be condemned." Mark 16:16

So the criminal on the cross was lost and Christ was a liar? Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[mailmandan]

You might be right MMD. Maybe we can all just live how ever we want then on our death bed, confess and repent and be saved. There are a lot of folks who do just that. To be fair there were "Malefactors" "Criminals" and "robbers" spoken about. you assume they are all the same two people. You don't know how long he was in prison before his sentence was carried out. You assume the repentant man never knew of Jesus before his sentence was carried out. You know nothing about him except a few sentences mentioning him and John's detail.

I also assume Jesus is no respecter of persons, that Salvation is the same for all. That it is likely this man had repented and turned to God before he was crucified. Like you are always preaching, He had faith first, then works of belief brought about because of his fath.

You can't prove "death bed" conversion using the whole Bible because there isn't anywhere else that supports this doctrine. Only your assumption about one sentence in the entire Bible can you create this doctrine. I'm not saying you are wrong, but there isn't enough information to prove either way in my opinion. I'm not going to teach my children that they can live how they want, then wait until their deathbed to repent and turn to God's way based on your interpretation of this one sentence.

You can if you want.

I believe there is enough evidence to validate my point and I certainly do not teach my son to live however he wants, then wait until his deathbed to repent and receive Christ through faith. The opportunity for a deathbed conversion may not be there for everyone who puts off repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ till the end.

 

[Studyman]

Peter was a genuine disciple of Christ who had a temporary, weak moment because he was afraid, yet after the Holy Spirit was given, we find him boldly confessing Christ (Acts 2:14-24; 4:8-13). We know that prior to Peter's weak moment, he was a believer and genuine disciple of Christ who confessed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matthew 16:16). Where do we find the proof that prior to his crucifixion, the thief was a believer and a disciple of Christ? *You are grasping at straws.

You don't know how long the thief was in prison before his sentence was carried out. Jesus picked Peter as a disciple for a purpose. Others choose Jesus, like the thief. Comparing Peter to the thief is like comparing Moses and Caleb. Or the Pharisees to Zechariahs. Apples and oranges.

 

[mailmandan]

If He truly is your foundation I suggest you listen to His words.

"Who ever believes and is baptized will be saved, whoever does not believe will be condemned." Mark 16:16

Listen to ALL of His words and not simply one half of one verse on the subject.

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned.

*The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. *NOWHERE does the Bible say "water baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

 

[gb9]

You don't know how long the thief was in prison before his sentence was carried out. Jesus picked Peter as a disciple for a purpose. Others choose Jesus, like the thief. Comparing Peter to the thief is like comparing Moses and Caleb. Or the Pharisees to Zechariahs. Apples and oranges.

and you do not know that the thief knew Christ before the Cross.

a wild card- perhaps the thief had heard Jesus speak at some point and BELIEVED Him. because, you know, that is what Jesus said of Himself. to believe in Him.

 

[kaylagrl]

Peter preached to those who had been saved by faith into the coming Messiah, but had not yet been identified with Jesus through immersion which is an identifier and outward sign of the inward conversion. It is to the N.T. what circumcision was to the old......a picture or painting as an identifier and states to the world that thru faith the old man is dead, buried with Christ and you have been resurrected a new creation in Christ Jesus...Peter is preaching to saved people and telling them to be identified with Christ through immersion....nothing more nothing less!

​THIS!!!!!.....

 

[kaylagrl]

I am not aware of if the thief on the cross was or was not baptized. How do you know for sure that he was not. As far as I can read the bible does not give an answer either way.

​He received salvation hanging on the cross!! Of course he wasn't baptized!! The Bible does give an answer. He is in heaven today and he was not baptized.