Featured Pardon by Grace or by Works?

Examine what you said. "Faith takes an act of the will."
Is that a definition of "work"?
Work is something that one "does," can DO, can be paid for, is acted upon, etc.
What acts of the will, will you pay me for if I become your employee. What is DOING faith? I can do baptizing. It is something that is done by man, and an act received by man. It is a work of man. The different religious rites are acts or works. Communion is something that man does. A man gives it. A man receives it, actively. He takes it and eats it or drinks it. It is a work. Some people get paid for eating. How many get paid for "having faith"? What kind of "work" is it? Would you, as my employer, pay me for "having faith"?

They had to look in faith. The mere looking was not good enough. They had to look believing in the action of looking that they would be healed.
Remember: Even the demons believe and tremble.
They could not look in the same way that demons do.
They had to look in faith believing that they would be healed.
Faith is not a work. No one can pay you for having faith. It does not fall in the category of work. It cannot be defined as a work. It is an intangible.

 

Are you kidding? What do you think happened to a Jew who was not circumcised? They were cut off.

 

We do not live in the OT. We live under grace in the NT.
What tribe do you belong to?

 

I would say it is an INTERNAL CONDITION of the heart rather than any EXTERNAL action. It RECEIVES rather than GIVES. Therefore, in that sense it is PASSIVE in regard to action but RESTS upon the object of faith.

 

You say false stuff, and then when you are corrected, you say it does not matter. All of the Truth matters.

Acknowledge the truth. Those in the Old Testament HAD to do works of the law to be able to be called children of God. They had to be circumcised; they had to observe special days; they had to have various ceremonial washings; they had to give sin offerings, and sacrifices just to worship God. JUST TO WORDHIP GOD.

Living under grace does not mean I get to do any evil I want and never stop. God does not even elect, or choose whom He will save unless He first accepts them from knowing their heart, after they obey.

 

Saved versus lost has to do with the INTERNAL spiritual condition of an individual whether they lived before or after Calvary. Cain participated in the sacrificial system as he offered up the fruits of his own labors and they were rejected. Thus participation in the sacrificial system had no effect upon the spiritual condition of the participants.


Like all external ordinances they were EXTERNAL to the spiritual condition of the participant. Abel participated in the sacrificial system not in order to have his spritual condition changed from lost to saved but as a witness that he was already righteous by faith in what the offered lamb symbolized, thus obtaining n EXTERNAL witness of his internal faith or justified condition before God. Hence, he did not particapte in order to be saved but because he was saved and it merely gave external witness to an already internal righteous spiritual condition.

Heb. 11:4 ¶ By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he WAS righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

Hebrews 10:1-4 speak directly to the efficasiousness of the sacrificial system denying that participation in these EXTERNAL ordinances ever could deal with INTERNAL sin:

Heb. 10:1 ¶ For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2 For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. 3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Therefore participation in the EXTERNAL sacrificial system and/or any EXTERNAL ordinances could not deal with the INTERNAL conscience defiled by sin or ever remove the sins that defiled the conscience.

Instead, it was designed to be an EXTERNAL WITNESS of "things to come" that are fully described immediately in verses 5-18 or the Person and work of Jesus Christ which alone was the proper object of faith, which faith secured the remission of sins between Genesis and the cross:

Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

Hence, the same gospel was PREACHED in between Genesis and the cross that was preached after the cross only that faith looked forward to the cross as we look back:

Heb. 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

In regard to external divine ordinances Paul demands that justification by faith was already obtained PRIOR TO participation in such divine ordinances:

Rom. 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

Hence, NO EXTERNAL ordinance or NO PARTICIPATION in external ordinances procure INTERNAL change of spiritual status before God. External ordinances are only for obtaining an EXTERNAL WITNESS that the internal spiritual condition is ALREADY right with God.

Roman Catholicism and most other sacramentalists define "sacrament" as "1127 Celebrated worthily in faith, the sacraments confer the grace that they signify. They are efficasious because in them Christ himself is at work; it is he who baptizes, he who acts in his sacraments in order to communicate the grace that each sacrament signifies" - Catholic Catechism, Second Edition, p. 292

The Roman Catholic Catechism also states that Old Testament Circumcision was a sacrament in the Old Testament and the circumcision of Christ - "This sign prefigures that 'circumcision of Christ' which is Baptism" - Ibid. p. 133

Rome teaches that sacraments are "signs" and "seals" of the very thing they signifiy.

Paul responds directly to this kind of reasoning in regard to circumcision being a "sign" and "seal" of justification in Romans 4:11. If you take the passage from verses 9-12 and replace the word "circumcision" with "baptism" or "baptized" and replace the words "uncirumcision" and "uncircumcised" with "unbaptized" or "without baptism" as follows, then you will clearly see the Roman Catholic, as well as, the whole sacramental view is completely repudiated by Paul:

Romans 4:9 ¶ Cometh this blessedness then upon the BAPTIZED only, or upon the UNBAPTIZED also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
10 How was it then reckoned? when he was BAPTIZED, or WITHOUT BAPTISM? Not in BAPTISM, but WITHOUT BAPTISM.
11 And he received the sign of BAPTISM, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being UNBAPTIZED: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not BAPTIZED; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
12 And the father of BAPTISM to them who are not of the BAPTIZED only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet WITHOUT BAPTISM.

The above exchange of words from "circumcision" and "uncircumcision" to "baptized" and "unbaptized" was purely to illustrate how the Roman Catholic definition of sacrament when applied to circumcision as a type of baptism fails.

CONCLUSION: External ordinances are never used by God to convey or change the internal spiritual condition of man. They simply are external signs and seals that obtain the external witness of what they already have obtained by faith. Significantly, since they are external signs and seals of what has already been obtained internally, the language of redemption is applied to them. So in the Old Testament we find the language of redemption directly applied to such ordinances. For example, the people of God are told to offer up such sacrifices "for sin" and "for thy cleansing." Luke 5:12-15 demonstrate this application of redemptive language but proves that actual cleansing was obtained PRIOR TO ceremonial cleansing. Therefore it is perfectly in keeping with God's redemptive langauge in the Old Testament that the very things that externally signify and are signs of justification, remission of sins, internal regeneration accompany the langauge of redemption "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" "arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins" etc. The external act saves, remits sins FIGURATIVELY as a sign and seal and thus "the like FIGURE whereunto even baptism doth also now save us" - 1 Pet. 3:21

 

What is so humerous about your post is that you are describing yourself and Moriah in perfect detail and you do not even know it.

You cannot respond to the Bibilcal evidence I presented in my post and so you philosophize and make slanderous accusations which humerously are descriptive of you both.

Try to deal with the Biblical evidence presented for a change. Now that would be refreshing!

 

Let me answer in kind. Moriah:

You say false stuff, and then when you are corrected, you say it does not matter. All of the Truth matters.
Acknowledge the truth. Those in the OT HAD to do the works of the law required by Moses. They had to be circumcised; had to observe special days; had to have various ceremonial washings; had to give sin offerings, and sacrifices in worship to God.
But all of that did not make them saved. It did not guarantee their salvation.
Living under grace does not mean I get to do any evil I want and never stop.

God called out the nation of Israel in the OT.
God is calling out a nation of believers in the NT.
The two are very distinct, and it doesn't have to do with Calvinism.

 

If they looked without believing they would not have been healed. Faith was the key.

Israel was a nation, a theocracy. The sign of the covenant between Israel and Jehovah was circumcision. We have no such covenant that corresponds. Each individual must enter into a personal relationship with Christ. They don't become a Christian by birth, or by being born into a "Christian family." In the OT, they became a Jew by birth, and it was sealed outwardly by circumcision. You can circumcise your children, but it won't make them Jews, neither will it make them Christians.

 

Acknowledge the truth. Those in the Old Testament HAD to do works of the law to be able to be called children of God. They had to be circumcised; they had to observe special days; they had to have various ceremonial washings; they had to give sin offerings, and sacrifices just to worship God. JUST TO WORDHIP GOD. - Moriah

My post was in direct response to the above statement by Moriah. Moriah does understand that pardon by works is inseparably tied to ones view of divine ordinances. Neither of you can respond intelligently to my post and so you stoop to this kind of demogogory.

You cannot deal with pardon by works versus grace without dealing with the Biblical reason for the institution of the sacrificial system and divine ordinances.

So, why don't you come back to the OP and deal with the Biblical evidence I presented if you are able???

 

They heard. They believed in faith.
Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.
One must have a message to believe in before they have faith.
It is the object of the faith that is important.
They were given instruction. They must put their faith in what God tells them to do--looking at the serpent on the pole. Then they would be healed. It still is a matter of faith.

Hardly. Salvation is by faith alone.
Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.
The message of salvation must be heard.
Faith has an object. The object of one's faith must be Christ and his work.
If your faith is in baptism, obedience, or any other work, you CANNOT be saved. Christ alone saves. He must be the object of your faith. Thus one is saved by faith alone, and not of works.

 

I answered that question directly in post #8 in here was your response in post #9

Biblicist, God instituted a sacrificial system in the OT. Was that a system of salvation by works?

I answered that response in Post 20 and 26 and here is your response:

Biblicist, the OP is not about outward ordinances What would be refreshing is if you would address the OP and the question I raised directly and quit posting rabbit trails in every other direction


Go figure! You gave no substantive response to any post I gave although the readers can easily see my posts were very substantive and detailed.

The same gospel preached in the Old Testament is the same gospel preached to us as Hebrew 4:2 explicitly and clearly states. The only difference is they looked forward to the cross and we look back and the gospel was progressive in revelation until it was fulfilled in the cross.