By faith alone or by faith and acting?

[Skandelon]

Luke,

You should be ashamed of yourself for this thread. You know full well that I believe that true saving faith alone saves. (by Grace through faith)

The question is whether the faith is alive or dead, as James addresses and others have brought up. Jesus says, "You will know them by their fruits." In other words, you will know those who have true saving faith by their actions/works. True saving faith WILL result in works, as I said in that last thread, but which you conveniently left out of your list of quotes.

People can believe something but choose not to follow. I know people who've been told by their doctor that if they keep smoking or eating fatty foods that they will die very soon, yet they choose to keep smoking and eating poorly. Is that because they really don't believe the doctor? Not necessarily. Some say they do believe him but they just don't want to sacrifice the pleasure. They don't want to give up their vice, just like the Rich Young Ruler didn't want to give up his wealth.

You make the assumption that if someone beleives the truth that they have to keep the truth and live by it, but the scripture clearly shows that they may choose to 'trade the truth in for a lie' and so grow defiled in their thinking and given over to their lusts. The scripture clearly teaches that people 'will perish because they refuse to love the truth and so be saved.' That is not my opinion Luke. It is what the Bible actually teaches.

Now, why don't you apologize to me and the board for suggesting that I believe in salvation by works and deal with my actual words.

 

[preacher4truth]

What about us regular Christians that are neither Calvinist nor Arminian?

I believe Cals and Arminians BOTH have it wrong. One side says salvation as a result of faith is irresistible, and the other says it's conditional.

John

Brother, do you know what irresistible grace means and actually teaches?

- Peace

 

[MB]

Faith alone means no works for salvation. It doesn't mean that there is no grace.

If it's faith alone it sure does. Not to mention that faith is a verb and being so it's self is an action. I heard so many Calvinist say that faith is a work and then now all of a sudden it isn't, go figure. I don't know of any one here who claims to work for there Salvation though the accusation of it is common practice. If you persevere or work to maintain your Salvation as in your doctrines then aren't you working for Salvation?

Besides How can one have faith to be saved by when most Calvinist believe they can't hear or understand until they are saved first. It just seems to me there are so many wholes in the doctrines of grace I'm supprized anyone believes any of it. Faith comes by hearing it isn't handed to us on a silver platter. Which seems to be another whole in it.

Regeneration still means to be saved. There fore when you claim to be regenerated first you are saying by regeneration alone because according to Calvinism, you can't have any faith until you are regenerated.

Maybe you could tell me why Calvinist never lable anything as they define it. Instead of claiming faith alone which relates it is completely alone. Why not just state it as it is. If grace is included then neither is alone these are two completely different things. If it includeds conviction and repentence that makes four and submission with out which you will not have any of it. Then to top it off It's all of God That makes 6 requirements for Salvation and faith is not alone.

It boggles the mind that Calvinist try to tell anyone else there doctrine is wrong. When nothing in there doctrine is supported by scripture. They refuse to define what they believe because it seems to me that way they can change it in an argument as in there claim that faith is a work.
MB

 

[Skandelon]

Interestingly enough, you posted this and several of those that agree with you immediately jumped on the band wagon in saying that these statements somehow say works are required for salvation.

But I read them, and I don't see that at all. I see people saying exactly what Aaron analogized: Where there's fire, there's smoke. Where there's no smoke, there's no fire.

It appears you've created a position regarding non-cals that doesn't exist. Well, except maybe for CrabtownBoy; he and I disagree on quite a few things, but mostly politics.

But I'll be happy to let the others speak for themselves to clarify their positions.

:applause::applause::applause: <---- I'm standing up too

 

[seekingthetruth]

Brother, do you know what irresistible grace means and actually teaches?

- Peace

Yes i do preacher, what is your point?

You guys believe that God forces faith and salvation on His elect without giving them a choice to deny it. Likewise you believe that if a person is not one of God's elect that they cannot seek after nor recieve the faith needed for salvation.

This is the main part of DoG that i oppose and believe to be unbiblical.

I also believe that Arminian theology is wrong because they teach that salvation is conditional.

This is why i am just a "regular Christian"

John

 

[preacher4truth]

Yes i do preacher, what is your point?

You guys believe that God forces faith and salvation on His elect without giving them a choice to deny it. Likewise you believe that if a person is not one of God's elect that they cannot seek after nor recieve the faith needed for salvation.

This is the main part of DoG that i oppose and believe to be unbiblical.

I also believe that Arminian theology is wrong because they teach that salvation is conditional.

This is why i am just a "regular Christian"

John

Bro, from what you say, you don't know what it teaches. The term "Irresistible Grace" is a bit misleading from what it actually affirms.

But I do agree with you that Arminian theology is errant, and was rightfully condemned.

Here is a thread I started on the subject. Note the vehement attacks against it, from those who had no clue as to what it teaches. Especially notice the very last comment.

Here is the link:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=73419

- Peace

 

[MB]

Bro, from what you say, you don't know what it teaches. The term "Irresistible Grace" is a bit misleading from what it actually affirms.

This I can agree with Irresistible grace is misleading. Though I am surprized a Calvinist would confess this as truth.

But I do agree with you that Arminian theology is errant, and was rightfully condemned.

Its in error because it came out of Calvinism. and Calvinism came out of Catholicism.
MB

 

[Amy.G]

This I can agree with Irresistible grace is misleading. Though I am surprized a Calvinist would confess this as truth.

Its in error because it came out of Calvinism. and Calvinism came out of Catholicism.
MB

I don't see any similarities between Calvinism and Catholicism.

 

[Winman]

Bro, from what you say, you don't know what it teaches. The term "Irresistible Grace" is a bit misleading from what it actually affirms.

The Calvinsit doctrine of Irresistible Grace is nothing but circular reasoning. If a person believes it was irresistible grace, if the person refuses to believe it was common or resistible grace. The name of the grace is determined by a person's reaction to it. How any intelligent person could be fooled by such an argument is beyond me, but obviously they can.

The scriptures do not show some men receive some special "effectual" or "irresistible" grace while others receive some powerless "common" grace. The grace that brings salvation has appeared to all men.

Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

 

[quantumfaith]

The Calvinsit doctrine of Irresistible Grace is nothing but circular reasoning. If a person believes it was irresistible grace, if the person refuses to believe it was common or resistible grace. The name of the grace is determined by a person's reaction to it. How any intelligent person could be fooled by such an argument is beyond me, but obviously they can.

The scriptures do not show some men receive some special "effectual" or "irresistible" grace while others receive some powerless "common" grace. The grace that brings salvation has appeared to all men.

Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[preacher4truth]

I don't see any similarities between Calvinism and Catholicism.

Amy, remember MB also claims Mormons, JW's, and those in other cults are saved if they believe in Jesus. Major problem; they have a different Jesus than that of the Scriptures.

Also, Calvinism is not synonymous with Catholicism. He doesn't know what he's talking about and simply parrots others of the same cloth.

 

[Skandelon]

The Calvinsit doctrine of Irresistible Grace is nothing but circular reasoning. If a person believes it was irresistible grace, if the person refuses to believe it was common or resistible grace. The name of the grace is determined by a person's reaction to it. How any intelligent person could be fooled by such an argument is beyond me, but obviously they can.

The scriptures do not show some men receive some special "effectual" or "irresistible" grace while others receive some powerless "common" grace. The grace that brings salvation has appeared to all men.

Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

This is very well stated Winman. I would like to know how a Calvinist reconciles this.

 

[slave 4 Christ]

[Skandelon]This is very well stated Winman. I would like to know how a Calvinist reconciles this.[/QUOTE]

By recognizing the entire context of Titus 2:11-14, which defines the parameters of the "all".

 

[Don]

I submit to you that a better answer, for both cals and non-cals to discuss, is the definition of the parameters of "all" defined in Romans 3:22-23. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God; but the righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ, is unto all and upon all them that believe.

 

[Luke2427]

Luke,

You should be ashamed of yourself for this thread. You know full well that I believe that true saving faith alone saves. (by Grace through faith)

Wrong. All I know is that you CLAIM to believe sola fide.

Your comments prove that at your core, perhaps unbeknownst to you, you do NOT believe it.

You believe, as you clearly said in the quotes I provided on the first page of this thread that one must ACT upon this faith.

You believe, at your core, in salvation by grace through faith plus some kind of ACTING.

I'm asking you to be honest with yourself and us and answer the question: What ACTS must you perform to be saved?

The question is whether the faith is alive or dead, as James addresses and others have brought up. Jesus says, "You will know them by their fruits." In other words, you will know those who have true saving faith by their actions/works. True saving faith WILL result in works, as I said in that last thread, but which you conveniently left out of your list of quotes.

The faith of devils is intrinsically deficient. Sufficient faith by its nature produces works.

If you are saying that works make faith alive somehow- that's VERY problematic too.

What Arminians seem to think is that you can come to believe upon the Lord Jesus Christ but your faith does not save you UNTIL YOU ACT UPON IT.

That is not sola fide any way you slice it.

People can believe something but choose not to follow.

More proof that you do not believe in sola fide.

TRUE FAITH CAUSES ONE TO FOLLOW.

If you have a faith that does not cause you to follow then you don't have REAL faith.

But it seems clear that you believe that a person can have REAL FAITH and not yet be saved. This person is only saved when, as you said several times, he "acts upon that faith."

In this context you apparently believe that salvation is by grace through faith PLUS FOLLOWING.

Those who cling to sola fide at their core believe salvation is by grace alone through faith alone and following is the inevitable result.

This is why Arminianism is unbiblical and soteriologically and philosophically illogical. The most common error that Arminians make is that salvation is by grace through faith plus CHOICE.

More specifically, they tend to make faith synonymous with choice. By doing so they totally redefine faith and make salvation come by grace through CHOICE.

The Calvinist believes salvation comes by grace through faith. The Arminian believes salvation comes by grace through choice.

The former is biblical. The latter is clearly not.

I know people who've been told by their doctor that if they keep smoking or eating fatty foods that they will die very soon, yet they choose to keep smoking and eating poorly. Is that because they really don't believe the doctor? Not necessarily. Some say they do believe him but they just don't want to sacrifice the pleasure. They don't want to give up their vice, just like the Rich Young Ruler didn't want to give up his wealth.

This illustration is further proof.

You see salvation coming to a man not as a result of his FAITH but as a result of his FAITH PLUS HIS ACTING UPON THAT FAITH.

 

[Luke2427]

Interestingly enough, you posted this and several of those that agree with you immediately jumped on the band wagon in saying that these statements somehow say works are required for salvation.

But I read them, and I don't see that at all. I see people saying exactly what Aaron analogized: Where there's fire, there's smoke. Where there's no smoke, there's no fire.

It appears you've created a position regarding non-cals that doesn't exist. Well, except maybe for CrabtownBoy; he and I disagree on quite a few things, but mostly politics.

But I'll be happy to let the others speak for themselves to clarify their positions.

I did not say these quotes show they believe in works salvation. I think they probably do, but I did not say that. I was making another point altogether.

These quotes show that these people do not believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone.

They show that these people believe is salvation by grace through faith PLUS ACTING UPON THAT FAITH.

The Bible confirms that you are saved by God's grace alone through faith alone and that any ACTS you perform HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR SALVATION. They are only the result of your salvation.

 

[Luke2427]

If it's faith alone it sure does. Not to mention that faith is a verb and being so it's self is an action.

Faith is a noun. Believe is a verb.

I heard so many Calvinist say that faith is a work and then now all of a sudden it isn't, go figure.

Name five. I bet you can't.

I don't know of any one here who claims to work for there Salvation though the accusation of it is common practice.

No one on here THINKS they believe that men must work for their salvation.

But at their core some DO believe that salvation comes by grace through faith PLUS...

This is clear from the various and numerous statements they make along these lines.

Besides How can one have faith to be saved by when most Calvinist believe they can't hear or understand until they are saved first.

Name a single Calvinist on earth that believes that.

I bet you can't.

It would be more honorable for you to actually know what you are talking about before you make these posts.

It just seems to me there are so many wholes in the doctrines of grace

I guess so- since you obviously don't know anything about the doctrines of grace as is clear from your statements in this post.

I'm supprized anyone believes any of it. Faith comes by hearing it isn't handed to us on a silver platter. Which seems to be another whole in it.

Another statement that indicates that you don't know what Calvinists believe.

I have never spoken to a Calvinist who believes that faith does NOT come by hearing the Word of God.

You don't know what you are talking about and I think you are in over your head in a debate along these lines.

Regeneration still means to be saved.

No it doesn't. It means to make alive.

There fore when you claim to be regenerated first you are saying by regeneration alone because according to Calvinism, you can't have any faith until you are regenerated.

Many Calvinists, like me and R. C. Sproul and Dr. Steve Lawson and I think the majority today believe that regeneration precedes faith and faith is necessary for salvation.

It boggles the mind that Calvinist try to tell anyone else there doctrine is wrong. When nothing in there doctrine is supported by scripture. They refuse to define what they believe because it seems to me that way they can change it in an argument as in there claim that faith is a work.
MB

It boggles my mind that you would be so deficient in your comprehension of these matters and still have the confidence to post anyway.

If you don't know that Calvinists believe that God uses means, like the Word of God so that faith comes by hearing, then you really ought not be swimming in the deep end yet.

Learn what Calvinist ACTUALLY believe before you call them unscriptural.

 

[Don]

I did not say these quotes show they believe in works salvation. I think they probably do, but I did not say that. I was making another point altogether.

These quotes show that these people do not believe in salvation by grace alone through faith alone.

They show that these people believe is salvation by grace through faith PLUS ACTING UPON THAT FAITH.

The Bible confirms that you are saved by God's grace alone through faith alone and that any ACTS you perform HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR SALVATION. They are only the result of your salvation.

As I said, I see nowhere that anyone has said differently; instead I see where these non-cals affirm that acts are exactly as you say: a result of salvation.

Perhaps I'm missing how you're interpreting their statements to mean that if there are no acts, then there is no faith, and thus, no salvation; and this somehow means that they're saying you must have acts to be saved.

 

[convicted1]

As I said, I see nowhere that anyone has said differently; instead I see where these non-cals affirm that acts are exactly as you say: a result of salvation.

Perhaps I'm missing how you're interpreting their statements to mean that if there are no acts, then there is no faith, and thus, no salvation; and this somehow means that they're saying you must have acts to be saved.

........................................... I goofed.........wrong post that Brother Don posted.......heheheheheh

 

[Luke2427]

As I said, I see nowhere that anyone has said differently; instead I see where these non-cals affirm that acts are exactly as you say: a result of salvation.

Perhaps I'm missing how you're interpreting their statements to mean that if there are no acts, then there is no faith, and thus, no salvation; and this somehow means that they're saying you must have acts to be saved.

I'll point it out one more time.

Skandelon post 134-
Any one can believe the truth, but saving faith is belief in action. It is the choice to act in accordance with what you believe.

Here he redefines faith and says that faith is not just trusting Christ but rather it is ACTING IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT YOU BELIEVE.

That could not be clearer, Don.