Denominational division

[Tom Butler]

Since nobody has yet told me what I must do to be unified with JSM17, and Methodists, and Presbyterians, I've been thinking about what I am willing to do.

In no particular order:

I am willing to give up musical instruments in worship. Although I do not believe the scriptures prohibit them, for the sake of unity and fellowship I will not insist on them.

I can fellowship in unity with those who hold to a different eschatology from mine. It is not a test of fellowship. I believe the position I hold is scriptural, but then I believed the position I formerly held was scriptural, too.

Although I believe the New Testament offices were Pastor (Elder, Bishop) and Deacon, I can fellowship with those churches who have pastors (or ministers/evangelists), elders and deacons.

My congregation observes the Lord's Supper quarterly, but I can easily go to weekly.

Although I am a Calvinist, I regularly and willingly fellowship with those who are not.

My ecclesiology strongly emphasizes the local church, and finds the so-called Universal Church a useless fantasy, I have not found that to be a barrier to fellowship and unity, at least on my part.

Despite my willingness to fellowship despite differences on the foregoing questions, I have now arrived at the deal-breaker.

I cannot have honest unity with one who holds to baptismal regeneration. It is a major divide over how one comes into a right relationship with God. It is a divide that cannot be bridged. Except, of course, the other side gives in and comes to my view.

But there are some things I'm willing to do. Okay, who's next?

 

[Darron Steele]

...

But there are some things I'm willing to do. Okay, who's next?

Me.

I will fellowship with anyone else whom Jesus Christ has accepted. This means that I will fellowship with any other Christians.

I will do as much as I can to serve Jesus Christ jointly with any other Christians serving the Lord to the best of their knowledge and ability. If we have disagreements, I will do my part to try to work around them, and will ignore them if they are irrelevant to the task at hand.

 

[JSM17]

Along that line, I would like to see your answer to this question:
What are YOU willing to do in order to get and maintain unity in Jesus Christ's church?
It is my experience that in the Churches of Christ, the common idea is that `everyone else' needs to do something -- but `never, ever' adherents of the Churches of Christ except proselytize.

The burden for unity is on `everyone else.' The adherents of the Churches of Christ are doing `just fine.' The commands telling Christians to have and maintain unity and not divide are to `everyone else.' Therefore, I would like to see you in your own words:
Is there anything that YOU need to do for unity besides proselytize and `just keep thinking and doing as I already think and do'?

I need to be less judgemental about people who do not think like I do.

However I will not bend or lean in areas that I believe are true although I investigate my positions on a regular basis.

I do not believe in salvation by faith alone and do not see the scriptures teaching that. It is amazing that people see that, when it is so plain that faith in and of itself cannot save.

It is all in how we define those in Christ, whether they be in Christ or not. The only way for a christian and a non-christian to have unity is for the non christian to come to a saving faith and to be washed by the blood of Christ.

Whereas many on this forum believe they are washed by His blood through faith alone, whereas I do not believe that, and the bible does not teach that.

The reason why we have so many denominations is because so many have diverted from the truth, if there is one truth and God gave us that one truth then who are we to think that we have 30 different truths that all lead to heaven. Now its ok for the hiarchy of a denominational group to ordain gays and to kill babies, because its more important to be sensative to the wants of the people instead of standing for the truth.

Its all a diversion from truth. If we cannot see the changes from the early centuries and then the attempts (reformation)to find the way back (restoration) yet still holding to strange ideas that are not biblical then there will always be denominations.

Is Christ divided? As for opinions or scruples, this is not what we are talking about. We are talking about doctrine, the gospel, which is more that just faith alone.

 

[FlyForFun]

I do not believe in salvation by faith alone and do not see the scriptures teaching that. It is amazing that people see that, when it is so plain that faith in and of itself cannot save.

It is all in how we define those in Christ, whether they be in Christ or not. The only way for a christian and a non-christian to have unity is for the non christian to come to a saving faith and to be washed by the blood of Christ.

Whereas many on this forum believe they are washed by His blood through faith alone, whereas I do not believe that, and the bible does not teach that.

What do you do with Ephesians 2?

2:8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

 

[annsni]

I need to be less judgemental about people who do not think like I do.

However I will not bend or lean in areas that I believe are true although I investigate my positions on a regular basis.

I do not believe in salvation by faith alone and do not see the scriptures teaching that. It is amazing that people see that, when it is so plain that faith in and of itself cannot save.

It is all in how we define those in Christ, whether they be in Christ or not. The only way for a christian and a non-christian to have unity is for the non christian to come to a saving faith and to be washed by the blood of Christ.

Whereas many on this forum believe they are washed by His blood through faith alone, whereas I do not believe that, and the bible does not teach that.

The reason why we have so many denominations is because so many have diverted from the truth, if there is one truth and God gave us that one truth then who are we to think that we have 30 different truths that all lead to heaven. Now its ok for the hiarchy of a denominational group to ordain gays and to kill babies, because its more important to be sensative to the wants of the people instead of standing for the truth.

Its all a diversion from truth. If we cannot see the changes from the early centuries and then the attempts (reformation)to find the way back (restoration) yet still holding to strange ideas that are not biblical then there will always be denominations.

Is Christ divided? As for opinions or scruples, this is not what we are talking about. We are talking about doctrine, the gospel, which is more that just faith alone.

This shows that I could not, in any way, worship with you because, from my view of Scripture, when you add in works to a requirement of salvation as I've seen in some religions, then you do not have Biblical salvation. I cannot compromise on that.

 

[Darron Steele]

...

It is all in how we define those in Christ, whether they be in Christ or not.

We do not define those in Christ -- He does.

Acts 11:26 “the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch” (NASB). Greek translated “disciples” is also translated “followers” (ICB) and is plural for Greek meaning “one who follows one’s teachings.”*

It is that simple. If a person fits that criteria, s/he is a Christian. We do not get to redefine "Christian" to `someone who follows Christ's teachings and who agrees with my most valued precepts and denies my most hated precepts.'

If a person fits the Bible meaning of the Bible term "Christian" then s/he is a Christian -- period.

The only way for a christian and a non-christian to have unity is for the non christian to come to a saving faith and to be washed by the blood of Christ.

We are not talking about unity between non-Christians and Christians.

Non-Christians are not in the church. The passages calling for the church to not divide and to maintain unity cannot refer to them.

The reason why we have so many denominations is because so many have diverted from the truth,
...
Its all a diversion from truth. If we cannot see the changes from the early centuries and then the attempts (reformation)to find the way back (restoration) yet still holding to strange ideas that are not biblical then there will always be denominations....

I look at it another way.

As long as there are factious people who will insist upon dividing against any Christians who will not be brought to agree with them `enough,' there will continue to be divisions in the church.

The reason why we have divisions "is because so many have diverted from the truth." The truth is that Christians are to resist factious lusts and strive to maintain unity. Ephesians 4:2-3 says “Be humble and gentle. Be patient with each other, making allowances for each other’s faults because of your love|; giving diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (NLT 1996|ASV). Many Christians refuse to do this. They insist that it is right to divide against any Christians they perceive to be mistaken, or at least `too mistaken for me.'

There will always be denominations because in many cases, union is not realistic. Sometimes, it is not religious disagreement that keeps union from happening -- sometimes, it is that a huge mess would be involved. If a merge would cause people to lose their livelihoods and retirements, and waste oodles of resources, and would distract church groups from service and evangelism, I am opposed to the merge. Union is not always possible -- unity is always possible.

As denominations continue to learn and accept the Bible's real teachings on unity, they become less and less divisions. Their adherents and congregations cooperate and fellowship together as occasion allows.

Those who insist upon division refuse to accept the Bible's real teachings on unity. They insist `If those Christians will not correct their mistakes, and will not agree with us enough to satisfy us, we will have nothing positive to do with them, and we are in the right by dividing against them.' As long as we have substantial numbers of people who insist such, we will have division.

_____
*Vine, et al, Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary, page 171 NT.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

What do you do with Ephesians 2?

2:8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

This shows that I could not, in any way, worship with you because, from my view of Scripture, when you add in works to a requirement of salvation as I've seen in some religions, then you do not have Biblical salvation. I cannot compromise on that.

I don't know too much about what the CoC believes, but I will say that with the Orthodox Church, our theology is much less based on a forensic approach to the atonement. We still tend to concentrate much more on the Christus Victor approach toward the atonement as our primary model of understanding. Because we do, works do not play as much of a part in the argument over atonement as they do in the post-Augustinian West.

Some of the problem I see is of definition, and, if I can control the definition, I can win the debate. For the Protestant West, no work is pure, therefore no work is acceptable, by definition. Philosophical arguments are made about intentions, unexpected results, etc., to prove that none of our works is perfect. That is coupled with the Romans verse on “filthy rags.” However, as even Luther points out, the place of works before and after salvation is different. There is quite a bit of merit to the quotation from Luther about the difference between a dead faith and a living faith.

What would separates the Orthodox Church from both Roman Catholic and Protestants, is that a Christian may please God and his works may be accepted by Him, first it is necessary that he have faith in God and then he must form his life according to this faith.

Like Protestants, faith is necessary first. Salvation is by grace through faith, not by works, Roman Catholic will miss this point. St. James’ phrase on justification by works is not equated to forensic justification but to a twofold of faith and conscience. But, we are then called to form our life. If we fail to do this, then we do make a shipwreck concerning the faith. The Orthodox would tend to say that Protestants miss the second part. By defining all works as intrinsically impure they make a tautology that blocks out a correct balance. The Orthodox approach is medicinal. Works are the medicine for our soul, which begins to form us and heal us of our sin in a practical way. Works are not forensic, but medicinal. That is a very major difference. But, there is a warning to those who fail to take their medicine that their disease may ravage them to the point of great loss, like he who had only one talent and would not even invest it.

I have a friend that moonlights as a professor of philosophy at our local university, he mentioned one evening that many of the atheists he knows “don’t want grace” because they recognize the responsibility that accompanies it; my thought is, too bad many professing Christians fail to see that responsibility.

This discussion of faith/works reminds me that there are passages where belief and obedience are synonymous (or belief and disobedience are antonyms). If belief that saves includes only three elements (knowledge, assent, confidence), then it is hard to explain how pisteuo (believe) and apeitho (disobey) can be antonyms. There are at least two places in the New Testament where “belief” and “disobedience” are contrasted, and these show convincingly that the faith that saves includes obedience as one of its constituent elements. And there is one passage where “unbelief” and “disobedience” are synonymous. (Heb 3:18,19) The faith that saves (the opposite of “unbelief”) must include obedience (the opposite of disobedience).

Then there are the passages that speak of the “obedience of faith” which show that there is an obedience that belongs to the very essence of faith. Such language has been met in Acts 6:7, and also appears twice in Rom, which gives help toward knowing what the faith is on the condition of which a man is justified. (Rom 1:5; 16:26) Peter too talks about how his readers have purified their souls by obedience to the truth, (1 Peter 1:22) and Peter throughout his letters shows the close connection between obedience and forgiveness. (See 1 Peter 1:2; 3:1; 4:17; 2 Peter 1:1. [See also 1Thes 1:8 and Rom 10:5 for other evidences that obedience is involved in a man's faith.]) If there is an obedience that belongs to the very essence of faith, the faith that saves must involve obedience to what God requires.

In XC
-

 

[JSM17]

What do you do with Ephesians 2?

2:8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Since everyone seems to like this one passage a lot, then maybe someone could explain to me how they get salvation through or by faith alone, of course assuming that this passage is saying that it is by our subjective faith alone that saves us along with God grace. Then if it is all God's grace and no part of man then how does faith come into play, is it by grace alone or faith alone or the obvious contradition of the saying "BY grace alone and faith alone", which is like saying that I am in a room alone with Bob alone and Jimmy alone and mark alone.

I would like someone to show me how this verse teaches salvation by faith alone.

 

[FlyForFun]

Since everyone seems to like this one passage a lot, then maybe someone could explain to me how they get salvation through or by faith alone, of course assuming that this passage is saying that it is by our subjective faith alone that saves us along with God grace. Then if it is all God's grace and no part of man then how does faith come into play, is it by grace alone or faith alone or the obvious contradition of the saying "BY grace alone and faith alone", which is like saying that I am in a room alone with Bob alone and Jimmy alone and mark alone.

I would like someone to show me how this verse teaches salvation by faith alone.

You refuse to remove the straw man and deal with the clear teaching of Scripture.

Since this passage is so unclear, pray tell us what it means?

 

[JSM17]

This shows that I could not, in any way, worship with you because, from my view of Scripture, when you add in works to a requirement of salvation as I've seen in some religions, then you do not have Biblical salvation. I cannot compromise on that.

22Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls for a sincere love of the brethren, fervently love one another from the heart,

23for you have been born again not of seed which is perishable but imperishable, that is, through the living and enduring word of God.

Obedience is a work.

17But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed,

"And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him."

And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation,

according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.

For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?

dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.

"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

You were running well; who hindered you from obeying the truth?

 

[Salty]

Since nobody has yet told me what I must do to be unified with JSM17, and Methodists, and Presbyterians, I've been thinking about what I am willing to do. ... In no particular order: ...But there are some things I'm willing to do. Okay, who's next?

Interesting question - I have started a thread in the Baptist only section.... that, come over and see

 

[Tom Butler]

I found that thread before I saw your post. Thanks for the heads-up.

 

[JSM17]

You refuse to remove the straw man and deal with the clear teaching of Scripture.

Since this passage is so unclear, pray tell us what it means?

What is the straw man that you refer to?

All I asked is for you to explain how this verse teaches salvation by faith alone.

 

[Marcia]

All I asked is for you to explain how this verse teaches salvation by faith alone.

I copied something I posted on the "Can the CoC Be Christian" thread:

Baptism is often compared to OT circumcision. God takes pains to show us that Abraham was saved before his circumcision - there is no outward act that is part of salvation.

Romans 4
3For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 4Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due.
5But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,
6just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
7"BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN,
AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED.
8"BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT."
9Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, "FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS."
10How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised

Rom. 4 explains how Abraham was saved by faith prior to circumcision.

Faith is not an outward act such as baptism or circumcision. The Bible contrasts faith with outward acts such as works.

 

[JSM17]

20because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.21But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction;

Paul has been showing how justification does not come from the Law but from faith. That is why he shows how Abraham was justified by faith and not from the works of the Law. Even David was not justified by the works of the Law. But both Abraham and David were justified by faith in Christ. But faith all by itself, or faith alone did not save.


James 2:21Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?

22You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;

23and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS," and he was called the friend of God.

24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Faith is perfected in obedience. The passage says that Abraham was reckoned righteous when he believed and obeyed.

The same scripture reference is used here as well so it must be viewed along with the other references dealing with justification.

Even going back to when God first spoke to Abraham, if he would not have gone out to the land that God told him to go then Abrahams faith would have been dead, it would have not justified him.

Hebrews 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going.

This was before Gen. 15, so if Abraham would have not acted on his faith in God of the things He told him, then he would have never been counted as righteous in Gen. 15.

Gal 3:5 So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?

6Even so Abraham BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.

Again Paul contrasts the works of the Law with faith, just as he did in Romans 4.

It is clear that an obedient faith is what justified Abraham, not faith alone.


Now I asked about Ephesians 2:8, show me how that text implies or directly teaches salvation by faith alone.

 

[annsni]

Now I asked about Ephesians 2:8, show me how that text implies or directly teaches salvation by faith alone.

If you cannot read the clear teaching of Scripture and see what it says even after it's been explained, then we cannot help you. It is only through the Holy Spirit that we can understand so seek Him.

 

[Darron Steele]

If you cannot read the clear teaching of Scripture and see what it says even after it's been explained, then we cannot help you. It is only through the Holy Spirit that we can understand so seek Him.

I suggest this is less about "cannot read the clear teaching" and more about `refuse to accept the clear teachings of Scripture.'

I mean, he was shown Ephesians 2:8, and Ephesians 2:9 denies something else s/he teaches, which is `salvation by faith and its subsequent works' = salvation by works. Ephesians 2:10 shows that works of faith come after salvation's regeneration, and not before.

S/he has been shown this passage many times. There is no inference made on the passage. It says exactly what it says, and what it says is totally incompatible with what s/he insists. I would say s/he just refuses to accept that it is so.

S/he has expressed a low opinion of faith several times. S/he seems to think that faith has any significant meaning or value, and cannot stand the idea that people would be saved on the basis of it.

Based on the posts s/he has made, s/he just cannot seem to stand the idea that Jesus Christ will save anyone who would earnestly serve Him. S/he only wants to accept that such a person can be saved if s/he does something to get salvation; s/he wants Heaven to be the reward for `achievers.' Show JSM17 a passage such as this, which directly negates what s/he teaches, and s/he does the `how does it say that?'

 

[Marcia]

20because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin.21But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
22even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction;

Paul has been showing how justification does not come from the Law but from faith. That is why he shows how Abraham was justified by faith and not from the works of the Law. Even David was not justified by the works of the Law. But both Abraham and David were justified by faith in Christ. But faith all by itself, or faith alone did not save.


James 2:21Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?

You do not seem to realize that justified in the Bible does not always mean justified as righteous. James 2:21 is stating that Abraham's faith was justified when he offered up Isaac - he revealed his faith through this act.

22You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;

23and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS," and he was called the friend of God.

24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Faith is perfected in obedience. The passage says that Abraham was reckoned righteous when he believed and obeyed.

It is saying that Abraham's works proved his faith but his works had nothing to do with salvation. Otherwise, you have a case here of the Bible contradiciting itself since the passage I posted, and other passages, clearly teach one is saved by faith alone.

Even going back to when God first spoke to Abraham, if he would not have gone out to the land that God told him to go then Abrahams faith would have been dead, it would have not justified him.

We do things out of faith; faith produces works but works do not save anyone.

Hebrews 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going.

This was before Gen. 15, so if Abraham would have not acted on his faith in God of the things He told him, then he would have never been counted as righteous in Gen. 15.

See what I wrote above.

It is clear that an obedient faith is what justified Abraham, not faith alone

.

You are wrong.

Now I asked about Ephesians 2:8, show me how that text implies or directly teaches salvation by faith alone

It's what it says.

 

[JSM17]

If you cannot read the clear teaching of Scripture and see what it says even after it's been explained, then we cannot help you. It is only through the Holy Spirit that we can understand so seek Him.

Eph 2:8-9

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.
NKJV

Does it say through faith alone?
Does it say not of all works?
Which is not of yourselves, Grace or faith?
If faith is a gift of God is it not of yourselves as well?
Is faith here talking about your faith or the faith?

You do not seem to realize that justified in the Bible does not always mean justified as righteous. James 2:21 is stating that Abraham's faith was justified when he offered up Isaac - he revealed his faith through this act.

You do not seem to realize that justified in the Bible does not always mean justified as righteous. James 2:21 is stating that Abraham's faith was justified when he offered up Isaac - he revealed his faith through this act.


JUSTIFICATION, JUSTIFIER, JUSTIFY
dikaiosis NT:1347 denotes the act of pronouncing righteous, justification, acquittal"; its precise meaning is determined by that of the verb dikaioo, "to justify"
(from Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Copyright (c)1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers)

It is saying that Abraham's works proved his faith but his works had nothing to do with salvation. Otherwise, you have a case here of the Bible contradiciting itself since the passage I posted, and other passages, clearly teach one is saved by faith alone.

What other passages?

24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Justified means to be right before God.

We do things out of faith; faith produces works but works do not save anyone.

Works like repentance?

It is clear that an obedient faith is what justified Abraham, not faith alone

You are wrong.

Heb 5:9

9 And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him,
NKJV

Is faith alone the only obedience that God requires? Of course faith is not a work so we can't really obey Him through faith if it relies on us right? Thats your implication is it not?

Quote:
Now I asked about Ephesians 2:8, show me how that text implies or directly teaches salvation by faith alone

It's what it says.

Back to the questions at the start of the post.

 

[JSM17]

Quote:
Originally Posted by annsni
If you cannot read the clear teaching of Scripture and see what it says even after it's been explained, then we cannot help you. It is only through the Holy Spirit that we can understand so seek Him.

I suggest this is less about "cannot read the clear teaching" and more about `refuse to accept the clear teachings of Scripture.'

I mean, he was shown Ephesians 2:8, and Ephesians 2:9 denies something else s/he teaches, which is `salvation by faith and its subsequent works' = salvation by works. Ephesians 2:10 shows that works of faith come after salvation's regeneration, and not before.

S/he has been shown this passage many times. There is no inference made on the passage. It says exactly what it says, and what it says is totally incompatible with what s/he insists. I would say s/he just refuses to accept that it is so.

S/he has expressed a low opinion of faith several times. S/he seems to think that faith has any significant meaning or value, and cannot stand the idea that people would be saved on the basis of it.

Based on the posts s/he has made, s/he just cannot seem to stand the idea that Jesus Christ will save anyone who would earnestly serve Him. S/he only wants to accept that such a person can be saved if s/he does something to get salvation; s/he wants Heaven to be the reward for `achievers.' Show JSM17 a passage such as this, which directly negates what s/he teaches, and s/he does the `how does it say that?'

Its "he" Darron, just so you don't have to keep typing "S/he".

The definite article is found before faith in the Greek, showing that the faith, or the gospel, is meant.

Actually the Majority text teaches me that faith in Ephesians 2:8 does not refer to subjective faith, it is not of yourselves, it is the faith that saves in the context, the gospel. Not of works is in reference to it "Faith" not being of yourselves it is a gift from God, that is Grace and the faith, which non of us merit through boastful works.

Luke 17:10

10 So likewise you, when you have done all those things which you are commanded, say, 'We are unprofitable servants. We have done what was our duty to do.'"
NKJV