• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

How Do The RCC/orthodox Churches Fit Ephesians 2:8-9 Into their theologies?

Bro. James

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I get thinkingsuff's point...

If we are are saved by an instantaneous expression of faith and no further actions are required - such as avoiding sin and loving God and our neighbor...

On what basis would God say "Well done"?

If Jesus is not saying, "I do not know you" to such an individual who would He say it to?
Jesus said, "I have never known you, depart from me you that work iniquity." Even though they had done many great things in His Name, they were lost, never having been born again. The point is: good works are an indicator of salvation--we are saved unto good works which God has before ordained that we should walk in them--Eph. 2. This is part of the teaching of election and pre-destination with which many are having trouble. See Eph. 1-4. Notice God's good will and pleasure. This also helps explain the "L" in TULIP. No, I am not a Calvinist. I put an S on TULIP--S is for Secured/Sealed. No man can pluck them out.

Salvation is of the Lord. So is holiness. He is trying to make us holy--we let our flesh get in the way. Notice the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. He was converted on the road to Damascus. The Lord had to give Paul a lot of personal instruction to get him sanctified.

There are many in high places religiously who have not been born again. Are they working hard? For sure. Are lost? The Lord knows them that are His. The others He does not know. Many have repeat after me salvation.

Peace,

Bro. James
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Yeshua1

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Here is your first problem. I didn't make it a two step program. I broke down the condition of the man specifically two aspects of that man to explain a view. So the entirety of the rest of your post is a non-sequitur. And as such you aren't really responding to what I've said. You are just taking an oportunity to preach your view. You niether answer what I said and you go off on a tangent.

faith in yeshua produces a new nature in Him, receipt of the Holy Spirit, and the desire to walk in a fashion pleasing our heavenly father!

That we continue to sin is NOT a sign not saved, its that we are not a finished product until we are glorified in him!

We have the free will chose after saved by god to walk in the Spirit and have good fruit, or walk in old ways/flesh, and have rotton spoils...

God has redeemed us to be able to walk in victory!
 

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
faith in yeshua produces a new nature in Him, receipt of the Holy Spirit, and the desire to walk in a fashion pleasing our heavenly father!
You cannot even have faith in Yeshua hamashiach, save you recieved grace from God first. And you can't even walk in a fashion pleasing to God unless you have chosen to accept Yeshua Hamashiach and the faith he provides.

That we continue to sin is NOT a sign not saved
Its a sign that you disobey him. Though I agree it doesn't necissarily mean you'll go to hell. However, disobey him long enough and frequently enough and you'll not only grieve the Holy Spirit, you'll strangle the new man.

We have the free will chose after saved by god to walk in the Spirit and have good fruit, or walk in old ways/flesh, and have rotton spoils...
Yes we do. Keep that always in mind when speaking about Catholic Theology. However, I must ask you having the free will to walk in the spirit or not what happens if you consistently choose not and never choose to do so?

God has redeemed us to be able to walk in victory!
Exactly!!!! Unlike before where sin was not optional but manditory due to our nature. Jesus Christ gives himself to us that we might live righteously before him "God has shown thee oh man what good and what the Lord requires of thee. To do Justly, to live Rightly, and to walk humbly with thy God." But in order to be victorious you must walk not sit and do nothing but live the divine life God gave you.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Here is our first problem. This is not a two step program in God's Word. If you look at Ephesians 2:1-10 the subject is quickening the spiritually dead man. Verse 1 states the fact while verses 2-3 explain what they were prior to quickening. If you will kindly study those previous attributes listed in verses 2-3 that is what is changed by quickening:

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others
.

In verse 5 it is again asserted they were quickened with a brief summary explanation that quickening is a past tense "savED" by grace experience:

5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

The added explanation here is instructional. This quickening was "with Christ" or as it is later stated in verse 10 it is a work only God can do "his workmanship" as it requires a CREATIVE act or "created IN CHRIST." However, here in verse 5 Paul introduces this completed work "with Christ" as a work that is accomplished "by grace ye are savED")

Verse 8 Paul continues this same description of quickening as a work in connection with Christ but expands upon it a little further - "For by grace are ye saved THROUGH faith."

Hence, he has now asserted twice it is a completed work "savED" and it is the work of God "with Christ" and accomplished "by grace." However in this second instance he expounds upon the meaning of grace by contrast and then explains why it must be accomplished solely by God.

This work of quickening is through faith rather than how you have explained it in a two step method. It is not quickened and then followed by faith but it is a finished work ("savED") that includes faith as it is accomplished "THROUGH FAITH." This work of God is then asserted to be "and that not of yourselves for it is a GIFT of God" The Greek preposition "ek" with the negative particle absolutely denies that this "saved" work of God includes human participation as it is "a gift" from God "and not of works, lest any man should boast."

Now, significantly the phrase "not of works" speaks of works originating from "ourselves" prior to quickening while "unto good works" in verse 10 speaks of works originating out of ourselves after quickening.

Faith fits NEITHER category! It is not "of works" prior to quckening OR part of "good works" after quickening but is inclusive as God's "workmanship" and his CREATIVE work of quckening as "faith" occurs "by grace are ye SAVED THROUGH FAITH" - This is the "workmanship of God" or being "CREATED IN CHRIST JESUS" just as vers 5 describes quickening as being "WITH CHRIST."

Bottom line - faith does not originate in and of man but is a creative work of God in the act of quickening which is the past tense "savED" state of man.

Now, this does not occur in baptism for a very obvious reason. Look again at verses 2-3 which show the past tense prior to quickening whereas faith is inseparably involved in the creative work of God in quickening.

You cannot possibly say that verses 2-3 describe the condition of the person being baptized. Hence baptism cannot possibly be the modus operandi for quickening.

Are you going to tell us that just prior to water being applied to the candidate for baptism that such a candidate is aptly described presently as one:

1. Still walking after the course of the world at the point of baptism?
2. Still having Satan working in him at the point of baptism?
3. Still a child of disobedience at the point of baptism?

Ephesians 4:18 also describes additional characteristics of the person still separated from "the life of God." Are you going to tell us that at the point of baptism such descriptions still characterize the candidate?? Look at them:

18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: \19 Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

1. Still having the understanding darkened at the point of baptism?
2. Still ignorant
3. Still blind
4. Still past feeling
5. Still given ove unto lasciviiousness
6. Still working uncleaness with greediness

The act of quckening changes all the above while prior to the point of quickening
all the above still characterize that candidate.

It does not take too much common sense to figure out that the candidate for baptism must already possess these changes BEFORE they are baptized.

There is no such thing as a believing unregenerated person or an unbelieving regenerated person as regeneration is INCLUSIVE of faith and change of all these characteristics.

Again, you created a completely false excuse to avoid the obvious problems I placed before you in the above post. When I pointed out your precise language where you did in fact make it a two step process you simply don't respond at all.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinkingstuff
Here is your first problem. I didn't make it a two step program. I broke down the condition of the man specifically two aspects of that man to explain a view. So the entirety of the rest of your post is a non-sequitur. And as such you aren't really responding to what I've said. You are just taking an oportunity to preach your view. You niether answer what I said and you go off on a tangent.
- WM

If you are not listing two steps then why do you say, "First" and "then"? - TB

Now first God must make that man able to have faith. Then God must offer that faith freely to the man. - WM
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The main reason no one can agree is that everyone has a different set of definitions for the same words. Our jargon is different in every group which disagrees. This is why every group has something added to the scripture--exception: the sola scriptura people, and even they have a disagreement about what infallibility means in terms of translations.
:applause: Define 'faith'. Define 'work'. Define 'obedience'.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
That's a lousy analogy.
No analogy is perfect, but here's another one:

Take marriage. 9 years ago tomorrow my wife and I exchanged vows before a registrar and were married in the eyes of the law of England and Wales (my brother-in-law's joke at the time: "Yesterday, Independence Day; today, Loss of Independence Day!"). That day we were married, on paper, in law and in fact.

Now, suppose since then I:

  • Just put my feet up after that and never helped with the chores around the house
  • Never helped with the kids
  • Never did a night feed or sat up with my kids when they couldn't sleep
  • Never told my wife I loved her
  • Never sent her a card/ present on Valentine's, anniversary, birthday or Christmas
  • Never made love to her
  • Never kissed her
  • Never held her hand
  • Never told her I loved her
  • Criticised her
  • Beat her
  • Never loved her
....would I still really be married to her?
 
No analogy is perfect, but here's another one:

Take marriage. 9 years ago tomorrow my wife and I exchanged vows before a registrar and were married in the eyes of the law of England and Wales (my brother-in-law's joke at the time: "Yesterday, Independence Day; today, Loss of Independence Day!"). That day we were married, on paper, in law and in fact.

Now, suppose since then I:

  • Just put my feet up after that and never helped with the chores around the house
  • Never helped with the kids
  • Never did a night feed or sat up with my kids when they couldn't sleep
  • Never told my wife I loved her
  • Never sent her a card/ present on Valentine's, anniversary, birthday or Christmas
  • Never made love to her
  • Never kissed her
  • Never held her hand
  • Never told her I loved her
  • Criticised her
  • Beat her
  • Never loved her
....would I still really be married to her?


In the eyes of God, you would be. In her eyes, you'd be seeing her through two black ones...:laugh:

When we are saved, we become married to God, for we all are the bride of Christ. There are times when we fail in our marriage/walk with God, but we still remain married to Him. In the times of our failures(sinning), He gives us the ole "rolling pin" across the noggin a few times, and we get back in line.
 

annsni

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
No analogy is perfect, but here's another one:

Take marriage. 9 years ago tomorrow my wife and I exchanged vows before a registrar and were married in the eyes of the law of England and Wales (my brother-in-law's joke at the time: "Yesterday, Independence Day; today, Loss of Independence Day!"). That day we were married, on paper, in law and in fact.

Now, suppose since then I:

  • Just put my feet up after that and never helped with the chores around the house
  • Never helped with the kids
  • Never did a night feed or sat up with my kids when they couldn't sleep
  • Never told my wife I loved her
  • Never sent her a card/ present on Valentine's, anniversary, birthday or Christmas
  • Never made love to her
  • Never kissed her
  • Never held her hand
  • Never told her I loved her
  • Criticised her
  • Beat her
  • Never loved her
....would I still really be married to her?

Both in the eyes of God and the state, yes.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You cannot even have faith in Yeshua hamashiach, save you recieved grace from God first. And you can't even walk in a fashion pleasing to God unless you have chosen to accept Yeshua Hamashiach and the faith he provides.

Here again, it obvious that you have a two step process. Note your choice of "first" and "And."

Ephesians 2:8 the term "saved" has been previously defined to refer to being "quickened" as verse 5 demonstrates. Quickening is the reversal of those characteristics spelled out in verses 2-3 (and Eph. 4:17-19).

Ephesians 2:5 says that quickening is by grace and verse 8 says it is "through faith." Ephesians 2:8 uses the perfect tense periphrastic construct. Faith is an inseparable part of that completed action and the phrase "it is a gift of God and not of yourselves" refers to the whole phrase "for by grace are ye saved through faith."

Your two step Catholic explanation simply cannot fit the context or grammar for quickening. Biblically and grammatically there is no such thing as an unregenerated but repentant believer any more than there is a regenerated but unrepentant unbeliever.
 

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If you enter into a contract with no intention of keeping it, is it still a valid contract that you are under obligation to?
Yes, but is the other party bound to keep it if you enter into it under false pretences eg: an illegal alien who marries a US citizen after convincing her that he's in love with her when he is only doing it to get a green card or similar?
 

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
Here again, it obvious that you have a two step process. Note your choice of "first" and "And."

Ephesians 2:8 the term "saved" has been previously defined to refer to being "quickened" as verse 5 demonstrates. Quickening is the reversal of those characteristics spelled out in verses 2-3 (and Eph. 4:17-19).

Ephesians 2:5 says that quickening is by grace and verse 8 says it is "through faith." Ephesians 2:8 uses the perfect tense periphrastic construct. Faith is an inseparable part of that completed action and the phrase "it is a gift of God and not of yourselves" refers to the whole phrase "for by grace are ye saved through faith."

Your two step Catholic explanation simply cannot fit the context or grammar for quickening. Biblically and grammatically there is no such thing as an unregenerated but repentant believer any more than there is a regenerated but unrepentant unbeliever.
I don't have a two step process those are the characteristics on entering salvation. What you propose is robotic effect. God programs you to believe so that you do. No expression of free will is applicable in your theology.
 

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
If you are not listing two steps then why do you say, "First" and "then"?

Now first God must make that man able to have faith. Then God must offer that faith freely to the man. - WM

Those are both characteristics of entering salvation. Jesus saves. However, you must accept that salvation. If you want to call it steps then fine there are an infinate number of steps to it. Even according to your theology. Ie... First God must decide whom to save. Second God must by his grace "regenerate" the man (which is your word for programing). Thirdly upon the programing God then must make a legal declaration of that man's righteousness. AD infinitum.....

How ever I see salvation as one thing with many different aspects and as for the entry into salvation I see it as Jesus saving us and continuing to save us by his grace. Though it can be broken down as do all things into steps for our human understanding. And I guess I broken down that way to explain the consept which you seem to let go over your head on many occasions.
 

annsni

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yes, but is the other party bound to keep it if you enter into it under false pretences eg: an illegal alien who marries a US citizen after convincing her that he's in love with her when he is only doing it to get a green card or similar?

Only if there is an "out" clause. I don't see one of those in Scripture or a marriage covenant.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I don't have a two step process those are the characteristics on entering salvation. What you propose is robotic effect. God programs you to believe so that you do. No expression of free will is applicable in your theology.


Now first God must make that man able to have faith. Then God must offer that faith freely to the man. - WM


Look again at your two step process. Your "first" step denies human ability or free will does it not? You are claiming that natural man must "first" be enabled to "have faith" which means he has no such ability to have faith.

So your "first" step process is God making them "able" to have faith which is an assertion of universal inability to believe is it not??

So you are suggesting that the there is a third stage that stands between unregenerate and regenerate or a stage where man comes from inability to ability but yet unregenerate.

Can you please provide scripture for this MIDDLE stage between unregenerated (inability) and regeneration?
 

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
Look again at your two step process. Your "first" step denies human ability or free will does it not? You are claiming that natural man must "first" be enabled to "have faith" which means he has no such ability to have faith.

So your "first" step process is God making them "able" to have faith which is an assertion of universal inability to believe is it not??

So you are suggesting that the there is a third stage that stands between unregenerate and regenerate or a stage where man comes from inability to ability but yet unregenerate.

Can you please provide scripture for this MIDDLE stage between unregenerated (inability) and regeneration?

Let me once again quote what I've already said on this thread since you didn't seem to read it:

Those are both characteristics of entering salvation. Jesus saves. However, you must accept that salvation. If you want to call it steps then fine there are an infinate number of steps to it. Even according to your theology. Ie... First God must decide whom to save. Second God must by his grace "regenerate" the man (which is your word for programing). Thirdly upon the programing God then must make a legal declaration of that man's righteousness. AD infinitum.....

How ever I see salvation as one thing with many different aspects and as for the entry into salvation I see it as Jesus saving us and continuing to save us by his grace. Though it can be broken down as do all things into steps for our human understanding. And I guess I broken down that way to explain the consept which you seem to let go over your head on many occasions
Which makes your argument a non-sequitur. It doesn't follow.
 
Top