Mark 4:1-20

[evangelist6589]

Going through this passage today in SS prompted some serious discussion and or debate. We know there are four seeds from the passage but the question asked is which one of the four seeds is a Christian? I took the lone ranger position of the last seed and also arguing for Lordship Salvation and referring to Mt 7, Lk 3:8, and other passages that say one must have the fruit of repentance if one is truly saved. However others argued against me and some even said that three of the seeds were true christians, one person said 2 of the seeds, and the person whom said my argument was flawed used the Thief on the Cross illustration in saying one does not need fruit to be truly saved. I did not get a chance but I would argue that certainly someone on their death bed can be saved by calling out to the Lord. But as the book of James indicates and anyone whom seriously considers looking at the Bible in depth on this debate in Biblical Theology (not systematic theology) (in my opinion) will not miss the many passages that emphasize that fruit is necessary. So what say you of this passage?

 

[JonC]

Going through this passage today in SS prompted some serious discussion and or debate. We know there are four seeds from the passage but the question asked is which one of the four seeds is a Christian? I took the lone ranger position of the last seed and also arguing for Lordship Salvation and referring to Mt 7, Lk 3:8, and other passages that say one must have the fruit of repentance if one is truly saved. However others argued against me and some even said that three of the seeds were true christians, one person said 2 of the seeds, and the person whom said my argument was flawed used the Thief on the Cross illustration in saying one does not need fruit to be truly saved. I did not get a chance but I would argue that certainly someone on their death bed can be saved by calling out to the Lord. But as the book of James indicates and anyone whom seriously considers looking at the Bible in depth on this debate in Biblical Theology (not systematic theology) (in my opinion) will not miss the many passages that emphasize that fruit is necessary. So what say you of this passage?

That's systematic theology, not Biblical theology. Anyway, I think the point was the one seed that took root and bore fruit. I'm not saying we must bear fruit to be saved, but that salvation is such as to bear fruit.

 

[JamesL]

John,
You've got several issues with your position.

You've employed flawed philosophy in your view of repentance, you've pressed a theological error onto the parable, you've taken James 2 completely out of context, you've allowed the modern heresy of "calling out to the Lord to be saved" to influence your deathbed theology, you've misread Matthew 7:21-23 (I'm pretty sure those are the verses you had in mind).

Wow.

But i know you're simply looking at it through the lens of Macship Salvation.

 

[plain_n_simple]

Macship Salvation

 

[Don]

I agree that only one "seed" is representative of someone who is truly saved. I use Hebrews 10:38-39 as my reference for this understanding.

I disagree about fruit being required as "proof" of salvation.

 

[JamesL]

I agree that only one "seed" is representative of someone who is truly saved. I use Hebrews 10:38-39 as my reference for this understanding.

I disagree about fruit being required as "proof" of salvation.

What do you mean when you say "saved" ??

 

[JonC]

I agree that only one "seed" is representative of someone who is truly saved. I use Hebrews 10:38-39 as my reference for this understanding.

I disagree about fruit being required as "proof" of salvation.

:thumbsup:

"But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul."

Also Hebrews 3:6
"but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house—whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end."

Faith unto salvation is the type of faith that "holds fast."

 

[blessedwife318]

You are putting the cart before the horse. You don't to go works to BE saved you do good works because you ARE save. That is a very important distinction and if you read James and the other passages you mentioned in context you would know that. This is what happens when you put man made books that on the same level or higher as it seems then the Bible.

 

[Don]

What do you mean when you say "saved" ??

Not one of those that cries "Lord, Lord"; but in return, hears "depart; I never knew you."

One who will not see the fires of hell; one who has the promise of heaven.

 

[Don]

You are putting the cart before the horse. You don't to go works to BE saved you do good works because you ARE save. That is a very important distinction and if you read James and the other passages you mentioned in context you would know that. This is what happens when you put man made books that on the same level or higher as it seems then the Bible.

Evangelist doesn't believe in works-based salvation. What he's espousing is that fruit (of the Spirit) shows you're saved; but without any fruit, he has to question if you're saved.

 

[blessedwife318]

Evangelist doesn't believe in works-based salvation. What he's espousing is that fruit (of the Spirit) shows you're saved; but without any fruit, he has to question if you're saved.

OK I read it wrong but it seemed like when I first read through here he was saying works are necessary for salvation. Thank you for pointing out my mistake, I will read more carefully in the future

 

[evangelist6589]

John,
You've got several issues with your position.

You've employed flawed philosophy in your view of repentance, you've pressed a theological error onto the parable, you've taken James 2 completely out of context, you've allowed the modern heresy of "calling out to the Lord to be saved" to influence your deathbed theology, you've misread Matthew 7:21-23 (I'm pretty sure those are the verses you had in mind).

Wow.

But i know you're simply looking at it through the lens of Macship Salvation.

Its not Mac as plenty of others before Mac have argued for Lordship.

 

[evangelist6589]

OK I read it wrong but it seemed like when I first read through here he was saying works are necessary for salvation. Thank you for pointing out my mistake, I will read more carefully in the future

Please do as I never would say such a thing.

 

[evangelist6589]

I agree that only one "seed" is representative of someone who is truly saved. I use Hebrews 10:38-39 as my reference for this understanding.

I disagree about fruit being required as "proof" of salvation.

Why? So by your logic just pray a prayer and live anyway you like after that point.

 

[PreachTony]

Going through this passage today in SS prompted some serious discussion and or debate. We know there are four seeds from the passage but the question asked is which one of the four seeds is a Christian? I took the lone ranger position of the last seed and also arguing for Lordship Salvation and referring to Mt 7, Lk 3:8, and other passages that say one must have the fruit of repentance if one is truly saved. However others argued against me and some even said that three of the seeds were true christians, one person said 2 of the seeds, and the person whom said my argument was flawed used the Thief on the Cross illustration in saying one does not need fruit to be truly saved. I did not get a chance but I would argue that certainly someone on their death bed can be saved by calling out to the Lord. But as the book of James indicates and anyone whom seriously considers looking at the Bible in depth on this debate in Biblical Theology (not systematic theology) (in my opinion) will not miss the many passages that emphasize that fruit is necessary. So what say you of this passage?

For the sake of furthering this discussion, can we define the terms we are dealing in? What exactly is meant by "fruit of repentance?" Because from an overview standpoint, I would find myself in agreement with the person using the Thief on the Cross as an example of "fruit" not being a requirement.

Consider the explanation Jesus gave. To my interpretation, the group that "fell by the wayside" is not Christian, as they heard the word, but it never took effect in their lives. The group on stony ground is Christian in name, but they are not strong in their faith or fruitful in their work, and they run off the moment things get difficult. The group amongst the thorns are Christian, but they are so invested in this life that it has robbed them of joy in Christ, making their Christian walk unfruitful.

The group on "good ground" is pretty self-explanatory.

 

[JamesL]

Why? So by your logic just pray a prayer and live anyway you like after that point.

If you think "saying a prayer" gains access to the grace of Christ, then you're hell bound regardless of how you live.

Nobody was ever saved because they said a prayer. FAITH is unseen. Faith is hope. Faith is confidence.

And I can assure you of this - if your hope and confidence are aimed at a prayer you said and the life you're living, then you aren't saved, period.

Your hope of eternity must rest squarely upon the shoulders of Christ. You must have confidence in Christ, and what He accomplished on your behalf when He bled and died. You must rely on His sacrifice, in your place, to bear the punishment for your sins. Firmly convinced that because He bore your punishment, He alone has rescued you from the wrath of God. That is biblical saving faith.

And I'm not saying you should have confidence in believing a set of facts, or confidence in your confidence.

By grace - I never hear you talk about what His death accomplished on your behalf.

Through faith , directed at Christ's sacrifice - saying a prayer is a work, just like baptism is a work. Either one is an eternally damning attempt to access God's grace.

 

[JonC]

That is a common Arminian objection to the eternal security of the believer. From previous conversations I believe you have demonstrated a position against Christian apostasy. Unless you have changed your view, I challenge you to reevaluate your comment here. Either that or show us where salvation is dependent on works.

Notice, you say two things in your initial post which, if left alone, is a self-contradiction.

I did not get a chance but I would argue that certainly someone on their death bed can be saved by calling out to the Lord.

fruit is necessary.

Which is it? Can a man be saved on his deathbed and die to live eternally or does this man have to live long enough after conversion to demonstrate fruit of the Spirit?

So what say you of this passage?

I believe that faith unto salvation is of a type that produces fruit. Whether or not fruit is evident, however, is a different matter.

 

[PreachTony]

I believe that faith unto salvation is of a type that produces fruit. Whether or not fruit is evident, however, is a different matter.

That's a pretty solid point, Jon. Some people never have a chance to exhibit the fruit of their salvation. Others are given ample opportunity.

Consider, though, when you plant an apple tree, do you expect to have apples off of it the next day? No, you have to give it time to grow.

 

[Don]

Why? So by your logic just pray a prayer and live anyway you like after that point.

By my logic? I didn't use "my logic." I made a statement.

Look, the fruit of the spirit is Galatians 5; longsuffering, meekness, peace, etc. Any/all of those are exhibited by those who reject Christ. Their fruit does not mean they're saved.

Requiring fruit is akin to requiring someone to speak in tongues to show that they've been filled with the Holy Spirit.

James isn't talking about the necessity of works as a result of being saved; he's talking about claiming to be Christian, but only showing up for Sunday morning service. The rest of the week is what you did before you allegedly became a Christian. Look at James 4; then put the book in context before you claim that if you're saved, you must have works.

 

[JamesL]

By my logic? I didn't use "my logic." I made a statement.

Look, the fruit of the spirit is Galatians 5; longsuffering, meekness, peace, etc. Any/all of those are exhibited by those who reject Christ. Their fruit does not mean they're saved.

Requiring fruit is akin to requiring someone to speak in tongues to show that they've been filled with the Holy Spirit.

James isn't talking about the necessity of works as a result of being saved; he's talking about claiming to be Christian, but only showing up for Sunday morning service. The rest of the week is what you did before you allegedly became a Christian. Look at James 4; then put the book in context before you claim that if you're saved, you must have works.

James was not in the context of false versus true faith, in any sense of either of them.

Go to 2:12, where he said WE will be judged

Go to 3:1 where he said TEACHERS will be judged more strictly

EVERYTHING in between is in that context - a believer's future judgment.

You've got to get away from a narrow understanding of "saved" in verse 14. What if a man says (NOT "claims") he has faith, but has no works. Can faith by itself save him? Well, we've got to ask - save him from what?

In the context - which is clear, our future works judgment (see 1Cor 3:15-20) - James is asking this:

What if a man shows up to have his works tested, and he says accurately that he has faith. Yet he has no works. Can his faith save him from suffering loss? Paul made it clear that he will be saved as one escaping a fire. He will lose everything.

This is the "saved" James was talking about. Whether or not a person will have any reward. NOT whether he will go to heaven. He's already assured eternal life here, on the basis of faith. That's what Paul labored to demonstrate in Romans 3-4

To the one who DOES NOT work, his faith is credited as righteousness.

But rewards are a whole different issue. See Colossians 3:23-24 " do your work for the Lord, knowing that from Him you will receive the reward of the inheritance"

Read the intro to the book of James. Every single one I've read makes mention of how similar James is to the Sermon on the Mount. Then read the sermon, and see the one word which is most prominent - reward.