Not under law but under grace.

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Larryjf:It's not a matter of how good they must be...there's not a standard measure of good for everyone to show once they are saved.

Before regeneration the works are nothing but sinful. After regeneration they start being good by the Holy Spirit. This will manifest itself in different ways in different people, but for instance...one may stop cursing, abusing alcohol, lying, being violent, etc. etc. The Lord doesn't remove all of the sin from a person until the other side of glory as we have only partook of the first resurrection (of the spirit), and are still waiting for our bodily resurrection. But our sins will lessen as our sanctification grows by God's grace. There will be evidence in a saved person that they have turned from sin and to Christ.

HP: How much less sin must there be in order to show forth this evidence you speak of? If there is ‘no standard’ how can anyone be sure of any evidence or the lack thereof? If one is still a liar, a thief, a blasphemer, an adulterer, etc, but is doing it less than they were before, could that be evidence that they have been born again? How would you interpret this verse? 1Jo 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

.....or this verse: "Those that compare themselves to themselves or among themselves, are not wise."

Larryjf: Are works will be perfectly consistent to our faith because it is the evidence of our faith. There is a direct connection...but it's not to earn our justification.

HP:You say that the ‘Lord does not remove all of the sin from a person’ until we are on ‘the other side of glory.’ How is sin perfectly consistent to our faith?

Larryjf: And yes, we are justified in spite of our sin. We are dead in our sins and transgressions until God regenerates us we are born again. We were reconciled to God by Christ while we were still His enemies (Rom 5:10)

HP: And how is not this an example of a true antinomian Calvinistic gospel message? ‘We are justified in spite of our sin.’

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Larryjf:It's not a matter of how good they must be...there's not a standard measure of good for everyone to show once they are saved.

HP: How about it list? Is there a standard measure of good for everyone to show once they have been saved? I believe the Scriptures are exceedingly clear on this point, and there is indeed a standard. Any takers on what that standard might be?

 

[larryjf]

HP: How much less sin must there be in order to show forth this evidence you speak of? If there is ‘no standard’ how can anyone be sure of any evidence or the lack thereof? If one is still a liar, a thief, a blasphemer, an adulterer, etc, but is doing it less than they were before, could that be evidence that they have been born again? How would you interpret this verse? 1Jo 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

.....or this verse: "Those that compare themselves to themselves or among themselves, are not wise."

I don't believe i ever said that we should compare ourselves among ourselves, so i'm not sure why you bring up that verse.

For a little more context for your 1 Jn 1:7 verse...
1 Jn 1:10 - If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

By asking "how much" you keep missing the point. Do you really think there is a certain amount that must be earned to get into Heaven? What if i asked you "how much faith is required?" How would you answer that?

HP:You say that the ‘Lord does not remove all of the sin from a person’ until we are on ‘the other side of glory.’ How is sin perfectly consistent to our faith?

Sin is not perfectly consistent with perfect faith....but i don't claim to have perfect faith.

Phil 3:12 - Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.

HP: And how is not this an example of a true antinomian Calvinistic gospel message? ‘We are justified in spite of our sin.’

How is it antinomian?
First, Calvinism is anything but antinomian.
Second, antinomianism teaches that one can do whatever they want because we are not under the Law....I said that works are evidence of our faith, which means that if we are still sinning we have no true faith.

I simply believe that good works are a product of our regeneration as opposed to a way of becoming regenerate.

 

[larryjf]

HP: How about it list? Is there a standard measure of good for everyone to show once they have been saved? I believe the Scriptures are exceedingly clear on this point, and there is indeed a standard. Any takers on what that standard might be?

Of course there is a standard, but it's not a standard that must be fully met at the moment of conversion...it is impossible. Even as Christians we continue to break the laws of God and sin against Him...that's why we are still called to confess our sins (1 Jn 1:9)

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Larryjf: The Lord doesn't remove all of the sin from a person until the other side of glory
Larryjf: But our sins will lessen as our sanctification grows by God's grace.

Larryjf: I said that works are evidence of our faith, which means that if we are still sinning we have no true faith…….

HP: Could you help us harmonize these statements? The first two seem to be contradictory to the last one to me.

 

[larryjf]

HP: Could you help us harmonize these statements? The first two seem to be contradictory to the last one to me.

The context of the last post was a reply to antinomianism.
So my point was that unlike antinomians, I have stated that good works are important...they are just not a requirement for salvation, they are a result of it.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Larryjf: I don't believe i ever said that we should compare ourselves among ourselves, so i'm not sure why you bring up that verse.

HP: I brought up this verse because you seemed to suggest that we should be comparing ourselves to our ourselves or to our past. You mentioned that we should be sinning less as believers. That to me sets up a comparison that Scripture calls unwise, in that I might say, I am sinning less than I used to so I must be better off than I used to be, or my sins now, being less than what were, are clear evidence that I must be saved. I know you did not say this, but I see such remarks consistent with your comments as I read them.

Larryjf: For a little more context for your 1 Jn 1:7 verse...
1 Jn 1:10 - If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

HP: First, this verse is simply stating that all have sinned, and if we say we have never sinned, we are indeed liars. This verse cannot be made to say that all believers are sinners.

Larryjf: By asking "how much" you keep missing the point. Do you really think there is a certain amount that must be earned to get into Heaven? What if i asked you "how much faith is required?" How would you answer that?

HP: I have not missed the point. I am asking you pertinent questions in relationshiup to your comments. As for me, no amount of good works will ever merit ones salvation period. I have never said anything to suggest or imply that one could merit salvation by anything one could or must do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim
HP:You say that the ‘Lord does not remove all of the sin from a person’ until we are on ‘the other side of glory.’ How is sin perfectly consistent to our faith?

Larryjf: Sin is not perfectly consistent with perfect faith....but i don't claim to have perfect faith.

HP: Why do you change the equation from faith to ‘perfect faith?’ Is sin consistent with faith is the question.

Larryjf; Phil 3:12 - Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own.

HP: Balance that with the statement Paul made, “ As many of us as are perfect.”


Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim
HP: And how is not this an example of a true antinomian Calvinistic gospel message? ‘We are justified in spite of our sin.’

Larryjf: How is it antinomian?

HP: It is antinomian because it is justification regardless of ones attitude or actions in regards to God’s law. It is anti law. It states regardless of whether or not my actions are in accordance to God’s law or not I am justified. It is pure unadulterated antinomianism as the statement stands. Possibly you might desire to re-word it to not reflect such sentiments if you are opposed to being labeled as antinomian.

Larryjf; First, Calvinism is anything but antinomian.
Second, antinomianism teaches that one can do whatever they want because we are not under the Law...

HP: Your comment was that “we are justified in spite of our sin.” If sin has no effect on our justification, it can also be said nothing we do or can do, regardless whether or not it is sin, has no bearing on our justification. Again, your comment as it reads is pure antinomian.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

As I recall. the question was asked by Larryjf as to how much faith must one have to be saved. It was asked in a rhetorical sense as if though the question could not be answered. May I attempt an answer?

I say it takes as much faith to be saved as it does to stop the sinning business and to come to a complete realization as to the heinousness of sin and the rebellion it is against a Holy God. It takes enough faith as to generate in the heart true repentance for all sins that are past, and a heart of obedience that desires with ones whole heart to follow the Lord in obedience. It takes as much faith as needed to satisfy the conditions of forgiveness that God calls upon man to fulfill, not to merit ones salvation, but to show forth their true heart in complete obedience to every known command of God revealed to the heart at that time. It takes enough faith for the heart to acknowledge without doubt the witness of the Spirit of God that testifies to man that God is pleased with the repentance and faith that the individual has exhibited and the presence of the indwelling Holy Spirit is felt in such a way as leave no doubt that such a one has been born again from above. It takes enough faith as to leave such a one with a clear conscience before God and man, knowing that there is nothing between themselves and their God or their fellow man. “Without holiness, no man shall see the Lord.”

 

[larryjf]

HP: I brought up this verse because you seemed to suggest that we should be comparing ourselves to our ourselves or to our past. You mentioned that we should be sinning less as believers. That to me sets up a comparison that Scripture calls unwise, in that I might say, I am sinning less than I used to so I must be better off than I used to be, or my sins now, being less than what were, are clear evidence that I must be saved. I know you did not say this, but I see such remarks consistent with your comments as I read them.

As we compare ourselves to the moral commands of God, we see ourselves progressing in sanctification.

HP: First, this verse is simply stating that all have sinned, and if we say we have never sinned, we are indeed liars. This verse cannot be made to say that all believers are sinners.

If we didn't continue to sin we would not need to confess our sins...

1 Jn 1:9 - If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

HP: I have not missed the point. I am asking you pertinent questions in relationshiup to your comments. As for me, no amount of good works will ever merit ones salvation period. I have never said anything to suggest or imply that one could merit salvation by anything one could or must do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim
HP:You say that the ‘Lord does not remove all of the sin from a person’ until we are on ‘the other side of glory.’ How is sin perfectly consistent to our faith?

HP: Why do you change the equation from faith to ‘perfect faith?’ Is sin consistent with faith is the question.

Because you brought into the equation the idea of being "perfectly consistent"

HP: Balance that with the statement Paul made, “ As many of us as are perfect.”

If you are referring to Philippians 3:15, then the context is not of perfection but of maturity. Those who are mature in their Christian walk. Obviously it does not contradict the passage that i quoted where Paul claimed that he has not reached perfection, so contextually they refer to different things. Being mature, we are fully enabled to run the race and to run it by the rules...but we have not attained the perfection that the race is set before us for, having complete victory and absolute perfection.

It says to "think this way"...the way described in vv 7-14.
and "if in anything you think otherwise...having too high of an opinion of ourselves as to our attainment of absolute perfection. Also pointing to the error of thinking in terms of reaching perfection by the Law (Gal 3:3).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim
HP: And how is not this an example of a true antinomian Calvinistic gospel message? ‘We are justified in spite of our sin.’


HP: It is antinomian because it is justification regardless of ones attitude or actions in regards to God’s law. It is anti law. It states regardless of whether or not my actions are in accordance to God’s law or not I am justified. It is pure unadulterated antinomianism as the statement stands. Possibly you might desire to re-word it to not reflect such sentiments if you are opposed to being labeled as antinomian.

HP: Your comment was that “we are justified in spite of our sin.” If sin has no effect on our justification, it can also be said nothing we do or can do, regardless whether or not it is sin, has no bearing on our justification. Again, your comment as it reads is pure antinomian.

Antinomianism has nothing to do with the doctrine of justification. It has to do with the doctrine of sanctification. Antinomianism teaches that AFTER a person is justified by faith they do not need to keep the Law. I said that a person keeps the Law as a result of saving faith.

Nothing we do justifies us...God justifies us.

Rom 3:20-28. Especially...

For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. (Rom 3:20)

For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. (Rom 3:28)

 

[larryjf]

As I recall. the question was asked by Larryjf as to how much faith must one have to be saved. It was asked in a rhetorical sense as if though the question could not be answered. May I attempt an answer?

I say it takes as much faith to be saved as it does to stop the sinning business and to come to a complete realization as to the heinousness of sin and the rebellion it is against a Holy God. It takes enough faith as to generate in the heart true repentance for all sins that are past, and a heart of obedience that desires with ones whole heart to follow the Lord in obedience. It takes as much faith as needed to satisfy the conditions of forgiveness that God calls upon man to fulfill, not to merit ones salvation, but to show forth their true heart in complete obedience to every known command of God revealed to the heart at that time. It takes enough faith for the heart to acknowledge without doubt the witness of the Spirit of God that testifies to man that God is pleased with the repentance and faith that the individual has exhibited and the presence of the indwelling Holy spirit is felt in such a way as leave no doubt that such a one has been born again from above. It takes enough faith as to leave such a one with a clear conscience before God and man, knowing that there is nothing between themselves and their God or their fellow man. “Without holiness, no man shall see the Lord.”

"as much" is not really telling us how much. You leave your quantification very open to interpretation.

"without holiness, no man shall see the Lord"...amen! And my holiness does not come from following the Law, it comes from having the holiness of Christ imputed to me through faith!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Larryjf: I said that a person keeps the Law as a result of saving faith.

HP: Can one be said to be keeping the law while in the commission of sin? You said that no one could be free from sin until they enter the world to come. If that is true, one must still, of necessity according to you, remain sinning as long as we remain in this world. I ask you again, can one remain sinning and be said to be keeping the law at one and the same time? Can a tree bring forth good fruit and bad? Can one serve two masters?

 

[larryjf]

HP: Can one be said to be keeping the law while in the commission of sin? You said that no one could be free from sin until they enter the world to come. If that is true, one must still, of necessity according to you, remain sinning as long as we remain in this world. I ask you again, can one remain sinning and be said to be keeping the law at one and the same time? Can a tree bring forth good fruit and bad? Can one serve two masters?

Let me re-phrase that...
One "seeks" to keep the Law because one is saved.
The Law is already fulfilled in Christ, so being in Christ we already have the standards met. But we are steered by the Holy Spirit, once He lives in us, to "strive" to keep the Law.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Larryjf: One "seeks" to keep the Law because one is saved.

HP: Larry, first let me thank you tonight for engaging my mind and help keep my mind focused on spiritual things. You have exemplified a true believer in our debate in spite of our differences. I am going to have to call it off short tonight on my part but I do hope we will have many more opportunities to discuss and debate together.

I will say that I like the way your comment reads above much better. We should have an attitude of sincere desire and intents to serve the Lord in obedience as saved individuals.

Let me end our discussion on my end tonight with this thought. One must keep in mind that it is a natural impossibility for the mind to pursue something it sees as a natural impossibility. If one is about to attempt a field goal, but for some reason the goal posts have been removed, there is no way to judge whether or not one makes the field goal. It is impossible for the mind to honestly attempt to live holy before God if in fact he or she believes it is impossible for him or her to do so. If we are going to honestly seek to live holy lives, and live in obedience to God’s law of love, we are going to have to believe that God has made a way possible for us to do just that. We need to keep before our hearts and minds our duty before God to ‘be ye perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect.” We need to place as frontlets before our eyes the command to ‘be ye holy as He is holy.” We need to memorize verses such as the following and make them our goal posts in this present world. 1Co 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.’ And…1Ti 4:12 Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith, in purity.

Again, I hope we can continue our discussions very soon! Until then, may God keep our heart and souls in purity and sincerity before Him!

 

[larryjf]

Thank you for the lively discussion brother.
Prov 27:17

Let me just respond briefly to your last post, because i think you are right. We would not strive for something that we knew was impossible to achieve. However, we must keep in mind that i am only saying that we won't achieve it this side of glory. The wonderful thing is that we are promised by God that He will finish the work that He has started in us, and we will be perfected in glory. So we are striving for our heavenly home while we are pilgrims here.

 

[Andre]

Paul does not teach that we don't need good works, he teaches that we don't need them for our justification.

Paul certainly seems to say that we need "good work" in order to get eternal life - Romans 2:7

To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

What is your position on this verse? What does Paul mean by it? Are zero people going to be given eternal life based on "persistence in doing good"? If so, why would Paul write something that will true for zero perons?

 

[larryjf]

Paul certainly seems to say that we need "good work" in order to get eternal life - Romans 2:7

To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

What is your position on this verse? What does Paul mean by it? Are zero people going to be given eternal life based on "persistence in doing good"? If so, why would Paul write something that will true for zero perons?

The passage tells us who God "gives" eternal life to, not those who "earn" it.

I agree that those who persist in doing good for God's glory are those who God saves. I disagree that those good works are the reason that God saves.

The passage simply points out the objects of God's salvation...those who have a true faith, which is expressed through good works...not a faith that is obtained through works, but a faith that is evidenced by works.

 

[Andre]

I must re-iterate a point that I believe (I could be wrong - I have not read this entire thread) has not been redressed: that the whole notion that Paul actually does not set faith against "good works", he sets faith against the specific aspects of Torah that mark out the Jew against his pagan neighbour. If this interpretation is correct, it seriously undermines the whole notion that "good works" are not essential to our justification.

Here is but one example from Romans 3:

Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. 29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

If I am not mistaken, most in the reformed tradition see this as a "justification by faith, not by doing good works" passage. Although I think Paul is clearly referring to Torah in particular when he refers to the "Law", I suppose that the "traditional" reformed view is to generalize this to "good works". I think that move is a little suspicious, but that is not my main point.

I think that verse 29 is the key here: If Paul were really teaching that good works don't justify, why does he go to the trouble of underscoring the equality of the Jew and the Gentile? Clearly Paul is talking about something which might be seen as distinguishing Jew from Gentile.

Note that earlier in the chapter, he writes:

We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.

Again, Paul is centrally concerned with the Jew - Gentile distinction. And in what does this distinction lie? Certainly not in respect to going "morally good works" - all humans are equal in this respect.

No, the distinction lies in those aspect of Torah that demaracate the Jew from his pagan neighbours - Sabbath, circumcision, purity laws, etc. This is what Paul is concerned with - he is arguing that a path to justification is available that is not concerned with such "ethnic" specificities. Whatever that path might entail, he is not set that path against the path of the "good works", he is setting it against the ethnic specificity of Torah.

There is a lot more that can be said in support of this position.

 

[larryjf]

Andre,

It seems that you are supporting the New Perspectives on Paul theology...of which i am totally in disagreement to.

Paul is not drawing a distinction between the Jew and the Gentile per-say. He is drawing a distinction between the erroneous Jewish teaching that one is justified by the works of the Law. This was not what God had intended for the Jews, but it was how they twisted what God had revealed to them.

 

[Andre]

The passage tells us who God "gives" eternal life to, not those who "earn" it.

I agree that those who persist in doing good for God's glory are those who God saves. I disagree that those good works are the reason that God saves.

I know what you are saying, but note the wider context:

But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. 6God "will give to each person according to what he has done."[a] 7To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. 8But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger.

Clearly Paul is taking about a judgement based on what people have done. And it is iffy that one can interpret "what they have done" for the Christian as being about placing faith in Christ. The entire passage is clearly about the content of human lives - the "works" that they exhibit.

There is, I suggest an awkward "asymetry" associated with seeing "what the Christian has done" as not being about works, when clearly those who are condemned are condemned on the basis of the content of the evil that they do.

And clearly, a "normal" North American cultural reading of this statement:

To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life

strongly implies that "persistence in doing good" is indeed the grounds for the awarding of eternal life. It would be a highly awkward reading to see this text as stating an attribute (a life full of good works) that merely accompanies the real grounds for the granting of eternal life (obviously "faith" in this context).

This is clear by the use of the word "persistence". If the text said something like:

"To those who exhibit good works, he will give eternal life"

then I think your position would be more plausible because the "good works" could be construed as a "side-effect" of something else that is itself the grounds for the granting of eternal life. But, in 'normal English', when we say:

"To those who persist in behaviour X, we will give Y"

we normally intend to represent a causal link. I suppose that the point might be argued from your position to some degree.

And then what about Romans 2:13

For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God's sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous.

I realize that you have a legitimate right to "interpret" these texts in terms of other texts that you see as setting "faith" against "good works". As you will know, I see those texts as setting "faith" against "ethnic Torah". This allows me to take Romans 2:7 and 2:13 at what I would claim is their "face value".

 

[Andre]

Andre,

It seems that you are supporting the New Perspectives on Paul theology...of which i am totally in disagreement to.

Paul is not drawing a distinction between the Jew and the Gentile per-say. He is drawing a distinction between the erroneous Jewish teaching that one is justified by the works of the Law. This was not what God had intended for the Jews, but it was how they twisted what God had revealed to them.

You are right - I am essentially arguing the position of NT Wright on this topic.

But you appear to say something that is at least consistent with my point when you say:

"He is drawing a distinction between the erroneous Jewish teaching that one is justified by the works of the Law"

The Jew, I would claim, would see the "works of Torah" as being all those things that set them apart from their pagan neighbours - Sabbath, circumcision, purity laws, etc. So indeed, Paul is saying that you are not justified in this manner.

Implicit in what I am saying is my belief (following the NPP people I believe) that the Reformers interpreted Paul in a particular place and time where it was natural for them to see "Peleganism" as a threat. I am swayed by arguments that Paul was deeply concerned with the unity of the Romans church and that, in that time and place, race was a much bigger deal than it is for us. To the extent that redressing such racial divisions was a central concern, this supports the position that Paul sets faith against the "ethnic specificity of Torah" versus "good works".

This is an interesting topic to me and I am happy to pursue it further (time permitting).