Salvation Assurance Beliefs

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

JN: If faith + works is required to be saved from the eternal penalty of sin, then we have contradictions in the Bible. We have agreed that faith and works are not the same thing. How can you be sure that James is not speaking of being saved from something else?

HP: There is no contradiction between faith and works in the sense Scripture uses them. The problem lies in the fact that the word 'works' is thought of in two distinct senses. If we can establish these two distinct senses of the word 'works' we can eliminate all confusion and seeming contradiction.

Can you have faith without an act of the will? Can one have faith without the formulation of an intent? Faith always involves an act of the will. It is not that we are saved “on the account of” or “due to the merit of” our formulated intents, but rather that we cannot have faith ‘without our formulated intents.’ The intents formulated by our will are never thought of in the sense of ‘that for the sake of’, but rather are always thought of in the sense of ‘not without which.’ We do not merit salvation due to our will being active in salvation, but neither will we be saved apart from our wills being active.

We cannot confuse the grounds of our salvation with the conditions God has set forth for us to comply with. The mercy of God is the only grounds of our salvation, but God had mandated us to fulfill certain conditions in order to enter into our hope of eternal life and to be found in Him in the last day. Initially those conditions we must fulfill are repentance and faith, and subsequently we must remain faithful unto the end.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Please forgive me if you have read this illustration before. I am posting it again because this issue needs to be clarified by illustration once again.


A man goes to prison for life, being justly condemned and sentenced by a judge for a specific crime. Can such an individual ‘merit’ a pardon by the performance of good works while in prison? Can such a criminal perform good works to such a degree that the governor is forced to grant this man a pardon based merely on the ‘merit’ of the performance of such good works? Absolutely not. Just the same can the governor, if he so pleases, pardon such a criminal? Of course he can. Still, there is something the criminal MUST do, there is an attitude that MUST be reflected by the criminal to receive a pardon IF the governor is indeed fair and just, and attitudes are tied inseparably to intents of the heart, this very initial intent being none other than a ‘work’ in one sense of the word. The governor MUST witness from the criminal a repentant attitude and a change of heart towards his former criminal behavior if the governor is even to consider such a pardon for the criminal.

What kind of governor would pardon a criminal from prison who had not exhibited true remorse for his crimes? Would not the governor have to be satisfied in his or her mind that IF they pardoned such a criminal that they would not return to commit the same crime or one of like heinous behavior upon society again and that such a criminal possessed and exhibited a true change of heart and attitude towards their former behavior? There are indeed certain conditions that the criminal must meet, works that such a one must of necessity do in order to have the opportunity for a pardon if such an opportunity is offered. These works on the part of the prisoner are in no way meritorious in nature, and in no way force the governor to grant such a one a pardon on their account. Just the same, there are definite conditions or works one must do in order for the governor to consider the pardon. These works are thought of in the sense of ‘not without which,’ not ‘that for the sake of.’ It can properly be stated that one is not pardoned due to any works (in one sense of the word ‘works’ in the sense of ‘that for the sake of’) of the prisoner, but just the same it can be said ‘without works’ (in another sense of the word, that being in the sense of ‘not without which’) one will never see the opportunity to receive a pardon.

Can you see how that works can be thought of as necessary for a pardon, or in the sense of “not without which,” yet at the same time no amount of works can be thought of as “that for the sake of” or forcing the governor to pardon the criminal on the account of works performed by the criminal?

Can you see how that in one sense we are saved apart from works, in the sense of doing anything 'meritorious' on our part, but we cannot be saved apart from works, thought of in the sense of 'fulfilling the conditions God has mandated for us to fulfill?'

 

[James_Newman]

HP: There is no contradiction between faith and works in the sense Scripture uses them. The problem lies in the fact that the word 'works' is thought of in two distinct senses. If we can establish these two distinct senses of the word 'works' we can eliminate all confusion and seeming contradiction.

Can you have faith without an act of the will? Can one have faith without the formulation of an intent? Faith always involves an act of the will. It is not that we are saved “on the account of” or “due to the merit of” our formulated intents, but rather that we cannot have faith ‘without our formulated intents.’ The intents formulated by our will are never thought of in the sense of ‘that for the sake of’, but rather are always thought of in the sense of ‘not without which.’ We do not merit salvation due to our will being active in salvation, but neither will we be saved apart from our wills being active.

We cannot confuse the grounds of our salvation with the conditions God has set forth for us to comply with. The mercy of God is the only grounds of our salvation, but God had mandated us to fulfill certain conditions in order to enter into our hope of eternal life and to be found in Him in the last day. Initially those conditions we must fulfill are repentance and faith, and subsequently we must remain faithful unto the end.

If you could show a scripture to back up your 'act of the will' assertion, I might be persuaded, because it certainly sounds good. But I think it is wrong. It is the theological doubletalk that is used to reconcile two ideas that don't require reconciling, if we realize that James is speaking to those who are already eternally secure through faith alone. Faith is not works, never shall be. Believing is not a work, if somehow you could show that an 'act of the will' was a work required to believe then you are right back at Eph 2:9.

James 2:12-13
12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath showed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.

Believers are going to be judged according to their works. We still have a salvation to 'work out' in fear and trembling, after we have believed. But it is not the free salvation that Christ purchased on the cross, it is the reward for obedience.

2 Corinthians 5:9-11
9 Wherefore we labor, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.
10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.

The we in verses 9 and 10 is believers. Unbelievers cannot work to be accepted of Him. Unbelievers will not be judged at the judgment seat of Christ. We (believers) will receive according to the works that we have done in the body, whether they are good or bad. Knowing the terror of the Lord, Paul is adding faith to his work. If Paul knew that there was a judgment coming, and he sat around twiddling his thumbs, the words of James chapter 2 would apply to him. Can faith save us (at the judgment seat of Christ)?

 

[James_Newman]

Your criminal illustration would be more applicable to the judgment seat of Christ than to our eternal salvation. God plainly tells us that we did not do anything to merit His grace. Good behaviour never entered into His decision to send His Son to die for our sins.

Romans 5:8
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

JN: Your criminal illustration would be more applicable to the judgment seat of Christ than to our eternal salvation. God plainly tells us that we did not do anything to merit His grace. Good behaviour never entered into His decision to send His Son to die for our sins.

Romans 5:8
8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

HP: Who in the world ever said that good behavior entered into His decision to send a Savior to the world???

What I did try to get across was for that mercy and grace to be made applicable to our own personal sin and guilt, and in order for us to receive of that grace, God set forth certain conditions for us to comply with. These conditions have nothing to do with the grounds of His sending His Son to die for us, but have everything to do with fulfilling the conditions God said 'without which' salvation will not be accomplished. “Unless ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.”

 

[James_Newman]

Salvation from what? I see at least three types of salvation in the Bible.

Luk 13:4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?
Luk 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

What happened to the men on whom that tower fell? Did they drop straight into the lake of fire? We may perish in this life for sins. Paul warns the Corinthians about partaking of the Lord's table unworthily.

1 Corinthians 11
29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

Should I assume then that these men were lost for eternity? Or were they merely being chastened as a father chastens his children?

31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.

But it is called a judgment. The judgment seat of Christ will not be a happy experience for those who lived a sinful life. (when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world)

1 Corinthians 3:13-15
13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

I don't know about you, but being saved by fire sounds like something I want to be saved from.

 

[BobRyan]

The act of the will "Behold I STAND at the door and KNOCK. If anyone hears AND OPENS THE DOOR then I WILL COME In and fellowship with him". Rev 3.

Clearly this is an act of the will BEFORE fellowship - BEFORE union with Christ -- BEFORE "Christ within you".

Rom 10 shows that first comes BELIEF and THEN comes salvation.

1 John 1:9 "IF WE confess -- HE IS faithful and just to forgive"

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

JN: I might be persuaded, because it certainly sounds good.

HP: What further evidence did Agrippa need to be persuaded, when he said, “Ac 26:28 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” ?

Possibly it is not more evidence one needs, but a willingnesss to believe (in the form of an act of the will) the evidence that already has been presented.

 

[drfuss]

I thought it might be expedient to again list the various beliefs being discussed.

1. Unconditional Security - Once saved, always saved even if you stop believing.
Works required? No
Heaven assured? Yes
Advocates - Charley Stanley, etc.

2. Continuing Security - If really saved, you will continue to believe.
Works required? No
Heaven assured? Yes
Advocates - SBC Faith and Message, etc.

3. Conditional Security - Eternally secure unless you choose to stop believing.
Works required? No
Heaven assured? Yes
Advocates - Some evangelical and pentecostal churches, etc.

4. Victorious Security - Secure as long as you live a victorious life, i.e. His spirit bearth witness with our spirit...
Works required? No, but works are part of the required victorious life.
Heaven assured? Yes, if living for Christ.
Advocates- Some evangelical and pentecostal churches, etc.

5, Grace Plus Works - God provides grace, we provide works.
Works required? Yes
Heaven assured? Maybe.
Advocates - Taught by many liberal churches, but church official theology may be any of the #1-4 beliefs listed above.

6. Grace, Works, Sacrements - God's grace, our works, church's sacrements.
Works required? Yes
Heaven assured? Yes, if faithful to Christ.
Advocates - Roman Catholic Church, etc.

In post #22, HP asked me to define how I defined works in the above listed beliefs. In post #23, I answered the question. My answer, in brief, was that I defined works as something someone must do in addition to having faith (or believing) for God's grace to be applied for salvation. Works included doing things for: giving glory to God, helping others, fulfulling our obligations and responsibilities, etc.

In defining works, I was not endorsing any of the beliefs. I was only defining works for purposes of the above belief descriptions.

 

[drfuss]

The following are some come comparisons and grouping of the beliefs:

1. Belief #1 is the only belief that does not require a person to be trusting Christ when they die to be saved. Since this is a very basic criteria for salvation, I consider Belief #1 to be the most separated belief from the others.

2. Belief #6 is the only one that requires church sacrements for salvation. I consider belief #6 to be the 2nd most separated belief.

3. Beliefs #5 & 6 are the only ones that requires works for God's grace to be applied for salvation. Works is an important criteria that separates Beliefs #5 & 6 from all the others.

4. Beliefs #2,3,&4 can be grouped together as the only ones that believe all of the following: you must be trusting Christ when you die to be saved, works are not required for salvation, church sacrements are not required, and your salvation is secure as long as you trust Christ.

5. Belief #2 believes in OSAS while Beliefs #3 & 4 do not. However, consider a "Christian" that trusts and serves Christ for a few years, and then stops trusting Christ. Belief #2 says that person was not a Christian in the first place; Beliefs #3 & 4 says that Christian forfeited his salvation. For practical purposes, the results are the same. The real difference is only in the terminology, i.e. was the person really a Christian in first place.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

drfuss: My answer, in brief, was that I defined works as something someone must do in addition to having faith (or believing) for God's grace to be applied for salvation. Works included doing things for: giving glory to God, helping others, fulfilling our obligations and responsibilities, etc.

HP: Your answers create more questions than they resolve. You have not settled the issue if in fact you must ‘do something’ to exercise faith or belief. Just because you decide to exclude faith and belief from works settles nothing. James states that faith without works is dead. Whatever it is that you describe as faith or belief is simply dead according to Scripture, IF you insist on separating it from anything man must do. Do you understand faith and belief as if they just fall out of the sky upon man apart from his will being active at all?

Let’s see if in fact you understand the import of what you are trying to categorize. Can you exercise faith apart from an act of the will? If my will is active, and must choose a specific intent in order to exercise faith, how is that not ‘doing something in order for God’s grace to be applied for salvation?’ When God calls upon man to repent, must he ‘do something in order for grace to be applied for salvation?’ Do you believe man is totally passive in faith, belief and repentance? Are they all of God, all of man, or is both man and God involved in all three?

 

[BobRyan]

There is NO such thing as "faith without works" - but those works do not "earn us the right to go to heaven"

Those who "imagine" faith without works have in fact merely renamed "presumption"

 

[BobRyan]

Matt 7 shows us that "it is faith THAT works"

Rom 2 shows us that "it is faith THAT works"

James 2 shows us that "it is faith THAT works"

Eph 2 shows us that "it is faith THAT works" -- for we have been "Created unto Good works". It is the very purpose of our new creation.

Romans 8 Matt 7 shows us that "it is faith THAT works" as we walk by the Spirit and put to death the deeds of the flesh

Matt 18 (last half of the chapter) shows us that "it is faith THAT works"

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BR: There is NO such thing as "faith without works"

HP: I would say it this way. ‘In a sense’ faith is most definitely apart from works, and in another sense, faith cannot be apart from works. Both are Scriptural ideas, both utilizing the word ‘works’ in two different senses. Works on the part of man, in relationship to faith and salvation, are never thought of in the sense of 'that for the sake of,' but works are thought of in relationship to faith and salvation in the sense of not without which.

If we are ever going to make sense of the texts that appear at first glance to be at antipodes with each other in realtionship to faith and works, we are going to have to apply ourselves to the understanding of the different senses of the word 'works.'

 

[BobRyan]

Works is mentioned in Romans 3 as "Works apart from faith" and is condemned.

But in Romans 2 and 6 and 8 and in James 2 we see "Faith THAT works".

Even "belief itself" is said by Christ to be works.

 

[drfuss]

HP: Your answers create more questions than they resolve. You have not settled the issue if in fact you must ‘do something’ to exercise faith or belief. Just because you decide to exclude faith and belief from works settles nothing. James states that faith without works is dead. Whatever it is that you describe as faith or belief is simply dead according to Scripture, IF you insist on separating it from anything man must do. Do you understand faith and belief as if they just fall out of the sky upon man apart from his will being active at all?


I was just defining works as related to the definitions of the various beliefs. I think those of Beliefs #5 & 6 would have no problem with my definition. However, I grant you that this can be a hazy area for some with the other beliefs.

Perhaps you could update the beliefs using the same brief format as I have listed them.

I would also be interested in your reaction to my post yesterday on some comparisons and groupings of the beliefs.

Thanks,
drfuss

 

[J. Jump]

You all are funny. It's just hilarious to see you all dance around Scripture trying so desperately to make them fit your understanding instead of the other way around. And in the midst of you doing this you can't even see you are contradicting yourself in the same posts.

BobRyan says that faith can not be separate from works, which directly violates Scripture, then he tries to make it mesh by saying that works don't earn us anything, which is just hilarious, because now he is destroying the meaning of works.

There really is no point in discussing things further with you all becuase you don't even care to think that someone else might be right. But I will enjoy continuing to what you all :type: around the Scriptures.

However I will continue to post no so much to address you all, but rather to help those that might be tempted to fall into your false teachings.

Works don't earn us anything . . . :laugh: . . . I just can't get over that one.

 

[drfuss]

JJ writes:
"You all are funny. It's just hilarious to see you all dance around Scripture trying so desperately to make them fit your understanding instead of the other way around. And in the midst of you doing this you can't even see you are contradicting yourself in the same posts."

This thread is about defining and comparing various beliefs on salvation assurance, not debating them. Suggest you read the first post again. It is necessary to define works to be meaningful in all six beliefs.

drfuss

 

[drfuss]

JJ writes:
"You all are funny. It's just hilarious to see you all dance around Scripture trying so desperately to make them fit your understanding instead of the other way around. And in the midst of you doing this you can't even see you are contradicting yourself in the same posts."

This thread is about defining and comparing various beliefs on salvation assurance, not debating them. Suggest you read the first post again. It is necessary to define works to be meaningful in all six beliefs.

drfuss

 

[J. Jump]

This thread is about defining and comparing various beliefs on salvation assurance, not debating them. Suggest you read the first post again.

That may not have been your intention, but debate is inevitable. But I do offer my apology if I have offended you with my post. That was not my intention, and wasn't thinking of you when I posted it.

It is necessary to define works to be meaningful in all six beliefs.

That's the biggest problem you aren't going to be able to define "works" to satisfy all. BobRyan says works are not meritorious, when in fact they are. So how are you going to settle that issue?