• 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!

The Doctrine by which the Church stands or falls, Volume 2...

Status
Not open for further replies.

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
D28guy said:
OK, all I am going to say is that every single scripture you posted is well known to everyone on my side of this arguement. (the truth of justification through faith alone)

Those passages of scripture do not disturb our position in that slightest bit. They fit like a hand in a glove with the truth of justification through faith in Christ alone. You are doing the same thing that the Roman Catholic cult does so well, and that is to fail to interpret them in light of the whole of scripture. In light of the whole of scripture, we end up with those passages speaking to more than one issue, but they never speak to our works having any part in our justification.

Well said. But Here is the problem - when "OSAS" is liberally tossed into the mix and so commonly accepte by the group that holds to the truth of Justified-by-faith "apart from the works of the Law" Rom 3 -- they shoot their own argument in the foot and open the door to the DT post exposing the problem for the "Justified-by-faith" group.

Your response illustrates the problem perfectly

D28Guy
Sometimes the negative consequence of falling away, or disobedience, is to lose the rewards that would have been ours in heaven, as opposed to gaining them.

Read carefully the list of examples that DT gave and SHOW that the texts "limit themselves to rewards among the saved" SHOW that they are in all cases "Describing the Gospel SAVED condition".

The problem is that you assume it -- but don't actually show that the list of texts he gave could ever be bent to that extent.

And that is the problem that when ignored leaves the two sides talkikng past each other.

So while I agree with the Justified-by-faith group I also agree with DT that they have gone to such an extreme error with OSAS as to difuse the benefit of thei Justified-by-faith position.

in Christ,

Bob
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Doubting Thomas said:
Continuing on....

Except that one of the verses that you conveniently left out (that I mentioned in the earlier thread) actually does speak about that issue:

“You see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. (2:24)

...and that in context James is in fact talking about SALVATION: “What does it profit, my brethren [ie CHRISTIANS], if someone says he has faith and does not have works? CAN FAITH SAVE HIM?” (James 2:14)

All true sir.

A point that is rock solid from scripture "sola scriptura". As DHK and others have demonstrated here -- there really is no way to answer that part of your objection with Biblically sound arguments that pay attention to the details of scripture.

So here is the big question for you -- Would you be willing to conclude then that because those whose traditions and man-made-doctrines are in contradiction the texts that you so rightly bring out - that their teaching must therefore be "error"?? Are you willing to set this up using scripture "As the test" of their doctrine?

I certainly would -- but would you?

in Christ,

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Doubting Thomas said:
Except that in several of the passages I offered, it's not mere rewards in heaven that are being lost or gained, it's 'Heaven' itself that's lost or gained!

Again, here's Peter:
“But also for this reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, ...
Therefore brethren be even more diligent to make your calling and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble; for so an entrance will supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:5-11).

And Paul:
"[God] who 'will render to each one according to his deeds'; eternal life to do those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness--indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek." (Romans 2:6-10)

Again you are taking a rock-solid position from scripture alone. And these arguments such as you are giving have practically FILLED the OSAS threads showing that it is OSAS that objects to them and seeks to avoid the inconvenient details listed in those texts.

YET your argument continues to be a "sola scriptura" case made -- so are you willing to conclude then that based on a sola scriptura argument - the OSAS position is in error?

If so -- I think we have progress. And certainly you will find that each time you opposed on this thread it will be from the OSAS position.

But I would argue that we are saved by grace through faith "NOT of works" from a NON-OSAS position.

From a position that IS able to freely accept the "loss of salvation" warnings of Romans 11 and of Matt 18 "Forgiveness revoked" lesson.

My argument is that EVEN the good deeds of the saints do not "earn" heaven -- the SHOW the Matt 7 fruit of the "new Creation" they give evidence that one has been truly born again.

in Christ,

Bob
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Doubting Thomas


Quote:d28guy
Sometimes they encourage us to live properly because we are children of the Light...through faith alone...and its the only truly rewarding way to live.

But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.” (1 John 1:7)
Not only is living as children of light "truly rewarding", our being cleansed by the blood of Christ is contigent on us presently walking in the Light.

“Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says I know Him and does not keep His commandments is a liar and the truth of God is not in him.” (1 John 2:3-4)

Notice John doesn't say here "if one doesn't keep His commandements...well...he really should because that's the only truly rewarding way to live." Rather, John calls that one a "liar" who claims to know God yet doesn't keep His commandments and that "the truth of God is not in him"

Quote:d28guy
On and on and on it goes.


Indeed it does. :BangHead:

Quote:D28guy
We are justified in Gods eyes through faith alone. It could not possibly be any clearer.


A point which you have repeatedly failed to demonstrate, and which is actually falsified by Scripture.

Your objection is to the OSAS flaw that must deny the Bible warnings about the loss of salvation - and you seem to claim that SINCE that part is in error SO ALSO is the part about being justified "by faith apart from the works of the law" Romans 3.

You are missing two things.

1. There are two justifications in scripture. The FUTURE one seen in Romans 2, and James 2 and Daniel 7, Matt 7.
"Justified by works and not by faith alone". The future form is corporate and objective - it does not change the state of the sinner it merely confirms what it already is either lost or saved! "By their fruits you shall know them"

The PAST one seen in Romans 3 and in Romans 5:1-3 "by faith apart from the works of the Law" -- it brings no merit of man -- and it changes the state from lost to saved.

2. The other thing you are missing is that OSAS is not the only option of for "Justification by faith apart from the works of the Law" -- though the ones who embrace the error of OSAS like to invent that idea.

The fact that the sinner MUST persevere to STAY saved is a proven Bible fact and you gave that evidence in triplicate -- well done.

in Christ,

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
BobRyan said:
All true sir.

A point that is rock solid from scripture "sola scriptura". As DHK and others have demonstrated here -- there really is no way to answer that part of your objection with Biblically sound arguments that pay attention to the details of scripture.
If you were given Biblically sound arguments, would you even listen to them.

A man convinced agaisnt his will is of the same opinion still.
So here is the big question for you -- Would you be willing to conclude then that because those whose traditions and man-made-doctrines are in contradiction the texts that you so rightly bring out - that their teaching must therefore be "error"?? Are you willing to set this up using scripture "As the test" of their doctrine?

I certainly would -- but would you?
If you start with a false premise you obviously will conclude with error, and in most cases concerning theology--heresy.
First of all, no one here has based any of their doctrine on tradition and man-made-doctrines, except for the Catholics (who will admit to Tradition), and the SDA's (who have woman-made doctrine from EGW). The Baptists have long held to sola scriptura. Don't accuse us of anything but.

Those who purport having a rock solid argument against salvation by faith alone are in fact standing on sinking sand. Again, the verses quoted are quoted without their proper context considered.
 

Doubting Thomas

Active Member
Bob,

I think you and I agree on this issue more than you realize. I'll therefore respond to this particular post (and then at the end respond to your earlier comments about "sola Sciptura" as it relates to my argumentation)

BobRyan said:
Your objection is to the OSAS flaw that must deny the Bible warnings about the loss of salvation - and you seem to claim that SINCE that part is in error SO ALSO is the part about being justified "by faith apart from the works of the law" Romans 3.
Not all--I agree 100% that one is justified "by faith apart from the works of the Law". :thumbs:

You are missing two things.

1. There are two justifications in scripture. The FUTURE one seen in Romans 2, and James 2 and Daniel 7, Matt 7.
"Justified by works and not by faith alone". The future form is corporate and objective - it does not change the state of the sinner it merely confirms what it already is either lost or saved! "By their fruits you shall know them"
Actually, I never "missed" this. I agree that there is more than one justification in Scripture related to salvation. (I was actually going to write a post on this yesterday, but I ran out of time). Justification simply means "to be reckoned, or considered, righteous". When we are initially "saved"--born again and made alive in Christ--we are initially justified or graciously reckoned righteous by God through our faith in Christ apart from any works we could possibly boast about--this speaks to the Eph 2:8-9 passage (and others) which I exegeted in the original thread on this topic. However, we are subsequently "justified" (reckoned righteous) as we continue to abide in Christ and bear fruit--ie works of loving obedience. This speaks to the works of James 2 and the fact we must actively abide in Christ--John 15--and continue in His goodness--Romans 11--if we don't want to be "cut off", and that we must "add" virtues/love to our faith--2 Peter 1. This especially speaks to our working out our salvation with fear/trembling as God works in us to will and do for His good pleasure (Phil 2:12-13). So even here the works of loving obedience (ie not the "works of Law") we must do we can't boast about, because they are only possible by and in fact come from God in Christ working in us. Last, we are finally justified--finally reckoned righteous-- when we are judged by God "who will render to each according to his deeds" and given eternal life if we patiently continue (ie perservere) to work what is good. This of course is what is referred to in Romans 2 and John 5:28-29 (and 2 Peter 1:5-11). And even these works we can't boast about but are the fruits of our abiding in Him, for without Him we can do nothing (John 15:5). Yet, we must make the active decision to continue in Christ and perservere. God is able to keep us from stumbling, but we thereby must also keep ourselves (Jude).

The PAST one seen in Romans 3 and in Romans 5:1-3 "by faith apart from the works of the Law" -- it brings no merit of man -- and it changes the state from lost to saved.
I don't disagree with this at all. In fact the key phrase is "apart from the works of the Law". In context this refers to the Mosaic Law, and by extension any meritorious system of works which we attempt to earn our way into Christ and by which we could "boast". This, however, is not the exact equivalent to saying "faith alone".

2. The other thing you are missing is that OSAS is not the only option of for "Justification by faith apart from the works of the Law" -- though the ones who embrace the error of OSAS like to invent that idea.
Obviously this is not the only option, as I don't believe in OSAS while I do believe one is "justified by faith apart from the works of the Law". So I'm not really "missing" anything in this regard. :saint:



The fact that the sinner MUST persevere to STAY saved is a proven Bible fact and you gave that evidence in triplicate -- well done.
Thanks. And the fact that the sinner must persevere shows that one is not ultimately justified by faith alone but by faith which continues working through love :thumbs:

(Regarding the question of sola Scriptura...)

Now I agree with you that this is the Scriptural position, and I have indeed argued thus from Scripture. However, the fact that DHK and D28guy also insist that theirs is the "Scriptural position", shows the weakness of sola Scriptura. As the Apostle Peter said Scriptures can be twisted by untaught and unstable men, as there are some hard things in them--particularly some of Paul's sayings (2 Peter 3:15-16). So while I would assert that Scriptures "contain all things necessary for salvation ("scriptura omnia continet"), I would continue to disagree that Scripture by itself--apart from the consensual teaching of the Church across time and space--is sufficient at arriving at it's own correct interpretation (ie "sola Scriptura"), as is demonstrated by the endless debates on this board as to what is "the Scriptural position" on this and many other issues. *In other words, Scriptures are materially sufficient--they have all the "stuff" necessary for salvation--but are formally insufficient--they need to be correctly interpreted.

(I hope this clarifies my position on this issue)

DT
 

Doubting Thomas

Active Member
DHK said:
To those who take a position against "salvation is by faith alone," there are typically two childish responses.
1. The Bible never says that salvation is "by faith alone," as if it has to have that exact wording to express the idea. This is really a ridiculous point in logic.
2. And second, But look at James 2:24 where it does say "not by faith alone," a verse taken far out of context as demonstrated above. I am not going into that right now for it requires more of a lengthy response which even if I were to give DT would not accept.
3. The truth of the matter, even when given is often never addressed but simply avoided.
For example many times I have gone phrase by phrase through Eph.2:8,9 demonstrating how every phrase in those two verses scream "faith alone." But the opponents would rather not respond to such an exposition and just avoid it.

Um....DHK, I responded to a similar post of yours in the original thread almost two weeks ago, answering your assertions, and I've yet to get a response from you about it. So perhaps I can turn this charge around to you and suggest that you are the one who "would rather not respond to such an exposition and just avoid it."

So here's my response again....

DHK said:
Originally Posted by DHK
That was a non sequitor. Not once in my entire post did I refer to James 2:24, which of course you took out of its context. Tell me, is it really necessary for you to have James 2:24 in front of you in order to understand either Romans 5:1 or Eph.2:8,9? If it is then you are in a sad state of affairs. Paul did not have James in mind when he wrote his epistles. The one has nothing to do with the other. And yes you are being very childish. I gave you a clear presentation of how these Scriptures teach "faith alone," and like a little child you give the predictable response: "But what about James 2:24; but what abou James 2:24!"

And no, the word "alone" does not have to be in the verse. These passages are so clear, you are just making up silly arguments for arguments sake. That is very clear for all the readers to see.

I wasn't discussing the clear unamgibuous statement of James to those who don't disregard the overall context his epistle, and do know what he is speaking about.

I spent a lengthy post on exegeting Eph.2:8,9. Now you spend the same amount of time going phrase by phrase through the same Scripture and show how I should have come to a different conclusion. There was nothing read into it. There was nothing taken out of context.

You make a couple different assertions above (in addition to your persistent childish namecalling), including:
1. I took James 2:24 out of context
2. You somehow proved Eph 2:8.9 teaches "faith alone" (despite the absense of the word "alone") through "exegesis" and taking "nothing out of context"
3. That I must somehow deal with Eph 2:8,9 without invoking James' clear statement since the latter (supposedly) "has nothing to do with" the former.

Okay, to hopefully avoid the continued charge of being "childish", I'll deal with these in reverse order.

First, you submit that despite the absence of the word "alone", Paul in Ephesians 2:8-9 somehow obviously teaches "justification by faith alone".
In reaching this conclusion, I submit you are making two fundamental erroneous assumptions:
1. That Paul is teaching that an individual's salvation is a once-for-all irrevocable event, and...
2. That Paul is excluding any and all kinds of "works" from consideration in an individual's ultimate salvation

Assumptions 1 & 2 overlap somewhat, but I'll look at each in turn with evidence from Paul's other writings which disconfirm DHK's assumptions before turning to Ephesians 2 itself.

First, Paul teaches elsewhere in several places that salvation is not an irrevocable event, but that our ultimate salvation is contingent on our continuing in Christ or continuing in the faith. Paul instructs that we (gentile Chrisians) must continue in the goodness of God or we too will be cut off (Romans 11:22); we are saved if we hold fast the word (if not, we've believed in "vain") (1 Cor 15:2); and that we will be presented holy and blameles in His sight if we continue in the faith and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel (Col 1:22-23). Paul himself did not consider his final salvation yet assured or attained (Phil 3:12-13), stating he disciplined his body lest he should become disqualified (1 Corinthians 9:27). Of course, I'm sure that DHK will dispute that Paul really meant that one has to continue in His goodness and continue in the faith to remain in Christ and be presented pure and blameless in his sight--despite what Paul actually clearly stated. The point is that the burden of proof is on DHK to "explain away" these clear statements, as they are contrary to the underlying assumptions he employs in interpreting Ephesians to mean one is saved by faith "alone"

(To be continued due to length of post...)
 

Doubting Thomas

Active Member
(Continuing on...)

Secondly, as I've stated elswhere in this thread, Paul's main concern is contrasting faith with "works of the Law" rather than works in general--particularly works of love. This can be seen succinctly in the epistle to the Galatians in which Paul states that "In Christ neither circumcision or uncircumcision avails anything but faith working through love" (Gal 5:6)

Of course, dissecting Paul's sustained argument in the epistle to the Romans (for instance) would take a long time indeed, but this distinction--between "works of the law" and "works of loving obedience"--can be detected just from reading the book from start to finish, especially in context of his entire corpus. Particularly this distinction should be evident early in Paul's epistle where he does teach that God will grant eternal life (or its opposite) in accordance with our works:

"[God] who 'will render to each one according to his deeds'; eternal life to do those who by patient continuence in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness--indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek." (Romans 2:6-10)

So here's a clear statement from Paul himself that salvation (ETERNAL LIFE) will be given to those who work what is good. (So unless you want to propose that since Paul didn't have ROMANS in front of him when he wrote to the Ephesians that this statement in ROMANS can have no bearing on the meaning of "the other" (in EPHESIANS), then I suggest we must keep this passage in mind when turning to Ephesians 2).

Now looking at Ephesians 2, knowing that Paul teaches elsewhere that one's salvation is simply not a once-for-all irrevocable event, what is Paul referring to when he says we "have been saved"? Looking back a couple of verses Paul states that God "made us [past tense] alive when we were dead in trespasses and sins" (2:1)..."made us [past tense] alive together with Christ" (2:5) and "and raised us [past tense] up together, and made us [past tense] to sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (2:6). Paul's "have been saved" [perfect tense], therefore, refers back to this initial moment of salvation (as described by Paul) for the Ephesian Christians which they (like he) had already experienced, the effects of which were extending into the present. Paul is addressing GENTILE Ephesians which is evident in verse 11 where he states that they (the same folks addressed in v.1-10) were "once (again past tense) Gentiles in the flesh--who are called [present tense] Uncircumcision by what is called [present tense] Circumcision ([ie, the Jews]". This gives us a context to what kind of "works" Paul has in mind when he is telling the Gentile Ephesian Christians it's "not of works" that they "have been saved"--namely a meritorious system of works, as exemplified by the works of the Torah, which one could boast about. However, Paul goes on to state that the Ephesians were "created [past tense] in Christ Jesus for good works" and we already have seen in Romans 2 that Paul teaches that God will render eternal life to those who actually do good works.

So putting this together, in the immediate context and in the wider context of the Pauline corpus of writings, one can safely say that the teaching in Ephesians 2:8-9 is that one's initial moment of salvation--of being made alive in Christ--has nothing to to with the works of the Torah (or by extension, any system of works where one seeks to earn or obligate God to give them salvation about which they can therefore boast) but is rather a gratuitous gift received by faith. To assert that it teaches more than that is to ignore the grammar and immediate context of the passage, and to disregard other statements Paul made in his writings which teach we must continue in the faith to remain in Christ and that God will render to each one according to his deeds (Romans 2:6) and would thereby introduce serious contradictions into the teachings of Paul.

So having said that it's an easy logical step to demonstrate that DHK has not "proven" that Ephesians 2:8-9 teaches one is ultimately justified or saved by faith alone. This is particularly true when one considers "salvation" and "faith" and "works" in not only the wider Pauline context, but in the even wider NT context as a whole. So at this point we turn to the verse in James which DHK accuses me of taking out of context. The verse again:
"You see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24). That James is referring in context to SALVATION is clear in this rhetorical question in verse 14: "What does it profit, my brethren, if one says he has faith but does not have works. Can faith SAVE him?" So now the burden of proof is on DHK to try to prove that when James says "a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" that he is somehow not referring to that man's salvation.

[This ends my original response in the original thread, with additional underlining added for emphasis]


DHK said:
Mike has quoted dozens of verses that are beyond refutation demonstrating that salvation is by faith alone. They go unrefuted.
Not even close. He's quoted a lot of verses demonstrating that we're justified by faith in Christ--even by faith apart from the deeds of the Law--but not by faith alone.

As far as the few verses that DT has mentioned in the past couple of posts every one of them can be shown how either they have been quoted out of context or without context to make them seem to say something other than what they mean. If you want to go through them one by one I would be glad to, and demonstrate that there is not one verse in the posts above that contradicts the position of "faith alone."
Yeah, I think you or Mike had better do that, because you'll need to do more than assert I'm taking these out of context; you'll have to prove it without begging the question. For already Mike has tried to dismiss my verses as somehow referring to a Christian just losing his "rewards" or to folks who supposedly were never actually Christians to begin with, or something else like that, and I've already responded by demonstrating how that is not the case.

However I would recommend that one would start a separate thread on What does James 2:24 teach.
BTW, I am not at home right now and am not able to get to a computer as often as I like. Therefore my posts will be farther apart than ususal, but I will do my best.
Why does James 2 need to be in a separate thread? It is highly relevant to the question at hand. So until you or someone else actually attempt to demonstrate how I'm allegedly taking this out of the context, I don't accept your assertions--either that I'm misinterpreting James 2 and/or that it needs a separate thread.
 

Doubting Thomas

Active Member
Just so it's clear, DHK's original post to which I had originally responded (re: James 2 and Ephesians 2:8-9) is found on page 21 of the original thread of the same name: #202 (10/15/07 at 11:06 AM); and my original response was on that same page: #205 (10/15/07 at 3:45 PM).
This is for documentation purposes
. :smilewinkgrin:
 

Doubting Thomas

Active Member
D28guy said:
Doubting Thomas,

DT said:
"A point which you have repeatedly failed to demonstrate,..."

I, and so many others, have demonstrated it scripturally over and over and over again. And we will continue to do so. The truth extinguishes the darkness of scriptural error.
The Truth does indeed "extinguish the darkness of (misinterpreted) scriptural error", as I have demonstrated from Scriptures regarding the unscriptural error of "sola fide".

D28guy said:
DT said:
"and which is actually falsified by Scripture."

Nooooo, the *attempt* is made to pervert Gods truth by counterfiet groups like the Romish church and others. But Gods truth stands like a brilliant shimmering light in the midst of great darkness.
God' Truth does "stand like a brilliant shimmering light in the midst of great darkness", your attempt to smear the truth by labeling it a Romish cultic perversion notwithstanding.

D28guy said:
"For it is by grace that you are saved, through faith. And that not of yourself, it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest anyone shgould boast."

(and oh how we love to boast. We just have to take some credit so that we can say that (((WE EARNED IT!!!))). God help us)
And I've exegeted this passage (twice now) in my response to DHK above. It doesn't teach one is ultimately justified by faith alone.

And by the way, some people think that passages ends there, but it gets even better...
And none of them teach we are justified by faith alone.

And, Mike, in the original post of this thread (volume 2), you tried to dismiss the relevance of the scriptures I had originally quoted by saying they only apply to Christian's losing "rewards" or to folks who were never actually Christians to begin with, or something else like that, and I in turn demonstrated that your dismissal fails on Scriptural grounds.
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
DT -

Your Biblically sound presentation for the real fallacy of OSAS and the fact that the Bible does not support it -- is irrefutable.

Your explanation of your acceptance of Romans 3 "justified by faith apart from the works of the law" was well stated -- clearly I missed that in the scan of the discussion -- again you have done well and I applaud your careful presentation of details of scripture not entirely acceptable to those who cling to the man-made tradition of OSAS.


Should you ever want to see the many here who agree with you on these points -- visit the OSAS threads!

in Christ,

Bob
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Doubting Thomas said:
(Regarding the question of sola Scriptura...)

Now I agree with you that this is the Scriptural position, and I have indeed argued thus from Scripture. However, the fact that DHK and D28guy also insist that theirs is the "Scriptural position", shows the weakness of sola Scriptura.

How so?

1. You have been arguing that when both views are compared to scripture - scripture clearly supports the one and debunks the other.

2. Scripture is a "common authority" for both sides -- in fact that "same authority" so it is the closest you will ever come to a single arena of common ground to decide a disputed idea.

3. By contrast EACH of you has his own "magesterium" telling him that this way is right and the other guy is wrong. Neither side is likely to go to the other side's magesterium and let them decide the matter.

So how is "Sola Scriptura" not working here? What is "the alternative" in this case??

As the Apostle Peter said Scriptures can be twisted by untaught and unstable men, as there are some hard things in them--particularly some of Paul's sayings (2 Peter 3:15-16).

True the bending of scripture has never been in question -- man-made tradition is good at it as we saw in Mark 7.

So while I would assert that Scriptures "contain all things necessary for salvation ("scriptura omnia continet"), I would continue to disagree that Scripture by itself--apart from the consensual teaching of the Church across time and space--is sufficient at arriving at it's own correct interpretation (ie "sola Scriptura")

But don't you have to BE a member of the church that you appeal to for doctrinal direction before you accept it's authority?

Hint: No one debating this issue is catholic.

Further - there is nothing in all of scripture indicating that church leaders can have wild doctrinal differences about scripture but still ALL church leaders will be infallibly doctrinally correct. In fact given the Jewish leaders rejecting their Messiah and the christian church becoming the RCC of the dark ages - we know that apostacy and corruption in leadership is almost "the norm" given 'enough lapse of time'. Spiritual entropy as it were.

in fact we see Paul say that error comes from WITHIN the church in Acts 20.

He sas that to Timothy in 1Tim 1 and he says that to Titus.

, as is demonstrated by the endless debates on this board as to what is "the Scriptural position" on this and many other issues. *In other words, Scriptures are materially sufficient--they have all the "stuff" necessary for salvation--but are formally insufficient--they need to be correctly interpreted.

So how would you use that in this case to resolve a disputed idea that is not resolved by the other side simply admitting to the truth of the scriptures you have posted?


in Christ,

Bob
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Doubting Thomas said:
Just so it's clear, DHK's original post to which I had originally responded (re: James 2 and Ephesians 2:8-9) is found on page 21 of the original thread of the same name: #202 (10/15/07 at 11:06 AM); and my original response was on that same page: #205 (10/15/07 at 3:45 PM).
This is for documentation purposes. :smilewinkgrin:

So then you're saying you want us to "click here"?

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1112299#post1112299
 

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
If you click on the number of the post - you will get to the link that you need. then in the Browser path section at the top of your browser just cut and paste the info into the text of your post.

(food for thought - from thoughtful food)
 

Doubting Thomas

Active Member
BobRyan said:
How so?

1. You have been arguing that when both views are compared to scripture - scripture clearly supports the one and debunks the other.

Clearly you and I see this, but others will continue to accuse us of "twisting" the Scriptures on this issue.

2. Scripture is a "common authority" for both sides -- in fact that "same authority" so it is the closest you will ever come to a single arena of common ground to decide a disputed idea.
Oh, I'm not disputing that it's a common authority, or even the primary common authority. However, I think when people began to interpret Scriptures in a certain way, it should give those folks pause if that particular interpretation is contrary to how the consensus of the Church across time and space has interpreted Scripture on that issue.

3. By contrast EACH of you has his own "magesterium" telling him that this way is right and the other guy is wrong. Neither side is likely to go to the other side's magesterium and let them decide the matter.
In practice we on all sides are usually first taught specific doctrines by our own particular "magisterium", and then we are shown the ostensible Scriptural support for our "mageterium's" views, as well as how to handle the seemingly problematic passages for that viewpoint. I experienced this as for years I was taught the standard SBC view on things such as OSAS--I knew the "proof texts" and how to "explain away" the "problem passages"...or so I thought.

So how is "Sola Scriptura" not working here? What is "the alternative" in this case??
Sticking with Vincent of Lerins' criteria of "universality, antiquity, and consent" as the reliable quite for correctly interpreting Scripture. I can find the exact quote from his Commonitory later where he sets out the "rule", but for now it suffices to say that Vincent indeed acknowledges the high authority/sufficiency of Scripture along with the problem of having a plethora of conflicting interpretations of the same.

True the bending of scripture has never been in question -- man-made tradition is good at it as we saw in Mark 7.
Ah, but apostolic tradition is another matter as we see in 2 Thess 2:15. The key is distinguishing the apostolic tradition from mere man-made tradition, and that key is "universality, antiquity, and consent".


Hint: No one debating this issue is catholic.
Depends on what you mean by "catholic". I'm not Roman Catholic, but I do consider myself "catholic" (little "c"), as in "according to the whole (faith)".

Further - there is nothing in all of scripture indicating that you can have wild doctrinal differences about scripture but ALL church leaders will be infallibly doctrinally correct.
True, individual leaders may fall away, but God promised that the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church (corporately).

In fact given the Jewish leaders rejecting their Messiah and the christian church becoming the RCC of the dark ages - we know that apostacy and corruption in leadership is almost "the norm" given 'enough lapse of time'. Spiritual entropy as it were.
And that's from folks drifting away from the norm of the apostolic tradition of the early church. Proper reform is in returning to the Scriptures and the ancient consensual norm of Scriptural interpretation in the Church. (*see my sig line below)

in fact we see Paul say that error comes from WITHIN the church in Acts 20.
True, but the WHOLE Church--the ground and pillar of truth (1 Tim 3:15)--doesn't fall away (Matthew 16:18)


So how would you use that in this case to resolve a disputed idea that is not resolved by the other side simply admitting to the truth of the scriptures you have posted?
I could point not only to the Scriptures (as I have done) but also to the consensus of how the early fathers interpreted them on this issue. That's all I can do, because some won't accept the evidence in either case.
 

D28guy

New Member
Greetings all...

Here is an excerpt from some excellent scripturally based teaching regarding this great and wonderful truth.

Needless to say, it is flooded with scripture...

JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE


Defining Justification

Justification may be defined as a legal act of God, at the instant we believe in Christ, in which He 1) forgives our sins, 2) imputes Christ's righteousness to us, and 3) declares us to be righteous in His sight, thereby 4) delivering us forever from all condemnation, guaranteeing for us a title to heaven.

There is a lot there, but its not all that complicated. I want to make three general remarks about this truth, and then take a more specific look at the elements of our definition.

General overview of justification

First, "Justification is a legal act of God..." By this I mean that justification is a legal declaration, not a surgical operation. We will see more about this in a little bit. For now it is enough to know that justification does not mean that God makes you righteous, but that God declares you to be righteous. While a surgeon operates inwardly on you to make you better, a judge simply declares what your status is before the law. He doesn't make you righteous, but if you are righteous he declares you accordingly. Likewise, justification is not an act of God in you, but an act of God about you. It is a change of our standing before God, not a change of our character.

The word justify is often used this way in the Bible. For example, Luke 7:29 says "when they heard this all the people and the tax collectors justified God, having been baptized with the baptism of John." It says that the people justified God. Clearly, this could not mean that they made God righteous. Rather, it means that they declared God to be righteous.

This is also evident from the verses where justification is paralleled with condemnation. Condemnation does not mean to make wicked, but to declare that one is wicked. So when we see justification and condemnation contrasted in Romans 8:33, 34 (which says "It is God who justifies, who is it who condemns?") we conclude that just as condemnation does not make a person wicked, but declares them to be wicked, so also justification does not mean to make righteous, but to declare righteous.

Second, notice that "Justification is a legal act of God..." It is God who justifies. Again, Romans 8:33-34 says "who shall lay a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies; who is the one who condemns?" But I want you to also notice here that justification isn't the only thing that God does. God is also the one who condemns. If you are not justified by God, you will be condemned by God. God is the one who will do one or the other to you. So your standing before God is in God's hands.

I'm sure that all of us here recognize that we are sinners, and therefore deserve to be condemned. That is not good news, because God condemns with a vengeance. Hebrews 10:31 says "It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Revelation 14:10-11 details the terrifying future awaiting those who refuse to worship the true God: "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or upon his hand, he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; and they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."

Justification in Jesus Christ is the only way to escape being condemned. In order to escape the wrath of God, you must look to Christ to be saved. Romans 8:1 says "therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus."

Third, "Justification is a legal act of God, at the instant we believe in Christ..." Thus, it should be easy to see that justification is not a process, but occurs in an instant. In the Scripture, justification is referred to in the past tense (Romans 5:1, 9; 8:1, 32).

Now that we have our general overview, let's look specifically at what justification involves.

What specifically does justification involve?

"Justification is a legal act of God, at the instant we believe in Christ, in which He forgives our sins..."

First, justification involves the forgiveness of our sins. This means that God stops holding them against us and declares us "not guilty." Speaking of justification, David says "blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven, and whose sins have been covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account" (Romans 4:7-8).

But how can God justly forgive sins? It would be wrong for God not to punish sin--what would you think of a judge who let all of the serial killers and ax murders go free without so much as a day in jail? But God is not unjust in forgiving us because He punished Christ for the sins of believers on the cross. So God did not just overlook our sins, but punished them completely. You deserve to be punished forever by God's wrath. But if you believe in Christ, God punished Christ in your place with His wrath so that He did not have to punish you. Christ endured the punishment that you deserve.

Romans 3:23-26 says "....for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration of His righteousness at the present time, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus." Because of Christ's death for sinners, God is just in justifying sinners.

"...declares us to be righteous in His sight..."

Second, God declares us righteous. It is not enough just to have our sins forgiven. That would only make us neutral in God's sight, whereas God requires us to have a positive righteousness--the righteousness of having perfectly obeyed His law. For example, I am not guilty of breaking the law in Kentucky--I am innocent of their laws. I am "not guilty." But I am not looked upon as having obeyed any of their laws, either. I am neutral to their laws. God requires that His laws be obeyed. Therefore, God must not only declare me to be "not guilty," but also must declare me to have perfectly fulfilled His law. That is, God must declare me to be righteous in order to be in a right relationship with Him. He does this in justification.

"...imputes Christ's righteousness to us [so that He can] declare us to be righteous in His sight..."

But there is another problem here. We all are sinners and we break God's laws every day. We are not righteous. So on what basis can God declare us righteous?

One of the most obvious things should be that God does not declare you righteous based upon your own good works--you don't have any! Romans 3:20 says: "by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin." Trying to obey God's law will reveal that you are a sinner, so it cannot justify you. But if you are not righteous, how can God declare you righteous?

The answer is that God gives us the righteousness of someone else--Jesus Christ. God declares you righteous based upon Christ's good works. That is, God imputes to us the righteousness (moral goodness) of Christ.

What does impute mean? In this context, it means that you a re given credit for something that you did not do. So when God imputes Christ's righteousness to us, it means that He gives us credit for Christ's obedience--He transfers its credit to us. You did not perfectly obey God. But Christ did. So God gives you credit for Christ's obedience. It is not that Christ stops being righteous when His righteousness is imputed to you, it is that He shares His righteousness with you.

Earlier I said that Christ died to pay the penalty for your sins. The Bible also teaches that Christ did not stay dead. He rose from the dead and lives forever at the right hand of God. Our justification stems from the death and resurrection of Christ: "He was delivered up because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification" (Romans 4:25).


(continued next post)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

D28guy

New Member
(continueing...)
What is the difference between imputed righteousness and inherent righteousness?

It is very important to recognize the difference between imputed righteousness and inherent righteousness. This distinction is at the heart of the matter. Inherent righteousness would be:
1. Good things you do for God.
2. Good things that God does in you.
It is not the ground of your justification. God does not justify you on the basis of righteousness that inheres in you. That is, He does not declare you righteous because He has first transformed you into a good person or because you have done good works to earn righteousness before Him. God does not look at you and say, "You've done a lot of good things, and you are a really good person. Therefore, I declare you to be righteous." The ground of God's declaration is not any works that you did on your own, nor is it any good transformation that God has brought about in you. Instead, you are declared righteous before God on the basis of someone else's righteousness--Christ's--that God lays to your account and gives you credit for. Imputed righteousness is something that is external to you and is given to you by someone else.

Difference between Rome and the Reformation

This is the essential difference between the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant church. R.C. Sproul explains this well: "The Roman Catholic view of justification [is that] God declares a person to be just when justice (or righteousness) inheres in the person. The person, under divine analysis or scrutiny, is found to be just. God justifies the just. ...By stark and radical contrast the Reformation view of justification is that God declares a person just based upon something [external to them], something not inherent in the person: the imputed righteousness of Christ."
This is how it is possible for Christians to be, as Martin Luther said, at the same time justified and yet sinners. Even though you are justified, you are still a sinner. This is possible because justification is not based upon what you inherently are (inherent righteousness), but is based upon what Christ did for you and you are given credit for (imputed righteousness).

Where is imputed righteousness taught in the Bible?

Romans 4:5 very clearly teaches that we are at the same time justified and sinners: "Now to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness." Notice that it says "God justifies the ungodly." That is, justification respects the ungodly. Therefore, justification cannot be based upon anything inherent in us--because we are ungodly when we are first justified. Also notice that justification is given to the one who does not work for it, but to the one who believes. Therefore, you do not earn justification through good works. Instead, it is given to you simply through faith.
We also know that this righteousness is imputed to us because of the many verses which say that it is not our own righteousness, but God's (specifically, Christ's) righteousness that justifies us. Jeremiah 23:6 says that Christ's name is "the Lord our righteousness." 1 Cor. 1:31 also calls Christ our righteousness. Romans 3:22 says that "the righteousness of God" is available "through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe." And in Phil 3:9 Paul says he counts all things to be loss for the sake of Christ, that He "may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith."
There are also many verses which speak of this righteousness as being given to us, indicating that it is imputed. Romans 4:6 says that God "reckons [or imputes] righteousness apart from works." Romans 5:17 says that believers receive the "gift of righteousness" from Christ.
Finally, there are also many verses which say that this righteousness is external to us--thereby indicating that it is not inherent righteousness that saves us, but imputed righteousness. In Luke 19:9-14 Jesus condemns those who "trust in themselves for righteousness." Isaiah 61:10 says "He has clothed me with garments of salvation, He has wrapped me with a robe of righteousness." The beginning of the verses says that for this reason we should "rejoice greatly in the Lord" and exult in Him.
Since this righteousness, then, is God's righteousness and not our own, since it is given to us, and since it is external to us instead of inherent in us, it is clear that it is imputed righteousness that serves as the basis of our being declared righteous.
Imputed righteousness is a wonderful thing! It is God supplying everything you need! And this is not just anyone's righteousness He gives you. It is Christ's righteousness! Christ is of infinite value and honor. And if you are a Christian, then Christ is the most important person in the world to you. He is your favorite person. You cherish and love Him. So be amazed that you are sharing in His righteousness!
Clearly, the concept of imputation is central to justification. It is the basis of our being declared forgiven and of our being declared just. God is able to forgive us our sins because He imputed them to Christ and punished Him in our place. And God is able to declare us righteous because He imputes Christ's righteousness to us. Christ gets the blame for our sins, we get the reward for His righteousness. 2 Corinthians 5:21 brings out both of these aspects very well: "He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."

"...thereby delivering us forever from all condemnation, guaranteeing for us a title to heaven."

Because justification involves forgiveness, being given Christ's righteousness, and being declared righteous, we are thereby delivered from all condemnation because there is no reason left for us to be condemned. If we are justified we can never be sent to hell (Romans 8:1). Justification therefore secures for us a title for heaven (Romans 8:31-32).

God bless,

Mike


http://www.geocities.com/athens/delphi/8449/just2.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Is there any place in all of that that deals with justification as used in James 2 and Romans 2:11-14?
 

D28guy

New Member
Bob,

"Is there any place in all of that that deals with justification as used in James 2 and Romans 2:11-14?"

Yes. From the same website. A different article....

"As Christians, when we are transformed by grace and given faith we are justified before God. We are clothed in Christ's righteousness; we are completely and finally righteous before God's eyes. This is what it means to have imputed righteousness. Christ's righteousness is given to us to be clothed in and on the cross He was clothed in our sinfulness.

The Catholic view states that through faith Christ's righteousness is infused with mans nature, or it is attached to man's nature; half righteous-half natural. But man is still not completely righteous. They believe that man must improve that righteousness and make it complete with our works; thus, we are finally saved by the works we complete. This is not true.

When we come to a true faith in Christ we are made wholly and finally righteous in Christ and are becoming transformed to the image of Christ through God's grace not our own efforts. Romans 5:18 states that just as through ‘one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life for all men.' Note the verse says one act of righteousness... not Christ's act and then completed by our many acts. But one act, by Christ, on the cross. We are saved by faith in the obedient life of Christ, His suffering, death, and resurrection. We believe that Christ paid the penalty for us and that by trusting in His grace to pay our penalty and to uphold us forevermore we are saved. The essence of faith is believing this promise and savoring all that God is for us in Jesus, as promised in the scripture. Regardless of how many times you come to Crusade, go to BASIC, go to church, read your Bible, pray, help people, not tell lies, do missions work, wear Christian T-shirts, or WWJD bracelets, you are not saved unless you have faith in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin. Quite certainly there will be a number of people who have done a great deal of deeds and works on this Earth and yet are not saved. Christ describes this in Matthew 7:22-23 that many will come to Him saying, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And He will say to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you who practice lawlessness.' Regardless of how great our works are on Earth, if they are not produced by faith we will not be saved.

So, what then is the place of works in a Christian's life? Let us look to James 2:14-24 for the answer. [READ TEXT] Did I just find a passage to contradict all that I've said? Note first verse 21, ‘Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?' Now many would want to say that this is old testament and therefore doesn't apply it to new covenant Christians. However, James is using this example as one we should model our faith after, we cannot cast it aside. Verse 24 states that ‘man is justified by works, and not by faith alone.' Wow! What does this mean!?

James is referring to the Old Testament when God commanded Abraham to take his only son Isaac and offer him as a sacrifice on the alter. At the moment Abraham is about to slay Isaac God stops him, provides him a ram to sacrifice, and Abraham is stated to have passed the test. So the questions we need to ask are: Is Abraham (and therefor we too) made righteous by faith or works? And, what about Abraham is ‘justified' by his works?

A clue to the beginning of the meaning comes in verse 22. It states that ‘faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness."' The text is very clear it is Abraham's belief, or faith, that is reckoned to him as righteousness. This is consisted with being saved by grace through faith, not of works. Abraham savored the promises of God, as we savor the promises of Christ, and was reckoned righteousness through faith, just as we are.

So what does it mean that Abraham was justified by his works? We have already seen that Abraham was made righteous by his belief, or his faith. James 2:14-26 is a passage regarding the evidences of a saving faith. It begins by posing the question of what sort of faith saves and it ends by concluding faith without works is dead faith, or unsaving. Preceding verse 21 is a question urging the reader to understand that faith without works is dead. Following verse 21 he is explaining to the reader that a faith that has works is complete, or perfect. So the context is stating that this sort of ‘justification' was an evidence of Abraham's faith, not a means for becoming righteous. That was done through faith. But Abraham's faith was evidenced by its fruit, its works. Simply put, Abraham was justified by faith before God, and his faith was evidenced (justified) by his works.

This term justification in the Greek means ‘to render (show or regard as) just or innocent'. This means that his faith was shown or regarded as just (or true) by the works it brought about. This is the same Greek word used by Christ in Matthew 11:19 and Luke 7:35, where he states: "Wisdom is vindicated (justified) by her deeds (or all her children)." This means that in this context to vindicate or justify means to take an action which demonstrates or evidences the worth or authenticity of something. We are rendered righteous before God by faith and our faith is shown true by its fruit.

That is how our works function in accordance with our faith. Works are the evidence that our faith is real. They are not the currency with which we purchase our place in heaven, but works are the receipt, or the evidence that Christ has purchased it for us and given us faith. Many people say I look like my father and sound like my father. Is this what makes me my father's son? No. I am my father's son because I am born of him. Looking like him and sounding like him are evidences that have occurred which bear testimony to the fact that I am his son. In the same way, talking like God, living Godly, laboring for God do not make us children of God. However, they are evidences that bear testimony to the fact that we have been born of God. [Example of King Solomon-1Kg 3:16-28]

Righteous works will result from every true faith, they are a necessary evidence. Christ spoke often about the necessity of this evidence. He stated in Matthew 7:17-19: "Even so, every good tree bears good fruit; but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, not can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." The good fruit doesn't make the tree good, but evidences its goodness.

So for us to have assurance that we are a good tree producing good fruit we must be able to recognize in ourselves the good fruit, so that we might produce more, and the bad fruit that remains from sin, that we might prune it away.

The first fruit of a Christian's faith is an inner-work, resulting in a changed heart. Galations 5:22-23 lists an example of these fruits: ‘But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, self-control...' Second Peter 1:5-7 gives another similar list: ‘In you faith supply moral excellence, and in your moral excellence, knowledge; and in your knowledge, self-control, and in your self-control, perseverance, and in your perseverance, godliness; and in your godliness, brotherly kindness, and in your brotherly kindness, love.' Peter even goes on to say in verse 10 that Christians should ‘be diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing of you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble; for in this way the entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be abundantly supplied to you.' Peter is saying that we can be certain about His calling of us (our salvation) when we see our faith producing these attributes and that it is such a faith that is supplied entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

http://www.geocities.com/athens/delphi/8449/works.html

Mike
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top