Arkady wrote: » As well as God and the Person themselves, do you think can other people be involved in someone's salvation, as a result of their prayers for example ?
Again I don't know of any mainstream Christian denomination that doesn't agree with this.
antiskeptic wrote: » I gather plenty have problems with 1. Many hold that you have to "accept Christ into your heart" or "believe in his finished work" to be saved. I would suppose folk can be saved without ever having heard of Christ. Would that not be a problem to mainstream denominations?
antiskeptic wrote: » 2. The object of faith would be problematic for many. Some would suppose "faith in Jesus Christ" or " in his atoning work". I would insert the word "believe God" for faith since Abraham "believed God" and was saved (so goes the model of NT salvation). Believing God is quite a different matter (in that it opens a whole raft of things one can believe God about) to modern faith requirements
antiskeptic wrote: » 3. Roman Catholicism supposes a person contributing to their being pulled over the line. Certain things have to be done by the person. Active work is required. There is a nod to the potential for salvation outside RC works but this strikes as a bit of a fudge since reference is made to the 'mystery of God' (i.e. we don't know) 4. As above, some would require a belief in Christ before crossing the threshold into salvation. 5. Again, RC problematic here since the credit can be part shared by those who contribute to their own salvation (or in RC, don't lose salvation granted to them by a failure to carry out necessary works)
Arkady wrote: » Yes but Abraham did a lot more than simply believe/have faith in God. Or could a wealthy man really self declare his utmost faith in God and then sit crossed legged under a shady palm tree for the rest of his life, secure in the notion of his now guaranteed salvation ?
Romans 4:1-8 ESVUK wrote: What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”
Arkady wrote: » I would have thought that those, who due to no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospels and Christ, cannot be held accountable for that ignorance, but instead can be held accountable in other ways. I'm sure God has his way of judging such.
Yes but Abraham did a lot more than simply believe/have faith in God. Or could a wealthy man really self declare his utmost faith in God and then sit crossed legged under a shady palm tree for the rest of his life, secure in the notion of his now guaranteed salvation ?
How does a Christian love their neighbour as themselves ? Again scripture is full of examples of those who don't simply say Lord, Lord, but also do God's will.
solodeogloria wrote: » Good morning all! Abraham wasn't saved by works.
antiskeptic wrote: » That would be the majority of people who have ever lived. The Bible doesn't give indication of two ways of salvation, just the one. Which means the essence of what saves must be the same for all people, irrespective of whether or not they have heard the gospels or of Christ. Which would appear to indicate that hearing the gospels and of Christ, aren't in themselves the essence of salvation. The thief on the cross is an interesting example. Cursing Christ one minute, then acknowledging his as Lord and saviour the next. You could say that he is saved by faith in Christ but that wouldn't explain why he had faith in Christ. Indeed, you can say that the something which brought about his change of view was the salvation transaction and his recognition of Christ was a consequence of that change having happened in him. He can be said to be saved by his faith in Christ. But the salvation transaction providing him with that faith is the actual nub of the issue. And whatever it is, it appears it applies to all who have ever lived and been saved. A person who has been born again, rich or poor, has gone through a monumental change of outlook - they now know there is a God. They now know they are to be saved. They now know they are sided with God in a battle against evil. Just like a person who has gone to visit famine areas and seen the situation with own eyes, the outlook change can be expected to bring about a change in action. The motivation for change doesn't come from fear of damnation. It comes from change in outlook. As Paul himself argues in Romans: are we to simply go on sinning. By no means: don't we know whose side of the battle we are on. To go on happily sinning, for a Christian, is as incongruous as a Nazi solider, who has come to realise the evil he is fighting and switched to the Allied side, to go on fighting against the Allied side. It's that stark a line drawn. Which is not to say we won't sin. We have, afterall, the Bible tells us, sin embedded within our body and minds. And we have a personal battle to fight with the desires and lusts of body and mind. And sometimes we will fail. And fail badly. And sometimes, if we are lazy and a slide back into complacency, discipline will come to bear from the commander in chief. Even unto the point of being removed from the game. But declared a traitor and cast into Hell we won't be. That very notion: grace unlimited is itself a motivator to row in alongside what God is attempting to achieve. As I say, the Christian is under new management. He also has the Spirit of God residing inside, to will and to act according to God's will.
Arkady wrote: » but this still doesn't explain how a rich man with sincere faith in God, who spends his life sitting cross legged under a shady palm tree, looking forward to his assumed certain salvation, is in fact doing the will of God, or how he is loving his neighbour ?
antiskeptic wrote: » The issue isn't whether sincere faith in God. The question is whether saved or not. If saved then salvation follows - since the person has satisfied ( as earlier outlined in my positing mechanism by which) the criteria for his being granted sure salvation. Whether he does or doesn't do the will of God subsequent to his being saved will have consequences for him but not his losing his salvation. I,ve suggested that he will indeed do more of God' will post-being saved (because of God taking up residence in the man, urging him in that direction). But whether or not, salvation will follow
alma73 wrote: » The man you picture would not be following Christ, Christ asks us to Feed the Poor, Visit the Sick, those in prison, To cloth the naked. Salvation is not a passive act, its an active act of following Christ and doing as he asked in the Gospel. To be fair on protestants who do not believe the same theology of salvation as Catholics, don't do have lots of works in their Churches, they are not passive Christians.
Arkady wrote: » Back with this worn out old sectarian strawman/misrepresentation of other denominations yet again ? Just as before, I'm still waiting for you to find any mainstream Christian denomination that claims he was, and post proper proof of it.
Galatians 5:13-15 ESV wrote: For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” But if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another.
Arkady wrote: » Yes but its claimed that only faith is essential for salvation, doing anything, including will of God, is completely unnecessary for salvation according to sola fide. Hence the rich man with faith can recline under the palm tree doing nothing, other than looking forward to his reward.
alma73 wrote: » Where does Christ say that in the Gospel?
Arkady wrote: » He doesn't, in either word or deed, nor to any of the apostles, nor any other Christian in the new testament spout or practice sola fide. . that's exactly whole problem with it's false claim. But according to sola fide, that rich dude lying on a deckchair as his servants fetch him cocktails is assured salvation, as long has he has only faith. Doing the will of God is apparently not required.
Ephesians 2:8-10 ESV wrote: For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
antiskeptic wrote: » You haven't really been reading what's been written, and any objection must object to what's written. Faith isn't the end of the matter. Part of the deal is that God comes to reside in the person by his Spirit. That results in a draw to a change of ways and if that draw is resisted, in disciplining. That discipline has any number of facts - up to and including death.
antiskeptic wrote: » The rich man might appear to the world to be enjoying the lazy days of sitting under a tree. But he won't be left in peace by God, and not being at peace with God isn't pleasurable. God ensures that much.
solodeogloria wrote: » Good morning all! Could you please respond to my post?
solodeogloria wrote: » There are plenty of passages throughout the New Testament that make it clear that works don't contribute to our salvation.
solodeogloria wrote: » It is only possible with God.
solodeogloria wrote: » You're getting confused between what contributes to our salvation and what we are called to do after our salvation.
solodeogloria wrote: » Our salvation remains secure.
solodeogloria wrote: » I can't help but think that the Council of Trent did huge damage in terms of Catholic teaching on salvation and works. The zeal to put Martin Luther down due to "heresy" caused more damage. Luther wrote extensively on Galatians and Romans where he saw the Apostolic teaching that we are only saved by grace through faith in Jesus. That's all. If you add works it lessens the importance of Christ's sacrifice.
solodeogloria wrote: » Simple maths. Jesus + works = salvation isn't the same as Jesus = salvation. The first lessens Jesus' death for us. Paul says that's really serious in Galatians. It is nullifying Jesus' death.
solodeogloria wrote: » Edit: the key question we need to ask is this. Where anywhere in the New Testament does it suggest that works contribute to our salvation?
Arkady wrote: » Little point when it's the same strawman every time.
Arkady wrote: » Again more straw manning, work alone, not work.
Arkady wrote: » Which self refutes the claim of its only though faith alone
Arkady wrote: » Why are we called to do it, if its not required?
Arkady wrote: » "Luther wrote" ? that's some sola scriptura you have now. A man with obvious deep physiological issues and a deep hatred of others, especially the Jewish people, thought he'd invented his own get out card for not doing God's will, and happily used for German politics by a German princes in their political wars with France, unlike the peaceful saints of God down through the centuries, who stood up for Christianity inside the Church, and not by playing Judas to Christianity and pied piper encouraging countless denominations, false teachings, wars and death across western Europe, and in Ireland.
Wikipedia wrote: It is true that the emperor intended it to be a strictly general or truly ecumenical council, at which the Protestants should have a fair hearing. He secured, during the council's second period, 1551–53, an invitation, twice given, to the Protestants to be present and the council issued a letter of safe conduct (thirteenth session) and offered them the right of discussion, but denied them a vote. Melanchthon and Johannes Brenz, with some other German Lutherans, actually started in 1552 on the journey to Trento. Brenz offered a confession and Melanchthon, who got no farther than Nuremberg, took with him the Confessio Saxonica. But the refusal to give the Protestants the right to vote and the consternation produced by the success of Maurice in his campaign against Charles V in 1552 effectually put an end to Protestant cooperation.
Arkady wrote: » No faith this time, what happened sola fide ? Yet again your false sums don't add up.
Arkady wrote: » [/B]I notice you've left out Faith yet again. Again repeating the same sectarian strawman, find me a single Christian denomination that claims works alone do. I've asked you that every time, and every time you have ignored it and then duck back in to try the same failedstrawman.
solodeogloria wrote: » Good afternoon! If it is a strawman, please help me understand you better. I want to do that. By saying works contribute to salvation. I'm not saying works alone save people in the post-Trent thinking. It is that grace is achieved by participating in the Sacraments. I.E - Grace has already been achieved, it's just that you need to work to get it. This is Jesus + works = salvation rather than Jesus Christ alone achieves grace by His death which is received by faith alone. Nick has already explained how the three work together and how we can say they are alone.
solodeogloria wrote: » Sola scriptura simply presents that the Bible is sufficient for salvation, and that nothing outside of it is required to be believed by anyone for salvation.
solodeogloria wrote: » I don't hate you. I simply disagree with you. The Christian should earnestly love one another. I long to help you understand my position and I hope to understand yours with God's help. We should be giving grace to one another. That's what I long for. Us to come to a better knowledge of God's Son Jesus. What's your aim in posting?
Arkady wrote: » I have but you continually revert to the strawman of pretending your arguing against works alone instead of Faith combined with doing the will of God, and then jump to claiming that faith alone doesn't mean faith alone when your position becomes contradictory and untenable. Nick left when his contradictions were pointed out and he ran out of ad hominems and still hasn't replied to the questions he was asked.
Arkady wrote: » And yet your left reverting to "what Luther wrote" and continually having to refer to him and what he said instead of scripture. So much for sola scriptura.
Arkady wrote: » It's nothing to do with me, its about discussing how the five solas are clearly self contradictory, it is interesting that both Nick and yourself both continually tried to revert to making it about the poster instead of the posts when your contradictory claims are pointed out.
solodeogloria wrote: » Good afternoon! This is my last post today. I think you've misunderstood me. The Bible is clear that our good works come from God so we cannot boast in them. Faith + works is equally problematic to works based salvation. Why? It minimises the cross of Christ.
solodeogloria wrote: » Luther's commentaries about Scripture are still talking about Scripture. I've explained about how Protestants understand sermons and commentaries. It isn't my fault if you don't want to listen to me.
solodeogloria wrote: » When you imply that I hate you it is about you and it is personal. I'm called to love you and others on this forum and that's what I aim to do.
solodeogloria wrote: » Can you please answer my question now?
Arkady wrote: » Written by who ? The new testament places great emphasis on actually doing the will of God.
And why if his sola fide leads will lead to guaranteed salvation as it claims ?
antiskeptic wrote: » The Bible says a lot of things and we could spend the rest of our days pitting verse against verse without getting very far. Rather than go that route I thought to suggest the basic working and if your objections were met then you might approach the Bible from that angle and confirm that it fit what I was saying For the reasons outlined a couple of times to you already. The Holy Spirit taking up residence. There is ample NT reference to that notion.
Arkady wrote: » Appreciate that, the problem is the 16th century Western European Protestant political invention of salvation only from faith alone and excluding every thing else, from doing God's will, to grace, to Christ, to the Holy Spirit just isn't there.
antiskeptic wrote: » Salvation by faith alone has context, doing God's will has a context, grace has a context, the Holy Spirit as a context. They are all there in the Bible in context. We just disagree on the context. I suggested an approach (a reverse engineering of sorts). You don't want to go there (for good reason, it now appears). Fair enough. Have at it with the usual alternative: "my verse plucked from context vs. your verse plucked from context" - with whomsoever you please. You'll be at it from here to eternity without resolution.
Arkady wrote: » Clearly state any non-strawmen questions that have not been answered. The only questions I recall you asking so far, are not questions about faith combined with doing the will of God, but are repeated strawmen ones about how can people be saved by works alone - When no denomination claims they can. When this is repeatedly pointed out to you, and you're asked to prove that any denomination claims this, you always fail to.
Edit: the key question we need to ask is this. Where anywhere in the New Testament does it suggest that works contribute to our salvation?
Arkady wrote: » Thanks for the refreshingly honest answers anti, and that's a good example of where sola scriptura breaks down again
antiskeptic wrote: This one (sold scriptura) is problematic:
Arkady wrote: » Thanks for the refreshingly honest answers anti, and that's a good example of where sola scriptura breaks down again, resulting in countless interpretations and denominations and heresies over the centuries. And we haven't even got into trying to find some logic in the five points of TULIP yet . . . but that's for another thread.
solodeogloria wrote: » Good morning all! This is the question: It isn't a straw man as you have argued that works contribute to our salvation. I understand that you mean this partially but this still weakens the cross and it's sufficiency for us. I'm arguing that our works contribute to our sanctification which is different. The only invention is that grace is achieved by participating in the sacraments. Luther simply taught the Apostolic Gospel. It was the Papacy who argued for grace to be attained by works by our participation and the church being Lord over the Bible. Please show me how grace attained through participation in the sacraments is Biblical. I make no apologies for being Reformed. Much thanks in the Lord Jesus, solodeogloria
