PDA

View Full Version : Recognizing the false Christian cults.



37818
04-02-2015, 06:31 AM
They existed in the Apostles time. And the genuine Christians recognize blatant cases. Three key things besides denying essentials of the faith. The false Christian cult makes claims that its centralized human organization is the genuine Church. Claims other authority over correctly understanding the Bible. And denies the gospel of grace alone through faith alone in God's Christ alone.

One Bad Pig
04-02-2015, 06:45 AM
In your opinion, would the Roman Catholic Church fit your definition?

37818
04-02-2015, 09:01 AM
In your opinion, would the Roman Catholic Church fit your definition?

To be honest yes. Except the fact of agreement on all the essentials otherwise required to believe in God's Christ (1 John 1:5). So I have known and know many Catholics who are genuine Christians.

37818
04-02-2015, 12:10 PM
To be honest yes. Except the fact of agreement on all the essentials otherwise required to believe in God's Christ (1 John 1:5). So I have known and know many Catholics who are genuine Christians. Correction . . . Except the fact of agreement on all the essentials otherwise required to believe in God's Christ (1 John 5:1). So I have known and know many Catholics who are genuine Christians.

I had transposed the 5 and 1

Soyeong
04-02-2015, 12:56 PM
They existed in the Apostles time. And the genuine Christians recognize blatant cases. Three key things besides denying essentials of the faith. The false Christian cult makes claims that its centralized human organization is the genuine Church. Claims other authority over correctly understanding the Bible. And denies the gospel of grace alone through faith alone in God's Christ alone.

Early Christians were originally seen as a cult of Judaism, claimed to be the genuine Church, and claimed authority over the correctly understanding Scriptures. "Of grace alone", "by faith alone", and "in Christ alone" are deceptive because our response to grace should be obedience, obedience is the proper expression of faith, and being in Christ involves practicing obedience. None of these concepts can be fully understood alone apart from obedience.

Scrawly
04-02-2015, 01:26 PM
Early Christians were originally seen as a cult of Judaism, claimed to be the genuine Church, and claimed authority over the correctly understanding Scriptures. "Of grace alone", "by faith alone", and "in Christ alone" are deceptive because our response to grace should be obedience, obedience is the proper expression of faith, and being in Christ involves practicing obedience. None of these concepts can be fully understood alone apart from obedience.

1) "but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all the Gentiles might come to the obedience that comes from faith--to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen." (Rom. 16: 26-27).

2) "For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. It teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age,

3) "to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me." (Acts. 26:28).

"Of grace alone", "by faith alone", "in Christ alone" are absolutely sufficient for properly understanding the gospel of grace and our response to the finished work of Christ.

37818
04-02-2015, 02:01 PM
Early Christians were originally seen as a cult of Judaism, claimed to be the genuine Church, and claimed authority over the correctly understanding Scriptures. "Of grace alone", "by faith alone", and "in Christ alone" are deceptive because our response to grace should be obedience, obedience is the proper expression of faith, and being in Christ involves practicing obedience. None of these concepts can be fully understood alone apart from obedience.

" . . But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; . . ." -- 1 Corinthians 1:23.

Obedience to grace is repentance from dead works.

Soyeong
04-02-2015, 02:03 PM
"Of grace alone", "by faith alone", "in Christ alone" are absolutely sufficient for properly understanding the gospel of grace and our response to the finished work of Christ.

Ephesians 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Paul makes it clear that we are not saved by works, but then good works come right back in at verse 10 as what those who are in Christ Jesus are created to do. Obedience that comes by faith then is precisely the good works that God has instructed His people to do in His law. So those verses affirm that those in Messiah do good works, that faith expresses itself as obedience, and grace teaches us to live obediently. However, when you talk about grace alone, faith one, and Christ alone, the important role that works play in the Christian walk is deemphasized.

Scrawly
04-02-2015, 02:51 PM
Ephesians 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Paul makes it clear that we are not saved by works, but then good works come right back in at verse 10 as what those who are in Christ Jesus are created to do.

I agree.


Obedience that comes by faith then is precisely the good works that God has instructed His people to do in His law.

"Bear one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ." (Gal. 6:2).

"Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, If a brother or sister is without clothes and lacks daily food. If one of you says to them, "Go in peace; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and be filled," and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, keep warm, and eat well," but you don't give them what the body needs, what good is it?
In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. (Jas. 3: 15-17). As all born-again, regenerate Christian's know - genuine faith produces a love for God, a love for others, a love for the gospel and a love for the Scriptures that expresses itself in obedience to the teachings of the New Covenant instituted in Christ's own blood.


So those verses affirm that those in Messiah do good works, that faith expresses itself as obedience, and grace teaches us to live obediently. However, when you talk about grace alone, faith one, and Christ alone, the important role that works play in the Christian walk is deemphasized.

This is only true of those who do not understand the gospel and its implications and/or are unfamiliar with the teachings of the New Covenant.

Soyeong
04-02-2015, 03:11 PM
"Bear one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ." (Gal. 6:2).

In other words, when you have a full understanding of the law and obey it, the result will be that you will bear one another's burdens.


faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

I've been emphasizing the importance of obedience, so this just reinforces my point.


This is only true of those who do not understand the gospel and its implications and/or are unfamiliar with the teachings of the New Covenant.

I agree, but then if you have a good understanding, then you should seek to express it in a way that those who don't have a good understanding will be able to understand.

Scrawly
04-02-2015, 03:55 PM
In other words, when you have a full understanding of the law and obey it, the result will be that you will bear one another's burdens.

Yup! "For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." (Gal. 5:14).


I've been emphasizing the importance of obedience, so this just reinforces my point.

And I agree because I understand what genuine faith is - and by the grace of God possess it.


I agree, but then if you have a good understanding, then you should seek to express it in a way that those who don't have a good understanding will be able to understand.

I strive to do just that.

37818
04-02-2015, 08:33 PM
Soyeong & Scrawly,

What has this to do with recognizing false Christian cults?

Leonhard
04-04-2015, 07:34 AM
Soyeong & Scrawly,

What has this to do with recognizing false Christian cults?

I think they're disputing some of the points you're making, or at the very least your wordings of them.

Leonhard
04-04-2015, 07:37 AM
Its seems you're basically targeting the Eastern Orthodoxy and the Holy Catholic Church with those extra points. But since what the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox believes, go back to the roots of the earliest churches, then if they're wrong... then there's only been false cults until Luther and Calvin.

37818
04-04-2015, 10:59 PM
Its seems you're basically targeting the Eastern Orthodoxy and the Holy Catholic Church with those extra points.Well, are those extra issues false? Question: Does the "Holy Catholic Church" and the "Eastern Orthodoxy" deny any essentials of the Christian faith? Did I say they denied the essentials?



But since what the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox believes, go back to the roots of the earliest churches, then if they're wrong... then there's only been false cults until Luther and Calvin.

Christ said, "I will build My church and the gates of the realm of the dead shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18).

So there has always been Christ's church. An essay (http://baptiststudiesonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Duvall-Successionism-View-of-Baptist-History.pdf).

Leonhard
04-05-2015, 12:09 AM
Well, are those extra issues false? Question: Does the "Holy Catholic Church" and the "Eastern Orthodoxy" deny any essentials of the Christian faith? Did I say they denied the essentials?

The first point is flawed, in as much as its not clear enough to distinguish a visible Church with a visible human head (the pope) and Apostolic Succession, but which is institude by Christ (the true head) and lead by the Holy Spirit. What do you think the earliest Church was under the apostles? There was already hierarchy among them, the Apostles had the right to teach and define doctrine, to interpret scriptures and bind people to certain readings of them, which is what they do in the letters we have, etc... That authority can't just be waved away, or justified in light of scripture, because most of scripture didn't exist back then, and even then hadn't been collected, and even if collected, was so scarce, expensive and rare that they had to be chained to the pulpits to prevent them from being stolen.

Your second point is merely sola scriptura.

Your third point is against just protestant doctrine. Oddly enough Catholics and Eastern Orthodox do not deny that we're saved by grace alone, and that any merit we have is imputed by grace and that without grace our works have no merit. What we deny is the Gnosticism that its merely enough to intellectually recognize that Christ is Risen, and "the essentials".

So I'm pretty much right, I think, that with those three extra points you're targeting all the older forms of Christianity, from Catholics, to Coptics, to Eastern Orthodox.


Christ said, "I will build My church and the gates of the realm of the dead shall not prevail against it." (Matthew 16:18).

So there has always been Christ's church. An essay (http://baptiststudiesonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Duvall-Successionism-View-of-Baptist-History.pdf).

What He says is true of course. The Catholic Church has always been, and will never fall. :tongue:

I'm still not sure how you'd maintain the truth of this saying of Christ, against the reality that baptists, or Protestantism in any codified form didn't exist until around the 16th Century. Either you'll have to accept that what the Roman Catholic says is true or is merely heterodox (and so one could firmly believe all of it without loss of salvation), or you'd be forced to accept that not only did the Holy Spirit neglect to maintain the truth in Christians so much so that basically all of them fell into grievous error pretty much immediately, and didn't make this broadly known until more than a millennium afterwards.

Adrift
04-05-2015, 07:20 AM
What we deny is the Gnosticism that its merely enough to intellectually recognize that Christ is Risen, and "the essentials".

What?!

First of all, how is following what is essentially Romans 10:9 (If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.) in any way a form of Gnosticism, and second of all, are you calling Protestants Gnostics?

Pentecost
04-05-2015, 07:42 AM
What?!

First of all, how is following what is essentially Romans 10:9 (If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.) in any way a form of Gnosticism, and second of all, are you calling Protestants Gnostics?

I did not percieve this as an attack on Protestants, it is I presume based on a charge made by Irenaeus against the Valentinians whom iirc made the claim that spiritual people could not sin, only material and animal people could, and that gnosis(knowledge) not faith is salvic.

I think Lepnhard is (rightly) distinguishing between intellectually affirming the holy truths of our faith, and contrasting against actually believing them.

Adrift
04-05-2015, 08:17 AM
I did not percieve this as an attack on Protestants

Huh. Well I guess I'm a bit confused then. When Leonhard wrote "Your third point is against just protestant doctrine." was he saying that 37818 was against Protestant doctrine, or was he saying that he (Leonhard/the RCC) was against a certain Protestant doctrine?


I think Lepnhard is (rightly) distinguishing between intellectually affirming the holy truths of our faith, and contrasting against actually believing them.

Hmm. Using the dictionary definition of "belief", belief means to intellectually affirm, so I'm not sure I see any distinction there. Maybe you meant the difference between intellectually acknowledging the truths of the faith (which even the demons do), and actually having faith, which is assenting to those truths, putting trust in Christ, and living those truths out so that good works follow.

One Bad Pig
04-05-2015, 09:02 AM
Huh. Well I guess I'm a bit confused then. When Leonhard wrote "Your third point is against just protestant doctrine." was he saying that 37818 was against Protestant doctrine, or was he saying that he (Leonhard/the RCC) was against a certain Protestant doctrine?



Hmm. Using the dictionary definition of "belief", belief means to intellectually affirm, so I'm not sure I see any distinction there. Maybe you meant the difference between intellectually acknowledging the truths of the faith (which even the demons do), and actually having faith, which is assenting to those truths, putting trust in Christ, and living those truths out so that good works follow.
I think Leonhard made a typographical error, and meant to type "again" not "against." :shrug:

Leonhard
04-05-2015, 02:05 PM
I think Leonhard made a typographical error, and meant to type "again" not "against." :shrug:

Yup.

Leonhard
04-05-2015, 02:07 PM
First of all, how is following what is essentially Romans 10:9 (If you declare with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.) in any way a form of Gnosticism, and second of all, are you calling Protestants Gnostics?

I would point out that you shouldn't quote mine, and use that as a method of exegesis. Weighing in on everything that St. Paul says, its clear that he calls people to radical conversion of the lives, turning away from their sins, and makes admonishments that those who don't will be damned.

This is not in any way inconsistent with what is being said here, because the Letter of James makes clear that faith without works is dead.

Leonhard
04-05-2015, 02:11 PM
The 'Gnosticism' part wasn't meant to say that protestants are gnostics, clearly they're not. However I think there's a gnostic tendency with the whole "Do you believe that Christ rose from the dead... good that its! You're on your way to Heaven, no matter what you do." Neither Lutherans, Calvinists or any other protestant has really held to this, but its a fairly popular understanding. It teaches that its the gnosis, the knowledge, that Christ rose from the dead, which saves. That acknowledgement is enough, but conversion and repentance is irrelevant.

When I said that the other points he lists are merely protestant doctrine, I'm not attacking protestant doctrine (I don't believe in it, but I didn't make that kind of point), I merely meant that he was setting out points that are meant to simple exclude Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy because they focus on a visible hierarchy and tradition.

Adrift
04-05-2015, 02:36 PM
I would point out that you shouldn't quote mine, and use that as a method of exegesis. Weighing in on everything that St. Paul says, its clear that he calls people to radical conversion of the lives, turning away from their sins, and makes admonishments that those who don't will be damned.

This is not in any way inconsistent with what is being said here, because the Letter of James makes clear that faith without works is dead.

Citing Romans 10:9 is quote-mining? :huh:

Adrift
04-05-2015, 02:39 PM
The 'Gnosticism' part wasn't meant to say that protestants are gnostics, clearly they're not. However I think there's a gnostic tendency with the whole "Do you believe that Christ rose from the dead... good that its! You're on your way to Heaven, no matter what you do." Neither Lutherans, Calvinists or any other protestant has really held to this, but its a fairly popular understanding. It teaches that its the gnosis, the knowledge, that Christ rose from the dead, which saves. That acknowledgement is enough, but conversion and repentance is irrelevant.

If no one teaches it, how is it a fairly popular understanding? Why did you even bring it up?


When I said that the other points he lists are merely protestant doctrine, I'm not attacking protestant doctrine (I don't believe in it, but I didn't make that kind of point), I merely meant that he was setting out points that are meant to simple exclude Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy because they focus on a visible hierarchy and tradition.

What specifically in his post were you asserting is Protestant doctrine? Can you spell out what you think Protestant doctrine is?

Leonhard
04-05-2015, 10:48 PM
What specifically in his post were you asserting is Protestant doctrine?

1) That the is not a Church is a visible, apostolic hierarchy.
2) Sola Scriptura.
3) Salvation by faith alone.

Leonhard
04-05-2015, 10:54 PM
Citing Romans 10:9 is quote-mining? :huh:

Its one line. I don't like interpreting the Bible like that, just plucking out a line as if it exists in a vacuum. The whole context of the verse for that is the lack of faith in Israel and the need for people to go out and mission the word. So here he's not talking about someone who happens to believe in Christ's Resurrection, but someone who actively on a mission.

This is not the same as someone who regularly falls into sexual depravity, gambles on the side, but goes to Church every Sunday and chews the fat with the others, and therefore thinks that his belief in Christ means his salvation is safe.

Adrift
04-06-2015, 04:34 AM
Its one line. I don't like interpreting the Bible like that, just plucking out a line as if it exists in a vacuum. The whole context of the verse for that is the lack of faith in Israel and the need for people to go out and mission the word. So here he's not talking about someone who happens to believe in Christ's Resurrection, but someone who actively on a mission.

This is not the same as someone who regularly falls into sexual depravity, gambles on the side, but goes to Church every Sunday and chews the fat with the others, and therefore thinks that his belief in Christ means his salvation is safe.

So you think verse 9 is only for Israel, and then, only in the process of missionizing? Did you not note that verse 12 says that there is no distinction between the Jew and the Greek, and verse 13 that says that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved?

Adrift
04-06-2015, 04:35 AM
1) That the is not a Church is a visible, apostolic hierarchy.
2) Sola Scriptura.
3) Salvation by faith alone.

Thank you. I note you skipped my other questions.

Leonhard
04-06-2015, 09:45 AM
I note you skipped my other questions.

I'm sorry Adrift, I wasn't aware that I had to answer all questions that you in particular ask me. :ahem:

Some of those questions required fairly long answers, and I didn't find it important.

Leonhard
04-06-2015, 09:52 AM
So you think verse 9 is only for Israel, and then, only in the process of missionizing? Did you not note that verse 12 says that there is no distinction between the Jew and the Greek, and verse 13 that says that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved?

That's sure is lot of implied views of you about what I believe. Are you aware of when Jesus said that not all who call to Him "Lord, Lord" will be saved? See how easily you can wring out inconsistencies by pitting single quotes against others?

Largely when you read the letters its clear that there's a message on throwing off your old lives, stop falling back into sins that lead to death (such as fornicating, drinking, lying, etc...), work out your salvation in fear and trembling. As well in our Lord's words. And that all this is part and parcel of being saved.

Can this be interpreted in a protestant way? Yes, I'm sure it can. I think such interpretations are deeply flawed. However we won't solve this by picking out a single quote from St. Paul. And I'm not interested in citing down and pitting line against line, that's never fruitful and never leads to anything good.

Adrift
04-06-2015, 10:37 AM
I'm sorry Adrift, I wasn't aware that I had to answer all questions that you in particular ask me. :ahem:

Some of those questions required fairly long answers, and I didn't find it important.

You don't, but I think it revealing when you don't.

Leonhard
04-06-2015, 10:51 AM
You don't, but I think it revealing when you don't.

Oh would you come off it? That high horse is a little tall for you. :lol:

But sure if you're that curious about my answers Adrift, and you want me to answer one of them. Give me one.

Not six though. If you give me six, I'll pick one, and answer that one.

Adrift
04-06-2015, 10:58 AM
That's sure is lot of implied views of you about what I believe. Are you aware of when Jesus said that not all who call to Him "Lord, Lord" will be saved? See how easily you can wring out inconsistencies by pitting single quotes against others?

It isn't at all inconsistent. Romans 10:10 reveals that the crucial requirement of 9 is belief in ones' heart, and that the profession of faith is a manifestation of that.


Largely when you read the letters its clear that there's a message on throwing off your old lives, stop falling back into sins that lead to death (such as fornicating, drinking, lying, etc...), work out your salvation in fear and trembling. As well in our Lord's words. And that all this is part and parcel of being saved.

It sounds like you believe salvation is a hard thing. A works-based thing. It isn't. Salvation is a gift, and gifts are not something that one works for. We can never be righteous enough to earn salvation, that's why it was given freely. It is clear in Paul's letters that after we've accepted Christ as Lord and after we've received his gift, that we must resolve to put away our old flesh nature, and renew the spirit of our minds to the new nature by the help of the Spirit. Paul talks about this in Romans chapter 7 and 8, and how it is the Spirit of Christ that helps us in our weakness.


Can this be interpreted in a protestant way? Yes, I'm sure it can. I think such interpretations are deeply flawed. However we won't solve this by picking out a single quote from St. Paul. And I'm not interested in citing down and pitting line against line, that's never fruitful and never leads to anything good.

The bottom line is that the implication that Protestants are somehow sneaking in some sort of Gnosticism is wrongheaded. If you didn't mean to imply that Protestants promote some form of Gnosticism in post #16, then it is a mystery as to why you would even bring Gnosticism up.

Adrift
04-06-2015, 11:02 AM
Oh would you come off it? That high horse is a little tall for you. :lol:

But sure if you're that curious about my answers Adrift, and you want me to answer one of them. Give me one.

Not six though. If you give me six, I'll pick one, and answer that one.

Oh stop with the melodramatics. It was a four sentence post. Its not like I bombarded you with a page full of questions.

I'll repeat the questions:

If no one teaches it, how is it a fairly popular understanding? Why did you even bring it up?

Leonhard
04-06-2015, 11:08 AM
This thread isn't really a place for me to expound on the entire view of the Roman Catholic Church regarding salvation. I happen to believe that few Christians will actually be saved compared to the number damned, which has been the normal view for Christians. That all Christians should be saved, has been a relatively recent phenomenon, even amongst Calvinists.

We don't disagree that salvation is a gift, accepted on the part of the believer. We disagree that works are essential to salvation. We agree that its grace that saves us, but you believe its merited by belief, and I believe this grace allows us to live just lives and allows our work to have supernatural merit (the merit of the work on its own is basically nothing).

The rest is a matter of interpretation, which can't be boiled down to a few quotes. I'm sorry Adrift, but it can't. Already you're gesturing outwards at the totality of the work of St. Paul like I do. I don't read him like that. Which was exactly the point I was trying to make.

As for gnosticism, its a very, very, very common view among protestants. If you have a more nuanced view where a Christian without works, in reality has no faith, then that's infinitely better. Then we both agree that being a Christian, and what's needed to be saved, is more than to agree with the Apostles Creed.

Leonhard
04-06-2015, 11:17 AM
If no one teaches it, how is it a fairly popular understanding?

I didn't say no one taught it. Luther didn't, and Calvin certainly didn't. Today? Any apologist and minister would reply to you that if you agree that Christ rose from the dead, you're saved. You've got the secret knowledge that God hides from the world in plain sight. You see the truth, you're saved... you sin, its not okay God doesn't like that, but you're saved.

Take the protestant community my mother came from. There was a guy there who'd every sunday donate a huge chunk of money, wafting the bills in the air before putting them down. He prayed, he sang, he listened to the preacher and talked about the sermon afterwards and could quote the bible, he told people about how sinful we humans are and how merciful God must be. However it was also known that he beat his wife regularly at home, and he never repented of that, and never changed his ways.

But he believed Christ had risen from the dead. He had the secret knowledge. He's saved.

This smacks of gnosticism to me. It doesn't make Christianity gnostic, because the Bible doesn't promote this at all. This man should have been mortally afraid of his salvation and felt as if his feet were dangling over the pit. He never did and the scandal of it drove my mother from that community, and to this day any form of piety smacks to her of the same fakeness.

I hope you see this and agree with me that Christ said "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" Jesus talked constantly about repenting, about turning away from sin "Go and sin no more." He warned people about their peril, and in particular he warned pious jews who were listening to him attentively that the road to damnation is wide, and to salvation narrow. And he didn't say this to people who scoffed at him, but to those listening attentively.

Is salvation impossible, no, of course not. Is it hard? Its grace we can't merit, but only ask for and that God gives to those who keep asking. And Jesus often talked about asking God often for good things. But I don't think we can allow ourselves the delusion that we can maintain our sinful habits, and nurture them for the rest of our lives, while being disciples of Christ. If you ask me it'll be one or the other.

Any view of Christianity that dispenses with discipleship and replaces it with the simple "I know God is real, and Christ rose from the dead, I have nothing to worry about from now on and forever." is a false cult.


Why did you even bring it up?

Because its a popular and false view.

Adrift
04-06-2015, 11:30 AM
This thread isn't really a place for me to expound on the entire view of the Roman Catholic Church regarding salvation. I happen to believe that few Christians will actually be saved compared to the number damned, which has been the normal view for Christians. That all Christians should be saved, has been a relatively recent phenomenon, even amongst Calvinists.

We don't disagree that salvation is a gift, accepted on the part of the believer. We disagree that works are essential to salvation. We agree that its grace that saves us, but you believe its merited by belief, and I believe this grace allows us to live just lives and allows our work to have supernatural merit (the merit of the work on its own is basically nothing).

The rest is a matter of interpretation, which can't be boiled down to a few quotes. I'm sorry Adrift, but it can't. Already you're gesturing outwards at the totality of the work of St. Paul like I do. I don't read him like that. Which was exactly the point I was trying to make.

As for gnosticism, its a very, very, very common view among protestants. If you have a more nuanced view where a Christian without works, in reality has no faith, then that's infinitely better. Then we both agree that being a Christian, and what's needed to be saved, is more than to agree with the Apostles Creed.

There is no such thing as a Christian who isn't saved. To be a Christian one must be a follower of Christ. So absolutely I go with what you're calling a "nuanced view" that a faith that sees no works naturally following is not a faith at all. There are plenty of people who use the word "Christian" to describe themselves who are not in the least Christian, that is, a follower of Christ.

Leonhard
04-06-2015, 11:39 AM
There is no such thing as a Christian who isn't saved. To be a Christian one must be a follower of Christ. So absolutely I go with what you're calling a "nuanced view" that a faith that sees no works naturally following is not a faith at all. There are plenty of people who use the word "Christian" to describe themselves who are not in the least Christian, that is, a follower of Christ.

As for who to call Christian, this term can be wider or narrower, but I think it must be anyone who has some belief in Christ and some affirmation of the Apostles Creed.

Beyond that we agree.

Btw sorry for being miffed, it was just that character assasination based on me not answering all of your questions. I've just come back from other debates with multiples of them, and to be fair one of your posts was free of periods, with each sentence ending in a question mark.

I haven't implied anything about you based on how much or little you've answered. I respect that you're a grown person with a life on his own, and that you focus on something things you think are more important than others, and rely on me to press issues I think you left out.

Adrift
04-06-2015, 11:42 AM
I didn't say no one taught it. Luther didn't, and Calvin certainly didn't. Today? Any apologist and minister would reply to you that if you agree that Christ rose from the dead, you're saved. You've got the secret knowledge that God hides from the world in plain sight. You see the truth, you're saved... you sin, its not okay God doesn't like that, but you're saved.

Take the protestant community my mother came from. There was a guy there who'd every sunday donate a huge chunk of money, wafting the bills in the air before putting them down. He prayed, he sang, he listened to the preacher and talked about the sermon afterwards and could quote the bible, he told people about how sinful we humans are and how merciful God must be. However it was also known that he beat his wife regularly at home, and he never repented of that, and never changed his ways.

But he believed Christ had risen from the dead. He had the secret knowledge. He's saved.

This smacks of gnosticism to me. It doesn't make Christianity gnostic, because the Bible doesn't promote this at all. This man should have been mortally afraid of his salvation and felt as if his feet were dangling over the pit. He never did and the scandal of it drove my mother from that community, and to this day any form of piety smacks to her of the same fakeness.

I hope you see this and agree with me that Christ said "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" Jesus talked constantly about repenting, about turning away from sin "Go and sin no more." He warned people about their peril, and in particular he warned pious jews who were listening to him attentively that the road to damnation is wide, and to salvation narrow. And he didn't say this to people who scoffed at him, but to those listening attentively.

Is salvation impossible, no, of course not. Is it hard? Its grace we can't merit, but only ask for and that God gives to those who keep asking. And Jesus often talked about asking God often for good things. But I don't think we can allow ourselves the delusion that we can maintain our sinful habits, and nurture them for the rest of our lives, while being disciples of Christ. If you ask me it'll be one or the other.

Any view of Christianity that dispenses with discipleship and replaces it with the simple "I know God is real, and Christ rose from the dead, I have nothing to worry about from now on and forever." is a false cult.



Because its a popular and false view.

Leonhard, maybe this is a popular view in Denmark, but it certainly isn't in the US. At least, not in any Protestant church I've ever been to (and I've been to services across the US, and even in Germany). Protestantism widely and heavily teaches that repentance of sin is the very first step in making Jesus Lord. I don't know any church anywhere that teaches that you only have to believe that Jesus was raised from the dead and that's all there is. In every salvation call, and in every one on one experience I've ever witnessed in my entire life as an orthodox Christian (and even when I wasn't so orthodox), recognition of one's sinfulness, and repentance of that sinfulness was the first step.

Now a view that I'm wholly aware of that is widely believed is that "If I do enough good works, and don't do too many really bad things, I'll go to heaven". I've seen this belief widely held among many people I know were raised in both Protestant and Roman Catholic households, but who don't really attend service more than twice a year, if that. Typically these same people don't know much about Jesus except that he's the bearded man who sits on a throne in the clouds.

Finally, I'm a little confused where you're getting the idea that believing Jesus was raised from the dead is some sort of secret knowledge. I don't know who you think teaches that, but I've never heard of it before.

Adrift
04-06-2015, 11:51 AM
As for who to call Christian, this term can be wider or narrower, but I think it must be anyone who has some belief in Christ and some affirmation of the Apostles Creed.

Beyond that we agree.

Btw sorry for being miffed, it was just that character assasination based on me not answering all of your questions. I've just come back from other debates with multiples of them, and to be fair one of your posts was free of periods, with each sentence ending in a question mark.

I haven't implied anything about you based on how much or little you've answered. I respect that you're a grown person with a life on his own, and that you focus on something things you think are more important than others, and rely on me to press issues I think you left out.

I apologize too if I came off too demanding. I wasn't attempting to take 37818's side in your discussion with him. Half the time I can't figure out what he's talking about, the other half the time when I can figure out what he's saying I find his views to be unusual and sometimes unorthodox, but when you mentioned Gnostics and Protestants in the same paragraph warning flags went up for me. It seemed to me that you were throwing Protestantism under the bus in order to counter 37818's post by weakly linking Protestantism with some variation of Gnostic belief. Hopefully you can see why a Protestant may reject that idea. If that wasn't your intention then all is good.

Leonhard
04-06-2015, 12:11 PM
Pretty much amen to the rest you said.


Finally, I'm a little confused where you're getting the idea that believing Jesus was raised from the dead is some sort of secret knowledge. I don't know who you think teaches that, but I've never heard of it before.

Its a quib about where its starting to look like gnosticism. "The rest of the world are ignorant that Christ rose from the dead, but you believe it, and you're sorry about your sins... you still sleep with a girlfriend... well that's sinful and stop doing it, but you're saved. You believe the secret that the world doesn't know."

I was making a parody that I felt they might as well have been saying. That's what 90+% of danish protestants believe. And here I'm talking those who aren't atheists.

On second thought, it might just be especially bad over here. :shrug:

Adrift
04-06-2015, 12:16 PM
Pretty much amen to the rest you said.



Its a quib about where its starting to look like gnosticism. "The rest of the world are ignorant that Christ rose from the dead, but you believe it, and you're sorry about your sins... you still sleep with a girlfriend... well that's sinful and stop doing it, but you're saved. You believe the secret that the world doesn't know."

I was making a parody that I felt they might as well have been saying. That's what 90+% of danish protestants believe. And here I'm talking those who aren't atheists.

On second thought, it might just be especially bad over here. :shrug:

Ok, fair enough. Sounds like Denmark is due for revival (well, I suppose that's true for all the West).

Abu Njoroge
05-06-2017, 05:31 AM
Although they are peaceful too me the mormons are a cult. I feel this way because of a couple reasons. One it is taught by them that the African race are descendants of Cain and because of Cains sin they were turned black. This is religious sponsored racism. I find the explanation that native Americans are a lost semetic tribe of isreal to be far fetched. The Semites are not the ancestors of all other races. This is why the Genesis story only goes back 6 or 10 thousand years at most.I would be willing to believe there were two Adams. one the Grandfather of the semetic people ant the older the grandfather of the human race.

Abu Njoroge
05-06-2017, 05:40 AM
Although they are peaceful too me the mormons are a cult. I feel this way because of a couple reasons. One it is taught by them that the African race are descendants of Cain and because of Cains sin they were turned black. This is religious sponsored racism. I find the explanation that native Americans are a lost semetic tribe of isreal to be far fetched. The Semites are not the ancestors of all other races. This is why the Genesis story only goes back 6 or 10 thousand years at most.I would be willing to believe there were two Adams. one the Grandfather of the semetic people ant the older the grandfather of the human race.

Perhaps all mormons dont believe the Cain theory? I hope not because Ive had a lot of positive talks with Mormons in my home town.

KingsGambit
05-06-2017, 08:50 AM
Perhaps all mormons dont believe the Cain theory? I hope not because Ive had a lot of positive talks with Mormons in my home town.

I believe many Mormons are ignorant of what their religion teaches. The Mormon church has tried to move away from this teaching in recent years and does not emphasize it so it is likely many are unaware.

I live in an area with many Mormons and most of them are very kind people who give me no reason to suspect them of racism on a personal level.

Jedidiah
05-06-2017, 12:11 PM
Ephesians 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Paul makes it clear that we are not saved by works, but then good works come right back in at verse 10 as what those who are in Christ Jesus are created to do. Obedience that comes by faith then is precisely the good works that God has instructed His people to do in His law. So those verses affirm that those in Messiah do good works, that faith expresses itself as obedience, and grace teaches us to live obediently. However, when you talk about grace alone, faith one, and Christ alone, the important role that works play in the Christian walk is deemphasized.

These good works follow salvation, they do not have an active role in bringing salvation.

One Bad Pig
05-06-2017, 05:26 PM
These good works follow salvation, they do not have an active role in bringing salvation.
Sort of. A Christian has been saved, is being saved, and will be saved. Consequently, works come with salvation, and show its progress; one is not being saved if there is no evidence of good works.

37818
05-07-2017, 08:10 AM
I think they're disputing some of the points you're making, or at the very least your wordings of them.


I apologize too if I came off too demanding. I wasn't attempting to take 37818's side in your discussion with him. Half the time I can't figure out what he's talking about, the other half the time when I can figure out what he's saying I find his views to be unusual and sometimes unorthodox, but when you mentioned Gnostics and Protestants in the same paragraph warning flags went up for me. It seemed to me that you were throwing Protestantism under the bus in order to counter 37818's post by weakly linking Protestantism with some variation of Gnostic belief. Hopefully you can see why a Protestant may reject that idea. If that wasn't your intention then all is good.

Talking in generalities are likely false. What was it I said that needs to be disputed in this thread? And what was it I said that you did not understand in this thread as to what I had meant?

And a specific, what is it about the keeping the Law to love God above all else has do do with identifying false Christian cults?

37818
05-07-2017, 08:32 AM
They existed in the Apostles time. And the genuine Christians recognize blatant cases. Three key things besides denying essentials of the faith. The false Christian cult makes claims that its centralized human organization is the genuine Church. Claims other authority over correctly understanding the Bible. And denies the gospel of grace alone through faith alone in God's Christ alone.

1) The false Christian cults make an exclusive claim to be the true church.
2) Make claims for an authority besides the written word of God.
3) Deny salvation [eternal life] is a current possession of a Christian by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

Bibleuser
12-12-2017, 06:54 AM
It would be good to review your points in the light of the attached Bible texts.

1. The false Christian cult makes claims that its centralized human organization is the genuine Church.
Acts 15:1-2, 6, 23, points to a “centralized human organization” of Apostles and Elders in Jerusalem guiding the congregations.


2. Claims other authority over correctly understanding the Bible.
2 Thessalonians 3:6 & 3:14 points to Pauls claim to only have right teachings.

3. And denies the gospel of grace alone through faith alone in God's Christ alone.
James 2:18-26 James points out that “faith” must have works also.
BU

37818
12-21-2017, 03:16 PM
It would be good to review your points in the light of the attached Bible texts.

1. The false Christian cult makes claims that its centralized human organization is the genuine Church.
Acts 15:1-2, 6, 23, points to a “centralized human organization” of Apostles and Elders in Jerusalem guiding the congregations.
Acts 15:1-2, 6, 23
. . . And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, [and said], Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. . . .

. . .And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. . . .

. . . And they wrote [letters] by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren [send] greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: . . .
The Apostles who are a key part of the foundation of the origins of Christ's church were yet alive (Ephesians 2:20) and the last of the New Covenant Holy Scriptures were not yet written including this account at the time it took place. And you are making an appeal to one such document which is an apostolic authority. Being Holy Scripture, not being any current claimed central organization. All such current "church" bodies make some kind of claim to these 66 books.



2. Claims other authority over correctly understanding the Bible.
2 Thessalonians 3:6 & 3:14 points to Paul's claim to only have right teachings.
2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14,
. . . Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. . . .

. . . And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. . . . Yes - in the apostolic authority of the then Apostle Paul and other Apostles. What we have now is this writing and other Holy Scripture of the 27 books of the 66 books.



3. And denies the gospel of grace alone through faith alone in God's Christ alone.
James 2:18-26 James points out that “faith” must have works also.
BU
James 2:18-26,
. . . Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent [them] out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. . . .

I had already answered this here:
Your understanding is mistaken. The Justification by works only applies to one who has been already justified without works (see Romans 4:1-5 with James 2:23). Abraham was in fact justified without works (Genesis 15:6) and much later justified by his works (Genesis 22:12) some 37 to 50 years later.

tabibito
12-22-2017, 05:13 AM
Acts 15:1-2, 6, 23
. . . And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, [and said], Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. . . .

. . .And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. . . .

. . . And they wrote [letters] by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren [send] greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: . . .
The Apostles who are a key part of the foundation of the origins of Christ's church were yet alive (Ephesians 2:20) and the last of the New Covenant Holy Scriptures were not yet written including this account at the time it took place. And you are making an appeal to one such document which is an apostolic authority. Being Holy Scripture, not being any current claimed central organization. All such current "church" bodies make some kind of claim to these 66 books.


2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14,
. . . Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. . . .

. . . And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. . . . Yes - in the apostolic authority of the then Apostle Paul and other Apostles. What we have now is this writing and other Holy Scripture of the 27 books of the 66 books.


James 2:18-26,
. . . Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent [them] out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. . . .

I had already answered this here:

The Justification by works only applies to one who has been already justified without works (see Romans 4:1-5 with James 2:23). Abraham was in fact justified without works (Genesis 15:6) and much later justified by his works (Genesis 22:12) some 37 to 50 years later.

Which is to say; you have admitted that he was justified by his works, and not by faith alone. The time delay doesn't affect the basics of the claim.
So - justification by faith alone ...
Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. Did Paul say this? Surely not. Or is it possible that there are two groups of law - the one being the law of Moses, the other; the law of Christ?
Romans 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: (faith doesn't even rate a mention here as a factor in justification.)

Romans 3: 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (not, "without deeds of any kind" but "without deeds of the law".
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Justified by faith, not our own, but that of Christ Jesus.

Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. And here, we are said to be justified by his blood.

The picture is VERY complex, but even in these few verses, the claim that we are justified by faith ALONE is demonstrated to be false.

Bibleuser
12-22-2017, 10:36 AM
Which is to say; you have admitted that he was justified by his works, and not by faith alone. The time delay doesn't affect the basics of the claim.
So - justification by faith alone ...
Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. Did Paul say this? Surely not. Or is it possible that there are two groups of law - the one being the law of Moses, the other; the law of Christ?
Romans 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: (faith doesn't even rate a mention here as a factor in justification.)

Romans 3: 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (not, "without deeds of any kind" but "without deeds of the law".
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Justified by faith, not our own, but that of Christ Jesus.

Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. And here, we are said to be justified by his blood.

The picture is VERY complex, but even in these few verses, the claim that we are justified by faith ALONE is demonstrated to be false.

James 2:24
You see that a man is to be declared righteous by works and not by faith alone.
BU

tabibito
12-22-2017, 11:22 PM
James 2:24
You see that a man is to be declared righteous by works and not by faith alone.
BU

The word under immediate review was "justify" BU - "righteous" has been discussed before.

37818
12-23-2017, 08:03 AM
Which is to say; you have admitted that he was justified by his works, and not by faith alone. The time delay doesn't affect the basics of the claim.
So - justification by faith alone ...
Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. Did Paul say this? Surely not. Or is it possible that there are two groups of law - the one being the law of Moses, the other; the law of Christ?
Romans 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: (faith doesn't even rate a mention here as a factor in justification.)

Romans 3: 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. (not, "without deeds of any kind" but "without deeds of the law".
16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Justified by faith, not our own, but that of Christ Jesus.

Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. And here, we are said to be justified by his blood.

The picture is VERY complex, but even in these few verses, the claim that we are justified by faith ALONE is demonstrated to be false.

Then you are in danger of having your name removed from the book of life (Revelation 20:15; Matthew 7:23; 1 John 1:8, 10; Ezekiel 18:4; Psalm 69:27-28; Romans 6:23a; Ezekiel 18:32;James 5:20).

". . . And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: . . ." -- James 2:23.

". . . For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. . . ." -- Romans 4:3-5.

". . . And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness. . . ." -- Genesis 15:6.

". . . For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works . . . ." -- Ephesians 2:8-10.

What you are failing to understand, is that, unless one is first counted as righteous without works, sin will negate any works (Matthew 7:22-23). Under unforgiven sin (Romans 3:23) works of righteousness cannot be credited! (Matthew 7:23.)

Bibleuser
01-03-2018, 06:12 AM
The word under immediate review was "justify" BU - "righteous" has been discussed before.

Romans 5:9
Much more, then, since we have now been declared righteous by his blood, will we be saved through him from wrath.

OK.

Still one cannot be Justified or declared righteous if one does not put faith to work, e.g. Jesus said to preach at Matt 24:14 & Acts 1:8 so if one does not do that (a work of faith) then one is not obeying Jesus, thus not justified or declared righteous. Or stop telling lies, or stop stealing or stop being immoral (a work of faith or obeidience to God) etc. etc..
BU

Bibleuser
01-03-2018, 06:16 AM
". . . And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: . . ." -- James 2:23.

". . . For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. . . ." -- Romans 4:3-5.



James 2:20-23
But do you care to know, O empty man, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father declared righteous by works after he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22 You see that his faith was active along with his works and his faith was perfected by his works, 23 and the scripture was fulfilled that says: “Abraham put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness,” and he came to be called Jehovah’s friend.

Please get the context right!
BU

37818
01-03-2018, 12:17 PM
James 2:20-23
But do you care to know, O empty man, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father declared righteous by works after he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? 22 You see that his faith was active along with his works and his faith was perfected by his works, 23 and the scripture was fulfilled that says: “Abraham put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness,” and he came to be called Jehovah’s friend.

Please get the context right!
BU

You need to get the contexts right. And then we can discuss this.

The contexts are Genesis 15:6 and Genesis 22:12. Many years apart. Abraham faith without works (Romans 4:4-5) came years before his works (Genesis 22:12) in fulfillment (James 2:23, Genesis 15:6).

tabibito
01-04-2018, 02:32 AM
You need to get the contexts right. And then we can discuss this.

The contexts are Genesis 15:6 and Genesis 22:12. Many years apart. Abraham faith without works (Romans 4:4-5) came years before his works (Genesis 22:12) in fulfillment (James 2:23, Genesis 15:6).

I do not think that Genesis 15:6 says what you want it to say.

Q: According to Genesis 15:6 is Abraham righteous, or is it belief that is righteous?
And flowing from that answer, is Paul in saying "faith was reckoned for righteousness" (Rom 4:5,9), making a claim that "a person's faith makes him righteous," or is he making a claim that a person, whether circumcised or not, can be righteous?
Rom 4:9 ελογισθη τω αβρααμ ηπιστις αυτου εις δικαιοσυνην - to Abraham, his faith was reckoned unto/for/toward righteousness ... Nothing is directly reckoned righteous in that statement: not faith, and certainly not Abraham.
λογιζεται η πιστις αυτου εις δικαιοσυνην (v4) ... faith gets evaluated
(v9) ελογισθη τω αβρααμ η πιστις εις δικαιοσυνην (v9) faith got evaluated

37818
01-04-2018, 06:18 AM
I do not think that Genesis 15:6 says what you want it to say.

Q: According to Genesis 15:6 is Abraham righteous, or is it belief that is righteous?
And flowing from that answer, is Paul in saying "faith was reckoned for righteousness" (Rom 4:5,9), making a claim that "a person's faith makes him righteous," or is he making a claim that a person, whether circumcised or not, can be righteous?
Rom 4:9 ελογισθη τω αβρααμ ηπιστις αυτου εις δικαιοσυνην - to Abraham, his faith was reckoned unto/for/toward righteousness ... Nothing is directly reckoned righteous in that statement: not faith, and certainly not Abraham.
λογιζεται η πιστις αυτου εις δικαιοσυνην (v4) ... faith gets evaluated
(v9) ελογισθη τω αβρααμ η πιστις εις δικαιοσυνην (v9) faith got evaluated

Romans 4:1-5, ". . . What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. [Genesis 15:6 is being referenced] Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. . . ." Genesis 15:6, ". . . And he believed Jehovah; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. . . ."

The record stands in evidence. And without righteousness being counted to Abraham by faith without works - Abraham's later work (Genesis 22:12) could not to had merit, but it did in fulfillment of that faith (James 2:23). Not the other way around. The faith without works preceded its work. (Genesis 15:6 prior to Genesis 22:12).

tabibito
01-04-2018, 10:57 PM
If you don't want to accept that Abraham was not declared righteous because he believed - despite the scriptural record - there is nothing to be done on that account.

So on to the next point:

Where does the scripture say that a man is deemed righteous just because he believes? Those to whom Jesus declares "I never knew you" clearly had faith - they were able to perform mighty deeds in his name. Those who did not believe (the seven sons of Sceva, for example) could not perform mighty deeds in Christ's name.

Where does scripture declare that faith gives rise to good works? Does it not rather say that works perfect faith?

37818
01-11-2018, 06:38 AM
If you don't want to accept that Abraham was not declared righteous because he believed - despite the scriptural record - there is nothing to be done on that account.

So on to the next point:

Where does the scripture say that a man is deemed righteous just because he believes?". . . But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. . . ." -- Romans 4:5.
". . . Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. . . ." -- Romans 3:25-26.
". . . Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. . . ." -- John 5:24.
". . . Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. . . ." -- John 6:47.
Then there is John 3:16, John 3:18, 1 John 5:13 and more.



Those to whom Jesus declares "I never knew you" clearly had faith - they were able to perform mighty deeds in his name.
No. Jesus argued that they were NOT doing God's will, "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. . . ." It was their claims of doing works, saying, "have we not?" Jesus argued, "ye that work iniquity." (Matthew 7:21-23.)



Those who did not believe (the seven sons of Sceva, for example) could not perform mighty deeds in Christ's name.(Acts 19:13-17.)


Where does scripture declare that faith gives rise to good works?". . . For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. . . ."




Does it not rather say that works perfect faith?(James 2:22-23, Genesis 22:12.)

You see, the works of sin prevent works from counting. (". . . wages of sin . . . " Romans 6:23.) Only after forgiveness as an unmerited gift can any good works have any merit.