"THE" Doctrine of Grace

[Phat8594]

The Granville Sharp rule cannot be applied to this verse for obvious reasons. Go back and read up on the rule.

Τουτο refers to the entire phrase and not to the individual components of the phrase. At the same time, τουτο collects all the components of the phrase under one umbrella so that one cannot be separated from another with respect to the later identifier, “gift.” Your analysis is bogus.

You clearly do not know what you are talking about. touto does not and can not be talking about faith or grace., or both. Paul used an article in front of both, so if he were referring to all of the components, he would have had to use "these" instead of "this". In other words, number (sing. vs. plur.) as well as gender shows us that your interpretation is patently wrong.

However, apparently you are too afraid(??) to admit your error. I pray that you will come to this text humbly, and read it the way God meant it, rather than twisting the scripture to suit your theology, when the Greek clearly shows you to be in the wrong.

τουτο collects all the components of the phrase under one umbrella so that one cannot be separated from another with respect to the later identifier, “gift.”

Actually Paul did separate out all of the components. He did so by putting articles in front of both grace and faith. See Greek is an articular language by nature, so articles are not necessary. However, they are used to make a clear distinction or to show particularity.

You aren't arguing against me, you are arguing against the basics of Koine Greek.

[rhutchin]

The Granville Sharp rule cannot be applied to this verse for obvious reasons. Go back and read up on the rule.

Τουτο refers to the entire phrase and not to the individual components of the phrase. At the same time, τουτο collects all the components of the phrase under one umbrella so that one cannot be separated from another with respect to the later identifier, “gift.” Your analysis is bogus.

You clearly do not know what you are talking about. touto does not and can not be talking about faith or grace., or both.

I said, “Τουτο refers to the entire phrase and not to the individual components of the phrase.”

What are you talking about?

Paul used an article in front of both, so if he were referring to all of the components, he would have had to use "these" instead of "this". In other words, number (sing. vs. plur.) as well as gender shows us that your interpretation is patently wrong.

That’s because Τουτο, as I said, refers to the entire phrase. Thus, it is singular. What point are you trying to make?

However, apparently you are too afraid(??) to admit your error. I pray that you will come to this text humbly, and read it the way God meant it, rather than twisting the scripture to suit your theology, when the Greek clearly shows you to be in the wrong.

What is the error that you see in my analysis? From what I can tell from your comment, you actually agree with me.

Τουτο refers to the entire phrase and not to the individual components of the phrase.

Actually Paul did separate out all of the components. He did so by putting articles in front of both grace and faith.

Depending on the text you use this holds. The Byzantine text has articles in front of both. The Alexandrian text (thus, NIV) does not have the article in front of “faith.” This issue is whether Τουτο refers to any of the components or to the entire phrase. My position is that Τουτο refers to the entire phrase. It is hard to tell what your position is from your comments.

See Greek is an articular language by nature, so articles are not necessary. However, they are used to make a clear distinction or to show particularity.

So which is it? Are the articles unnecessary or are they used to make a clear distinction or to show particularity.

You aren't arguing against me, you are arguing against the basics of Koine Greek.

If you could articulate a position, we might be able to judge whether you know what you are talking about and whether you know anything about koine Greek.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Yet, God also has free will and can, from among those who reject salvation, freely choose some for salvation and then take such action as is necessary to bring them to salvation while leaving those not chosen to face the consequences of their choice.

God can make green canaries fly backwards too while inverted... iow It is unwise to say what God can and cannot do... God does NOT HAVE free will, He IS free... Our conditional freedom is an image of His unconditional freedom...

But... You are going to have to show me from Scripture where God forces a man who determinedly keeps to his evil ways, despite the call of God, I say forces such an evil man into loving God and man and unwanted salvation... You will notice that Saul, for instance, never went back to killing Christians... And he never turned back from preaching the Gospel... And he remarked on how dreadful it would be for him were he to turn away from God, and how he COULD find himself "unapproved", should he turn away...

But to your point - It is not a matter of God's freedom to choose, but of man's redemption through repentance that is the stuff of salvation... God's words are clear on this: "Repent and be baptized, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand... The Kingdom of Heaven is suffering violence, and the violent are taking it by force..." The forcefulness is in repentance, yet it is the Grace of God that enters a person into the Kingdom, and ONLY God's Grace CAN do so, yet it does not do so until AFTER repentance, because God first said "Repent"... And THEN said: "Be baptized..." And these two FOR the Kingdom... THAT is the Ekonomia of Salvation in Christ... Other salvations are NOT the rule, but the exceptions...

Arsenios

[Phat8594]

I said, “Τουτο refers to the entire phrase and not to the individual components of the phrase.”

What are you talking about?

You said it refers to the entire phrase and therefore the componenets are under one umbrella. You then said there is no distinction made. While we see from the Greek that there is a distinction.

What is the error that you see in my analysis?

You err when you claim that gift refers to (or includes) faith. There is no umbrella that encompasses all of the terms. Paul did not structure the sentence this way. So what is the gift from God that Paul refers to? Salvation.

Are the articles unnecessary or are they used to make a clear distinction or to show particularity.

Paul does both here.

If you could articulate a position, we might be able to judge whether you know what you are talking about and whether you know anything about koine Greek.

I have. I think what you mean is "If you would articulate a position I (rh) agree with, then I might thnk you know something about koine Greek"

Its fine if you want to question my knowledge of Greek. However, I think if anything....it is evident that you do not know much at all about koine Greek. If you want to learn more, i highly suggest getting William Mounce's Basics of Biblical Greek to it, along with the workbook. Classes will also help a great deal.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

FINALLY!!

I slept on it!

I have been sick for three days, and simply went back to Chrysostom, who DOES know the Greek... This quote bears VERY careful reading - I had missed the import the first time I had cited it:

Ver. 8. “For by grace,” saith he “have ye been saved.”
This begins the sentence, and Ellicott's note refers this back to v.5's account of the exceeding riches of his Grace...
[“Confirmatory explanation of the truth and justice of the expression, ‘the exceeding riches of His grace’ by a recurrence to the statement made parenthetically in verse 5.”—Ellicott.—G.A.]

Now these first five words (7 in English) themselves form a complete sentence... The Greek has, in its power, a force hard to translate, which is saying in effect: "For by the exceeding riches (v.5) of the Grace of God you are existing, having been saved..."

And to this portion, Chrysostom then observes, addressing the hearer of this Epistle:

In order then that the greatness of the benefits bestowed may not raise thee too high,
observe how he brings thee down: “by grace ye have been saved,” saith he,

Now WHY would he say this? Because of the great work that the Faith entails... As Jesus is recorded explaining, the COST of DISCIPLESHIP, even unto BLOOD [eg one's life]... At such a high price for a Christian to pay in order that he should RECEIVE THE GIFT, it can be natural in error to think that because he has paid with his life, he has somehow EARNED his salvation, and Paul slaps this aside with his first 5 words... And then he immediately adds in the WORKS OF DISCIPLESHIP:

“Through faith;”

And Chrysostom continues: [in this vein of the labors of the Faith]

Then, that, on the other hand, our free-will be not impaired, he adds also our part in the work,

So that you can see the dismissal of works in the first part being added back in by the next three words: "through the Faith"... For the Apostolic Christians knew clearly what a GREAT WORK this Christian Faith IS... They paid with their lives (unto blood) to attain it... And so then, acknowledging the WORKS as he just has, he AGAIN takes away their merit, as Chrysostom goes on to note:

and yet again cancels it, and adds,

“And that not of ourselves.”

Then Chrysostom comments:

Neither is faith,

[Meyer objects to this interpretation saying: “How violent is this taking to pieces of the text, since οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν and οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων present themselves in a manner alike natural and weighty as elements belonging to one flow of the discourse! The τοῦτο refers to the salvation just designated as regards its specific mode.” So substantially Ellicott.—G.A.]

He means, “of ourselves.” Because had He not come, had He not called us, how had we been able to believe? for “how,” saith he, “shall they believe, unless they hear?” (Rom. x. 14.) So that the work of faith itself is not our own.

So that the crucial key to understanding the meaning here is that Faith is Works... And not just ANY works, but the works of the Faith, and out of ourselves we have no such works, nor the Faith which these works ARE... It is GOD who GAVE us these works of obedience to Christ... The work of faith is itself not even our own, but the doing of it is... We have to DO it, but WHAT we do WHEN we do it is NOT, for we are doing the WORKS of the Faith, which is of God... We are doing Christ's works, for the Mystery of the Faith is Christ IN US, held in a pure conscience...

And it is this Faith, and the very works that comprise our discipleship in it at great cost unto blood, he goes on to say that do not give us salvation, nor even our existence, let alone our existence hav:

“It is the gift,” said he, “of God,” it is “not of works.”

Not even your life purchases this salvation...

And I would have to add here... Just as Salvation is a Gift of God, so also must be the "cost of discipleship" that you GIVE to receive the greater Gift, for God is Faithful and Rich in Mercy, and a Lover of mankind... He DESIRES with desire to give this Gift... We give but a miserable life that is already lost, and receive the Life of God... And if we hold back, as Ananias and his wife did in the beginning of Acts, we will lose both...

The next comment then explains the antimony of the works of the Faith being necessary, but not able to purchase, salvation...

Was faith then, you will say, enough to save us? No; but God, saith he, hath required this, lest He should save us, barren and without work at all. His expression is, that faith saveth, but it is because God so willeth, that faith saveth. Since, how, tell me, doth faith save, without works? This itself is the gift of God.

You see, the very fact that we CAN "work out our own salvation in fear and trembling" is God's gift, and THAT we do so is Christ's commandment... It is the cost of discipleship unto blood, holding back nothing...

God bless you guys - You will not be able to resolve this text between you by grammatical exegesis... Touto is an abstract noun referring conceptually to what has gone before... Phat is correct that it does not impose "gift" on any noun before it, but instead on the idea presented, which Hutch agrees with, for it refers to the phrase as a whole, but in the main, the verbal adjective of 'having been saved" modifying the "you" of "este"... But as an abstraction, touto also refers through Grace back to v.5 and even to the entire discourse up to this point... And arguing over the extent of the coverage of such an abstract noun will find you wearing scivvies chasing squirrels through the branches of the bushes!!

Westerners tend to look for too much in the text itself anyway, and by doing so tend to see too little... The point of this text that is utterly overlooked in this discussion so far, absent Chrysostom, is that the Faith is a Divine enterprise with human workers who do not earn the salvation they receive but must labor in order that God give it to them by Grace...

Thank-you for the discussion...

Arsenios

[rhutchin]

FINALLY!!

I slept on it!

I have been sick for three days, and simply went back to Chrysostom, who DOES know the Greek... This quote bears VERY careful reading - I had missed the import the first time I had cited it:

Ver. 8. “For by grace,” saith he “have ye been saved.”
This begins the sentence, and Ellicott's note refers this back to v.5's account of the exceeding riches of his Grace...
[“Confirmatory explanation of the truth and justice of the expression, ‘the exceeding riches of His grace’ by a recurrence to the statement made parenthetically in verse 5.”—Ellicott.—G.A.]

Now these first five words (7 in English) themselves form a complete sentence... The Greek has, in its power, a force hard to translate, which is saying in effect: "For by the exceeding riches (v.5) of the Grace of God you are existing, having been saved..."

And to this portion, Chrysostom then observes, addressing the hearer of this Epistle:

In order then that the greatness of the benefits bestowed may not raise thee too high,
observe how he brings thee down: “by grace ye have been saved,” saith he,

Now WHY would he say this? Because of the great work that the Faith entails... As Jesus is recorded explaining, the COST of DISCIPLESHIP, even unto BLOOD [eg one's life]... At such a high price for a Christian to pay in order that he should RECEIVE THE GIFT, it can be natural in error to think that because he has paid with his life, he has somehow EARNED his salvation, and Paul slaps this aside with his first 5 words... And then he immediately adds in the WORKS OF DISCIPLESHIP:

“Through faith;”

And Chrysostom continues: [in this vein of the labors of the Faith]

Then, that, on the other hand, our free-will be not impaired, he adds also our part in the work,

So that you can see the dismissal of works in the first part being added back in by the next three words: "through the Faith"... For the Apostolic Christians knew clearly what a GREAT WORK this Christian Faith IS... They paid with their lives (unto blood) to attain it... And so then, acknowledging the WORKS as he just has, he AGAIN takes away their merit, as Chrysostom goes on to note:

and yet again cancels it, and adds,

“And that not of ourselves.”

Then Chrysostom comments:

Neither is faith,

[Meyer objects to this interpretation saying: “How violent is this taking to pieces of the text, since οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν and οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων present themselves in a manner alike natural and weighty as elements belonging to one flow of the discourse! The τοῦτο refers to the salvation just designated as regards its specific mode.” So substantially Ellicott.—G.A.]

He means, “of ourselves.” Because had He not come, had He not called us, how had we been able to believe? for “how,” saith he, “shall they believe, unless they hear?” (Rom. x. 14.) So that the work of faith itself is not our own.

So that the crucial key to understanding the meaning here is that Faith is Works... And not just ANY works, but the works of the Faith, and out of ourselves we have no such works, nor the Faith which these works ARE... It is GOD who GAVE us these works of obedience to Christ... The work of faith is itself not even our own, but the doing of it is... We have to DO it, but WHAT we do WHEN we do it is NOT, for we are doing the WORKS of the Faith, which is of God... We are doing Christ's works, for the Mystery of the Faith is Christ IN US, held in a pure conscience...

And it is this Faith, and the very works that comprise our discipleship in it at great cost unto blood, he goes on to say that do not give us salvation, nor even our existence, let alone our existence hav:

“It is the gift,” said he, “of God,” it is “not of works.”

Not even your life purchases this salvation...

And I would have to add here... Just as Salvation is a Gift of God, so also must be the "cost of discipleship" that you GIVE to receive the greater Gift, for God is Faithful and Rich in Mercy, and a Lover of mankind... He DESIRES with desire to give this Gift... We give but a miserable life that is already lost, and receive the Life of God... And if we hold back, as Ananias and his wife did in the beginning of Acts, we will lose both...

The next comment then explains the antimony of the works of the Faith being necessary, but not able to purchase, salvation...

Was faith then, you will say, enough to save us? No; but God, saith he, hath required this, lest He should save us, barren and without work at all. His expression is, that faith saveth, but it is because God so willeth, that faith saveth. Since, how, tell me, doth faith save, without works? This itself is the gift of God.

You see, the very fact that we CAN "work out our own salvation in fear and trembling" is God's gift, and THAT we do so is Christ's commandment... It is the cost of discipleship unto blood, holding back nothing...

God bless you guys - You will not be able to resolve this text between you by grammatical exegesis... Touto is an abstract noun referring conceptually to what has gone before... Phat is correct that it does not impose "gift" on any noun before it, but instead on the idea presented, which Hutch agrees with, for it refers to the phrase as a whole, but in the main, the verbal adjective of 'having been saved" modifying the "you" of "este"... But as an abstraction, touto also refers through Grace back to v.5 and even to the entire discourse up to this point... And arguing over the extent of the coverage of such an abstract noun will find you wearing scivvies chasing squirrels through the branches of the bushes!!

Westerners tend to look for too much in the text itself anyway, and by doing so tend to see too little... The point of this text that is utterly overlooked in this discussion so far, absent Chrysostom, is that the Faith is a Divine enterprise with human workers who do not earn the salvation they receive but must labor in order that God give it to them by Grace...

Thank-you for the discussion...

Arsenios

I think this is a very excellent comment.

However, I have two minor quibbles that don’t affect that which Chrysostom says and may clarify that we understand your thinking on that which he says.

1. Chrysostom says, Then, that, on the other hand, our free-will be not impaired, he adds also our part in the work,

Chrysostom introduces his bias – free-will – which he is compelled by that presupposition to preserve in some manner.

2. Chrysostom does not attach free-will to the act of salvation but to the works of salvation. He says, the work of faith itself is not our own. ,

You correctly understand the import here as you conclude, “So that the crucial key to understanding the meaning here is that Faith is Works... And not just ANY works, but the works of the Faith, and out of ourselves we have no such works, nor the Faith which these works ARE... It is GOD who GAVE us these works of obedience to Christ...”

Faith, then, is that which follows after salvation and not that which precedes salvation or is any basis for God to save a person. Paul has in mind the living out of one’s faith after one is saved in doing those works that God has prepared for that person to do. God saves a person at a point in time. However, salvation encompasses the whole of the believer’s life and the living out of salvation – the working out of salvation with fear and trembling – is through faith (or as you say, through discipleship).

Nonetheless, an excellent comment that captures both Chrysostom and that which Paul has written. I commend you for your labors.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

I think this is a very excellent comment.

However, I have two minor quibbles that don’t affect that which Chrysostom says and may clarify that we understand your thinking on that which he says.

1. Chrysostom says, Then, that, on the other hand, our free-will be not impaired, he adds also our part in the work,

Chrysostom introduces his bias – free-will – which he is compelled by that presupposition to preserve in some manner.

Chrysostom is a 4th century Greek speaking Bishop of the Church in Constantinople who was martyred for his Faith... He does not have a "bias of free will"... He is only compelled by the Apostolic teachings of the Church up to that point in time, as am I... YOU are the one constraining yourself in your own bias that man has no part in his salvation, when God commands it...

2. Chrysostom does not attach free-will to the act of salvation but to the works of salvation. He says, the work of faith itself is not our own. ,

You correctly understand the import here as you conclude, “So that the crucial key to understanding the meaning here is that Faith is Works... And not just ANY works, but the works of the Faith, and out of ourselves we have no such works, nor the Faith which these works ARE... It is GOD who GAVE us these works of obedience to Christ...”

Yes, and is it WE WHO DO THEM, and IF we REPENT and OBEY CHRIST's COMMANDMENTS, we SHALL be saved... Remember the Scripture? He who perseveres to the end SHALL be saved... You DO remember this, yes?

Faith, then, is that which follows after salvation

Maybe if you took a logic course it would help... The Faith of Christ exists BEFORE your salvation IN IT... YOU must appropriate it in repentance and be Baptized INTO it...

and not that which precedes salvation or is any basis for God to save a person.

Do you even KNOW that you just said that the Faith of Christ does not precede YOUR entry into it???

It is the ENTIRE BASIS of your salvation... It is what Christ GAVE to us...

Paul has in mind the living out of one’s faith after one is saved in doing those works that God has prepared for that person to do. God saves a person at a point in time. However, salvation encompasses the whole of the believer’s life and the living out of salvation – the working out of salvation with fear and trembling – is through faith (or as you say, through discipleship).

REPENT and BE BAPTIZED... First repentance, then baptism... [Not that repentance ever stops, mind you] THAT is the sequence UNTO salvation, for Christ Himself tells us to do this BECAUSE: The Kingdom of Heaven is AT HAND...

And YOUR argument denies Christ, because you say: "You are already IN the Kingdom of Heaven, so NOW you can repent and be Baptized..."

Do you get the difference???

Arsenios


Nonetheless, an excellent comment that captures both Chrysostom and that which Paul has written. I commend you for your labors.[/QUOTE]

Arsenios

[rhutchin]

However, I have two minor quibbles that don’t affect that which Chrysostom says and may clarify that we understand your thinking on that which he says.

1. Chrysostom says, Then, that, on the other hand, our free-will be not impaired, he adds also our part in the work,

Chrysostom introduces his bias – free-will – which he is compelled by that presupposition to preserve in some manner.

Chrysostom...He does not have a "bias of free will"... He is only compelled by the Apostolic teachings of the Church up to that point in time, as am I...

That one is “compelled” to do such and such is the nature of bias. Bias may originate within the person or be imposed from outside (e.g., being compelled). However, whether the apostolic teachings compelled him on this point or his personal preferences is not clear. Certainly, you have not made the case but have expressed your personal opinion on the source.

YOU are the one constraining yourself in your own bias that man has no part in his salvation, when God commands it...

Actually, the Calvinists make a sound Biblical argument for this (so it is a perfectly legitimate Biblical bias). Those opposing the Calvinists do not.

2. Chrysostom does not attach free-will to the act of salvation but to the works of salvation. He says, the work of faith itself is not our own. ,

Yes, and is it WE WHO DO THEM, and IF we REPENT and OBEY CHRIST's COMMANDMENTS, we SHALL be saved... Remember the Scripture? He who perseveres to the end SHALL be saved... You DO remember this, yes?

It is still true that Chrysostom does not attach free-will to the act of salvation but to the works of salvation. Focus on the issue. Chrysostom was not expounding on that faith which leads to a person being saved but that faith which arises from a person having been saved. Of this faith, he says, the work of faith itself is not our own.

You correctly understand the import here as you conclude, “So that the crucial key to understanding the meaning here is that Faith is Works... And not just ANY works, but the works of the Faith, and out of ourselves we have no such works, nor the Faith which these works ARE... It is GOD who GAVE us these works of obedience to Christ...”

Faith, then, is that which follows after salvation…

Maybe if you took a logic course it would help... The Faith of Christ exists BEFORE your salvation IN IT... YOU must appropriate it in repentance and be Baptized INTO it...

Maybe, if you read that which you wrote, you would not get so confused. Even you agreed that we are dealing with faith expressed as a consequence of salvation as you said, “out of ourselves we have no such works, nor the Faith which these works ARE...”

…and not that which precedes salvation or is any basis for God to save a person.

Do you even KNOW that you just said that the Faith of Christ does not precede YOUR entry into it???

It is the ENTIRE BASIS of your salvation... It is what Christ GAVE to us...

But, as even you wrote in your comment, the faith that we see in v8 is not that faith identified with out salvation but that faith identified with our works. Do you want to change your position here and divorce yourself from your earlier comments and understanding of Chrysostom on this verse? If so, revise them so that they accurately express Chrysostom as you understand him.

Paul has in mind the living out of one’s faith after one is saved in doing those works that God has prepared for that person to do. God saves a person at a point in time. However, salvation encompasses the whole of the believer’s life and the living out of salvation – the working out of salvation with fear and trembling – is through faith (or as you say, through discipleship).

REPENT and BE BAPTIZED... First repentance, then baptism... [Not that repentance ever stops, mind you] THAT is the sequence UNTO salvation, for Christ Himself tells us to do this BECAUSE: The Kingdom of Heaven is AT HAND...

And YOUR argument denies Christ, because you say: "You are already IN the Kingdom of Heaven, so NOW you can repent and be Baptized..."

Do you get the difference???

So, what does that have to do with my comment relative to your earlier comments??


Nonetheless, you wrote an excellent comment that captures both Chrysostom and that which Paul has written. I commend you for your labors. This even if you do not understand fully the import of that which you wrote.

[rhutchin]

Its fine if you want to question my knowledge of Greek. However, I think if anything....it is evident that you do not know much at all about koine Greek. If you want to learn more, i highly suggest getting William Mounce's Basics of Biblical Greek to it, along with the workbook. Classes will also help a great deal.

It is evident that neither one of us has any real skill in koine Greek and both of us depend on others for their understanding this verse. You appeal to Mounce. I appeal to the Randolph Yeager and the Semantic and Structural Analysis commentaries.

I strongly suspect that Mounce does not argue his position based on grammatical agreement between τουτο and its antecedent. Certainly there is no word, salvation, in this verse to be the antecedent. The reference to salvation is through the verb. Thus, Mounce can only appeal to context to support his conclusion that τουτο refers to salvation a point on which none of us should disagree.

The issue at hand is how the contextual identification of τουτο with salvation impacts the other terms in the phrase, “by grace you are saved through faith.” You made a bogus reference to the Granville Sharp rule in an effort to promote your opinion which I seriously doubt came from Mounce.

I am curious as to whether Mounce really got into the issue of the articles in the verse and how they impact our understanding of the verse. Please tell us what Mounce actually said about the use of the article in this verse.

[Rdr. Arsenios]

But, as even you wrote in your comment, the faith that we see in v8 is not that faith identified with out salvation but that faith identified with our works.

So now you are wanting to divide Scripture into two different Faiths ?? There is ONE Faith, given once, for all, to the Apostles, by Christ... That is the ONLY Faith - It is the Faith of Christ... It exists before you know about it, and after you find out about it, and while you are looking at it, and when you are trying to enter into it, and while you are entering it, and after you enter it, and when you are reborn into it by Baptism, and while as a new-re-born you are maturing in it, and after you ARE mature in it, and after you die and are buried in the earth in it... Do you really want to say, as you just did,, that the Faith we see in v.8 is not that faith identifies without salvation??? That instead it is a faith identified with our works???

Chrysostom's point is that the Faith IS works, it is something we DO, and it is a great work... And the result of that Faith is our salvation, first upon Baptism, and then at the Great and Dread Last Judgment... His point is that the work that the Faith IS is not out of ourselves, but out of the Faith of Christ, which He gave once, for all, to the Apostles... He did not give it to the Bible, but to the Apostles, you see... And his further point is that our works are absolutely needed in order that we be saved, because that is how God made it to be for the sake of our salvation,. and NOT because the works themselves save, because they clearly cannot save, and only God can save... So that our salvation is according to our works, which is the works of the Faith given once, for all, to the Apostles, but is ONLY from God as a gift by Grace...

Do you want to change your position here and divorce yourself from your earlier comments and understanding of Chrysostom on this verse? If so, revise them so that they accurately express Chrysostom as you understand him.

I have changed nothing... YOU are the one dividing faith into two parts that make no sense... Chrysostom means the Faith given once, for all, to the Apostles, and this he understands as works, as something man DOES, but WHAT he is given to DO is FROM the Faith, and is not from HIMSELF, because he did not originate the Faith of Christ out of himself, but received it from the Apostles who received it from Christ... The Faith is the practice of it, with the theory only there to enable the practice... The Faith is pre-eminently PRACTICAL... It affects what one DOES, because it is in this way that repentance has meaning... Thoughts without actions will lead you straight to hell...

Even you agreed that we are dealing with faith expressed as a consequence of salvation as you said, “out of ourselves we have no such works, nor the Faith which these works ARE...”

This is a nonsensical statement on your part... The Faith is NOT a consequence of salvation - It is the MEANS of salvation... THAT is WHY" Christ gave it once, for all, to the Apostles, that mankind might be saved... And those who consecrate their lives in it ARE saved... They receive the Gift of salvation... Faith IS works, and these works do not originate from us, but from Christ, that we DO them... This is the Faith of Christ... Are you just deliberately being obtuse? The works of the Faith of Christ are GIVEN to us for our salvation... IF we do them, we will be saved... NOT because they impart salvation, [only God's Grace does that] but because God requires that we do them before He will GIVE us the Gift of salvation...

What is it about this that is giving you so much trouble?

Arsenios

[Rdr. Arsenios]

Faith, then, is that which follows after salvation
and not that which precedes salvation
nor is it any basis for God to save a person.

The Faith given once, for all, to the Apostles, FOLLOWS AFTER your salvation???

Nay - It exists while you are still lost in your sins...

You enter it in order that you should be saved...

It is the Faith of Christ, not of man...

You know this...

You are talking nonsense...

Faith is for the sake of salvation...

But ONLY the Faith given once, for all, to the Apostles...

THAT is the Faith of Christ...

It is a WORK for man to enter and do...

Arsenios

[Rdr. Arsenios]

[B][B]

Originally posted by rhutchin
Paul has in mind the living out of one’s faith after one is saved in doing those works that God has prepared for that person to do. God saves a person at a point in time. However, salvation encompasses the whole of the believer’s life and the living out of salvation – the working out of salvation with fear and trembling – is through faith (or as you say, through discipleship).

REPENT and BE BAPTIZED... First repentance, then baptism... [Not that repentance ever stops, mind you] THAT is the sequence UNTO salvation, for Christ Himself tells us to do this BECAUSE: The Kingdom of Heaven is AT HAND...

And YOUR argument denies Christ, because you say: "You are already IN the Kingdom of Heaven, so NOW you can repent and be Baptized..."

Do you get the difference???

So, what does that have to do with my comment relative to your earlier comments??

Your comment relative to previous comments commenting on the commentary is false...

But I would ask you, since you by your own admission do not understand the Gospel, for you neither understand repentance nor Baptism, yet you proclaim yourself and your opinions to be the truth... So in this proclaimed truth of yours, your Calvinistic truth, because you wrote "God saves a person at a point in time.", I would ask you this:

WHEN does the Bible say that this point of time IS?

And when you have shown the Scripture that tells you when that is,
then please illustrate how that works out with the example of Saul/Paul...

At what POINT in time was Paul SAVED?
OR...
Was Saul saved BEFORE Paul?

How did Paul's "public display of his having been saved",
which YOU think Baptism IS,
fit into your scheme of salvation for him?

Did he get saved when Christ came to him on the road to Damascus?
Did he get saved when he arrived blind in Damascus?
Did he get saved when he regained his sight?
Did he get saved before he was baptized?

And then, I want you to explain HOW YOU KNOW when he got saved?

Just tell me WHEN this Jew got SAVED,
and WHY it was THEN...

Arsenios

[Rdr. Arsenios]

It is evident that neither one of us has any real skill in koine Greek and both of us depend on others for their understanding this verse. You appeal to Mounce. I appeal to the Randolph Yeager and the Semantic and Structural Analysis commentaries.

YOUR common tater offers his private theological opinions on the meaning of Scripture...
HIS "commentator" teaches translation of the Greek language... Without commenting on theology...

But I do appreciate your private confession of your personal ignorance of the Language of the Christian Bible...

You rely on Calvin and Yeager to tell you what the words mean...
I rely on the Body of Christ from Apostolic times...

Do you think Christ failed until Calvin bailed him out?

Arsenios

[Phat8594]

I am curious as to whether Mounce really got into the issue of the articles in the verse and how they impact our understanding of the verse. Please tell us what Mounce actually said about the use of the article in this verse.

The book I suggested for you isn't a commentary. Its a book to learn Koine Greek....as in a text book. Its easy to study from, especially when you pair the workbook along with it. Taking a class with it, will also help.

[Phat8594]

Faith, then, is that which follows after salvation and not that which precedes salvation or is any basis for God to save a person.

So I just want ot make this clear...you are saying that salvation precedes faith..correct?