Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 101 to 107 of 107

Thread: Turning from sin and conversion

  1. #101
    tWebber The Remonstrant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    661
    Amen (Given)
    200
    Amen (Received)
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet View Post
    When Jesus was talking to the rich young ruler, His point was that one had to keep all of the commandments perfectly in order to achieve salvation by human merit. If you want to achieve salvation through human merit, then you would have to keep all of God's commandments perfectly. The problem is that we cannot keep all of God's commandments perfectly so receiving salvation cannot be based on our own efforts to please God or to obey God. The rich young ruler did not obey all of God's commandments. He could not keep the commandment that taught that one must love God with all of one's heart, mind, soul, strength, and so on.
    I believe a better way to frame the encounter between the Lord Jesus and the rich, young ruler recorded in the Synoptic Gospels is not so much in terms of perfect law-keeping in order to gain entrance into God’s kingdom, but competing allegiances. To whom/what was the rich, young ruler committed? As demonstrated by the mournful departure of the young man from the Lord and his failure to obey Jesus’ counsel to part with his possessions, his loyalty rested not upon God, but mammon. The impossibility of a dual allegiance to God and wealth is explicitly declared by Christ: ‘“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon”’ (Mt 6.24, RSV; cf. Lk 16.13).
    Last edited by The Remonstrant; 04-23-2019 at 05:17 PM.
    [I]f what you have heard from the beginning remains in you, you also will remain in the Son and in the Father. … The one who has the Son has the life; the one who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. (1 Jn 2.24; 5.12, LEB)

    <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>

  2. Amen KingsGambit, tabibito amen'd this post.
  3. #102
    tWebber tabibito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    DownUnder
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,116
    Amen (Given)
    177
    Amen (Received)
    637
    Quote Originally Posted by The Remonstrant View Post
    I believe a better way to frame the encounter between the Lord Jesus and the rich, young ruler recorded in the Synoptic Gospels is not so much in terms of perfect law-keeping in order to gain entrance into God’s kingdom, but competing allegiances. To whom/what was the rich, young ruler committed? As demonstrated by the mournful departure of the young man from the Lord and his failure to obey Jesus’ counsel to part with his possessions, his loyalty rested not upon God, but mammon. The impossibility of a dual allegiance to God and wealth is explicitly declared by Christ: ‘“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon”’ (Mt 6.24, RSV; cf. Lk 16.13).
    Mammon would of course stand for many things as analogy. The "no man can serve two masters" is broader ranging than mere considerations of wealth. Nor can it pass without notice that, at the first pass, Jesus did not include "sell all you have and give to the poor" in the requirements. That part came only after the second question, "What do I still lack?" - the answer is prefaced with "If you want to be perfect ..." and follows with "give up all you have AND FOLLOW ME." (Matt 19:20-21)
    και εκζητησατε με και ευρησετε με οτι ζητησετε με εν ολη καρδία υμων

  4. #103
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    99
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by The Remonstrant View Post
    I believe a better way to frame the encounter between the Lord Jesus and the rich, young ruler recorded in the Synoptic Gospels is not so much in terms of perfect law-keeping in order to gain entrance into God’s kingdom, but competing allegiances. To whom/what was the rich, young ruler committed? As demonstrated by the mournful departure of the young man from the Lord and his failure to obey Jesus’ counsel to part with his possessions, his loyalty rested not upon God, but mammon. The impossibility of a dual allegiance to God and wealth is explicitly declared by Christ: ‘“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon”’ (Mt 6.24, RSV; cf. Lk 16.13).
    Do you believe that there is a distinction between how a "declared righteous" status is received from God and the consequence of being born again? Is giving one's allegiance to God the means by which a "declared righteous" status is received or is it the consequence of being born again?

  5. #104
    tWebber tabibito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    DownUnder
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,116
    Amen (Given)
    177
    Amen (Received)
    637
    Trying to find without success so far, a scriptural reference showing "declared righteous"
    και εκζητησατε με και ευρησετε με οτι ζητησετε με εν ολη καρδία υμων

  6. #105
    tWebber Chrawnus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Finland
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,577
    Amen (Given)
    4999
    Amen (Received)
    3181
    Quote Originally Posted by tabibito View Post
    Trying to find without success so far, a scriptural reference showing "declared righteous"
    At least the NET Bible translates Rom 5:1 with "declared righteous", instead of "justified". I'm thinking the two terms are identical in meaning.

  7. #106
    tWebber tabibito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    DownUnder
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    4,116
    Amen (Given)
    177
    Amen (Received)
    637
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrawnus View Post
    At least the NET Bible translates Rom 5:1 with "declared righteous", instead of "justified". I'm thinking the two terms are identical in meaning.
    I thank you, good sir.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hornet View Post
    When Jesus was talking to the rich young ruler, His point was that one had to keep all of the commandments perfectly in order to achieve salvation by human merit. If you want to achieve salvation through human merit, then you would have to keep all of God's commandments perfectly. The problem is that we cannot keep all of God's commandments perfectly so receiving salvation cannot be based on our own efforts to please God or to obey God. The rich young ruler did not obey all of God's commandments. He could not keep the commandment that taught that one must love God with all of one's heart, mind, soul, strength, and so on.
    According to the rich young man, he had in fact been adherent to the law. He claimed to love God with all he had - "All these things have I kept from my youth up." - Jesus did not contradict him.

    According to Luke 18, the tax collector went home justified even though he did not do anything good. He realized that he was a sinner and he begged God for mercy.
    To the best of my knowledge, no-one here is arguing that people aren't justified by faith.

    Romans 4:1-4 teaches that Abraham was not justified by works. He was justified by faith. This passage also teaches that God justifies the ungodly. Even though a person is ungodly, God can still declare him righteous.
    To the best of my knowledge, no-one here is claiming that the outcome of faith is not righteousness.

    Galatians 2:16 teaches that we are justified by faith, not by works of the law.
    Nice verse - especially when verse 17 is taken into account. A person might be led to believe that his own faith is a mere side issue in Paul's point - that he is indeed saved by the faithfulness of Christ.

    James 2:24 says, "You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." This verse is not contradicting what I've been saying.
    If you are arguing that we are saved by faith, then James does indeed contradict that claim - so does Paul.

    James is using the word "justified" in the sense "shown to be righteous." In other words, James is saying that our good works give evidence of whether we are saved. Our good works do not cause us to be saved. Salvation is not received by our good works. We are not saved on the basis of our good works. Our good works are the evidence that we have been saved.
    I'm sure that James would not have said that we are saved by works and NOT by faith alone if he meant that good works do no more than demonstrate faith.

    A right standing before God is received as soon as we trust Christ for our salvation. When God saves us, He changes us so that we will do good works, but those good works are not the basis upon which we are declared righteous. Good works are the sign that we have been born again.
    True, the outcome of faith is indeed righteousness - but the outcome of faith (alone) is NOT salvation. Romans 10:10 makes that fact obvious.
    και εκζητησατε με και ευρησετε με οτι ζητησετε με εν ολη καρδία υμων

  8. #107
    See, the Thing is... Cow Poke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Republic of Texas
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    48,933
    Amen (Given)
    10493
    Amen (Received)
    23113
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrawnus View Post
    At least the NET Bible translates Rom 5:1 with "declared righteous", instead of "justified". I'm thinking the two terms are identical in meaning.
    Yeah, think of "justified" as "just as if I've never sinned".
    --- this space intentionally left blank ---

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •