Faith and Works: The Relationship between Faith, Works, and Salvation in the NT

[Cow Poke]

I will amend: Even the many proponents of sola fide with whom I have had acquaintance have admitted that certain unrepented sins preclude salvation.

Elaborate, please.

[tabibito]

Elaborate, please.

I haven't met one who claimed salvation was available to people who engage in such things as prostitution, but most sins are considered acceptable. Of course, most (but not quite all) of them claim that people who engage in sins that they consider unacceptable were never Christians to begin with.

[Cow Poke]

I haven't met one who claimed salvation was available to people who engage in such things as prostitution, but most sins are considered acceptable. Of course, most (but not quite all) of them claim that people who engage in sins that they consider unacceptable were never Christians to begin with.

OK, I'm not getting this at all. Salvation is available to anybody who will believe, including prostitutes - why would somebody think they're exempt? And "acceptable sins"? I'm really not following you.

[Obsidian]

I haven't met one who claimed salvation was available to people who engage in such things as prostitution. . . .

OK, I'm not getting this at all.

A lot of people claim to believe in "grace," yet don't. A lot of people even claim to believe in salvation by faith alone, yet don't. It is called inconsistency. Or you might even want to call it "hypocrisy."

Of course, the Calvinist idea that God miraculously prevents us — this side of heaven — from engaging in major sins is at least logically possible and in some way consistent. But it is contrary both to the Bible, and to our common experience. The real Bible teaching is that our spiritual identity has been reborn, and we stop sinning once the flesh is destroyed.

[tabibito]

OK, I'm not getting this at all. Salvation is available to anybody who will believe, including prostitutes - why would somebody think they're exempt? And "acceptable sins"? I'm really not following you.

Precepts, set A (to which I subscribe)
Salvation is available to anyone who believes (current status) or will choose to come to believe. Salvation is offered, but the offer must be accepted before it is actuated. Past sins are forgiven (2 Peter 1:9). Sins are relegated to the past on the basis of repentance. Salvation is held by those who believe (current status) in Christ. Believing includes believing and acting on what Christ said and says.

Precepts, sets B to E (not addressed)

Precepts, set F (which my post was addressing)
Once you are saved you are saved; it doesn't matter what you do (unless it is an unacceptable sin) or don't do, you can't lose your salvation. God decided who would be saved before the world was created.

Precepts, set G (as for set F, but without the comment about unacceptable sin.)

Precepts, sets H-Z (not addressed)

Note: The use of "sets A-Z" only indicates that there are more precepts in play than I know the number of.

[Obsidian]

Believing includes believing and acting on what Christ said and says.

Well, isn't that clever.

[tabibito]

Well, isn't that clever.

To tell the truth, it's tautological. The requirement to act is included in what Jesus says.

[JonathanL]

To tell the truth, it's tautological. The requirement to act is included in what Jesus says.

John 15 would imply that abiding in Jesus is what leads to acting, just as a branch produces fruit when and because it is connected to the vine. Not acting would then be a requirement only in the sense that it shows that the person doesn't really abide in Christ, contrary to his claims.

And if Jesus' words in John 15:7 about His words abiding in us is meant to explain what he means when he says in John 14:23 that if anyone loves Him then he will keep His words, then keeping His words would not refer to acting on His teachings. Rather, it would mean to commit His teachings to your memory. The message that Jesus gives us in John 15 would then be: "If you abide in me and commit my teachings to memory, then the acts spoken of in those teachings/commandments will naturally be produced, just as fruits are naturally produced from the branches that are connected to the vine."

Believing would then necessarily lead to acting. But acting isn't a part of believing, but a result.

[tabibito]

John 15 would imply that abiding in Jesus is what leads to acting, just as a branch produces fruit when and because it is connected to the vine. Not acting would then be a requirement only in the sense that it shows that the person doesn't really abide in Christ, contrary to his claims.

And if Jesus' words in John 15:7 about His words abiding in us is meant to explain what he means when he says in John 14:23 that if anyone loves Him then he will keep His words, then keeping His words would not refer to acting on His teachings. Rather, it would mean to commit His teachings to your memory. The message that Jesus gives us in John 15 would then be: "If you abide in me and commit my teachings to memory, then the acts spoken of in those teachings/commandments will naturally be produced, just as fruits are naturally produced from the branches that are connected to the vine."

Believing would then necessarily lead to acting. But acting isn't a part of believing, but a result.

The argument fails on the point that acting is portrayed as volitional. Paul's address to Agrippa in Acts (26:20); Matt 7:24,26; 21: 28-31;John 3:36 (where "not obey" is contrasted with believe); John 17:4 (Even Jesus did the work that it was given him to do).

As to the analogy of the vine branch producing fruit - note the comment regarding the vine branch that fails to produce fruit (that branch will be cut off ... it is, or was, in the vine, Christ) John 15:2, the branch cannot produce fruit unless it is in the vine (15:4), and remaining in the vine is not a matter of belief in but of abiding in Christ (15:6).

[JonathanL]

The argument fails on the point that acting is portrayed as volitional. Paul's address to Agrippa in Acts (26:20); Matt 7:24,26; 21: 28-31;John 3:36 (where "not obey" is contrasted with believe); John 17:4 (Even Jesus did the work that it was given him to do).

The counter-claim would be that abiding in Jesus also leads to wanting to obey his commandments. So even though from our perspective the acting is perceived as volitional (and in a sense it truly is volitional) it's also true that unless we abide we would neither have wanted to, nor made the decision to act in the first place.

[tabibito]

The counter-claim would be that abiding in Jesus also leads to wanting to obey his commandments.

Why would someone choose to be in Christ if he didn't want to obey? Ah yesssss ... free handouts. But you do have a point, God does work in us to produce to desire (will) and to do good works. By way of prompting and directing development. I think that it has a lot to do with the natural flow-on from developing love, but not entirely (nor provable).

So even though from our perspective the acting is perceived as volitional (and in a sense it truly is volitional) it's also true that unless we abide we would neither have wanted to, nor made the decision to act in the first place.

There is some veracity to that - but not a whole lot. God isn't going to force a person unwilling to act. Wanting to come to God in the first place arises from believing the gospel, not from abiding in Christ.

[JonathanL]

Why would someone choose to be in Christ if he didn't want to obey? Ah yesssss ... free handouts. But you do have a point, God does work in us to produce to desire (will) and to do good works. By way of prompting and directing development. I think that it has a lot to do with the natural flow-on from developing love, but not entirely (nor provable).
There is some veracity to that - but not a whole lot. God isn't going to force a person unwilling to act. Wanting to come to God in the first place arises from believing the gospel, not from abiding in Christ.

But in John 6:44a Jesus also says "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him." (ESV), which would indicate that coming to Jesus/believing in the gospel (I'm not sure if it's proper to make a distinction between the two) isn't even possible to do on your own volition.

[tabibito]

But in John 6:44a Jesus also says "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him." (ESV), which would indicate that coming to Jesus/believing in the gospel (I'm not sure if it's proper to make a distinction between the two) isn't even possible to do on your own volition.

Yes. Illustrative of the meaning:

If I call and hold out my hand to Tack, he will come toward me. If my hand is empty or bread is on offer, he'll turn away. If I have mixed seed or (better) a mix of brown rice and flaked oats he'll land and eat. Tack won't come to me unless the food draws him - but the food doesn't reach out, catch and drag him to me. Many circumstances occur where "draw to" isn't an action performed by the object that does the drawing. (The sound of fire-works drew him to the window e.g.)

Even worse is Doujou. Nothing will draw him to me except that I have another pigeon pinned on its back in my lap. Then he'll come and inspect the other pigeon's feet, and satisfying himself that the other pigeon's foot is indeed tangled in thread, he'll stand beak to beak with it until I get it untangled. The moment that the thread is removed, Doujou is gone.

[JonathanL]

Yes. Illustrative of the meaning:

If I call and hold out my hand to Tack, he will come toward me. If my hand is empty or bread is on offer, he'll turn away. If I have mixed seed or (better) a mix of brown rice and flaked oats he'll land and eat. Tack won't come to me unless the food draws him - but the food doesn't reach out, catch and drag him to me. Many circumstances occur where "draw to" isn't an action performed by the object that does the drawing. (The sound of fire-works drew him to the window e.g.)

Even worse is Doujou. Nothing will draw him to me except that I have another pigeon pinned on its back in my lap. Then he'll come and inspect the other pigeon's feet, and satisfying himself that the other pigeon's foot is indeed tangled in thread, he'll stand beak to beak with it until I get it untangled. The moment that the thread is removed, Doujou is gone.

I don't think that interpretation works in this case. Jesus said the words in v.44 to explain why some people believe, while others do not, as is made clear in verses 60 and onwards:

Scripture Verse: John 6:60-65 ESV

Joh 6:60 When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?”
Joh 6:61 But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples were grumbling about this, said to them, “Do you take offense at this?
Joh 6:62 Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?
Joh 6:63 It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
Joh 6:64 But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.)
Joh 6:65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

© Copyright Original Source

And notice that Jesus here further explains what he means by the Father drawing someone to Jesus, namely that no one can come to Jesus unless the Father grants it to him. So in this case the drawing is performed by the Father.

[tabibito]

Out of a flock of mixed species numbering 85 (numbers do vary a bit - but not by a whole lot) who come for food - 8 will come to my hand with another 16 (or so) that will gather at my feet. The rest won't come any closer than they have to. There is more in the pigeon's own personality than anything else that makes the difference.

John 6:55 would need to be evaluated in the light of "Why would God withhold the opportunity for a person to come to Christ?"