So... So what?

[FlimFlamboyant]

A murderer, liar, etc can be saved by Christ's sacrifice, IF they repent, turn around and quit doing the unclean thing. Same with the Trinity. If they quit believing the lie, they can be saved.

Because this is a sin that will never be forgiven (unless one repents and changes) See Deut 5:7. To do this would be to show hatred for the God and Father of Jesus Christ.

Ok, so the general consensus amongst JW's is that a man cannot dishonor God and be saved, yes? What this really boils down to, then, is the issue of salvation, and what role works play. Is it the JW's position that a man must maintain a certain level of righteousness in order to qualify for salvation?

[NonTrinitarian]

Ok, so the general consensus amongst JW's is that a man cannot dishonor God and be saved, yes? What this really boils down to, then, is the issue of salvation, and what role works play. Is it the JW's position that a man must maintain a certain level of righteousness in order to qualify for salvation?

You can't "qualify" for salvation as if it were something you can "earn". IE, God doesn't "Owe" anyone salvation. However, you must serve God with your whole heart, soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus said "workers of lawlessness" would not be saved. (Mattew 7) So no one qualifies for salvation, it's a gift God chooses to grant to those who do their best to worship Him in spirit and truth.

[FlimFlamboyant]

You can't "qualify" for salvation as if it were something you can "earn". IE, God doesn't "Owe" anyone salvation.

I didn't necessarily have that in mind.

However, you must serve God with your whole heart, soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus said "workers of lawlessness" would not be saved. (Mattew 7) So no one qualifies for salvation, it's a gift God chooses to grant to those who do their best to worship Him in spirit and truth.

So, to re-word it, it is therefore the JW's position that a man must maintain a certain level of righteousness in order to receive the gift of salvation, yes? How righteous must one be? Is it defined, or are you left to wonder about your salvation until the day of judgment?

[Cal_Minian]

Ok, so the general consensus amongst JW's is that a man cannot dishonor God and be saved, yes? What this really boils down to, then, is the issue of salvation, and what role works play. Is it the JW's position that a man must maintain a certain level of righteousness in order to qualify for salvation?

Dear Flim,
I have been told I am going to hell because I do not worship Jesus. So this is not exactly a JW issue. Most Trinitarians will agree that one must accept Jesus as savior and some that one must also acept Jesus as God to be saved. There is no difference.

That being said this is not a "work" any more than "believing" in Jesus for a Trinitarian is a work. But they all agree that this is necessary for Salvation.

Aside from that I gave you a Scripture that supports my position and that is what really matters.

From now on, please respond to the Scriptures and offer your own. In this forum that is really the only thing that matters, since you are talking to JWs.

Regards,
Cal Minian

[FlimFlamboyant]

I have been told I am going to hell because I do not worship Jesus. So this is not exactly a JW issue. Most Trinitarians will agree that one must accept Jesus as savior and some that one must also acept Jesus as God to be saved. There is no difference.

That's not really my point, nor does it really have anything to do with my question.

That being said this is not a "work" any more than "believing" in Jesus for a Trinitarian is a work. But they all agree that this is necessary for Salvation.

What is not a work? What do they all agree is necessary for salvation? I'm having difficulty pin-pointing what you mean by "this" in the context you provided.

Aside from that I gave you a Scripture that supports my position and that is what really matters.

You gave me a scripture that supposedly supports a position that I haven't even mentioned in this thread, nor do I intend to. This is not about proving the Trinity.

From now on, please respond to the Scriptures and offer your own. In this forum that is really the only thing that matters, since you are talking to JWs.

I have every intention of bringing up scriptures, but I need to ask you questions concerning what it is that you believe before I can do so. I'm sure you would rather have me do that than make assumptions about what you believe simply because you're a JW, wouldn't you?

[NonTrinitarian]

That's not really my point, nor does it really have anything to do with my question.

Actually, whether you want to admit it or not, it is your point. Your whole thread is about why JW's are so determined to prove Jesus is not God. All Cal asked is why Trinitarians are so determined to prove he is.

It's the same exact question, only turned around and directed to you rather than us.

[NonTrinitarian]

Dear Flim,
I have been told I am going to hell because I do not worship Jesus. So this is not exactly a JW issue. Most Trinitarians will agree that one must accept Jesus as savior and some that one must also acept Jesus as God to be saved. There is no difference.

Good point Cal. I copy and pasted the oringial question and turned it around. Let's see their answer.

What would like to know from the Trinitarian camp, however, is... So what? I see people railing for the deity of Christ all of the time, citing verse after verse that supposedly prove that he's Jehovah. However, what I haven't seen expressed is the reason behind this. What I mean by that is not "because this verse says he is", but what is there about the concept of the non-deity of Christ that the Trinitarians perceives as damaging? What important tenet of doctrine would supposedly be rendered invalid if Jesus Christ really is not God in flesh?

[FlimFlamboyant]

Actually, whether you want to admit it or not, it is your point. Your whole thread is about why JW's are so determined to prove Jesus is not God. All Cal asked is why Trinitarians are so determined to prove he is.

It's the same exact question, only turned around and directed to you rather than us.

But it's not an answer, is it? But I'll indulge you for a moment, since I suppose it's only fair, and answer the question in reverse, as you've presented it:

What would like to know from the Trinitarian camp, however, is... So what?

I have no idea. Seriously. You never see Paul attempting to persuade the Jews that Jesus is God, do you (though I never see him deny it)? The majority of his efforts toward the Jews consist of proving that Jesus is the son of God, and that he is the Christ. I honestly haven't come to a conclusion as to whether or not the belief in Christ's deity plays any factor at all in a man's salvation. If it doesn't, then "so what?" indeed. Sure, I'll debate it to some extent, but as of right now, I believe there are far more important issues, such as our salvation. That seems to be what this thread is now leaning toward, now that it has become an issue.

In any case, you've both answered the question by expressing the fact that you believe that a man cannot be saved while "dishonoring" God, whether that be through the worship of Jesus, or through sin in general (Rom 2:23). So, it seems that the focus has changed, really. Now the issue is righteousness, and how it pertains to our salvation; specifically, how it is that one is made righteous. As you stated earlier:

A murderer, liar, etc can be saved by Christ's sacrifice, IF they repent, turn around and quit doing the unclean thing.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I presume that you would use the law (perhaps the Ten Commandments specifically) to determine how these individuals should live their lives so that they can be saved, yes?

[NonTrinitarian]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I presume that you would use the law (perhaps the Ten Commandments specifically) to determine how these individuals should live their lives so that they can be saved, yes?

JW's recognize that the 10 commandments are not binding on Christians as the Mosaic Law was done away with when Christ died. However, the principles are still there (IE, no you can't go and kill someone or commit adultery.)

As I said, we cannot earn our salvation. However, in order to be considered for salvation, you have to have works (faith without them is dead). Even most Trinitarians will in principle admit this but they try not to. IE, to be saved, you have to do something. It may be felt that you only have to profess Jesus as your savior but still, it's a work. It's something one has to do in order to be saved. Others will go further and say you have to be baptized. Others will go further and say you have to obey the commands found at 1 Cor 6:9,10. Others will even go further and say you have to pay a certain amount of pentance. So basically just about all but Univeralists think some work is involved, it's just the degree of it.

JW's believe we have to do our best to follow the commands set out in God's Word. We can't do them perfectly (and thus cannot earn salvation) but we must try to do the best we can and beg for God's mercy when judgement comes.

[FlimFlamboyant]

JW's recognize that the 10 commandments are not binding on Christians as the Mosaic Law was done away with when Christ died. However, the principles are still there (IE, no you can't go and kill someone or commit adultery.)

Sure. The covenantal contract was abolished, though that of course did not suddenly make it alright to murder people. Agreed.

As I said, we cannot earn our salvation.

Agreed there as well.

However, in order to be considered for salvation, you have to have works (faith without them is dead).

Now this is a very popular line of reasoning these days, it seems, but appears to me to be little more than a semantical change in what is really the same principle. As for James 2, I had previously written a small essay on this passage which demonstrates how works are being touted as the proof of a man's already-existing faith, or absense thereof, in line with Mat 7:16-20, not a prerequisite for salvation. (click here)

Even most Trinitarians will in principle admit this but they try not to. IE, to be saved, you have to do something. It may be felt that you only have to profess Jesus as your savior but still, it's a work.

I would say that one merely has to believe that Jesus died for our sins and rose again (as opposed to mere profession). How that could be considered a work is beyond me, especially when I consider the distinction that Paul makes between the two:

(Eph 2:8,9) 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.

It's something one has to do in order to be saved. Others will go further and say you have to be baptized. Others will go further and say you have to obey the commands found at 1 Cor 6:9,10. Others will even go further and say you have to pay a certain amount of pentance. So basically just about all but Univeralists think some work is involved, it's just the degree of it.

A Universalist would declare that everyone is saved, whether they believe that Christ died for their sins or not. I do not share that view.

JW's believe we have to do our best to follow the commands set out in God's Word. We can't do them perfectly (and thus cannot earn salvation) but we must try to do the best we can and beg for God's mercy when judgement comes.

How do you know that the best you can do (or anyone, for that matter) is good enough? Consider this:

(Mat 5:20) For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Note first of all that their righteousness had to exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees. Before you think that may not be such a tall order, consider what Paul spoke of himself while he was still a Pharisee:

(Phi 3:6) Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

In short, a man's righteousness would have to exceed the righteousness that he would have from a blameless standing before the law. Why? Because the law addressed only the outward action, not the intentions of the heart. Jesus goes on to address that issue:

(Mat 5:21,22) Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

How can works of the flesh change a man's heart? It is the heart that God looks upon, afterall, and not the outward appearance (1 Sa 16:7). Works of the flesh cannot address this problem; how could they? Purity of the heart is not something that man can accomplish through any work of his own. David understood this as he wrote the following:

(Psa 51:9,10) Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine iniquities. Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.

David sought for God to do this for him. Why? Because David knew that he couldn't do it himself. He didn't ask for a better law; he didn't even ask for God to help him purify his heart through obedience. He turned the matter over to God in its entirety. Consider also the words of Peter as he spoke of the events at the house of Cornelius:

(Act 15:8,9) And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

Cornelius was, by every carnal standard, a "righteous" man (Acts 10:2). So why would God have to purify his heart? Because it needed it, and he couldn't be saved without it, despite his many good works. Now I'm sure you'll say something to the effect of "sure, this is a perfect example of a man who was considered for salvation because of his works!", but then we have people such as the thief on the cross, and the apostle Paul.

Purity of the heart (or "spirit", really) is ultimately what God desires above all else. He hasn't saved these vessels of flesh, afterall. They go on to suffer the wages of sin (death; Rom 6:23) regardless of how we live our lives. That is, of course, not to say that God does not desire good works; he most certainly does. However, the purpose of those works is what is at issue. It is God who purifies the heart by faith, not by works.

[NonTrinitarian]

Now this is a very popular line of reasoning these days, it seems, but appears to me to be little more than a semantical change in what is really the same principle. As for James 2, I had previously written a small essay on this passage which demonstrates how works are being touted as the proof of a man's already-existing faith, or absense thereof, in line with Mat 7:16-20, not a prerequisite for salvation.

This is more of a chicken versus the egg argument of which is first. The end result is that if you do NOT have works, you will not be saved.

I would say that one merely has to believe that Jesus died for our sins and rose again (as opposed to mere profession). How that could be considered a work is beyond me, especially when I consider the distinction that Paul makes between the two:

(Eph 2:8,9) 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.

It's not beyond me at all. You have to do SOMETHING, even if you say that is "merely believe" something. The point is, YOU and I BOTH have to do SOMETHING in order to be saved. We just disagree on the extent of what we have to do. Paul was talking about works of law and thinking they can save you. Something I never said. Additionally, there are WAY TOO MANY words from Paul's pen that show he felt Christians had to OBEY God's command if they wanted to be saved. Or was he talking out of both sides of his mouth?

A Universalist would declare that everyone is saved, whether they believe that Christ died for their sins or not. I do not share that view.

So we agree we all have to do something. You just limit it to less than what I think the Bible says.

How do you know that the best you can do (or anyone, for that matter) is good enough?

I thought I made it clear there's nothing you can do that is "good enough" for salvation. It's a gift. Do your best and trust in the God of mercy.

[FlimFlamboyant]

It's not beyond me at all. You have to do SOMETHING, even if you say that is "merely believe" something. The point is, YOU and I BOTH have to do SOMETHING in order to be saved. We just disagree on the extent of what we have to do. Paul was talking about works of law and thinking they can save you. Something I never said.

But that is what you said, whether you're aware of it or not. You said:

A murderer, liar, etc can be saved by Christ's sacrifice, IF they repent, turn around and quit doing the unclean thing. Same with the Trinity. If they quit believing the lie, they can be saved.

In short, what you said was, "if they stop sinning" (to some extent) they can be saved. Consider the following verse:

(1Jo 3:4) Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

If sin is the transgression of the law, and one must turn from their sins in order to be saved, then by extension, what you're saying is that one must not transgress the law if he wants to be saved. Therefore, what you're telling me is that one must be in obedience to the law in order to be saved. Paul clearly contests that idea, as you apparently agree.

Additionally, there are WAY TOO MANY words from Paul's pen that show he felt Christians had to OBEY God's command if they wanted to be saved. Or was he talking out of both sides of his mouth?

Such as?

I thought I made it clear there's nothing you can do that is "good enough" for salvation. It's a gift. Do your best and trust in the God of mercy.

What you're saying is that it's a "gift" given to people who are "good enough". That is exactly what you're saying when you tell me it is given to people who "do their best". If they don't "do their best", then they don't get it, do they? So they have to do "good enough" (their best) in order to receive it.

[Cal_Minian]

What you're saying is that it's a "gift" given to people who are "good enough". That is exactly what you're saying when you tell me it is given to people who "do their best". If they don't "do their best", then they don't get it, do they? So they have to do "good enough" (their best) in order to receive it.

Flim, you sound like a universalist, are you?

[FlimFlamboyant]

Flim, you sound like a universalist, are you?

No, as I said before:

"A Universalist would declare that everyone is saved, whether they believe that Christ died for their sins or not. I do not share that view."

[NonTrinitarian]

What you're saying is that it's a "gift" given to people who are "good enough". That is exactly what you're saying when you tell me it is given to people who "do their best". If they don't "do their best", then they don't get it, do they? So they have to do "good enough" (their best) in order to receive it.

Pretty much. I'm not the judge so I can't say HOW FAR they can deviate from their "best". But we should all try to serve God with our WHOLE heart and soul. What do you think?