Are dead stars no longer stars? If a fish's gills seal, will they stop being a fish?

I edited to include this. This is judgment.

I don't think it is for any person to say, this particular thing is or is not a star. I mean to say then, to assign nature to person. To judge this is to judge another person ontologically, and that is not our place.

We see activities of others, but imperfectly. Likewise ourselves. We experience our actions and others actions, their energy, imperfectly. Our judgment of nature is hopelessly inadequate. So we must never judge others, in any way, for the slightest apparent sin.

But we also must hold to truths and the confessions of our faith, and these things are revealed to us in the scriptures. A star is a star, a fish is a fish, and a person who does not love others does not know God and is not being saved.

I should have just gone to St John's first letter to begin with. The entirety of his letter is about this link of love, faith, actions, how to test ourselves, how to know. He gives us these if statements.

• If we say that we have fellowship with Him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth
• If we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.
• If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
• If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
• If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.
• If anyone should love the world, the love of the Father is not in him, because all that is in the world, the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the vaunting of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world.
• If you know that He is righteous, you know also that everyone practicing righteousness has been begotten of Him.
• If anyone should say, "I love God," and should hate his brother, he is a liar. For the one not loving his brother, whom he has seen, is not able to love God, whom he has not seen.
• If God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.
• If we should love one another, God abides in us, and His love is having been perfected in us
• If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater

Then we have several "by this we know" statements.

• By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
• By this we know that we are in Him: the one claiming to abide in Him ought also walk just as in the same way that He walked.
• We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers.
• By this we have known love, because He laid down His life for us; and we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers
• We should love not in word, nor in tongue, but in action and in truth. And by this we will know that we are of the truth
• By this we know that He abides in us: by the Spirit whom He has given to us.
• By this we know that we abide in Him and He in us: because He has given to us from out of His Spirit
• By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments

We also see other links between nature and action or energy: "in action and in truth". But this doing->being and being->doing link is unavoidable, an ontological necessity.

• the one doing the will of God abides to the age
• whoever may keep His word, truly in him the love of God has been perfected
• Behold what love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of Godand we are!...now we are children of God...
• Anyone abiding in Him does not sin
• The one practicing righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous.
• Anyone having been born of God does not practice sin, because His seed abides in him, and he is not able to continue sinning, because he has been born of God.
• the one abiding in love abides in God, and God abides in him
• The one having the Son has life; the one not having the Son of God does not have life.

Those points and Psalm 119 are so harmonious.

Quote:

---

You know that those quotes are scripture right? You bolded questions I have about our actions as if these are preposterous.

---

I certainly didn't quote anything of yours that was scripture.

Quote:

---

I never, ever, ever once said that works are not necessary for salvation. When I say His judgment is righteous, and whatever standard, merit or ontology or whatever - I'm saying, whatever we think or rationalize about this, it is not relevant. However He judges will be right, and perfect, and true. It will be everything: merit, being, faith, actions, desires, and more, because He judges the heart, the whole person. And even then, not as an accuser, but on the basis of what He said as the only way to life, from the Father (John 12:47-50). He is the way to salvation, and our sole hope is in Him, not our own works or works of the Law, and if we trust in them, by them we will be judged (John 5:39,45). This is what the scriptures tell us, that He judges the inner parts, and that He is true, justified, and blameless in His judgment.

---

Swimmer said it best:

"I don't deny that there are rewards in Heaven. I don't really get how the point system works. Since Christ covers my sins, I know my bad stuff isn't on the scorecard. I struggle enough with getting to the finish line sometimes, that I'm not really worried about how I place. (Acts 20:23) I just concentrate on maintaining my faith and playing to the strong skill set that God called me to: loving the crap out of people and tactfully telling others they are wrong on the internet."

What you propose and continue to propose is "Christ + " when it comes to salvation.

So Christ saves only if your works are sufficient to meet the unknown standard God has for us.

Quote:

---

It's silly to say I'm using only James. I have quoted or directly reference scripture *a lot* in this discussion. Here's a list of the one's I've used, and these are just the ones I referenced directly or quoted verbatim. There's a lot more that I indirectly paraphrased, not including Titus, 2 Tim, a 1 John in this post.

---

I think you put it once in a different discussion that "even heretics use Scripture." I'm not accusing you of being a heretic. What I'm pointing out is that simply using scripture is not sufficient.

Since you mentioned Roman's twice, Lets' explore it Chapter by Chapter to see what it says.

Romans 1:

""16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith,[e] as it is written, "The righteous shall live by faith."[f]"

Romans 2:

You pointed out the following verses:

""5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.

6 He will render to each one according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; 8 but for those who are self-seeking[a] and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. "


You left out who he is talking about though?

"Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things. 2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who practice such things. 3 Do you suppose, O manyou who judge those who practice such things and yet do them yourselfthat you will escape the judgment of God? "

Certainly changes the perspective of who Paul is talking about....

Romans 3:

"21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. 26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

Romans 4:
"What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness." 4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in[a] him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, "

Romans 5:
"Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we[a] have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Through him we have also obtained access by faith[b] into this grace in which we stand, and we[c] rejoice[d] in hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us."

Romans 6:
For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 We know that our old self[a] was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. 7 For one who has died has been set free[b]from sin. 8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. 10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. 11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.

" What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! 16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves,[c] you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. 19 I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations. For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification."

Interesting. Sanctification clearly follows becoming a "slave to righteousness."

" But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

But further, he's clear that the fruits of sin are death, but the fruits of the righteousness found in Christ is eternal life. Would be odd to say that if sanctification was the requirement to get the fruit wouldn't it?

Romans 7:
"For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good.17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me."

You would have us judged on our works, yet Paul shows despair at how sin causes him to fall short. I guess God is handicapping our abilities?

Romans 8:
Man this one is a struggle. I should just quote the entire chapter.

"There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.[a]2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you[b] free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. 3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin,[c] he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."

"So then, brothers,[e] we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons[f] of God. "

"For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience."

Romans 9:
"What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion,[b] but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills."

Romans 10:
"For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them. 6 But the righteousness based on faith says, "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) 7 "or 'Who will descend into the abyss?'" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8 But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim);9 because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.11 For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame."12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.""

Romans 11:
"28 As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now[e]receive mercy. 32 For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all."

Romans 12:
"For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. 4 For as in one body we have many members,[e] and the members do not all have the same function, 5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. 6 Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; 7 if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; 8 the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads,[f] with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness."

Odd, as Paul transitions to how we should act together with each other, no mention of salvation.

Romans 13:
"Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. 9 For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet," and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

11 Besides this you know the time, that the hour has come for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed. 12 The night is far gone; the day is at hand. So then let us cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13 Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy. 14 But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires."

Salvation still not dependent on our works, but clearly we should follow God's commandments.

Romans 14:

You mentioned Romans 14:4 as a reference to supporting works? I'm not sure why?

"As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. 2 One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3 Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master[a] that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. 8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. 9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.

Synergism? No it's the Lord who will make him stand.

Romans 15:
"For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to bring the Gentiles to obedienceby word and deed, 19 by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of Godso that from Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ; 20 and thus I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named, lest I build on someone else's foundation"

Paul's works? No! Christ's works.

Romans 16:
" Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations, according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith 27 to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen."

And how does Paul end Romans? By stressing obedience to faith while not mentioning works.

I would contend that you cannot read Roman's and come to any sort of synergism belief unless you come in saying that is what you believe and force fitting the scriptures into that box. You will probably call that "Apostolic Tradition," but I call that the flaw with that process.

Quote:

---

certainly didn't quote anything of yours that was scripture.

---

Ha...yes you did.

Those are almost all direct scriptural references, some outright verbatim. The parts about God judging come from 1 Samuel, James, Jeremiah, and Matthew. The bold part in the first one is the parable of the tower and the wise king about knowing your measure and what you must do to be a disciple from Luke. The bold part in the second paragraph is from the parable of the last judgment in Matthew.

Quote:

---

Swimmer said it best: ...

---

So you want to teach others their error by claiming ignorance of "how it works"? Bold move Cotton....

But, as I said, there is no point system. We do know, however what we are judged by: love. It's in the scriptures. If you want to learn how it works, go read.

Quote:

---

What you propose and continue to propose is "Christ + " when it comes to salvation.

---

This is just completely false, not true. Not a single have time I ever advocated any salvation apart from Christ, or by any other means but Christ. You should not say things like this, because they are simply not true. I assume you just didn't read what I wrote in this actual thread. So I'll quote myself to say it again.

That is what salvation is, to be totally identified with who we are in Christ Jesus, to grow up to the full measure (Ephesians 4:13), to attain to completion or perfection in Christ (Colossians 1:28).
....
The saving work of Jesus Christ is the only way and means of reconciliation between mankind and God. And, the saving work of Jesus Christ is the only way and means of salvation. In other words, the direct causal link between justification and perfection and sanctification and salvation is Jesus Christ.
....
And that not only is Christ the accomplisher and do-er of our justification, he is also the do-er of our salvation. We will be saved by Him, we will be saved in His life. He does both, justification, and perfection. Or as the scriptures say, He is our Salvation (Psalm 62:2, Isaiah 12:2, Psalm 35:3).

Quote:

---

So Christ saves only if your works are sufficient to meet the unknown standard God has for us.

---

This is just a blatant bad faith mischaracterization. Listen man, I know I've written a lot on this thread, but the idea behind writing a lot is to make it perfectly clear what I am saying. Again, let me quote myself.

I am arguing for works united with faith as salvific, arguing against works of our own piety or righteousness or by the law or apart from faith or love as useful or salvific. I am arguing for faith as justifying, but against faith without works, i.e., faith alone, as justifying, because faith without works does not exist.

Our own works do not justify us or save us. Works alone are empty and cannot justify or save. Faith working through love saves us, unites us with Christ, regenerates us, renews us, seals us for the promises. We are not saved without regard for what we have done, and this includes both what we do on our own (which is useless, empty, vain, etc) and what we do as a coworker with God, who works in us, in faith, in love.

Quote:

---

What I'm pointing out is that simply using scripture is not sufficient.

---

careful there, you'll erode sola scriptura right from beneath your feet. And I wasn't implying that random quotes are sufficient. I was showing that the idea that somehow the entirety of the Church's soteriology is based on one chapter in James is wrong. You'll now proceed to argue against this by abusing bits and pieces of only the book of Romans. Ironic, don't you think?

I know I am saved by Christ alone through faith alone.

How glory points are scored in heaven? That I don't know. As Christians, we should be motivated by desire to be Christlike and make our Father proud.

Romans 1:16-17 doesn't say anything whatsoever about justification by faith alone. You are arguing in vain; arguing for faith is not sufficient, because all Christians everywhere have always confessed that faith saves. You must argue for faith alone.

Romans 2:6 doesn't limit in any way that only those who will be judged as only those who judge. It says he will give to each / every one according to the works of him. But don't take my word for it, how about the words of scripture?

Quote:

---

Psalm 62:12 For You will repay each man according to his deeds.
Proverbs 24:12 If you say, "Behold, we did not know about this," will not He who weighs hearts consider it? Does not the One who guards your life know? Will He not repay a man according to his deeds?
Jeremiah 17:10 I, the LORD, search the heart; I test the mind to reward a man according to his way, by what his deeds deserve.
Matthew 16:27 For the Son of Man will come in His Father's glory with His angels, and then He will repay each one according to what he has done.
Malachi 3:2 But who can endure the day of His coming? And who can stand when He appears? For He will be like a refiner's fire, like a launderer's soap.
1 Cor 3:13 his workmanship will be evident, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will prove the quality of each man's work.
1 Cor 4:15 (concluding the above teaching on judgment) Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.
2 Tim 4:8 From now on the crown of righteousness is laid up for me, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day--and not only to me, but to all who crave His appearing.
Romans 14:12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.
2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each of us may receive what is due us for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad.

---

Your exegesis of this passage is simply not correct.

Romans 3:26 see point 1. Again, never have I ever argued against faith saving. Only that there is such a thing as a faith without works. Works don't save; faith without works doesn't save because it doesn't exist. As Christ Jesus taught, A good tree is not able to bear bad fruits, nor a bad tree to bear good fruits. Every tree not bearing good fruit is cut down and is thrown into fire.

Romans 4:6 is talking about justification, not the whole work of salvation.

Romans 5... I don't know why you quoted this, because it's just nice scripture that doesn't really say anything relevant.

Romans 6 is about baptism. And 1 John teaches quite clearly how one knows if he has died to to sin and into life to God: "We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers." Would you pit scripture against scripture? No, because they both teach the same thing.


Further, the answer to the riddle is right there: "Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?...now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification."

This is the teaching of the Church. Obedience to Christ (i.e., faith working through love) leads to righteousness, leading to sanctification. Unless you're ready to say that sanctification is not part of salvation, what are you arguing?

Go back and read the parables! The talents, the unforgiving slave, they're all slaves to the master! Do not think He does not come to reckon accounts! He said Himself that He would!

Quote:

---

But further, he's clear that the fruits of sin are death, but the fruits of the righteousness found in Christ is eternal life. Would be odd to say that if sanctification was the requirement to get the fruit wouldn't it?

---

Sanctification is the fruit! Becuase to be holy is to be like God, and to be like God is to be God, through union. This is literally what the scriptures say. You talk as if I suggest salvation apart from Christ, but then speak of sanctification as if there is some other holiness!

Quote:

---

You would have us judged on our works, yet Paul shows despair at how sin causes him to fall short. I guess God is handicapping our abilities?

---

It is not my idea that we are judged on our works. It is quite literally verbatim what the scriptures say, what Christ Jesus says. You can scoff at this, I suppose. Rather odd, really. Again, your stance puts scripture against scripture as if to prove the red letters false by St Paul.

Romans 8. These are all quotes from Romans 8.

• Now you are not in flesh but in Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you
• if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not of Him.
• if Christ is in you, the body is indeed dead on account of sin, but the Spirit is life on account of righteousness.
• if the Spirit of the One having raised up Jesus out from the dead dwells in you, the One having raised up Christ Jesus out from the dead also will give life to your mortal bodies, on account of His Spirit dwelling in you
• if you live according to flesh, you are about to die
• if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

Do you just ignore these because you don't like what they say? Or what? Seriously, how do you read these?

Romans 9 is not really about this. It is about Israel vs Gentiles, and an argument that God's justice towards Israel is Just. In other words, Romans 9 is saying that the faithless Jews were vessels of wrath.

This is getting tedious because you quote scripture as if I am to argue against it. Of course I affirm Romans 10, but again even in the bit you quoted, this is about the ability of faith in Christ to save the Gentiles apart from the Law. The verse before frames it: For the end of Law is Christ, unto righteousness to everyone believing.

Romans 11: yeah, He is merciful to everyone, all are saved from death.

Quote:

---

Odd, as Paul transitions to how we should act together with each other, no mention of salvation.

---

Yeah, it's almost like he's not talking about salvation in this passage.

Quote:

---

Salvation still not dependent on our works, but clearly we should follow God's commandments.

---

St Paul says - "Let us walk properly as in the daytime, not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and sensuality, not in quarreling and jealousy". Where else does St Paul talk about this? Oh right, when he says "I forewarn you, even as I warned before, that those doing such things will not inherit God's kingdom."

Quote:

---

You mentioned Romans 14:4 as a reference to supporting works? I'm not sure why?

---

No, I put forward this verse as evidence that no person is able to judge another person.

Quote:

---

Synergism? No it's the Lord who will make him stand.

---

Don't take passages out of context. This passage is about not judging another. Read the preceding sentence: Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand. This doesn't show synergism or monergism.

Quote:

---

Paul's works? No! Christ's works.

---

It's like you don't read the words.

"What Christ has accomplished through me". This isn't the only time St Paul speaks in this way. He says - "I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. And that which I now live in the flesh, I live through faith from the Son of God, the One having loved me and having given up Himself for me." And he says, "Unto this also I toil, striving according to His energy, working in me in power." And "if I go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me." And "But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me has not been void. Rather, I toiled more abundantly than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me." "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For God is the One working in you both to will and to work according to His good pleasure."

And this doozy -
Now the one planting and the one watering are one, and each will receive his own reward, according to his own labor. For we are God's fellow workers; you are God's field, God's building.

It's both. We work because He works in us. He doesn't work in us if we don't work with Him. And we receive reward according to our labor.

Quote:

---

And how does Paul end Romans? By stressing obedience to faith while not mentioning works.

---

Yes he does. What do you think "obedience of faith" means? Go back and reread the times he talks about obedience in Romans. Obedience is always action. You can't obey by not doing anything.

Christ's obedience to death is what justifies us -- obedience of one man, righteousness, as a foil to disobedience of one man, Adam in Romans 5:19.

We see obedience "to the ones you obey" - sin to death, or obedience leading to righteousness. in Romans 6:16.

St Peter talks about how the sanctifying work of the spirit is "to obey Jesus Christ".

It isn't a dichotomy. Please understand this. If the answer is (A + B) you can't prove that false by proving A. You have to prove either not A or not B or not (A + B). You keep trying to prove A. I agree with A. We work. It is God who works in us. A + B. Our work alone (B) is useless.

Every single time you read faith, you have to say to yourself, "self, faith is a quality of the nature. how do we know what a thing's nature is? oh, by its energies, it's actions." Or, you say to yourself "self, if faith is not a quality of the nature, it must be an action. Therefore it must be something that is done." Either way, when you see "obedience of faith" you can't say "ah ha, this is just some vague being" - no, this is action in faith. Obedience in faith, faith working through love.

Quote:

---

I would contend that you cannot read Roman's and come to any sort of synergism belief unless you come in saying that is what you believe and force fitting the scriptures into that box. You will probably call that "Apostolic Tradition," but I call that the flaw with that process.

---

Obviously you can read Romans, quote it extensively, and come to any sort of belief you like.

Go re-read Romans, then every time you say "hm, how do I know?" go read 1 John side by side.

I don't need to appeal to "apostolic tradition" to refute this, and I really haven't. I only need to appeal to scriptures.

I asked you some questions that you didn't answer. Could you try?
What does Christ use to separate the sheep from the goats?
What do you think the judgment is about?
How do you read the parable of the talents?

Quote:

---

I know I am saved by Christ alone through faith alone.

---

Chapter and verse?

Ephesians 2:8-9
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God not by works, so that no one can boast.

Strange. I don't see anything about faith alone in that verse.

It is a great study, though. Verse 8 and 9 are a reiteration of verses 4-7. Verse 8 starts with the conjunction, "for" - its sense is shaped by the preceding statement, verse 8 is the conclusion or explanation of the preceding verses. You can see this because he even repeats himself, he says "by grace you are saved" in v5. He's talking about justification, because he's talking about how we were saved by grace, made alive while we were being dead in trespasses. It's no good to quote the conclusion without the argument.

Quote:

---

And you, being dead in your trespasses and sins - in which once you walked according to the age of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit now working in the sons of disobedience, among whom we all also once lived in the desires of our flesh, doing the things willed of the flesh and of its thoughts; and we were by nature children of wrath even as the rest.

But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, made us alive with Christ even we being dead in trespasses - by grace you are saved - and He raised us up together and seated us together in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

For by grace you are saved through faith, and this not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

---

And it doesn't end there! Much like salvation.

Quote:

---

For we are His workmanship, having been created in Christ Jesus for good works which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Therefore remember that formerly you -- the Gentiles in the flesh, the ones being called the uncircumcision by that being called the circumcision, made by hands in the flesh -- that at that time you were separate from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of the promise, not having hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you, the ones once being far off, have become near by the blood of Christ...So then, you are no longer strangers and aliens, but are fellow citizens of the saints and of the household of God, having been built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is increasing into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a habitation of God in the Spirit.

---

This whole passage is about *how* those who were in enmity - both the gentiles for alienation from the Law, and the Jews for failure to keep it, were reconciled. By grace. Not works, so neither the Jews can boast in the Law. I never really noticed before how closely this is linked with the first part of Romans 1-5. It's like a mini summary of it.

Note well that if this is the whole of salvation then all men are saved, like completely, bound for heaven, no one will be condemned. Because the grace, the salvation St Paul is speaking of here is for all men.

The whole rest of the book is about what we do AFTER this reconciliation. No. This is not the end, and it is wrong to say that this is the summation of St Paul's soteriology.

To be honest, I'm not really sure which part you think we disagree on.

We've run around in so many circles, that I believe we have caught our own tail.


Justification is a distinct event, not the end of a Christian's life but rather the start of it. A Christian's faith and spiritual health grows and withers with our obedience and love. It seems on this we do not disagree.

Quote:

---

So you want to teach others their error by claiming ignorance of "how it works"? Bold move Cotton....

---

What? Nothing to even reply to on this.

Quote:

---

This is just completely false, not true. Not a single have time I ever advocated any salvation apart from Christ, or by any other means but Christ. You should not say things like this, because they are simply not true. I assume you just didn't read what I wrote in this actual thread. So I'll quote myself to say it again.

---

If I might offer a piece of advice. the frequent attempts to belittle or pose personal attacks against someone you disagree with is not a particular good method of discussion. I'd suggest a different tack.

I've read every word you've written, including these:

"I never, ever, ever once said that works are not necessary for salvation."

"However He judges will be right, and perfect, and true. It will be everything: merit, being, faith, actions, desires, and more, because He judges the heart, the whole person."

And of course these contradicting statements:

"Our own works do not justify us or save us."

"We are not saved without regard for what we have done, and this includes both what we do on our own (which is useless, empty, vain, etc) and what we do as a coworker with God, who works in us, in faith, in love."

So yes, I read what you wrote and it's why I continue to have a problem with synergism.

You want to simultaneously say works do not save us while also saying that we are not saved without our works. I don't buy it.

Quote:

---

careful there, you'll erode sola scriptura right from beneath your feet. And I wasn't implying that random quotes are sufficient. I was showing that the idea that somehow the entirety of the Church's soteriology is based on one chapter in James is wrong. You'll now proceed to argue against this by abusing bits and pieces of only the book of Romans. Ironic, don't you think?

---

Nonsense and the fact that you would make this kind of comment/argument shows you aren't particularly serious about having real discussion.

Points of contention:

1. Justification = salvation
They are not the same thing. Salvation includes justification, but not the other way around. Special care is needed with the verb "to save". St Paul often uses it in a lot of different ways, very broadly, different tenses, and scripturally it can mean both eternal salvation and also salvation from specific things, sometimes temporal (e.g., "your faith has saved you" not eternally but from the temporal suffering; or death).

2. That faith can exist alone (that is, apart from works)
The entire discussion is a notional one, that there is such a thing as a workless faith. Perhaps we can say that if there were such a thing as a workless faith, it could save. But the whole idea is contrary to the mind of the scriptures, because repeatedly we see that a workless faith simply isn't faith in Jesus at all. Every indication we have in the scriptures is that faith never exists without activity, obedience, work, love. So the very idea of "faith alone" is a kind of oxymoron, like "dry wetness" or "hot coldness".

2b. That we are not really made righteous by faith.
As a followup to the above, to "fix" this problem, a person can say that we are not ontologically made righteous, but only declared to be so. Therefore our apparent lack of love is of no problem whatsoever, because even though a person could be "workless" Christ is infinitely "workful," so we fall on his works. They're accounted to us, even though they are not ours. Now, the stage is set for the great debate between Luther and Rome. They both presume this is the case; they argue between themselves on how one avails oneself of this "treasury of merits" to be called "wet" while being "dry". Meanwhile, apart from both sides, the East's position is that we are actually made righteous through faith, and this is what salvation is. You aren't called "wet," you become "wet". You aren't called righteous, you are made righteous.

3. That a dichotomy can be made between the event and the ongoing activity of salvation
There has been a tendency here at times to favor the event to the exclusion of the ongoing. As Cooper says, there's no need for this, because scripturally salvation (and even justification) is both a past event and an ongoing process, it is both finish and will be finished at judgment. Even justification should not be spoken of solely as past tense, because St Paul himself, in Romans no less, speaks of it as a future event. We shouldn't limit it to either, because the scripture doesn't.

Quote:

---

If I might offer a piece of advice. the frequent attempts to belittle or pose personal attacks against someone you disagree with is not a particular good method of discussion. I'd suggest a different tack.

---

I genuinely don't see where I've belittled or attacked you, frequently or otherwise. If I have, I'm sorry - I didn't mean it.

Quote:

---

And of course these contradicting statements:

You want to simultaneously say works do not save us while also saying that we are not saved without our works. I don't buy it.

---

Do you think it is possible that they are not contradictory?

"I never, ever, ever once said that works are not necessary for salvation."
does not contradict with
"Our own works do not justify us or save us."

Why? Because the bottom specifies our own works. Works are necessary, but not our own. Work justifies, because St Paul specifically says that Christ's death on the Cross is a work.

"However He judges will be right, and perfect, and true. It will be everything: merit, being, faith, actions, desires, and more, because He judges the heart, the whole person."

"We are not saved without regard for what we have done, and this includes both what we do on our own (which is useless, empty, vain, etc) and what we do as a coworker with God, who works in us, in faith, in love."
These are more or less a summary of what the scriptures say about judgment. The first quote can be found in both the psalms and prophets as well as NT accounts. St Paul talks about the judgment of what we've built on the foundation (which is the first part) and the coworker is also Pauline.

You haven't answered any questions. How do you read about the judgment? If we just pause the discussion to consider everything the scriptures say about judgment, even if we only look at what Jesus Himself says about judgment, what do you think we are judged on? It really seems as if you reject the idea of judgment altogether because you feel like it is contradictory to the gospel.

Quote:

---

Nonsense and the fact that you would make this kind of comment/argument shows you aren't particularly serious about having real discussion.

---

What, I'm not allowed to say that it's kinda funny for you to say using scripture isn't sufficient but it has to be joined to right interpretation? Because that's kind of a side argument. Relax man.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Points of contention:

1. Justification = salvation
They are not the same thing. Salvation includes justification, but not the other way around. Special care is needed with the verb "to save". St Paul often uses it in a lot of different ways, very broadly, different tenses, and scripturally it can mean both eternal salvation and also salvation from specific things, sometimes temporal (e.g., "your faith has saved you" not eternally but from the temporal suffering; or death).

---

In a sense, I think you are being contrary here. A birth is not the completion of a life, but it is the beginning of one. Getting in a car isn't a whole roadtrip, but it is the neccessary start. No one denies that there are things that Christians must do after justifications to remain in the faith. Justification is an event, a declaration, an act. Faith saves and because someone is faithful, they will do God's will. A person who has not been justified cant partake in theosis. Likewise, a person born will not live if they dont take care of their health and a person on a roadtrip will not get far after getting in their car if they don't refill with gas and do maintenance.

Quote:

---

2. That faith can exist alone (that is, apart from works)
The entire discussion is a notional one, that there is such a thing as a workless faith. Perhaps we can say that if there were such a thing as a workless faith, it could save. But the whole idea is contrary to the mind of the scriptures, because repeatedly we see that a workless faith simply isn't faith in Jesus at all. Every indication we have in the scriptures is that faith never exists without activity, obedience, work, love. So the very idea of "faith alone" is a kind of oxymoron, like "dry wetness" or "hot coldness".

---

Nobody has asserted this. No one is advocating for "cheap grace". Btw, dry wetness exists. It's in wine. Cause of the tannins.

Which part of the Christian life saves you? The faith. Which part strengthens the faith? The works.
Which part of the body allows you to lift an object? Muscles. What strengthens the muscles? Exercise, not moving will make them atrophy and die.

Quote:

---

2b. That we are not really made righteous by faith.
As a followup to the above, to "fix" this problem, a person can say that we are not ontologically made righteous, but only declared to be so. Therefore our apparent lack of love is of no problem whatsoever, because even though a person could be "workless" Christ is infinitely "workful," so we fall on his works. They're accounted to us, even though they are not ours. Now, the stage is set for the great debate between Luther and Rome. They both presume this is the case; they argue between themselves on how one avails oneself of this "treasury of merits" to be called "wet" while being "dry". Meanwhile, apart from both sides, the East's position is that we are actually made righteous through faith, and this is what salvation is. You aren't called "wet," you become "wet". You aren't called righteous, you are made righteous.

---

Imputed righteousness.

Quote:

---

3. That a dichotomy can be made between the event and the ongoing activity of salvation
There has been a tendency here at times to favor the event to the exclusion of the ongoing. As Cooper says, there's no need for this, because scripturally salvation (and even justification) is both a past event and an ongoing process, it is both finish and will be finished at judgment. Even justification should not be spoken of solely as past tense, because St Paul himself, in Romans no less, speaks of it as a future event. We shouldn't limit it to either, because the scripture doesn't.

---

Super nuancey. You treat it as though there is a wide chasm whete there is a tiny fissure. Which is most ot this thread.

Does it feel to anyone else like were sitting around a table after a couple of beers, and whether it's the beer or the background noise, we are mostly talking past each other? Only without the fun parts.

Is that just me?

Quote:

---

In a sense, I think you are being contrary here.

---

I'm not being contrary. In this very thread, y'all said this:
To do that [not use justification and salvation interchangeably] is to miss the point of justification.
Justification is the binary 1/0 saved-not saved in our soteriology. So it's distinction without a difference.

If we're all cool that justification is not the exact same thing as salvation, then that's fine, but that hasn't been the stance. They are not interchangeable, because they are not the same thing.

Quote:

---

Nobody has asserted this. No one is advocating for "cheap grace".

Which part of the Christian life saves you? The faith. Which part strengthens the faith? The works.
Which part of the body allows you to lift an object? Muscles. What strengthens the muscles? Exercise, not moving will make them atrophy and die.

---

People have asserted this. In fact, on this very thread - for example, AgLiving said "So I could summarize your entire point to simply say that without works, you don't have faith. I don't think you can read Paul's letters and come to that conclusion." Faith cannot exist alone.

Ironically (irenically?) enough at this point I actually go to Luther to argue against this. Here are two quotes from Luther.

Therefore justification does not demand the works of the Law but a living faith which produces its own works.

Faith without works justifies. Faith without works is dead. Therefore dead faith justifies...In the major premise, "faith" ought to be placed with the word "justifies" and the portion of the sentence "without works justifies" is placed in a predicate periphrase and must refer to the word "justifies," not to "faith." In the minor premise, "without works" is truly the subject periphrase and refers to faith. We say that justification is effective without works, not that faith is without works. For that faith that lacks fruit is not an efficacious but a faith. "Without works" is ambiguous, then. For that reason, this argument settles nothing. It is one thing that faith justifies without works; it is another thing that faith exists without works.

The whole thing is a kind of abstract discussion about theory - "can faith justify without works?". People immediately respond "no, because faith can't exist without works." Luther says no no no, I'm not saying that it can. That's another question entirely. But in theory, if it could, it would save, right?

I don't have an issue, per se, with the idea of "but if it could...?". The problem is, you always have to go around constantly qualifying sola fidei by saying sola (living) fidei. So let's say...

(living) faith alone
living faith produces its own works
living faith = faith with works or evinced by works
faith with works alone

Everyone happy? should be, I think?

Quote:

---

Super nuancey. You treat it as though there is a wide chasm whete there is a tiny fissure. Which is most ot this thread.
(moved)
A birth is not the completion of a life, but it is the beginning of one. Getting in a car isn't a whole roadtrip, but it is the neccessary start. No one denies that there are things that Christians must do after justifications to remain in the faith. Justification is an event, a declaration, an act. Faith saves and because someone is faithful, they will do God's will. A person who has not been justified cant partake in theosis. Likewise, a person born will not live if they dont take care of their health and a person on a roadtrip will not get far after getting in their car if they don't refill with gas and do maintenance.

---

Justification shouldn't (only) be spoken of as a past event. As was already quoted in this thread (and not by me), Cooper says:
"Notions of salvation as event and process need not be pitted against one another. Justification, in Lutheran (and Pauline) theology, is an event of the past and present [and future cf Romans 2:13 - k2], in which God's eschatological verdict of 'righteous' is placed on his people in advance."

Justification is the idea of being capable of entering into, being placed in, a right relationship with God. It is in St Paul's terminology completely synonymous with reconciliation (cf Romans 5:10, 2 Corinthians 5:18-21). But as we see, in verse 20, reconciliation to God is an ongoing thing, because Christians still sin from time to time. We don't need Christ's work to re-justify us, but we need reconciliation to God. Just as "Colin" needed to "come back". The ministry of reconciliation (that is, preaching and exhorting people to take hold of the grace offered through justification) continues externally in evangelization, and internally pastorally.

"Faith saves and because someone is faithful, they will do God's will."
This is exactly the nuance that makes things difficult. I am not you can say, because someone is faithful, they will do. This leaves open a possibility of separation, temporal delay, what have you. As if to say, well they are faithful but they haven't done it yet but they will. This is where I get the value of the subtlety of Greek for this, because I think a truer way to say it is - because someone has faith they are having done and will do God's will. I.e., they have works and will do. Even if it is not works people see, it is activity, energy, actualization that God sees.

That being said, it *is* an interesting notion to think about faith as nature vs faith as potentiality with regard to works as actuality (energeia). I need to muse on this a bit, phone a friend or two to discuss. standby.

This is what I call a four beer discussion, as in, you shouldn't even start it until four beers in.

But, even if the people discussing are talking past one another, it doesn't mean it isn't edifying for both the participants and those who may be "listening in".

I am not sure that any honest and humble discussion which causes us to consider our salvation and the scriptures can be wasted, if it is held in love and sincerity. I try to do that, even though I know I write too much.

Quote:

---

I'm not being contrary. In this very thread, y'all said this:
To do that [not use justification and salvation interchangeably] is to miss the point of justification.
Justification is the binary 1/0 saved-not saved in our soteriology. So it's distinction without a difference.

If we're all cool that justification is not the exact same thing as salvation, then that's fine, but that hasn't been the stance. They are not interchangeable, because they are not the same thing.

---

Why wouldn't you post the "Colin example too?"

Kind of ruins this comment.

As a reminder:
"Meet Colin. Colin hasn't really ever considered Christianity, but through the grace of God stumbles into a church one day and the Holy Spirit works faith into Colin. Colin does not reject this wonderful gift and is yay! justified, written into the book of Heaven and because of his newfound faith, he starts studying Gods word, taking communion, becomes a part of the church and draws nearer to God every day. But then! duh duh duh duhhhhhhh (dramatic music) Colin falls into a bad crowd and stops praying, stops going to church, stops participating in sanctifying activities and eventually says "nah God aint real yo"

He has now rejected God's free offer of salvation and yes, is no longer justified. This is le sad.

However! His mother, Monica, is praying for him all the time and because of her faith, participating in sanctification and doing good works such as trying to get Colin back to church. One Easter, Colin goes to church, and because he hasn't hardened his heart, the Holy Spirit works faith back into Colin and the free gift of salvation that is offered to all of mankind is there for him. Colin repents and receives absolution and is yes, once again justified! Yay Colin! Colin goes on to get married, have tiny little babies, which are baptized because all babies should be baptized and the Holy Spirit works faith in those tiny little babies! Yay for Colin and his babies who are all a part of the church of believers!"

Quote:

---

People have asserted this. In fact, on this very thread - for example, AgLiving said "So I could summarize your entire point to simply say that without works, you don't have faith. I don't think you can read Paul's letters and come to that conclusion." Faith cannot exist alone.

Ironically (irenically?) enough at this point I actually go to Luther to argue against this. Here are two quotes from Luther.

Therefore justification does not demand the works of the Law but a living faith which produces its own works.

Faith without works justifies. Faith without works is dead. Therefore dead faith justifies...In the major premise, "faith" ought to be placed with the word "justifies" and the portion of the sentence "without works justifies" is placed in a predicate periphrase and must refer to the word "justifies," not to "faith." In the minor premise, "without works" is truly the subject periphrase and refers to faith. We say that justification is effective without works, not that faith is without works. For that faith that lacks fruit is not an efficacious but a faith. "Without works" is ambiguous, then. For that reason, this argument settles nothing. It is one thing that faith justifies without works; it is another thing that faith exists without works.

The whole thing is a kind of abstract discussion about theory - "can faith justify without works?". People immediately respond "no, because faith can't exist without works." Luther says no no no, I'm not saying that it can. That's another question entirely. But in theory, if it could, it would save, right?

I don't have an issue, per se, with the idea of "but if it could...?". The problem is, you always have to go around constantly qualifying sola fidei by saying sola (living) fidei. So let's say...

(living) faith alone
living faith produces its own works
living faith = faith with works or evinced by works
faith with works alone

Everyone happy? should be, I think?

---

It is interesting to watch you get worked up when I comment on synergism, yet you are so confident that you are correctly explaining Lutheranism by pulling a random quote. I think Jordan commented in both podcasts that doing so is not the best way to discuss any topic.

However, lets go to the Augsburg Confession (usually a good starting point for Lutheranism).

Quote:

---

Forasmuch, therefore, as the doctrine concerning faith, which ought to be the chief one in the Church, has lain so long unknown, as all must needs grant that there was the deepest silence in their sermons concerning the righteousness of faith, while only the doctrine of works was treated in the churches, our teachers have instructed the churches concerning faith as follows:
9] First, that our works cannot reconcile God or merit forgiveness of sins, grace, and justification, but that we obtain this only by faith when we believe that we are received into favor for Christ's sake, who alone has been set forth the Mediator and Propitiation, 1 Tim. 2:5, in order that the Father may be reconciled through Him. 10]Whoever, therefore, trusts that by works he merits grace, despises the merit and grace of Christ, and seeks a way to God without Christ, by human strength, although Christ has said of Himself: I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. John 14:6.
11] This doctrine concerning faith is everywhere treated by Paul, Eph. 2:8: By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of your selves; it is the gift of God, not of works, etc.
12] And lest any one should craftily say that a new interpretation of Paul has been devised by us, this entire matter is supported by the testimonies of the Fathers. For 13] Augustine, in many volumes, defends grace and the righteousness of faith, over against the merits of works. 14] And Ambrose, in his De Vocatione Gentium, and elsewhere, teaches to like effect. For in his De Vocatione Gentium he says as follows: Redemption by the blood of Christ would become of little value, neither would the preeminence of man's works be superseded by the mercy of God, if justification, which is wrought through grace, were due to the merits going before, so as to be, not the free gift of a donor, but the reward due to the laborer.
15] But, although this doctrine is despised by the inexperienced, nevertheless God-fearing and anxious consciences find by experience that it brings the greatest consolation, because consciences cannot be set at rest through any works, but only by faith, when they take the sure ground that for Christ's sake they have a reconciled God. As Paul teaches Rom. 5:1: 16]Being justified by faith, we have peace with God. 17] This whole doctrine is to be referred to that conflict of the terrified conscience, neither can it be understood apart from that conflict. Therefore 18]inexperienced and profane men judge ill concerning this matter, who dream that Christian righteousness is nothing but civil and philosophical righteousness.
19] Heretofore consciences were plagued with the doctrine of works, they did not hear the consolation from the Gospel. 20] Some persons were driven by conscience into the desert, into monasteries hoping there to merit grace by a monastic life. 21] Some also devised other works whereby to merit grace and make satisfaction for sins. 22]Hence there was very great need to treat of, and renew, this doctrine of faith in Christ, to the end that anxious consciences should not be without consolation but that they might know that grace and forgiveness of sins and justification are apprehended by faith in Christ.

---

Quote:

---

Furthermore, it is taught on our part that it is necessary to do good works, not that we should trust to merit grace by them, but because it is the will of God. 28] It is only by faith that forgiveness of sins is apprehended, and that, for nothing. 29] And because through faith the Holy Ghost is received, hearts are renewed and endowed with new affections, so as to be able to bring forth good works. 30] For Ambrose says: Faith is the mother of a good will and right doing. 31] For man's powers without the Holy Ghost are full of ungodly affections, and are too weak to do works which are good in God's sight. 32] Besides, they are in the power of the devil who impels men to divers sins, 33] to ungodly opinions, to open crimes. This we may see in the philosophers, who, although they endeavored to live an honest life could not succeed, 34] but were defiled with many open crimes. Such is the feebleness of man when he is without faith and without the Holy Ghost, and governs himself only by human strength.

---

So clearly as we've repeatedly said, Faith alone saves, but faith is never alone.

Has anyone in this thread read the dialogues between the Lutherans and Orthodox in the 16th century? I have not and would be interested to see what the points of contention were.

To me the starting point would be the filioque, where Lutherans have sided with the Catholics. But I don't know how much of a discussion point that was.

Yes. If you're interested, Augsburg and Constantinople by George Mastrantonis has an excellent first chapter / overview and then the full texts of the conversation translated.

Main issues are ...

filioque
Lutheran rejection of nearly all of the holy mysteries
sola fide

Then a bunch of other issues... rejection of monasticism, fasting/feasting/calendar, ecclesial structure and practice, etc.

I have read lots of filioque argument and basically think its way above my paygrade and so I stay silent for the filioque. I think you can twist either position to be bad if you try hard enough.

I lean a bit further East than most Lutherans though (similar to Cooper). I would argue that it's just more old fashioned and confessional than some others, but I've also been called a hipster and even a legalist

Quote:

---

Lutheran rejection of nearly all of the holy mysteries

---

Quote:

---

Why wouldn't you post the "Colin example too?"

Kind of ruins this comment.

---

Because the Colin example doesn't address specifically wither there is a distinction between justification and salvation. If anything, it reinforces the point of view that they are the same thing. On the other hand, you earlier explicitly said that they should be used interchangeably.

You haven't really answered anything. Do you think they are the same or not? I'm kind of confused.

Quote:

---

It is interesting to watch you get worked up when I comment on synergism, yet you are so confident that you are correctly explaining Lutheranism by pulling a random quote. I think Jordan commented in both podcasts that doing so is not the best way to discuss any topic.

---

It's not a random quote. It's actually incredibly specific and germane to the discussion. I didn't take it out of context, I actually provided the context where he talks exactly about what we're talking about.

I wasn't trying to "explain Lutheranism". I was trying to focus on the idea that faith cannot exist alone. YOU said it can. You said, again, that you can't come to the conclusion from the writings of St Paul that without works, you don't have faith. Do you

Do you disagree with what Martin Luther said here?

Re: Augsburg confession quotes.
Throwing up a wall of confessional texts doesn't really address the issue here. I said there is a point of contention that faith can possibly exist without works. None of those answer this question. I didn't ask if it was necessary to do good works, or if good works merit justification (which, incidentally, I have never said). You'll note the word "salvation" doesn't show up once in the quotes.

Quote:

---

So clearly as we've repeatedly said, Faith alone saves, but faith is never alone.

---

You literally have not said that a single time before now in this thread. And you have, somehow, yet again, sidestepped the points which I really tried to make clear.

"faith alone saves" is once again using "saves" and "justifies" interchangeably. This is kind of the point we've been discussing, so it isn't helpful.

If faith is never alone, then what is the point of saying anything about it being alone? I actually wrote something about this earlier. I'll try again

faith alone saves
faith is never alone
therefore faith is always accompanied by works
therefore faith (which is accompanied by works) saves

Is this OK with you? If not, why?

This is why I brought up the Luther quote. It makes the point clearly: "It is one thing that faith justifies without works; it is another thing that faith exists without works."

If you're just talking about the hypothetical / notional case of "could faith justify without works" that's one thing. If we're talking about can faith existing without works that is another.

I am kinda tired of writing essays when I'm actually trying to have a conversation.

Do you think it is possible that the statements I made are not contradictory? Did you understand how I explained that they weren't? Or did that not make sense?

How do you read about the judgment? If we just pause the discussion to consider everything the scriptures say about judgment, even if we only look at what Jesus Himself says about judgment, what do you think we are judged on?

Lutherans teach only two sacraments (mysteries). The Orthodox teaching includes many more explicitly, and in fact no limit as we teach that any means of receiving grace is participation in the Holy Mystery of Christ.

Patriarch Jeremias wrote in the third and final reply - by which time he'd gotten a little testy:
"But since you are content with some of the sacraments, even though you have dangerously distorted and changed the written teachings of the Old and New [Testament] to your own purpose, you further say that some of them are not sacraments, but only traditions, not having been established in Holy [scriptural] Texts. But you oppose them in every way, just as chrismation, which was accepted even by Saint John Chrysostom. Some others you drag along as does a torrent. And then you call yourself theologians!"

I've been told that I was quite a good theologian. And that was before 4 beers.

Very good thread read. And it has got me thinking so I will just put my thoughts down here....feel free to eviscerate then as you will.

Faith is made manifest by works. Just like with the parable of the tree. In that a good tree brings forth good fruit someone who has faith in Christ will do good works. A bad tree bears bad fruit and will be hewn down at the judgement day.

Faith cannot exist without works because our faith is made manifest by our works. Works alone do not justify us because our works alone are insufficient to justify us as we all fall short of the demands of justice and perfection within the law. Our faith in and conversion to Christ makes up the difference. But......just as Christ said in the parable of the bridegroom-

There are many that will claim to have faith in Christ. There will be many who cry lord lord whom he will ignore because they never knew him and he never knew them. Our faith is manifested by our works. Faith without works is dead- nonexistent.

We demonstrate our faith BY our works and through Christ's atonement we recieve salvation and are justified through his blood.

Our faith demands that we should do works. Our works reinforce our faith and develop our relationship with Christ. This changes our heart to have charity for our fellow man which brings about our conversion to Christ. Our conversion to Christ is what justifies us in the end.

One cannot exist without the other. It is foolish to debate otherwise. But faith in Christ is the first step and necessary for salvation. As that faith grows and is made manifest by our works we store up treasures in heaven....but simply proclaiming Christ as your savior without developing a relationship with him and being converted to him is not enough.

How much do you have to be converted to Christ to be justified? Only Jesus is the judge of that because only he is capable of knowing your heart and knowing whether you truly have faith in him.

I am a firm believer that 11th hour conversions don't count...because that individual never developed enough of a relationship with Christ to have the faith necessary to be justified. But that is just me and it is a measuring stick I use for myself.

I take comfort in the fact that I try my hardest to develop that relationship and do everything I can to help my family develop that relationship with Christ and I encourage others to do the same as well. However it is not my place to tell others where the line is, because that is His call. He will determine whether you knew Him. He will determine if you were truly converted and had faith in him.

I have faith in his judgement and mercy. Otherwise I could not call myself a disciple of Christ.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

I am a firm believer that 11th hour conversions don't count...because that individual never developed enough of a relationship with Christ to have the faith necessary to be justified. But that is just me and it is a measuring stick I use for myself.

---

Luke 23:39-43 said:

---

One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him,fn saying, "Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!" But the other rebuked him, saying, "Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." And he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom." And he said to him, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise."

---

For the record, this isn't really accurate, but would be a rather heavy derailment from soteriology talk.

Shrug. Ok, sure, absolution / penance if you like (it is called on by Melanchthon in the Apology but not explicitly listed in the Augsburg confession as such...same with the Large/Small catechism). But the whole enumeration of sacraments is really just argument over Rome's legalism in the strictness of the seven. The article XIII point of "it doesn't matter how you reckon them, but there are properly only three" is not that different than the East's position of "it doesn't matter how you reckon them, but there are definitely more than three".

I'm just pointing out that it was a point of contention between the Tubingen Lutherans and Patriarch Jeremias, and it shows up in all three rounds of discussion as such. So Jeremias didn't understand, or the Lutherans didn't explain it right, or there is a difference in how the East and Lutherans's view the mysteries.

k2aggie07 said:

---

Lutherans teach only two sacraments (mysteries). The Orthodox teaching includes many more explicitly, and in fact no limit as we teach that any means of receiving grace is participation in the Holy Mystery of Christ.

Patriarch Jeremias wrote in the third and final reply - by which time he'd gotten a little testy:
"But since you are content with some of the sacraments, even though you have dangerously distorted and changed the written teachings of the Old and New [Testament] to your own purpose, you further say that some of them are not sacraments, but only traditions, not having been established in Holy [scriptural] Texts. But you oppose them in every way, just as chrismation, which was accepted even by Saint John Chrysostom. Some others you drag along as does a torrent. And then you call yourself theologians!"

---

As swimmer said. Not really true on there being 2 sacraments.

Some advice:

Some of the best conversations that have occurred on this site have occurred on the old Orthodox thread where many people (myself included) asked questions and you/others provided the Orthodox view.

I would suggest that if you approached discussion this way more frequently when it comes to Lutheranism, most disagreements would actually fall away.

On this particular topic, this issue here is not about the number of sacraments.

Where there is disagreement (or probably lack of clarity) is over what the definition of a sacrament is and once again, I would point you to the confessions that really clearly talk about this particular issue. The section is called "Of the Number and use of Sacraments"

Book of Concord

3 primary but more secondary and nothing limits grace....ah to get into that you owe me beer.

Like I said.... I PERSONALLY don't believe 11th hour conversions count. Otherwise what is the point of life at all? It is silly to believe someone could live a life of sin and right before they die proclaim Christ is their savior and expect salvation.

The statement I made is a blanket one....... I then go on to say that my personal feelings don't matter as Christ is the final judge and knows men's hearts and is the determining factor as to whether they have had the faith needed to receive salvation. I know what I needed to do in my life to recieve salvation and I encourage others to do the same. That is enough for me.

I do not know those men's hearts. Christ did. He knew whether they had faith. I do not. That being said, there are alot of extenuating factors in that case no? They had limited time to know Christ, they argued for him, and professed a belief in him. Which is literally all they were capable of doing the first time they were confronted with the opportunity to be converted to Christ. If a person does all they can to be faithful and converted then their conversion is genuine, no?

That is different than someone who has had ample opportunity to know Christ and rejected him and the opportunity to know him at every turn and then the second they are about to die out of an instinct born of fear at the thought of death falsely professes a belief in him.

But like I said....Christ is the final judge. He knows our hearts and our circumstances in a way no mortal can. We know due to the Bible that Faith is the requirement to be saved but that faith is manifested through actions and works.

The two are a duality, which cannot be separated from each other. True faith results in works. Otherwise the professed faith is a falsehood. You can commit good works without faith and this alone is insufficient, but good works CAN lead to faith.

You use one example to show that two men nailed to a cross had faith and they were saved. The extenuating circumstances being because they were nailed to the cross and could do no good works. For every single example like that I can show you a dozen more where faith and works worked in concert-

Very similar to the debate method proabortionists use to advance their agenda- use an extreme outlier like rape and incest to support the cause and hold it up as your prime example and then state that due to the extreme outlier falling outside of normative parameters it must be the standard for all cases. But when you look at the subject as a whole and take all the information in context you realize that the outlier was exactly that- and outlier and a special case.

This is why blanket statements are generally not a good idea because there will always be outliers.....which is why I stated unequivocally that in the end Christ is the final judge and knows men's hearts and will judge their faith and works accordingly.

Never mind, it's a stupid argument to have.