Faith is a work.

[Jackson123]

One of my favorite passages on faith is Hebrews 11:6- “without faith it is impossible to please him”. These are all very good scriptures and very true. But if by these scriptures you are implying that belief is ALL you have to do then you are wrong. Just in case you hold to a “faith only” doctrine, please note that the word “0nly” or “alone” is not in a single one of these scriptures. I am afraid most people have been so indoctrinated with “faith only” that they cannot read a passage on faith without mentally ADDING THE WORDS ALONE OR ONLY in there. God could not have been any plainer when He wrote in James 2:24- “NOT BY FAITH ONLY” Hence we have Mark 16:16- He that believes AND is baptized shall be saved”. God wants you to understand that there is MORE TO SALVATION than faith. Is faith important? Absolutely. But so is baptism. Is repentance important, yes. Is confession important, yes.

Psalms 119:160 in the American Standard Version says that the SUM OF YOUR WORD IS TRUTH. or as the NKJ says the “entirety” of your word is truth. This means that you don’t have God’s TRUTH on a subject until you know All God has said about that subject. So when it comes to the subject of salvation, you need to open your eyes to ALL God has said about salvation. Couple that information with God approved examples showing how people were saved in the Bible and you will have all that God wants you to know about that subject. I know this is so because 2Timothy 3:16 tells us that All scripture is inspired of God and is capable of instructing us in righteousness and is complete thoroughly furnishing us unto every good work.

Colossians 2:8 warns that you not let someone Cheat you by the philosophies of men and the traditions of this world. God warns us not to SUBTRACT FROM HIS WORD ( Revelation 22:19). Men have certainly subtracted BAPTISM FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS from his word. But if you do take things away from his word, He says He will take away your name from the book of life and from the Holy City if God. This is serious business, folks.

Salvation is by faith alone, not by work but faith is never alone.

What is faith?

In bible context, faith is entrust, you have faith in Jesus mean you trust Him.

Like you trust a map.

If you are at Los Angeles, ca and you want to go to Phoenix az, you open the map or use Gps! Gps will say turn right, because you trust God, you turn right

Same thing happen when you trust or have faith in Jesus

Have faith in Jesus mean follow His command, when Jesus say love your enemy, you do

So if you say you have faith in Jesus but you kill your enemy, mean you are lie.

reformation by Martin Luther emphasized faith alone in respon to the Catholic Church that sale forgiveness certificate.

But Martin know that faith will produce good work

Not in the sense as long as you believe that Jesus is God, no matter what you do (killing, rob, raping) you save

Faith in Jesus is not only believe that He is God, but faith in Jesus is invite Him to be the leader of you life.

Invite Him to direct your life, include love your enemy, help the needy and all His teaching.


Salvation is by faith alone, but faith that save never alone

A branch that not produce fruit will be cast to fire

How a branch save from the fire?

Bear fruit? No

A branch can not bear fruit by itself

Than how ?

If branch want save from fire, abide to the vine.

How you save from hell?

By do a good work? Can you do good work or love other to the point willing to die on the cross like Jesus for other?

No

Your good work is like filthy rags in God standard


Isaiah 64:6 King James Version (KJV)

6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Your good work not save you

Than what save you

Abide to Jesus will save you not your work

But yes abide in Jesus will produce good work

Abide in Jesus make you more like Jesus that lead you to love other to the point willing to die on the cross for other, love your enemy like what Jesus did etc

We as a branch can not bear fruit of ourself, Jesus in us did for us.

 

[garee]

Salvation is by faith alone, not by work but faith is never alone.

Salvation is by the faith of Christ alone . Previously we had no faith none. it is called a work of faith or labor of love. Impossible to separate faith, the plan or intention from works and expect something to happen .

It would be like our Faithfull Creator planning to create light and doing the work of says.... let there be light and nothing appeared..

Faith is a work

 

[PS]

Salvation is by faith alone, not by work but faith is never alone.

Salvation is by the faith of Christ alone . Previously we had no faith none. it is called a work of faith or labor of love. Impossible to separate faith, the plan or intention from works and expect something to happen .

It would be like our Faithfull Creator planning to create light and doing the work of says.... let there be light and nothing appeared..

Faith is a work

Have you got one really good scripture for that statement.

 

[PS]

.
A work of faith is building a church, when you have no money.

.

 

[Guojing]

Salvation is by faith alone, not by work but faith is never alone.

Such arguments are circular and often violate modus tollens.

If you are saved, there will be works manifested, is a popular belief held by people who believe that "Salvation is by faith alone, not by work but faith is never alone"

But it means the same thing as

If there are no works manifested, you are not saved.

This second argument, they will reject, but both are logically equivalent.

 

[Beckworth]

Salvation is by faith alone, not by work but faith is never alone.

Salvation is by the faith of Christ alone . Previously we had no faith none. it is called a work of faith or labor of love. Impossible to separate faith, the plan or intention from works and expect something to happen .

It would be like our Faithfull Creator planning to create light and doing the work of says.... let there be light and nothing appeared..

Faith is a work

Yes it is. John 6:29. It is a work of God. That makes it an acceptable work— not a work of the law Galations 2:16 or a boastful work Ephesians 2, but a work commanded by God that originated with God. ANY work that originated with GOD. and not men is a work of his.

CONSIDER FOR A MOMENT. Baptism originated with God. It was commanded by God and his apostles. Therefore it is a work of God also. Not the kind of work talked about in Galations2 or Ephesians 2, but the kind of work talked about in John 6:29.

 

[Jackson123]

Such arguments are circular and often violate modus tollens.

If you are saved, there will be works manifested, is a popular belief held by people who believe that "Salvation is by faith alone, not by work but faith is never alone"

But it means the same thing as

If there are no works manifested, you are not saved.

This second argument, they will reject, but both are logically equivalent.

No it may no work manifested, example a man accepted Jesus, than die in the next second, there is no work manifested but he save because salvation by faith.

What is salvation by faith alone not mean

It not mean you are welcome to kill, curse the Lord Jesus and not believe in Jesus

As long as you believe in Jesus/have faith in jesus though there is no manifestation, you save

But if Jesus in your heart, you are healthy, have enough time, more likely the love of Jesus in you will be manifest or show up in the form of how you love other.

 

[Guojing]

No it may no work manifested, example a man accepted Jesus, than die in the next second, there is no work manifested but he save because salvation by faith.

What is salvation by faith alone not mean

It not mean you are welcome to kill, curse the Lord Jesus and not believe in Jesus

As long as you believe in Jesus/have faith in jesus though there is no manifestation, you save

But if Jesus in your heart, you are healthy, have enough time, more likely the love of Jesus in you will be manifest or show up in the form of how you love other.

Ahh the thief on the cross argument, I recall John Wesley using that point. You lean more towards Methodism?

But you do agree that, if you have time after you accepted Christ, if there are no works manifested at all, you are not saved?

 

[Jackson123]

Ahh the thief on the cross argument, I recall John Wesley using that point. You lean more towards Methodism?

But you do agree that, if you have time after you accepted Christ, if there are no works manifested at all, you are not saved?

No, a person may have time but sick in the hospital and no way to manifest love, as long as he have faith, he is save.

And I believe a thief on the cross already manifest his love

1 cor 13

6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

The thief do not like what people do to Jesus

Jesus do nothing wrong why people kill Him

That is one of the aspec of love that being manifest by the thief, but that is not produce salvation, that is product of salvation.

 

[Guojing]

No, a person may have time but sick in the hospital and no way to manifest love, as long as he have faith, he is save.

And I believe a thief on the cross already manifest his love

1 cor 13

6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

The thief do not like what people do to Jesus

Jesus do nothing wrong why people kill Him

That is one of the aspec of love that being manifest by the thief, but that is not produce salvation, that is product of salvation.

You are splitting hair here.

If you have the time and you have the ability to do works but you don’t, are you still saved merely from believing?

 

[Guojing]

No, a person may have time but sick in the hospital and no way to manifest love, as long as he have faith, he is save.

And I believe a thief on the cross already manifest his love

1 cor 13

6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;

The thief do not like what people do to Jesus

Jesus do nothing wrong why people kill Him

That is one of the aspec of love that being manifest by the thief, but that is not produce salvation, that is product of salvation.

By the way, are you aware of John Wesley's argument that shares your same belief? He has a very sophisticated way of arguing your point that you may want to use in the future.

 

[Jackson123]

You are splitting hair here.

If you have the time and you have the ability to do works but you don’t, are you still saved merely from believing?

If you are believe in Jesus and Jesus in your heart, then you act like Jesus.

Jesus do loving work, so it is impossible for a Christian that have ability to do loving work and not do it.

People that claim to be Christian, have ability to do loving work and not do it is not save, not because he not do good work, but because he is do not have real faith in Jesus

Let me say one more time

If Christ in his heart he will act like

If he have faith in Christ, he will act like
.

 

[Jackson123]

By the way, are you aware of John Wesley's argument that shares your same belief? He has a very sophisticated way of arguing your point that you may want to use in the future.

Thanks for your information, I am not Methodist but it is good to know what is his argument look like

 

[Guojing]

If you are believe in Jesus and Jesus in your heart, then you act like Jesus.

Jesus do loving work, so it is impossible for a Christian that have ability to do loving work and not do it.

People that claim to be Christian, have ability to do loving work and not do it is not save, not because he not do good work, but because he is do not have real faith in Jesus

Let me say one more time

If Christ in his heart he will act like

If he have faith in Christ, he will act like
.

You are defining real faith as "belief and do good works", thus allowing you to still believe that salvation is by faith alone but faith that saves will have works following.

Even if you stick to your guns, can you understand why someone might regard that kind of argument as circular?

 

[Guojing]

Thanks for your information, I am not Methodist but it is good to know what is his argument look like

Here is his quote

"But does not God command us to repent also? Yea, and to 'bring forth fruits meet for repentance'--to cease, for instance, from doing evil, and learn to do well? And is not both the one and the other of the utmost necessity, insomuch that if we willingly neglect either, we cannot reasonably expect to be justified at all? But if this be so, how can it be said that faith is the only condition of justification?" God does undoubtedly command us both to repent, and to bring forth fruits meet for repentance; which if we willingly neglect, we cannot reasonably expect to be justified at all: therefore both repentance, and fruits meet for repentance, are, in some sense, necessary to justification.

But they are not necessary in the same sense with faith, nor in the same degree. Not in the same degree; for those fruits are only necessary conditionally; if there be time and opportunity for them. Otherwise a man may be justified without them, as was the thief upon the cross (if we may call him so; for a late writer has discovered that he was no thief, but a very honest and respectable person!) but he cannot be justified without faith; this is impossible. Likewise, let a man have ever so much repentance, or ever so many of the fruits meet for repentance, yet all this does not at all avail; he is not justified till he believes.

How John Wesley reconciled the thief on the cross, in my opinion, is based on this paragraph. Here is how I understand his argument:

1. Both faith and works are necessary for justification.
2. But faith is more necessary compared to works. Faith is necessary unconditionally/absolutely.
3. Works are only necessary in a conditional sense, provided there is time and opportunity to do them.
4. The thief on the cross had neither the time, nor the opportunity to do works, so he is excused from them.
5. For the rest of us however, we do not have that excuse, so works become necessary for our justification.

This is a rather ingenious argument, I have to say. At least, I am glad that John Wesley is willing to state that he believes that, for most of us, works are necessary for our justification. So his argument avoids that circularity.

 

[Jackson123]

You are defining real faith as "belief and do good works", thus allowing you to still believe that salvation is by faith alone but faith that saves will have works following.

Even if you stick to your guns, can you understand why someone might regard that kind of argument as circular?

I do not think my argument is circular

Here I quote what is circular reasoning look like

Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving";[1] also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with.[2] The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need of proof or evidence as the conclusion, and as a consequence the argument fails to persuade. Other ways to express this are that there is no reason to accept the premises unless one already believes the conclusion, or that the premises provide no independent ground or evidence for the conclusion.[3] Begging the question is closely related to circular reasoning, and in modern usage the two generally refer to the same thing.[4]

Circular reasoning is often of the form: "A is true because B is true; B is true because A is true." Circularity can be difficult to detect if it involves a longer chain of propositions. Academic Douglas Walton used the following example of a fallacious circular argument:

Wellington is in New Zealand.
Therefore, Wellington is in New Zealand.[5]

 

[Guojing]

I do not think my argument is circular

Here I quote what is circular reasoning look like

Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving";[1] also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with.[2] The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need of proof or evidence as the conclusion, and as a consequence the argument fails to persuade. Other ways to express this are that there is no reason to accept the premises unless one already believes the conclusion, or that the premises provide no independent ground or evidence for the conclusion.[3] Begging the question is closely related to circular reasoning, and in modern usage the two generally refer to the same thing.[4]

Circular reasoning is often of the form: "A is true because B is true; B is true because A is true." Circularity can be difficult to detect if it involves a longer chain of propositions. Academic Douglas Walton used the following example of a fallacious circular argument:

Wellington is in New Zealand.
Therefore, Wellington is in New Zealand.[5]

Okay if you don't view it that way, I can respect that.

However, can you understand the difference between John Wesley's argument and yours?

 

[Jackson123]

Here is his quote

"But does not God command us to repent also? Yea, and to 'bring forth fruits meet for repentance'--to cease, for instance, from doing evil, and learn to do well? And is not both the one and the other of the utmost necessity, insomuch that if we willingly neglect either, we cannot reasonably expect to be justified at all? But if this be so, how can it be said that faith is the only condition of justification?" God does undoubtedly command us both to repent, and to bring forth fruits meet for repentance; which if we willingly neglect, we cannot reasonably expect to be justified at all: therefore both repentance, and fruits meet for repentance, are, in some sense, necessary to justification.

But they are not necessary in the same sense with faith, nor in the same degree. Not in the same degree; for those fruits are only necessary conditionally; if there be time and opportunity for them. Otherwise a man may be justified without them, as was the thief upon the cross (if we may call him so; for a late writer has discovered that he was no thief, but a very honest and respectable person!) but he cannot be justified without faith; this is impossible. Likewise, let a man have ever so much repentance, or ever so many of the fruits meet for repentance, yet all this does not at all avail; he is not justified till he believes.

How John Wesley reconciled the thief on the cross, in my opinion, is based on this paragraph. Here is how I understand his argument:

1. Both faith and works are necessary for justification.
2. But faith is more necessary compared to works. Faith is necessary unconditionally/absolutely.
3. Works are only necessary in a conditional sense, provided there is time and opportunity to do them.
4. The thief on the cross had neither the time, nor the opportunity to do works, so he is excused from them.
5. For the rest of us however, we do not have that excuse, so works become necessary for our justification.

This is a rather ingenious argument, I have to say. At least, I am glad that John Wesley is willing to state that he believes that, for most of us, works are necessary for our justification. So his argument avoids that circularity.

I have bite different understanding with John w

He say: let a man have so many fruit for repentance, he is not justified till he believe.

I not sure with this statement

Jesus say branch can not bear fruit of itself

In order to bear fruit branch must abide in Him

To me abide men believe.

How a man have so many fruit before he believe in Jesus?

 

[Guojing]

I have bite different understanding with John w

He say: let a man have so many fruit for repentance, he is not justified till he believe.

I not sure with this statement

Jesus say branch can not bear fruit of itself

In order to bear fruit branch must abide in Him

To me abide men believe.

How a man have so many fruit before he believe in Jesus?

He is using his point that belief in Jesus (faith) is necessary unconditionally for salvation. Someone who does all kinds of good deeds, but do not put their faith in Jesus, will still be unsaved.

To give you an example for your last point, some people think Mother Teresa, for example, may not have put her faith in Jesus, but I think all of us can see she done many more good deeds than what most of us would have done.

https://www.nytimes.com/1997/09/07/weekinreview/how-mother-teresa-left-a-legacy-of-good-works.html

 

[Jackson123]

He is using his point that belief in Jesus (faith) is necessary unconditionally for salvation. Someone who does all kinds of good deeds, but do not put their faith in Jesus, will still be unsaved.

To give you an example for your last point, some people think Mother Teresa, for example, may not have put her faith in Jesus, but I think all of us can see she done many more good deeds than what most of us would have done.

https://www.nytimes.com/1997/09/07/weekinreview/how-mother-teresa-left-a-legacy-of-good-works.html

But I do not believe a man able to bear fruit (good deed in God standard) without have faith in Jesus

I believe abide in Him mean have faith in Him