During Tribulation, is it still Faith only for salvation?

[TheDivineWatermark]

No idea. all I know is that without faith we cannot please God,

but where does faith come from

Hearing the message. so if we hear so much argument over the word. how will faith ever come

Well, if we "contend earnestly for the faith ['the faith' referring to 'that body of truth' as found in the NT (i.e. following His death/resurrection/exaltation)] having been delivered once for all to the saints," then more people have the opportunity of actually knowing just what that is (in order to "believe" it), right? I wouldn't think any true believer would be content to hear falsehoods being flung about, and remain wholly unconcerned about it (not that each of us can do 100% of the work, but at least contribute our "part," right?)

 

[Robertt]

Well, if we "contend earnestly for the faith ['the faith' referring to 'that body of truth' as found in the NT (i.e. following His death/resurrection/exaltation)] having been delivered once for all to the saints," then more people have the opportunity of actually knowing just what that is (in order to "believe" it), right? I wouldn't think any true believer would be content to hear falsehoods being flung about, and remain wholly unconcerned about it (not that each of us can do 100% of the work, but at least contribute our "part," right?)

and for those that don't believe, how will the ever if all this debate contrinues..

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

and for those that don't believe, how will the ever if all this debate contrinues..

I'm not sure that the word "debate" (as we use and understand the word in our day) always translates to a "negative"...

The English word "debate" is used two times in the kjv (I think), and both times it is indeed referring to something "negative" (but this wouldn't be how some "debates" we see, say, between Christians on their YouTube videos would be described, IMO [i.e. as "sinful"]... "wrangling, contentious, quarreling"... no, they are just presenting each side of a point of, let's say, doctrine/teaching, and their understanding of it [via Scripture]... for the purpose of helping others come to see just what is true [IMO, that would be their "motive" in such a debate]).

Even Ephesians 4:11-12 says, "[For the perfecting of the saints...]...Till we all come in the unity of the faith..." (meaning, TIME is involved, not to mention the giving of "pastor/-teachers" to that end...), and Philippians 3:15 says, "Let us therefore, as many as be perfect [/mature], be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you" ...and I'm pretty sure you probably don't think Paul was being "contentious" when he said (essentially) to the Thessalonians, "don't believe THEM [those in 2Th2:2], believe US INSTEAD [what WE taught you!]" per 2Th2:15 (the other bracketed end of THAT section). I think "motive" is key here... is it for the purpose of "wrangling, being contentious, quarreling, i.e. self-interest," or is it for the purpose of presenting (and love for) "the TRUTH" [contending earnestly for 'the faith,' … 'that body of truth'] (we can see that "But the wisdom from above is indeed first pure, then peaceable, gentle, reasonable, full of mercy and of good fruits, impartial, sincere," so there's that )... Thoughts?

 

[Ahwatukee]

Everybody from year 70-90 when the book of revelation was written have been able to take the mark. Its a spiritual mark that allows the servants of Yahweh (God) to differentiate between believers and non-believers or the righteous and the wicked.

Greetins cc4,

John was banished to the island of Patmos during Emperor Domian's reign which was from 81 - 96 AD. Therefore, the book of Revelation had to have been written during that time and not any earlier.

The book of Revelation should be read as "if the plain literal sense makes good sense, then don't seek any other sense. That said, within the scripture the mark is said to go on the literal right hand or forehead. And that unless anyone has the mark they would not be able to buy or sell. Since scripture tells us that the entire world will worship him (all those whose names were not written in the book of life before the world began) then all of those who do not belong to Christ will receive it world wide, as it will be the only way to electronically credit and debit one's bank account.

Around 2015 people began to receive RFID chip implants under the skin of the hand for the purpose of security and use of office equipment and making purchases at the local café. This is the technology for the mark which will continue to evolve leading up to the revealing of the antichrist.

The mark of the beast will be a device or application on the literal right hand or forehead and after the beast proclaims himself to be God, that mark will become mandatory in order for anyone to be able to electronically buy or sell. No one in the past has been exposed to the mark of the beast, as it is a future mark.

 

[azamzimtoti]

Does a chip on the shoulder count as the mark?

 

[Robertt]

Even Ephesians 4:11-12 says, "[For the perfecting of the saints...]...Till we all come in the unity of the faith..." (meaning, TIME is involved, not to mention the giving of "pastor/-teachers" to that end...),

and there lays the biggest issue. That scripture says Apostles. Prophets. Evangelists. Pastors and Teachers. And yet all we have now is pastors and teachers. so how will we ever be perfected....

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

and there lays the biggest issue. That scripture says Apostles. Prophets. Evangelists. Pastors and Teachers. And yet all we have now is pastors and teachers. so how will we ever be perfected....

Pastors/-teachers... and then also by what verse 16 says, IMO , "from whom the whole body, being joined together and being held together by every ligament of its supply, according to the working in the measure of each individual part, the increase of the body makes for itself, to the building up [G3619 - oikodomēn - edification] of itself in love." (and that just speaks of "in the here and now" )

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

And in 2Tim2:2, do you think this (the bold in the following) is speaking of that which is limited to "pastors in a pulpit/podium/up-in-the-front"...? "And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, entrust these to faithful men [G444 - anthropois] who will be competent to teach others also"... or anyone "faithful" and "competent" to teach others also, like, wherever they are... [not limited to pulpits/podiums]?? Thoughts?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

The focus is to understand how different people understand the concept of salvation as a free gift.

Seems everyone is clear enough, thanks to scripture, that salvation during the tribulation involve Faith AND rejecting the mark of the beast.

As to whether the latter condition is considered as also part of faith or as work is of course up to each of us to decide according to our favourite church doctrine.

Here's how I understand it.

People "saved" during the trib years [I understand that to be AFTER our Rapture occurs] will be because of "faith"... and that "faith" will be evidenced by certain works during that specific time frame (as shown, for example, in Matt25 [with v.40's "the least of these My brethren" being the believing remnant of Israel/Jews who are NOT the ones BEING "judged/separated" in this passage, but are the ones whom the "nations" either "BLESSED" [and thus will be "BLESSED" themselves (the SHEEP)], or did NOT "bless" but instead "cursed" by not "blessing" [so will themselves be called, by our Lord, "ye CURSED"] at the time of His Second Coming to the earth FOR the commencement of the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom, aka "the wedding FEAST/SUPPER," aka "the kingdom OF THE heavenS [that is, on the earth, upon His "RETURN" there]"--these [faithful Israel/Jews--the "WISE [-servants / -virgins plural]"] will BE the ones DOING the "INVITING" to the promised and prophesied earthly MK, DURING those trib years; ppl will have to either embrace or reject their specific msg [Matt24:14[26:13] DURING the trib (see also Rev7:9); Rev19:9 [distinct from 19:7]; Matt22:8-14; etc...)

 

[Guojing]

Here's how I understand it.

People "saved" during the trib years [I understand that to be AFTER our Rapture occurs] will be because of "faith"... and that "faith" will be evidenced by certain works during that specific time frame (as shown, for example, in Matt25 [with v.40's "the least of these My brethren" being the believing remnant of Israel/Jews who are NOT the ones BEING "judged/separated" in this passage, but are the ones whom the "nations" either "BLESSED" [and thus will be "BLESSED" themselves (the SHEEP)], or did NOT "bless" but instead "cursed" by not "blessing" [so will themselves be called, by our Lord, "ye CURSED"] at the time of His Second Coming to the earth FOR the commencement of the promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom, aka "the wedding FEAST/SUPPER," aka "the kingdom OF THE heavenS [that is, on the earth, upon His "RETURN" there]"--these [faithful Israel/Jews--the "WISE [-servants / -virgins plural]"] will BE the ones DOING the "INVITING" to the promised and prophesied earthly MK, DURING those trib years; ppl will have to either embrace or reject their specific msg [Matt24:14[26:13] DURING the trib (see also Rev7:9); Rev19:9 [distinct from 19:7]; Matt22:8-14; etc...)

Well you may be more comfortable lumping "works" as evidence of "faith" in order to still hold on to the view that salvation is still by faith alone during the tribulation. That is fine.

For me, I prefer to adopt the literal meaning for the words and just call faith as faith and works as works, and say that it is Faith AND works required for salvation then.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Well you may be more comfortable lumping "works" as evidence of "faith" in order to still hold on to the view that salvation is still by faith alone during the tribulation. That is fine.

For me, I prefer to adopt the literal meaning for the words and just call faith as faith and works as works, and say that it is Faith AND works required for salvation then.

Well, this may be due to our seeing "James" differently... I see the James 2 example of Abraham as showing an occurrence [the offering up of Isaac] taking place in his life MANY YEARS AFTER the Genesis 12 thing[/Rom4:3,5 ...(see also vv.9-12, for the timing issues there, for the readers)].

IOW, Abraham's justification [in God's sight] was not in question in God's mind all those intervening years (so I do not believe this is the subject of what James is making a point to say). Abraham was called the "friend of God" by other men (which I think is the point being made in James 2), per 2Chron20:7.

See what I'm saying? (I gather, from your OP and other posts, that you believe "James" is for the future trib years, and is saying "faith + works = salvation [eternal salvation]")

 

[Guojing]

Well, this may be due to our seeing "James" differently... I see the James 2 example of Abraham as showing an occurrence [the offering up of Isaac] taking place in his life MANY YEARS AFTER the Genesis 12 thing[/Rom4:3,5 ...(see also vv.9-12, for the timing issues there, for the readers)].

IOW, Abraham's justification [in God's sight] was not in question in God's mind all those intervening years (so I do not believe this is the subject of what James is making a point to say). Abraham was called the "friend of God" by other men (which I think is the point being made in James 2), per 2Chron20:7.

See what I'm saying? (I gather, from your OP and other posts, that you believe "James" is for the future trib years, and is saying "faith + works = salvation [eternal salvation]")

I have heard this "Paul is talking about justification before God while James is talking about justification before Man" preached in a few places. True, that is one way to reconcile the 2 together, and I can certainly understand the appeal of that.

 

[Alertandawake]

"Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. “And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."

This very statement alone should be enough to tell people NOT to accept the mark of the beast, period.

There is no loophole one can use to justify accepting. If you have to starve for refusal to accept, then you have to starve. If you are threatened with prison for refusal to accept, then prison it is. Now a single person here has the advantage compared to someone who is married and has children. But what about parents, who have to make the choice, for example, do they watch their children starve or do they break down and accept the mark? You see many can fall into the trap with this kind of thinking, for example, "HE understands, the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. He understands, I had to feed my children." THis kind of thinking is what is going to have people accept the mark, once it is revealed.

The warnings given in Rev 14.9-11 are very clear.

If you or anyone you know happens to be in a church and a pastor is teaching the opposite, that is teaching it is ok to get, then get out of that church. Because there are pastors/priests out there who deliberately distort truthful teaching just to keep the cash flow going.

 

[Guojing]

This very statement alone should be enough to tell people NOT to accept the mark of the beast, period.

There is no loophole one can use to justify accepting. If you have to starve for refusal to accept, then you have to starve. If you are threatened with prison for refusal to accept, then prison it is. Now a single person here has the advantage compared to someone who is married and has children. But what about parents, who have to make the choice, for example, do they watch their children starve or do they break down and accept the mark? You see many can fall into the trap with this kind of thinking, for example, "HE understands, the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. He understands, I had to feed my children." THis kind of thinking is what is going to have people accept the mark, once it is revealed.

The warnings given in Rev 14.9-11 are very clear.

If you or anyone you know happens to be in a church and a pastor is teaching the opposite, that is teaching it is ok to get, then get out of that church. Because there are pastors/priests out there who deliberately distort truthful teaching just to keep the cash flow going.

So the question to ask is, "Is this still salvation by faith alone, apart from works"? What do you think?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So the question to ask is, "Is this still salvation by faith alone, apart from works"? What do you think?

Me thinks that it has no bearing on ones salvation. And your making a mountain out of a molehill

 

[eternally-gratefull]

This very statement alone should be enough to tell people NOT to accept the mark of the beast, period.

There is no loophole one can use to justify accepting. If you have to starve for refusal to accept, then you have to starve. If you are threatened with prison for refusal to accept, then prison it is. Now a single person here has the advantage compared to someone who is married and has children. But what about parents, who have to make the choice, for example, do they watch their children starve or do they break down and accept the mark? You see many can fall into the trap with this kind of thinking, for example, "HE understands, the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. He understands, I had to feed my children." THis kind of thinking is what is going to have people accept the mark, once it is revealed.

The warnings given in Rev 14.9-11 are very clear.

If you or anyone you know happens to be in a church and a pastor is teaching the opposite, that is teaching it is ok to get, then get out of that church. Because there are pastors/priests out there who deliberately distort truthful teaching just to keep the cash flow going.

Are we saved by works or by Grace? Has anyone ever in the history of mankind been saved by works?

 

[danja]

I heard a preacher say that our genes will be reversed and we will not be redeemable .That is why we will not take the mark of the beast

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I heard a preacher say that our genes will be reversed and we will not be redeemable .That is why we will not take the mark of the beast

Really? That is out there,,lol Who said this?

 

[posthuman]

During the Tribulation, if someone believes Jesus Christ's death burial and resurrection in his heart, but chose to take the mark of the beast, because he does not want to starve to death, would God still considered him saved in the end, because he believed in Jesus?

How could someone truly believe this yet think it so inconsequential that they willingly worship the beast in order to spare their flesh from suffering?

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

danja said:
I heard a preacher say that our genes will be reversed and we will not be redeemable .That is why we will not take the mark of the beast

Really? That is out there,,lol Who said this?

I, too, have heard some say this. But when you trace through all they present, on this, it seems to me it is because they want to say that those who died (without Christ / apart from faith) in the past (prior to when this "mark" is implemented) have opportunity to be ultimately redeemed (after being dead for whatever length of time pays for their [supposedly lesser] wrong-doings), and it is only the beast and the false prophet (and anyone taking the "mark") who will have "altered" their DNA (by doing so) so as to be no longer human (as we know it) and thus (according to this view) not (or no longer) be redeemable.

I agree this view is (as you put it) "out there" (I think it's along the lines of the "serpent seed doctrine," if I recall... what do you think?)