THE LIE IN LORDSHIP SALVATION THEORY
- Thread starter Sudakar
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Hello again Guojing, I believe that a proper understanding of what is written in the Bible often requires that we take a deeper look, one that goes beyond our 'first blush' impressions of a verse or passage, to have any hope of arriving at the Lord's intended meaning. This should not be surprising considering that great number of human authors that He chose to use, their varied situations in life and POV's, that they wrote what they did more than two millennia ago, as well a number of other factors.
That said, I believe exactly what you do, that faith w/o works will not save anyone, but that does 'not' mean that our works have anything to do with our salvation (other than demonstrating to us that it is real/that we are really and truly saved), as Jesus, Paul, Peter and others make plain to us in many other passages.
Surely you'd agree that a proper exegesis of a passage must not directly contradict what is taught (in other places) in the Bible
Perhaps this will be helpful (it's a quote from Calvin, and just FYI, Luther taught the exact same principle using slightly different words),
The fact of the matter is, if the word δικαιόω (translated as "justified" in our Bibles) carries the same meaning in St. James' Epistle as it does in many/most places in the Pauline Epistles, then we have a big problem, because that would mean that the Bible contradicts itself. The good news is, 1. words have more than one meaning, and 2. I believe St. James makes his meaning clear (by what he wrote in Chapter two prior to v24 .. cf v18).
~Deut
That said, I believe exactly what you do, that faith w/o works will not save anyone, but that does 'not' mean that our works have anything to do with our salvation (other than demonstrating to us that it is real/that we are really and truly saved), as Jesus, Paul, Peter and others make plain to us in many other passages.
Surely you'd agree that a proper exegesis of a passage must not directly contradict what is taught (in other places) in the Bible
Perhaps this will be helpful (it's a quote from Calvin, and just FYI, Luther taught the exact same principle using slightly different words),
"We are justified by faith alone, but the faith that justifies is never alone"
The fact of the matter is, if the word δικαιόω (translated as "justified" in our Bibles) carries the same meaning in St. James' Epistle as it does in many/most places in the Pauline Epistles, then we have a big problem, because that would mean that the Bible contradicts itself. The good news is, 1. words have more than one meaning, and 2. I believe St. James makes his meaning clear (by what he wrote in Chapter two prior to v24 .. cf v18).
~Deut
IS DEMANDING CHRISTIANS TO PROVE THEY HAVE SAVING FAITH WITHOUT STATING A STANDARD TO CHECK FOR COMPLIANCE, MEANINGFUL?
If you say works accompany salvation, its fine. But if you go beyond and say that works prove saving faith, then you have to state the standard of works required to prove one has saving faith or else the standard of proof for having a saving faith becomes subjective and arbitrary to each individual and eventually making no sense except blabbery.
Lordship Salvationists are scared of stating the standard for fear of being exposed they have not met the standard themselves and looking like hypocrites!
If you say works accompany salvation, its fine. But if you go beyond and say that works prove saving faith, then you have to state the standard of works required to prove one has saving faith or else the standard of proof for having a saving faith becomes subjective and arbitrary to each individual and eventually making no sense except blabbery.
Lordship Salvationists are scared of stating the standard for fear of being exposed they have not met the standard themselves and looking like hypocrites!
-
1
- Show all
IS DEMANDING CHRISTIANS TO PROVE THEY HAVE SAVING FAITH WITHOUT STATING A STANDARD TO CHECK FOR COMPLIANCE, MEANINGFUL?
If you say works accompany salvation, its fine. But if you go beyond and say that works prove saving faith, then you have to state the standard of works required to prove one has saving faith or else the standard of proof for having a saving faith becomes subjective and arbitrary to each individual and eventually making no sense except blabbery.
Lordship Salvationists are scared of stating the standard for fear of being exposed they have not met the standard themselves and looking like hypocrites!
If you say works accompany salvation, its fine. But if you go beyond and say that works prove saving faith, then you have to state the standard of works required to prove one has saving faith or else the standard of proof for having a saving faith becomes subjective and arbitrary to each individual and eventually making no sense except blabbery.
Lordship Salvationists are scared of stating the standard for fear of being exposed they have not met the standard themselves and looking like hypocrites!
IS DEMANDING CHRISTIANS TO PROVE THEY HAVE SAVING FAITH WITHOUT STATING A STANDARD TO CHECK FOR COMPLIANCE, MEANINGFUL?
If you say works accompany salvation, its fine. But if you go beyond and say that works prove saving faith, then you have to state the standard of works required to prove one has saving faith or else the standard of proof for having a saving faith becomes subjective and arbitrary to each individual and eventually making no sense except blabbery.
Lordship Salvationists are scared of stating the standard for fear of being exposed they have not met the standard themselves and looking like hypocrites!
If you say works accompany salvation, its fine. But if you go beyond and say that works prove saving faith, then you have to state the standard of works required to prove one has saving faith or else the standard of proof for having a saving faith becomes subjective and arbitrary to each individual and eventually making no sense except blabbery.
Lordship Salvationists are scared of stating the standard for fear of being exposed they have not met the standard themselves and looking like hypocrites!
IS DEMANDING CHRISTIANS TO PROVE THEY HAVE SAVING FAITH WITHOUT STATING A STANDARD TO CHECK FOR COMPLIANCE, MEANINGFUL?
If you say works accompany salvation, its fine. But if you go beyond and say that works prove saving faith, then you have to state the standard of works required to prove one has saving faith or else the standard of proof for having a saving faith becomes subjective and arbitrary to each individual and eventually making no sense except blabbery.
Lordship Salvationists are scared of stating the standard for fear of being exposed they have not met the standard themselves and looking like hypocrites!
If you say works accompany salvation, its fine. But if you go beyond and say that works prove saving faith, then you have to state the standard of works required to prove one has saving faith or else the standard of proof for having a saving faith becomes subjective and arbitrary to each individual and eventually making no sense except blabbery.
Lordship Salvationists are scared of stating the standard for fear of being exposed they have not met the standard themselves and looking like hypocrites!