Is having faith/belief obeying?

[studier]

@studier, same for the ones who went into translated John 6:29 to provide helpful understanding on how believing is something we are required to do. That would mean believing is obeying (Jn. 3:36).

NIV (New International Version): Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”

RSV (Revised Standard Version) : Then they said to him, "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?"

ESV (English Standard Version): Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?”

AMP (Amplified Bible): Then they asked Him, “What are we to do, so that we may habitually be doing the works of God?”

ISV (International Standard Version): Then they asked him, “What must we do to perform God’s works?”

MNT (Montgomery New Testament): What are we to do habitually," they asked him, "that we may keep working the words of God?"

Goodspeed (Goodspeed New Testament) Jesus answered them, "The work God has for you is to believe in the messenger that he has sent to you."

LONT (Living Oracles New Testament): They asked him, therefore, What are the works which God requires us to do?

Williams (Williams New Testament): Then they asked Him, "What must we do to perform the works that God demands?

WNT (Weymouth New Testament) What are we to do," they asked, "in order to carry out the things that God requires?

JMNT (Jonathan Mitchell New Testament): Then they said to Him, "What should we be habitually doing, so that we would be habitually working God’s works (or: actions having the character of God; or: the deeds which have their source in God; or: = the things God wants us to do)?"

BSB (Berean Study Bible): Then they inquired, “What must we do to perform the works of God?”

MSB (Majority Study Bible): Then they inquired, “What must we do to perform the works of God?”

VIN (Venerably Illuminating Narrative: Then they asked him, "What must we do to perform the works of God?"

NLT (New Living Translation): They replied, “We want to perform God’s works, too. What should we do?”

NET (New English Translation): Jesus replied, "This is the deed God requires - to believe in the one whom he sent."

BBE (Bible in Basic English): Then they said to him, How may we do the works of God?

NASB20 (New American Standard Bible): Therefore they said to Him, “What are we to do, so that we may accomplish the works of God?

Thanks for all of these. As you've brought out, I also think the ones that take the track of "the works God requires" are interesting. They are choosing a more precise or elaborated translation of the Greek phrase "the works [of] the God". The most basic but often ambiguous if not unmeaningful way to translate this construction is by filling the brackets with [of] because in the Greek there is no word there. It's simply "the work [] the God" and the translator interpreter needs to determine how to fill in the brackets.

Even if we look at the English word "of" in an English dictionary, we can see that there are several concepts that "of" can be asserting. In the Greek "the God" is in what's called the Genitive case and there is a list similar to this one of the categories and subcategories of meanings and thus ways the [] can be filled in and the phrase translated to bring out what Jesus is saying.

Another thing to consider in this Scripture is this (I'll use the NET translation which chose "God requires" and I'll minimally change and add a few things to remain more literal with the Greek and fill in some missing wording by implication):

NET John6:27-29 Do not work (command) for the food that disappears, but [work] (command) for the food that remains to eternal life – the food (or the eternal life) which the Son of Man will give to you. For God the Father has put his seal of approval on him." 28 So then they said to him, "What must (should) we do to accomplish (work) the deeds (works) God requires?" 29 Jesus replied, "This is the deed (work) God requires – to believe in the one whom he sent."

• in 6:27 Jesus commands these unbelievers to work for food which in context is to hear and learn God's teaching Jesus is teaching. This in itself normally bothers the anti-works group. The obvious choice IMO is Jesus vs. interpretive traditions.
• In 6:29 this translation has Jesus equating the God required work with belief. IOW the unbeliever coming to belief is the work God requires, which IMO can seem to say belief is man's work.
  • Alternatively, if we just stay with "This is the work [of] God - that you believe in the one whom He sent" then we might say the unbeliever coming to belief is God's work, which a few traditions will like, and I can see the point.
    • God made His Salvation Plan. God sent His Son. God is teaching/drawing men to come to His Son, etc...
    • But is this what Jesus is saying here? He will speak of some of these things later, so is it necessary that He's saying it here?
      • It seems to conflict with the command Jesus just gave these unbelievers.
      • Maybe it's just the complement to His command.
  • Alternatively, since "This" in Greek can refer forward or backward and the clause "that you believe..." can also be translated differently, we could have: 29 Jesus replied, "This (Jesus' command to work for the lasting food/teaching) is the work God requires – for this purpose; to believe in the one (Jesus) whom He sent.
    • The more I ponder this part of Scripture, the more I like this interpretation.
      • Jesus is always saying what He hears the Father say, so the Father is commanding unbelievers to work for lasting food, i.e. to hear and learn God's teaching - the Gospel.
        • Later Jesus will bring in the Father's drawing men by teaching them, and the ones who believe, have heard & learned from the Father. So, Jesus is really commanding unbelievers to work to hear and learn from God so they can believe in Jesus and Jesus will give them eternal life.
        • So, in 6:27 God commands you to work for the food/[to hear & learn] the Gospel <> 6:29 This is the work God requires (God commands = God requires).
      • This would put obedience before belief, but I don't think I see this as an issue because God initiates and commands > then men obey to hear, learn, believe. This really just becomes another command to believe in God's Son not unlike 1J3:23 and others.
        • Faith-Obedience and Obedience-Faith - what's the difference once they're so strongly correlated if not equated to one another?

Anyway, just some externalized pondering as best I can present it at the moment.

 

[mailmandan]

I am having difficulty understanding how some do not believe that having biblical faith is obeying.

So, according to your logic, biblical faith "is" baptism, biblical faith "is" multiple acts of obedience, biblical faith "is" works. You basically take faith AND multiple acts of obedience/works (with a heavy emphasis on water baptism) wrap them BOTH up in a package and simply stamp faith on the package and make no distinction between faith AND multiple acts of obedience/works which "follow" and are produced "out of" faith. I understand that flawed logic because prior to my conversion several years ago while still attending the Roman Catholic church, that is how I defined biblical faith as well.

I thought I recognized your avatar picture.

Campbellism Its History & Heresies: Bob L. Ross: 9781561865024: Amazon.com: Books

 

[studier]

Jesus is God's only begotten (unique, one of a kind) Son of God.

Psalm2 does not say Jesus is the only begotten or uniquely born Son of God.

With no offense intended, your hesitancy to explain "Christ" through the Psalm that Paul emphasized in his Gospel presentation is indicative of what IMO is part of the problem that results in many of these debates we Christians have.

Decades ago, I was noticing way too repetitively that Christians had become way too familiar with the 1Cor15 "Gospel" they were being taught. So, I began asking those who parroted this "Gospel" if they could explain "Christ" to me. My approximation is that 90% could not and gave me the deer in the headlights look with tongues tied. Some would stumble around trying to not sound unlearned but did not accomplish the goal.

NKJ 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you-- unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

Firstly, this is not the entire Gospel Paul was proclaiming (which he "had proclaimed"), which is why I referred you to Acts13:16... where we can see the Gospel Paul was proclaiming to Jews and to Gentiles. And within Acts we can see that Paul was proclaiming in Corinth and spent 3.5 years there teaching.

All Paul is doing in 1Cor15 is drawing these Christians whom he had taught back to parts of the Gospel he had taught them in order to get into a discussion of the vital importance of the resurrection. These verses from 1Cor15 are not the entire Gospel Paul had proclaimed. The death, burial and resurrection are parts of what Paul proclaimed per Acts13.

Next, if we look at these verses through the eyes of the unlearned, they do not explain "Christ". This is why I asked you to go through Ps2 and tell me what you learn or will pull out about YHWH's Christ.

IMO Christians are not being like Paul - the Wise Master Builder (Greek Architektōn - so, the wise/skillfull Architect). They are not laying the only foundation properly. Low quality foundation then a low-quality building. The only foundation is Jesus is the Christ. Until someone is taught who and what YHWH's Anointed/Christ/Mashiach is, this only foundation is not complete or is left with major cracks that will negatively affect the building others are attempting to build upon it.

So, please do me a favor and tell me even one thing you see about YHWH's Christ from Ps2. If you still want me to do some of the work for you, please let me know. It's actually important for the Faith-Obedience issue.

 

[Cameron143]

Every one has God initiating/wielding; souls cooperating/coworking--or not.

Actually, it is the previous verse that speaks to man's responsibility in light of the work that God is doing.
And the whole point I'm making is that these people are already saved, to which all parties agree. But @studier is contending that these verses are teaching that we must do works in order to maintain our salvation, and not that works result from our salvation. Do you believe our ongoing works maintain our salvation?

 

[mailmandan]

Psalm2 does not say Jesus is the only begotten or uniquely born Son of God.

Psalm 2:7 - “I will declare the decree: The Lord has said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.

John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

Strong's Lexicon
monogenés: Only begotten, unique, one and only
Original Word: μονογενής
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: monogenés
Pronunciation: mo-no-ge-NACE
Phonetic Spelling: (mon-og-en-ace')
Definition: Only begotten, unique, one and only
Meaning: only, only-begotten; unique.

Strong's Greek: 3439. μονογενής (monogenés) -- Only begotten, unique, one and only

Its prophetic application is to the Son, Jesus Christ, God's only begotten Son. This verse is quoted in the NT with reference to the birth of Jesus. (Hebrews 1:5-6) The writer of Hebrews presents the unique relationship that the Son has with the Father. The angels did not experience such a relationship. I find it disturbing that you seemed to have shrugged this off.

With no offense intended, your hesitancy to explain "Christ" through the Psalm that Paul emphasized in his Gospel presentation is indicative of what IMO is part of the problem that results in many of these debates we Christians have.

I did explain it. Again, I find it disturbing how you shrugged this off in Psalm 2. Maybe John 3:16 or Hebrews 1:5-6 will enlighten you.

Decades ago, I was noticing way too repetitively that Christians had become way too familiar with the 1Cor15 "Gospel" they were being taught. So, I began asking those who parroted this "Gospel" if they could explain "Christ" to me. My approximation is that 90% could not and gave me the deer in the headlights look with tongues tied. Some would stumble around trying to not sound unlearned but did not accomplish the goal.

NKJ 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you-- unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

Firstly, this is not the entire Gospel Paul was proclaiming (which he "had proclaimed"), which is why I referred you to Acts13:16... where we can see the Gospel Paul was proclaiming to Jews and to Gentiles. And within Acts we can see that Paul was proclaiming in Corinth and spent 3.5 years there teaching.

All Paul is doing in 1Cor15 is drawing these Christians whom he had taught back to parts of the Gospel he had taught them in order to get into a discussion of the vital importance of the resurrection. These verses from 1Cor15 are not the entire Gospel Paul had proclaimed. The death, burial and resurrection are parts of what Paul proclaimed per Acts13.

Next, if we look at these verses through the eyes of the unlearned, they do not explain "Christ". This is why I asked you to go through Ps2 and tell me what you learn or will pull out about YHWH's Christ.

IMO Christians are not being like Paul - the Wise Master Builder (Greek Architektōn - so, the wise/skillfull Architect). They are not laying the only foundation properly. Low quality foundation then a low-quality building. The only foundation is Jesus is the Christ. Until someone is taught who and what YHWH's Anointed/Christ/Mashiach is, this only foundation is not complete or is left with major cracks that will negatively affect the building others are attempting to build upon it.

So, please do me a favor and tell me even one thing you see about YHWH's Christ from Ps2. If you still want me to do some of the work for you, please let me know. It's actually important for the Faith-Obedience issue.

I already told you, and I don't need you to do work for me. Just make your main point clear. Your arguments are sounding like babble to me.

 

[Jimbone]

The perfect sacrifice would be the sacrifice of Christ. One must by faith then respond in obedience to God’s saving grace.

See you're right about obedience, but only the saved can even be obedient, so if you're suggesting obedience is needed to BE saved then you're dead wrong, just categorically and completely wrong.

If you are saying that the saved will be obedient I agree, but only if the credit is rightly placed, if you think we are saved and then, by our own power, are obedient then I couldn't disagree more.

We are saved and then, ONLY BY HIS POWER, do good works that we would have never done before He saved us, thereby giving Him all credit and glory for them.

The fact you have so much trouble giving God the glory for these things should be a HUGE red flag for everyone on your side of this debate. You lift man to lower God, plan and simple.

 

[Cameron143]

The verse is explaining 2:12. Who's commanded to do the work?

Men are, of course. In light of what God is doing in an individual, we are to respond.

An example: In Psalm 37:4 we are taught to delight ourselves in the Lord and we will receive the desires of our heart. These desires aren't the earthly desires that currently reside in our sinful hearts, but good and holy desires God works into our hearts. We have a responsibility to pursue God, but He performs the work.

Obeying God is said to be our reasonable service in Romans 12:1-2. How is it accomplished? It says by the mercies of God. Another grace God extends to His people.

Nowhere in these verses does it suggest that we do these things to maintain our salvation. We do these things because God is continually at work in us, conforming us into the image of Christ. And He is doing so that His original goal in creation will come to pass: the glory of the knowledge of the Lord shall fill the earth, as the waters cover the sea...Habakkuk 2:14.

 

[GWH]

Actually, it is the previous verse that speaks to man's responsibility in light of the work that God is doing.
And the whole point I'm making is that these people are already saved, to which all parties agree. But @studier is contending that these verses are teaching that we must do works in order to maintain our salvation, and not that works result from our salvation. Do you believe our ongoing works maintain our salvation?

I believe (per EPH 2:10) that someone who professes faith but lacks love is not saved (JM 2:17), that loving/good works can be imitated by those who are not saved (per 2CR 11:14), but that saving faith in Jesus as Lord is first (the horse) and opens the door for Christ indwelling saints as the Holy Spirit (per RV 3:20, RM 5:5 & 1CR 12:13) and continues (the cart) by producing loving works/fruit of the Spirit (per GAL 5:22-23).

 

[studier]

Psalm 2:7 - “I will declare the decree: The Lord has said to Me, ‘You are My Son, Today I have begotten You.

Do you see the word "only" is Ps2?

Its prophetic application is to the Son, Jesus Christ, God's only begotten Son. This verse is quoted in the NT with reference to the birth of Jesus. (Hebrews 1:5-6) The writer of Hebrews presents the unique relationship that the Son has with the Father. The angels did not experience such a relationship. I find it disturbing that you seemed to have shrugged this off.

I'm reading Ps2 to understand what Paul actually proclaimed. Part of what we do is import more advanced learning back into the basic evangelistic message. @GWH I believe would speak of this as placing didache back into the kerygma. I've asked you to draw from Ps2 not add to it.

I did explain it. Again, I find it disturbing how you shrugged this off in Psalm 2. M

At this point I really don't think you know what "Christ" means other than being able to almost translate the word in 3 languages, which is actually more than many can do.

I already told you, and I don't need you to do work for me. Just make your main point clear. Your arguments are sounding like babble to m

Which IMO is more a point about you than me. If my point to you is not clear by this time, then you do need me or someone to teach you.

It seems like Ps2 is like babble to you since all you've done is import a word into it and then post from Strong's to explain what your eisegesis means.

 

[Cameron143]

I believe (per EPH 2:10) that someone who professes faith but lacks love is not saved (JM 2:17), that loving/good works can be imitated by those who are not saved (per 2CR 11:14), but that saving faith in Jesus as Lord is first (the horse) and opens the door for Christ indwelling saints as the Holy Spirit (per RV 3:20, RM 5:5 & 1CR 12:13) and continues (the cart) by producing loving works/fruit of the Spirit (per GAL 5:22-23).

I would argue that they don't truly have faith, but you avoided the question: do our ongoing works maintain our salvation?

 

[mailmandan]

Do you see the word "only" is Ps2?

I'm reading Ps2 to understand what Paul actually proclaimed. Part of what we do is import more advanced learning back into the basic evangelistic message. @GWH I believe would speak of this as placing didache back into the kerygma. I've asked you to draw from Ps2 not add to it.

At this point I really don't think you know what "Christ" means other than being able to almost translate the word in 3 languages, which is actually more than many can do.

Which IMO is more a point about you than me. If my point to you is not clear by this time, then you do need me or someone to teach you.

It seems like Ps2 is like babble to you since all you've done is import a word into it and then post from Strong's to explain what your eisegesis means.

You sound puffed up and I don't need you as my teacher, but thanks anyway. I believe there is another reason why your strange, mysterious reasoning sounds like babble to me. Regardless, this conversation is going nowhere.

 

[studier]

Nowhere in these verses does it suggest that we do these things to maintain our salvation.

Over time in these threads I've seen others speak of your moving the goalposts during discussions. I may even have been one of them.

We haven't even gotten back to this concept of maintaining salvation in these latest exchanges.

Men are, of course. In light of what God is doing in an individual, we are to respond.

Which is pretty much what I've been saying, while you in turn claim I'm butchering the meaning worse than you've ever seen.

Just to be clear since you like to change the wording of Scripture, God is providing capabilities IN His Children for this purpose, so they can both will/desire and work on behalf of God's good pleasure Phil2:13. Christians are thus commanded to accomplish their salvation with fear and trembling 2:12 (because God is providing capability to the Christian to will and to accomplish salvation as He commands and because a Christian willing to work to accomplish salvation and working with God to accomplish salvation well-pleases God).

Maintaining salvation is not the word used here ("accomplishing" is), nor is the word "respond" used here (but we might find some agreement conceptually on this one).

Maintaining salvation is some interesting and potentially ambiguously loaded terminology. With God working in us, are we responsible to maintain the level we've attained and not be regressing but to be advancing? What if we are not maintaining and are regressing? What if we never advance as we should? Can we regress to zero (lose salvation)? I basically know the answers from all sides although I maintain and do not lose preparedness to read something on these threads I haven't read before. In such case it does not shock, it just is.

 

[studier]

You sound puffed up and I don't need you as my teacher, but thanks anyway. I believe there is another reason why your strange, mysterious reasoning sounds like babble to me. Regardless, this conversation is going nowhere.

So do you. But if we remove such a comment both ways, we're left with your inability to explain "Christ" from Psalm2 and your lack of desire to ultimately have someone or anyone assist you (which could be pride). That's not very discipleish.

You see, Dan, I think part of the reason you equivocate re: faith-obedience is because you can't explain what "Christ" means and includes. Paul pointed to Ps2 for a reason and that reason is because it explains who and what YHYW's Christ is to the point Paul saw it necessary to know from an evangelistic message. If someone is immediately taught who and what Christ means and is, and thus who and what we're being called to believe into, then faith-obedience is a given. And this correlates very well with how Paul explains faith and obedience being parallel. Some of us see this correlation very clearly. To some it's babble even when we show it from Scripture.

 

[JBTN]

Thanks for all of these. As you've brought out, I also think the ones that take the track of "the works God requires" are interesting. They are choosing a more precise or elaborated translation of the Greek phrase "the works [of] the God". The most basic but often ambiguous if not unmeaningful way to translate this construction is by filling the brackets with [of] because in the Greek there is no word there. It's simply "the work [] the God" and the translator interpreter needs to determine how to fill in the brackets.

Even if we look at the English word "of" in an English dictionary, we can see that there are several concepts that "of" can be asserting. In the Greek "the God" is in what's called the Genitive case and there is a list similar to this one of the categories and subcategories of meanings and thus ways the [] can be filled in and the phrase translated to bring out what Jesus is saying.

Another thing to consider in this Scripture is this (I'll use the NET translation which chose "God requires" and I'll minimally change and add a few things to remain more literal with the Greek and fill in some missing wording by implication):

NET John6:27-29 Do not work (command) for the food that disappears, but [work] (command) for the food that remains to eternal life – the food (or the eternal life) which the Son of Man will give to you. For God the Father has put his seal of approval on him." 28 So then they said to him, "What must (should) we do to accomplish (work) the deeds (works) God requires?" 29 Jesus replied, "This is the deed (work) God requires – to believe in the one whom he sent."

• in 6:27 Jesus commands these unbelievers to work for food which in context is to hear and learn God's teaching Jesus is teaching. This in itself normally bothers the anti-works group. The obvious choice IMO is Jesus vs. interpretive traditions.
• In 6:29 this translation has Jesus equating the God required work with belief. IOW the unbeliever coming to belief is the work God requires, which IMO can seem to say belief is man's work.
  • Alternatively, if we just stay with "This is the work [of] God - that you believe in the one whom He sent" then we might say the unbeliever coming to belief is God's work, which a few traditions will like, and I can see the point.
    • God made His Salvation Plan. God sent His Son. God is teaching/drawing men to come to His Son, etc...
    • But is this what Jesus is saying here? He will speak of some of these things later, so is it necessary that He's saying it here?
      • It seems to conflict with the command Jesus just gave these unbelievers.
      • Maybe it's just the complement to His command.
  • Alternatively, since "This" in Greek can refer forward or backward and the clause "that you believe..." can also be translated differently, we could have: 29 Jesus replied, "This (Jesus' command to work for the lasting food/teaching) is the work God requires – for this purpose; to believe in the one (Jesus) whom He sent.
    • The more I ponder this part of Scripture, the more I like this interpretation.
      • Jesus is always saying what He hears the Father say, so the Father is commanding unbelievers to work for lasting food, i.e. to hear and learn God's teaching - the Gospel.
        • Later Jesus will bring in the Father's drawing men by teaching them, and the ones who believe, have heard & learned from the Father. So, Jesus is really commanding unbelievers to work to hear and learn from God so they can believe in Jesus and Jesus will give them eternal life.
        • So, in 6:27 God commands you to work for the food/[to hear & learn] the Gospel <> 6:29 This is the work God requires (God commands = God requires).
      • This would put obedience before belief, but I don't think I see this as an issue because God initiates and commands > then men obey to hear, learn, believe. This really just becomes another command to believe in God's Son not unlike 1J3:23 and others.
        • Faith-Obedience and Obedience-Faith - what's the difference once they're so strongly correlated if not equated to one another?

Anyway, just some externalized pondering as best I can present it at the moment.

Looking at Theou in John 6:29. Isn’t this the genitive or possessive form of the word? wouldn’t that mean that the works are God’s works or works of God. Isn’t “of” there to indicate that its the possessive form of God that we find in Greek manuscripts?

 

[Cameron143]

Over time in these threads I've seen others speak of your moving the goalposts during discussions. I may even have been one of them.

We haven't even gotten back to this concept of maintaining salvation in these latest exchanges.



Which is pretty much what I've been saying, while you in turn claim I'm butchering the meaning worse than you've ever seen.

Just to be clear since you like to change the wording of Scripture, God is providing capabilities IN His Children for this purpose, so they can both will/desire and work on behalf of God's good pleasure Phil2:13. Christians are thus commanded to accomplish their salvation with fear and trembling 2:12 (because God is providing capability to the Christian to will and to accomplish salvation as He commands and because a Christian willing to work to accomplish salvation and working with God to accomplish salvation well-pleases God).

Maintaining salvation is not the word used here ("accomplishing" is), nor is the word "respond" used here (but we might find some agreement conceptually on this one).

Maintaining salvation is some interesting and potentially ambiguously loaded terminology. With God working in us, are we responsible to maintain the level we've attained and not be regressing but to be advancing? What if we are not maintaining and are regressing? What if we never advance as we should? Can we regress to zero (lose salvation)? I basically know the answers from all sides although I maintain and do not lose preparedness to read something on these threads I haven't read before. In such case it does not shock, it just is.

I said you were butchering the scripture by saying man was exercising the power of God. God exercises His power in and through people. He doesn't impart His power to them.
Plenty of examples of this. When Moses lifted the rod, who divided the sea? When Elijah called down fire, under whose power was it manifested?

 

[studier]

Looking at Theou in John 6:29. Isn’t this the genitive or possessive form of the word? wouldn’t that mean that the works are God’s works or works of God. Isn’t “of” there to indicate that its the possessive form of God that we find in Greek manuscripts?

The genitive of possession is one choice of many for a genitive.. Are you familiar with the many? If not, then I'll list them from one resource if you'd like. As I recall there are about 30 of them. Narrowing down to fewer is normally pretty simple. Then it gets interesting.

 

[mailmandan]

So do you. But if we remove such a comment both ways, we're left with your inability to explain "Christ" from Psalm2 and your lack of desire to ultimately have someone or anyone assist you (which could be pride). That's not very discipleish.

You see, Dan, I think part of the reason you equivocate re: faith-obedience is because you can't explain what "Christ" means and includes. Paul pointed to Ps2 for a reason and that reason is because it explains who and what YHYW's Christ is to the point Paul saw it necessary to know from an evangelistic message. If someone is immediately taught who and what Christ means and is, and thus who and what we're being called to believe into, then faith-obedience is a given. And this correlates very well with how Paul explains faith and obedience being parallel. Some of us see this correlation very clearly. To some it's babble even when we show it from Scripture.

Your eisegesis remains babble to me, and you seem to be making this out to be more complicated than it really is. Again, faith is the root of salvation and obedience which follows and is produced out of faith is the fruit. Plain and simple.

 

[GWH]

I would argue that they don't truly have faith, but you avoided the question: do our ongoing works maintain our salvation?

No, you rejected my answer.

 

[mailmandan]

From beginning "have been saved through faith" (Ephesians 2:8) to end "receiving the end of your faith--the salvation of your souls (1 Peter 1:9) salvation is by grace through faith and is NOT BY WORKS.

 

[Cameron143]

No, you rejected my answer.

Would you please answer just yes or no: do our ongoing works maintain our salvation?