Saved by faith alone?

[lrs68]

I'm not even sure I understand what the issue is.

As for false doctrine and claims of false doctrine, without these there would be no forum.

I just read the post mentioning the belief that goes against being born into sin due to the sin of Adam. It caused me to research the pages. But I see it is based off some usage of Scripture that was disagreed with in terms of interpretation.

 

[Magenta]

Go ahead. Tell men that they can believe in His creation. They can believe in His morals. They can believe him as Creator.

Us believers who are advancing in His truth will tell unbelievers of His Son. So that everyone does know.

Yes, it's called the great commission. But do you also know that some do not hear? Jesus said so. I'm not sure you know such things.

And surely by now you also know that some say everyone hears even though that directly contradicts what Jesus said?

So who you think is advancing in His truth better not be some of them. You would be terribly deceived!

 

[GWH]

Nature and all that exists is proof of God its creator,yes.

That doesn't ever mean everyone that also exist in that creation know God. Or, his Salvation.

Nor does the scripture claim that.

Atheists exist in God's creation.

Actually, Romans 1:20, 2:14-16 & 9:22 indicate that atheists can perceive God via creation and conscience,
so they are without excuse and will be justly condemned to hell and then destroyed after justice is achieved.

 

[studier]

Actually, Romans 1:20, 2:14-16 & 9:22 indicate that atheists can perceive God via creation and conscience,
so they are without excuse and will be justly condemned to hell and then destroyed after justice is achieved.

It goes deeper than perception. All men have what's IMO best stated as experiential knowledge - knowledge that's usable and meant to be used practically - about God. This is what's in Rom1. There is an interpretation that Paul is applying this teaching to an interlocutor rather than it being Paul's actual teaching. But as the general view stands, this is the teaching about all of humanity. Everyone has usable knowledge of God, and everyone decides whether or not it's worth anything. The reprobate mind is literally a mind of no value because it sees this usable knowledge about God as having no value.

 

[GWH]

It goes deeper than perception. All men have what's IMO best stated as experiential knowledge - knowledge that's usable and meant to be used practically - about God. This is what's in Rom1. There is an interpretation that Paul is applying this teaching to an interlocutor rather than it being Paul's actual teaching. But as the general view stands, this is the teaching about all of humanity. Everyone has usable knowledge of God, and everyone decides whether or not it's worth anything. The reprobate mind is literally a mind of no value because it sees this usable knowledge about God as having no value.

It goes deeper than not seeing.
It is foolishly refusing to perceive that without God life is a farce,
and what one believes is no more significant than the ideology of a rock!

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

We were discussing the erroneous assumption that James was using the term "dead faith" as a label for people who only claimed faith.

How can I look at you as someone who looks to the word without a Bias. And you come out like this?

It is what we were discussion/

as for James.

”what does it profit someone if they CLAIM to have faith. Yet have no works. CAN that faith save them.”

The eronious assumption is to think it is NOT talking about what you claim it is not discussing

It is erroneous because a "dead faith" was at one point "alive faith" otherwise one would not label it dead, and there are a multitude of other reasons within the context of the full letter why this interpretation is incorrect.

this is totally wrong

1. It never said they ever had faith
2. It says they claimed to have faith (the argument) A claimed faith by assumption is no faith at all. But in word only
3. He just spoke of those who were hearers only and not doers.
4. He never said they had works, then stopped doing. Them. he said they had no works.

You have to add so much assumption and words to the text to even come close to seeing it as you do.

You will to do this, feel free.. I only want to see what the word says

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

The topic of Faith in James has somehow turned into a Reformed\Choice conversation. I wonder how it always diverts into that specific discussion?

Here's a copy\paste from another poster that I found intriguing:






It's interesting how one view will state God so loved the world\universe is the proper translation that He died to provide Salvation for it.



Then there's the other view that will take a mathematical approach and say, [ok, these people went to Heaven] and [these people went to Hell] therefore God only truly died for [those people that went to Heaven].

^

But in reality and according to every Scripture in the Bible there's nothing that makes this claim about God not dying for those who go to Hell.



In fact, that is man made simple reasoning that has become a Doctrine. So technically it's a lie according to the Bible.



That is why I stick with God died for the Universe meaning everyone.





The other interesting factor is the issue of Sovereignty. According to the Bible, God is Sovereign and doesn't need man to create Doctrines to verify it. And yet, there's a Doctrine that man has made to do as God has not instructed us to do.



That makes me wonder what does God think when we make Doctrines based upon man's reasoning and not on the Bible itself...?

Amen

In John 3, Jesus died for the world

In james, Thwe claimed to have faith but had no works

one is all including (everyone)

the other is all exclusive (no works period)

its amazing how people change the meanings of words

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Are you inviting me to go ahead and sow into rocky ground? I'm not sure that is so good advice

My presumption is that Jesus is the only good soil, so every other soil must incorporate into Him.

As I read the ongoing conversation I am baffled at how people are more worried about the soil. And not what they should represents.

Only one group produced fruit. This should tell us the word (seed) went out. But only one group found their foundation in the good soil. (Christ)

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

The fact that the elect get to heaven proves they did not fail the Gods test.

But they did fail Gods test.

For ALL have sinned and fall short of Gods glory

No one has passed Gods test. What makes you think they did?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Of course it is the point of the parable!
Otherwise, what is the point of telling the parable?
Telling it would be a waste of breath.

The point is how people react to the word

People react n different ways.

The way they react (the soil) determines how much the seed will grow

 

[studier]

It is foolishly refusing to perceive that without God life is a farce,

I was once again just pondering this, which is basically where I rest more and more. I was looking at one of the threads in the news forum talking about the tech and structures of world assets and currencies heading into being all digital. It details how all tangible assets are ultimately the target of ownership by a small group. Someone(s) wants everything - all control. Satanic to the core. Yed life - existence - is a farce without God. We can have this understanding - this perception as you call it - now, but at some point, others will be living it in ways you and I can only theorize or take in someone's creativity about.

 

[lrs68]

Amen

In John 3, Jesus died for the world

In james, Thwe claimed to have faith but had no works

one is all including (everyone)

the other is all exclusive (no works period)

its amazing how people change the meanings of words

Absolutely agree with you 💯%

 

[GWH]

The point is how people react to the word

People react n different ways.

The way they react (the soil) determines how much the seed will grow

Well, the point is both how people react and encouraging them to be good soil.

 

[GWH]

I was once again just pondering this, which is basically where I rest more and more. I was looking at one of the threads in the news forum talking about the tech and structures of world assets and currencies heading into being all digital. It details how all tangible assets are ultimately the target of ownership by a small group. Someone(s) wants everything - all control. Satanic to the core. Yed life - existence - is a farce without God. We can have this understanding - this perception as you call it - now, but at some point, others will be living it in ways you and I can only theorize or take in someone's creativity about.

Indeed, so let us hope the MAGA (Make America Godly Again) movement lasts,
even though our ultimate Hope/Way is eternal!

 

[Intersection]

But they did fail Gods test.

For ALL have sinned and fall short of Gods glory

No one has passed Gods test. What makes you think they did?

Those who make it to heaven did not fail Gods test.

 

[HeIsHere]

How can I look at you as someone who looks to the word without a Bias. And you come out like this?

It is what we were discussion/

as for James.

”what does it profit someone if they CLAIM to have faith. Yet have no works. CAN that faith save them.”

The eronious assumption is to think it is NOT talking about what you claim it is not discussing


this is totally wrong

1. It never said they ever had faith
2. It says they claimed to have faith (the argument) A claimed faith by assumption is no faith at all. But in word only
3. He just spoke of those who were hearers only and not doers.
4. He never said they had works, then stopped doing. Them. he said they had no works.

You have to add so much assumption and words to the text to even come close to seeing it as you do.

You will to do this, feel free.. I only want to see what the word says

When you understand that James is speaking to another interlocutor than maybe you will understand the letters.

 

[HeIsHere]

How can I look at you as someone who looks to the word without a Bias. And you come out like this?

It is what we were discussion/

as for James.

”what does it profit someone if they CLAIM to have faith. Yet have no works. CAN that faith save them.”

The eronious assumption is to think it is NOT talking about what you claim it is not discussing


this is totally wrong

1. It never said they ever had faith
2. It says they claimed to have faith (the argument) A claimed faith by assumption is no faith at all. But in word only
3. He just spoke of those who were hearers only and not doers.
4. He never said they had works, then stopped doing. Them. he said they had no works.

You have to add so much assumption and words to the text to even come close to seeing it as you do.

You will to do this, feel free.. I only want to see what the word says

James writing to people telling them they are not saved because they do not have works.
Paul must have been very pleased.

 

[GWH]

James writing to people telling them they are not saved because they do not have works.
Paul must have been very pleased.

Yes, Jam. 2:17 agrees exactly with Gal. 5:6.

 

[HeIsHere]

Yes, Jam. 2:17 agrees exactly with Gal. 5:6.

And neither is speaking about the salvation of the spirit.

 

[HeIsHere]

Yes, and rightfully so, otherwise, it is the wisdom of men, not God

[1Co 2:7 KJV]
7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, [even] the hidden [wisdom], which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

[1Co 2:12-14 KJV]
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

And btw these passages are about the DEEP things of God which I already explained at least a year ago if not two.
NOT about the Gospel, so you can put those aside as you PROOF tests.