Saved by faith alone?

[Doll]

This question would be better asked of you. Are you obeying faith alone regeneration theology or the Jesus of the Bible?

It seems you are doing the former. Your insistence on defining general statements as all-encompassing is troubling. The absurdity of your reasoning is rather obvious.

Faith Alone Regeneration Theology is a theology without an example. A theology based on shoehorning a grammatical definitive into the verbiage of rather general statements. This is childish and puts all scripture at risk.

Something must have happened to you in the Roman Catholic Church that you are suppressing and using this theology as a coping mechanism.

Are you under the impression you are providing a more mature example there?

The natural mind is incapable of understanding the things of God because they are spiritually discerned.

When the Holy Spirit,Spirit of Holy God,enters those He chooses,and removes the hardening from their mind that is innate in all people, so they can then understand God's communications to them,that is regeneration.

Regenerated by the Holy Power that gives Soul and life to all people, bridged the separation that hardening,our natural worldly consciousness, knew as our everyday life and concern.
That Spiritual union is what allows us to understand the things of God. Because it is God teaching us his words.

We are born again in the Spirit of understanding that we would have had if Adam and Eve,who had that spiritual union with God before the fall.

James 1:16 Do not be led astray, my dear brothers and sisters.17 All generous giving and every perfect gift[q] is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or the slightest hint of change.18 By his sovereign plan he gave us birth through the message of truth, that we would be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.

 

[studier]

If I may, I'd like to use your post to move away from the unproductive jousting about "faith-alone" which IMO is simply a failed systematic theology at this point of its history. It began with a purpose, but it's become a slogan for a tradition that at minimum does not understand biblical Faith, which I assume most of us would agree is an incredibly important word for all of us to properly understand.

I'm going to begin by saying I've been looking at ways to think about how the Text ultimately written by the Creator of the Universe is structured. Lexical words like "synonyms" just seem to fall short when trying to explain how words and concepts in the Bible interact and are interconnected. At the moment I'm using "entanglement" theory from physics. The Bible seems to me to be an entanglement. It's words are entangled, interconnected in a way that in-depth studies always lead from one word to another. In a way, if we could think more like Him, maybe the entire Text can be reduced to one word, one thought, and in that one word all the Text is contained. Maybe this is comparable to His saying His name in YHWH.

To cut this short, these theological systems that choose one word to focus on and to isolate are simply treating the Text unnaturally and in doing so end up in error. It seems to me "faith-alone" is in essence the epitome of this.

This is being done on the fly, so to speak, to see where it takes me or us, assuming I continue. I'm going to be very technical with the language of the Text because I think we take too much for granted when we compare verses and words. Greek is very specific and very detailed much unlike English.

Please don't take this as being confrontational. I'm just going to be dealing with what's stated both by you and very literally in places in the Text. I'm going to use [ ] to show where interpretive English translation is taking place. I'me going to use "pistis" for faith because some tend to want to translate it different ways especially in faith-alone discussions.

The phrase “saved by faith” is absolutely biblical (Ephesians 2:8–9, Romans 5:1),

Is "The phrase “saved by faith”' "absolutely biblical" per the referenced verses?

• Eph2:8-9 says [by] grace you are saved [through] pistis...
• Rom5:1 says: Therefore, [since] we were justified-declared righteous-vindicated-freed [ek-from] pistis...
• Looking just at these parts of the Text, I don't immediately see them telling us "saved by faith" is absolutely biblical. But I'm looking for intensive biblical accuracy - the mind of Christ - and taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.

but the expression “faith alone” must be carefully understood — because Scripture never separates true faith from obedience and repentance.

Although based upon the "because..." statement I might find a way to agree with the premise that "faith alone must be carefully understood", at this point I think we may be long past working with this slogan other than to go back to where it began and realize the context in which it was originally used.

I do find some agreement with what's stated in this "because..." statement. Biblical Pistis is a concept that is entangled with several other words that become facets of pistis apart from which pistis is not "true faith". Obedience and repentance are attached to pistis. Repentance may well be a part of it, but maybe more in a lexically and logically sequential way. Obedience on the other hand is absolutely entangled with pistis to such a degree that it is essentially used synonymously with pistis in the Text. They are used as co-defining responses to the Gospel - the Gospel is believed and the Gospel is obeyed. They are not sequential. They are co-instantiated and mutually defining expressions.

This is the beginning issue with faith-alone soteriology. It has isolated pistis from other words that define and explain it - words that are facets of pistis and integral parts of it. Then we also have to deal with the multiple expressions of the soteriological system. What's the point? We have the Text.

I'll try to continue when I have time. Maybe some will respond to this first session. If it's not productive maybe I'll stop here.

 

[Sipsey]

If I may, I'd like to use your post to move away from the unproductive jousting about "faith-alone" which IMO is simply a failed systematic theology at this point of its history. It began with a purpose, but it's become a slogan for a tradition that at minimum does not understand biblical Faith, which I assume most of us would agree is an incredibly important word for all of us to properly understand.

I'm going to begin by saying I've been looking at ways to think about how the Text ultimately written by the Creator of the Universe is structured. Lexical words like "synonyms" just seem to fall short when trying to explain how words and concepts in the Bible interact and are interconnected. At the moment I'm using "entanglement" theory from physics. The Bible seems to me to be an entanglement. It's words are entangled, interconnected in a way that in-depth studies always lead from one word to another. In a way, if we could think more like Him, maybe the entire Text can be reduced to one word, one thought, and in that one word all the Text is contained. Maybe this is comparable to His saying His name in YHWH.

To cut this short, these theological systems that choose one word to focus on and to isolate are simply treating the Text unnaturally and in doing so end up in error. It seems to me "faith-alone" is in essence the epitome of this.

This is being done on the fly, so to speak, to see where it takes me or us, assuming I continue. I'm going to be very technical with the language of the Text because I think we take too much for granted when we compare verses and words. Greek is very specific and very detailed much unlike English.

Please don't take this as being confrontational. I'm just going to be dealing with what's stated both by you and very literally in places in the Text. I'm going to use [ ] to show where interpretive English translation is taking place. I'me going to use "pistis" for faith because some tend to want to translate it different ways especially in faith-alone discussions.



Is "The phrase “saved by faith”' "absolutely biblical" per the referenced verses?

• Eph2:8-9 says [by] grace you are saved [through] pistis...
• Rom5:1 says: Therefore, [since] we were justified-declared righteous-vindicated-freed [ek-from] pistis...
• Looking just at these parts of the Text, I don't immediately see them telling us "saved by faith" is absolutely biblical. But I'm looking for intensive biblical accuracy - the mind of Christ - and taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.

Although based upon the "because..." statement I might find a way to agree with the premise that "faith alone must be carefully understood", at this point I think we may be long past working with this slogan other than to go back to where it began and realize the context in which it was originally used.

I do find some agreement with what's stated in this "because..." statement. Biblical Pistis is a concept that is entangled with several other words that become facets of pistis apart from which pistis is not "true faith". Obedience and repentance are attached to pistis. Repentance may well be a part of it, but maybe more in a lexically and logically sequential way. Obedience on the other hand is absolutely entangled with pistis to such a degree that it is essentially used synonymously with pistis in the Text. They are used as co-defining responses to the Gospel - the Gospel is believed and the Gospel is obeyed. They are not sequential. They are co-instantiated and mutually defining expressions.

This is the beginning issue with faith-alone soteriology. It has isolated pistis from other words that define and explain it - words that are facets of pistis and integral parts of it. Then we also have to deal with the multiple expressions of the soteriological system. What's the point? We have the Text.

I'll try to continue when I have time. Maybe some will respond to this first session. If it's not productive maybe I'll stop here.

I like the term “entanglement” as an adjective to describe the enormity and yet consistancy of Scripture. It‘s kinda like the concept of God’s Love. It is composed of justice, mercy, grace, and several other elements. To study each aspect of His agape love is helpful, but falls short of its fullness.

 

[LightBearer316]

Is "The phrase “saved by faith”' "absolutely biblical" per the referenced verses?

• Eph2:8-9 says [by] grace you are saved [through] pistis...
• Rom5:1 says: Therefore, [since] we were justified-declared righteous-vindicated-freed [ek-from] pistis...
• Looking just at these parts of the Text, I don't immediately see them telling us "saved by faith" is absolutely biblical. But I'm looking for intensive biblical accuracy - the mind of Christ - and taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.

Excellent question — and I really appreciate your desire for precision and for taking “every thought captive to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor 10:5).

Strictly speaking, Scripture phrases it this way:

“By grace are ye saved through faith” (Eph 2:8-9)
“Being justified by faith, we have peace with God” (Rom 5:1).​

So while the phrase “saved by faith” is a fair summary, the inspired wording keeps the order exact:

• Grace is the cause — the unearned favor of God.
• Faith is the means — the channel through which we receive that grace.
• Christ’s finished work is the ground — the reason salvation is possible at all.

We could diagram it this way:

Grace (source) → Faith (means) → Salvation (result).​

Thus, “saved by faith” is biblically accurate in meaning, but less exact in wording. Paul’s precision guards us from thinking faith earns salvation — it merely receives what grace provides.

So yes, when understood correctly — that faith is the instrument, not the cause — the statement “saved by faith” is true. The full, Spirit-given phrasing remains:

Saved by grace, through faith, apart from works, because of Christ alone.​

Grace and peace as you continue to pursue the mind of Christ in the Word.

 

[NightTwister]

It is a rather simple question.

Are the chosen by God able to resist their fate?

Are the unchosen by God able to resist their fate?

If we are unable to resist our fate then we are coerced.

coerce
verb
(transitive)
to compel or restrain by force or authority without regard to individual wishes or desires

You're still going with the false dichotomy.

 

[LightBearer316]

Although based upon the "because..." statement I might find a way to agree with the premise that "faith alone must be carefully understood", at this point I think we may be long past working with this slogan other than to go back to where it began and realize the context in which it was originally used.

I do find some agreement with what's stated in this "because..." statement. Biblical Pistis is a concept that is entangled with several other words that become facets of pistis apart from which pistis is not "true faith". Obedience and repentance are attached to pistis. Repentance may well be a part of it, but maybe more in a lexically and logically sequential way. Obedience on the other hand is absolutely entangled with pistis to such a degree that it is essentially used synonymously with pistis in the Text. They are used as co-defining responses to the Gospel - the Gospel is believed and the Gospel is obeyed. They are not sequential. They are co-instantiated and mutually defining expressions.

This is the beginning issue with faith-alone soteriology. It has isolated pistis from other words that define and explain it - words that are facets of pistis and integral parts of it. Then we also have to deal with the multiple expressions of the soteriological system. What's the point? We have the Text.

I'll try to continue when I have time. Maybe some will respond to this first session. If it's not productive maybe I'll stop here.

Thank you for that thoughtful and well-articulated response — I really appreciate the depth of your reflection on pistis and the way you’re drawing attention to its rich, multifaceted nature in Scripture.

I agree — pistis (faith) in the biblical sense is not mere intellectual assent or profession; it’s living, active trust that manifests itself in obedience. The Reformers’ use of “faith alone” was never meant to describe a faith that is alone, but rather to affirm that nothing in addition to faith (no works or merit of our own) contributes to justification.

James 2 helps clarify the distinction:

“Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” (James 2:17)​

“Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” (James 2:24)​

This isn’t a contradiction of Paul’s teaching, but a complement to it — Paul addresses how we are justified before God (by grace through faith, apart from works), while James addresses what kind of faith justifies (a living faith that inevitably produces obedience).

In that sense, I agree entirely that obedience is inseparable from genuine faith — not as an added requirement for salvation, but as the natural fruit of it (Ephesians 2:8–10; Titus 2:11–14).

So yes, pistis and obedience are indeed co-instantiated, as you put it — two sides of the same coin of saving belief. The difference is that “faith alone” guards the foundation (grace, not merit), while obedience and repentance demonstrate the reality of that faith.

Appreciate the thoughtful dialogue — this is the kind of iron-sharpening-iron exchange that helps us all handle the Word of Truth more carefully (2 Timothy 2:15).

Grace and peace to you in Christ.

 

[mailmandan]

Biblical Pistis is a concept that is entangled with several other words that become facets of pistis apart from which pistis is not "true faith". Obedience and repentance are attached to pistis. Repentance may well be a part of it, but maybe more in a lexically and logically sequential way. Obedience on the other hand is absolutely entangled with pistis to such a degree that it is essentially used synonymously with pistis in the Text. They are used as co-defining responses to the Gospel - the Gospel is believed and the Gospel is obeyed. They are not sequential. They are co-instantiated and mutually defining expressions.

Repentance is a "change of mind" that precedes belief/faith which is the new direction of that change of mind. Two sides to the same coin.

Matthew 21:32 - For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him.

Mark 1:15 - and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent, and believe the gospel.

Acts 20:21 - testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions. Acts 26:20 declares, "I preached that they should repent and turn to God and demonstrate their repentance by their deeds. This is the fruit of repentance (Matthew 3:8) and not the essence of repentance (change of mind).

Folks who oppose salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation will typically confuse the "fruit of repentance" with the "essence of repentance" (and they also do the same thing with faith) and end up teaching salvation by works.

In regard to the gospel being believed and the gospel being obeyed, we obey the gospel by choosing to believe the gospel. Romans 10:16 - But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” Obeying the gospel is not something that we do after we believe the gospel (Romans 1:16) in order to obtain salvation by works.

This is the beginning issue with faith-alone soteriology. It has isolated pistis from other words that define and explain it - words that are facets of pistis and integral parts of it.

So, by saying that obedience/works is an integral part of faith, you are saying that obedience/works is the very essence of faith and that salvation by faith really means salvation by faith AND works? Is that what you are saying?

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

So, by saying that obedience/works is an integral part of faith, you are saying that obedience/works is the very essence of faith and that salvation by faith really means salvation by faith AND works? Is that what you are saying?

Salvation by faith and works is not a problem, but justification by faith and works is. Justification is by faith alone. But justification is not salvation; it is merely the start of the salvation process.

 

[LightBearer316]

If I may, I'd like to use your post to move away from the unproductive jousting about "faith-alone" which IMO is simply a failed systematic theology at this point of its history. It began with a purpose, but it's become a slogan for a tradition that at minimum does not understand biblical Faith, which I assume most of us would agree is an incredibly important word for all of us to properly understand.

I'm going to begin by saying I've been looking at ways to think about how the Text ultimately written by the Creator of the Universe is structured. Lexical words like "synonyms" just seem to fall short when trying to explain how words and concepts in the Bible interact and are interconnected. At the moment I'm using "entanglement" theory from physics. The Bible seems to me to be an entanglement. It's words are entangled, interconnected in a way that in-depth studies always lead from one word to another. In a way, if we could think more like Him, maybe the entire Text can be reduced to one word, one thought, and in that one word all the Text is contained. Maybe this is comparable to His saying His name in YHWH.

To cut this short, these theological systems that choose one word to focus on and to isolate are simply treating the Text unnaturally and in doing so end up in error. It seems to me "faith-alone" is in essence the epitome of this.

This is being done on the fly, so to speak, to see where it takes me or us, assuming I continue. I'm going to be very technical with the language of the Text because I think we take too much for granted when we compare verses and words. Greek is very specific and very detailed much unlike English.

Please don't take this as being confrontational. I'm just going to be dealing with what's stated both by you and very literally in places in the Text. I'm going to use [ ] to show where interpretive English translation is taking place. I'me going to use "pistis" for faith because some tend to want to translate it different ways especially in faith-alone discussions.

Thank you for that very thoughtful and respectful post — I truly appreciate your desire to move past surface-level debate and press deeper into what the Text itself reveals. Your “entanglement” analogy is actually quite fitting in many ways; Scripture is indeed beautifully interconnected, and every word, phrase, and truth harmonizes perfectly when viewed through the mind of Christ rather than human systems.

That said, I would suggest that the “faith alone” expression—when properly understood—was never meant to isolate pistis from repentance, obedience, or transformation. The Reformers coined it as a theological safeguard, not as a slogan. It was shorthand to affirm that justification is by grace through faith, apart from works (Eph. 2:8–9; Rom. 3:28), while acknowledging that true faith is always living and active (Gal. 5:6; James 2:17).

In other words, pistis isn’t isolated from obedience; it expresses itself through obedience. But obedience is the fruit of faith, not its co-cause. Faith receives the grace that saves, and that grace then works powerfully within us “both to will and to do of His good pleasure” (Phil. 2:13).

I wholeheartedly agree that when we study Greek closely, we see that pistis carries connotations of trust, loyalty, and fidelity — yet none of those ever diminish grace as the sole basis of salvation. They simply reveal the richness of what genuine, Spirit-born faith produces.

I’m looking forward to your deeper textual work on this — sharpening one another in the Word is always profitable when done with humility and reverence for the Lord.

Grace and peace to you as you continue your study.
-------------
Meaning of pistis

The Greek word πίστις (pistis) is commonly translated as faith, belief, or trust in English Bibles. But its meaning is richer and more layered than our modern use of “faith” as simply “believing something is true.”

At its core, pistis means:

A conviction so deep that it produces trust, loyalty, and obedience to the one believed.​

Key Aspects of pistis

1. Intellectual conviction – acknowledging something as true.
   
   “He that cometh to God must believe that He is…” (Hebrews 11:6)​
2. Personal trust – relying upon someone, not merely agreeing with facts.
   
   “I know whom I have believed” (2 Timothy 1:12).​
3. Faithfulness / fidelity – a relational loyalty that results in obedience.
   
   “Faith worketh by love.” (Galatians 5:6)​

So pistis carries both trust and faithfulness — belief that leads to steadfast loyalty. It’s not passive; it’s active confidence in God’s character and Word.

Biblical Usage

• Salvation:
  “By grace are ye saved through pistis (faith)” (Eph. 2:8).
  → Faith is the instrument by which we receive grace.
• Justification:
  “Being justified by pistis (faith), we have peace with God.” (Rom. 5:1).
  → Faith unites us to Christ’s righteousness.
• Faithfulness:
  In some contexts, pistis even means faithfulness (e.g., Gal. 5:22 — “faith” is a fruit of the Spirit meaning steadfastness or reliability).

In the New Testament, pistis isn’t mere belief in facts — it’s wholehearted trust, loyalty, and fidelity toward God, resulting in a life of obedience.
You could summarize it this way:

“Pistis” = believing the truth, trusting the Person, and obeying the Lord who saves.​

 

[HeIsHere]

Thank you for that thoughtful and well-articulated response — I really appreciate the depth of your reflection on pistis and the way you’re drawing attention to its rich, multifaceted nature in Scripture.

I agree — pistis (faith) in the biblical sense is not mere intellectual assent or profession; it’s living, active trust that manifests itself in obedience. The Reformers’ use of “faith alone” was never meant to describe a faith that is alone, but rather to affirm that nothing in addition to faith (no works or merit of our own) contributes to justification.

James 2 helps clarify the distinction:

“Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” (James 2:17)​

“Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” (James 2:24)​

This isn’t a contradiction of Paul’s teaching, but a complement to it — Paul addresses how we are justified before God (by grace through faith, apart from works), while James addresses what kind of faith justifies (a living faith that inevitably produces obedience).

In that sense, I agree entirely that obedience is inseparable from genuine faith — not as an added requirement for salvation, but as the natural fruit of it (Ephesians 2:8–10; Titus 2:11–14).

So yes, pistis and obedience are indeed co-instantiated, as you put it — two sides of the same coin of saving belief. The difference is that “faith alone” guards the foundation (grace, not merit), while obedience and repentance demonstrate the reality of that faith.

Appreciate the thoughtful dialogue — this is the kind of iron-sharpening-iron exchange that helps us all handle the Word of Truth more carefully (2 Timothy 2:15).

Grace and peace to you in Christ.

What is a dead faith?

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

We don't continually become justified; that happens once for all time and it happens by faith alone. Justification is a perfect and enduring anchor of the soul, but it is not perfected salvation.

Once justified and sanctified our vessels must be kept clean (holy) for the master of the house to use by abstaining from works of the flesh and defilements of the world . This lifelong sanctification is accomplished by works of the spirit, ie, obeying the spirit's voice rather than the impulses of the flesh.

So we are saved through justification by faith alone accompanied by works of the spirit anchored to that faith-alone justification.

 

[TrustandObey]

It's misunderstood. We are saved by faith that trusts in Jesus Christ "alone" for salvation (Romans 4:5-6) which is not to be confused with a bare profession of faith that remains "alone" - barren of works. (James 2:14)

Could you define what you mean by "works"?

Is it works of merit or works of obedience?

Is it both?

Could you give an example of the works that you suspect people are using to earn their salvation?

 

[TrustandObey]

Repentance is a "change of mind" that precedes belief/faith which is the new direction of that change of mind. Two sides to the same coin.

Matthew 21:32 - For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him.

Mark 1:15 - and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent, and believe the gospel.

Acts 20:21 - testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions. Acts 26:20 declares, "I preached that they should repent and turn to God and demonstrate their repentance by their deeds. This is the fruit of repentance (Matthew 3:8) and not the essence of repentance (change of mind).

Folks who oppose salvation through faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation will typically confuse the "fruit of repentance" with the "essence of repentance" (and they also do the same thing with faith) and end up teaching salvation by works.

In regard to the gospel being believed and the gospel being obeyed, we obey the gospel by choosing to believe the gospel. Romans 10:16 - But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” Obeying the gospel is not something that we do after we believe the gospel (Romans 1:16) in order to obtain salvation by works.

So, by saying that obedience/works is an integral part of faith, you are saying that obedience/works is the very essence of faith and that salvation by faith really means salvation by faith AND works? Is that what you are saying?

Change your life (repent) and then believe in Jesus?

Acts 2:36-38

“All the people of Israel should know beyond a doubt that God made Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

When the people heard this, they were deeply upset. They asked Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?”

Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift.

Do you see repentance before belief in these verses?

 

[studier]

I like the term “entanglement” as an adjective to describe the enormity and yet consistancy of Scripture. It‘s kinda like the concept of God’s Love. It is composed of justice, mercy, grace, and several other elements. To study each aspect of His agape love is helpful, but falls short of its fullness.

I like the entanglement concept also. It was fascinating to see how it was discovered and how God has matter interconnected or entangled in the Universe. I see the same thing in His Word. Whether we know it or not, when we use a word like pistis, or agape as you've stated, we're ultimately touching on so much if not all of His Text.

I agree with you re: agape. It's another one of those vital words that is easily seen to be entangled with other vital words and concepts, including faith and easily obedience. Stripping these words of their biblical connections just takes us into error.

 

[mailmandan]

Could you define what you mean by "works"?

Clothing and feeding a brother or sister in need is a good example. (James 2:15-16)

Is it works of merit or works of obedience?

Works of merit are not works of obedience if done with the expectation of receiving eternal life based on accomplishing those works.

Is it both?

Oxymoron.

Could you give an example of the works that you suspect people are using to earn their salvation?

Any works that you "add" to salvation through faith.

 

[GWH]

If I may, I'd like to use your post to move away from the unproductive jousting about "faith-alone" which IMO is simply a failed systematic theology at this point of its history. It began with a purpose, but it's become a slogan for a tradition that at minimum does not understand biblical Faith, which I assume most of us would agree is an incredibly important word for all of us to properly understand.

I'm going to begin by saying I've been looking at ways to think about how the Text ultimately written by the Creator of the Universe is structured. Lexical words like "synonyms" just seem to fall short when trying to explain how words and concepts in the Bible interact and are interconnected. At the moment I'm using "entanglement" theory from physics. The Bible seems to me to be an entanglement. It's words are entangled, interconnected in a way that in-depth studies always lead from one word to another. In a way, if we could think more like Him, maybe the entire Text can be reduced to one word, one thought, and in that one word all the Text is contained. Maybe this is comparable to His saying His name in YHWH.

To cut this short, these theological systems that choose one word to focus on and to isolate are simply treating the Text unnaturally and in doing so end up in error. It seems to me "faith-alone" is in essence the epitome of this.

This is being done on the fly, so to speak, to see where it takes me or us, assuming I continue. I'm going to be very technical with the language of the Text because I think we take too much for granted when we compare verses and words. Greek is very specific and very detailed much unlike English.

Please don't take this as being confrontational. I'm just going to be dealing with what's stated both by you and very literally in places in the Text. I'm going to use [ ] to show where interpretive English translation is taking place. I'me going to use "pistis" for faith because some tend to want to translate it different ways especially in faith-alone discussions.



Is "The phrase “saved by faith”' "absolutely biblical" per the referenced verses?

• Eph2:8-9 says [by] grace you are saved [through] pistis...
• Rom5:1 says: Therefore, [since] we were justified-declared righteous-vindicated-freed [ek-from] pistis...
• Looking just at these parts of the Text, I don't immediately see them telling us "saved by faith" is absolutely biblical. But I'm looking for intensive biblical accuracy - the mind of Christ - and taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.

Although based upon the "because..." statement I might find a way to agree with the premise that "faith alone must be carefully understood", at this point I think we may be long past working with this slogan other than to go back to where it began and realize the context in which it was originally used.

I do find some agreement with what's stated in this "because..." statement. Biblical Pistis is a concept that is entangled with several other words that become facets of pistis apart from which pistis is not "true faith". Obedience and repentance are attached to pistis. Repentance may well be a part of it, but maybe more in a lexically and logically sequential way. Obedience on the other hand is absolutely entangled with pistis to such a degree that it is essentially used synonymously with pistis in the Text. They are used as co-defining responses to the Gospel - the Gospel is believed and the Gospel is obeyed. They are not sequential. They are co-instantiated and mutually defining expressions.

This is the beginning issue with faith-alone soteriology. It has isolated pistis from other words that define and explain it - words that are facets of pistis and integral parts of it. Then we also have to deal with the multiple expressions of the soteriological system. What's the point? We have the Text.

I'll try to continue when I have time. Maybe some will respond to this first session. If it's not productive maybe I'll stop here.

I liked your thoughtful post before the quote of LB. I agree that we must be careful to define "faith alone" rather than sling it around like a slogan as I did before joining CC a year ago. Discussion on CC helped me clarify that it means "faith first and until the last" as Romans 1:17 seems to indicate. IOW, godly works/obedience (Eph. 2:10) should not be divorced/isolated from saving faith (Eph. 2:8-9).

This realization is why I added the following statement to Lesson 2 of our website:

There is no qualitative difference between faith that accepts God’s saving grace at conversion and faith that accepts God’s working grace or motivates good works while walking/living (Eph. 2:8-10, 2Cor. 5:7), but only a quantitative difference as each additional moment passes–and of course faith remains non-meritorious during the saint’s entire lifetime (Rom. 1:17). IOW, the ability to do good works as well as have saving faith are both due to God’s grace.

 

[LightBearer316]

What is a dead faith?

Excellent question — and one that goes right to the heart of James’ message.

A “dead faith” is a faith that exists in word or intellect only, but shows no life, transformation, or fruit that comes from the Spirit of God. James isn’t saying works add to salvation; he’s saying that genuine, saving faith always produces evidence of new life.

James gives practical examples:

“If a brother or sister be naked, and one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled… and ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?” (James 2:15–16).​

​

In other words, a faith that doesn’t act is faith that doesn’t live. It’s like a body without breath.

“For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.” (James 2:26)​

​

A “dead faith” acknowledges truth about God but doesn’t trust or obey Him. Even demons believe certain truths about God (James 2:19), but they do not love or follow Him.

By contrast, living faith unites us to Christ — and that union inevitably bears fruit: obedience, love, and transformation (John 15:5; Galatians 5:6).

So, to summarize:

Dead faith = mere belief without transformation.​

Living faith = trust in Christ that produces obedience through grace.​

​

James’ warning is that mere profession cannot save — only a faith that is alive in Christ, proven by the Spirit’s work within us, is genuine.

Paul emphasizes the root of salvation—faith by grace.
Peter emphasizes the fruit of salvation—repentance and holiness.
Jesus unites them both: “Repent, and believe the gospel” (Mark 1:15).
James insists on the proof: “faith without works is dead” (James 2:26).

They’re not contradicting each other — they’re all describing the same gospel from different angles. Genuine faith (Paul) leads to repentance and holiness (Peter), which inevitably shows itself in action (James).

The gospel calls us not only to believe but also to be transformed. Faith, repentance, and holiness all flow together in the life of one who truly belongs to Christ.

Grace and peace as we each examine ourselves, whether we be in the faith (2 Corinthians 13:5).

 

[TrustandObey]

Who do you suspect is adding these works to gain salvation?

 

[LightBearer316]

Who do you suspect is adding these works to gain salvation?

That’s a fair question — and to be clear, I’m not suggesting anyone here is consciously adding works to gain salvation.

My point is simply that Scripture makes a careful distinction between the root and the fruit of salvation. Works don’t contribute to being saved — they confirm that salvation has truly taken place.

Paul says,
“By grace are ye saved through faith… not of works.” (Ephesians 2:8–9)
and then immediately adds,
“For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works.” (Ephesians 2:10)

In other words, genuine faith always produces obedience — not as a condition for salvation, but as the natural outcome of it.

So when I emphasize that faith without works is dead, I’m not accusing anyone of adding works — I’m simply agreeing with James that a living faith inevitably shows itself in action, because Christ lives within it.

Grace and peace, brother.

 

[mailmandan]

Change your life (repent) and then believe in Jesus?

Acts 2:36-38

Change your mind (repent) and then believe in Jesus unto salvation.

“All the people of Israel should know beyond a doubt that God made Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

When the people heard this, they were deeply upset. They asked Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?”

Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift.

Do you see repentance before belief in these verses?

I see repentance before saving belief. In Acts 2:37, their "belief" at this point was "mental assent" that Jesus was the Messiah and they were guilty of crucifying Him. *That is not saving belief yet. They still needed to change their mind further and believe in Jesus unto salvation as we see in (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18).

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism. (Acts 10:47)

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

*So, the only Biblical conclusion when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 13:38-39; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*