Not By Works

It is God who works in us to will and to do of His Good Pleasure, so what you call adding your own works to salvation, I call the operation of Grace, from first to last

Our lenses must be in submission to the Word of God, not the other way around. You are correct, it is not an easy task, but it starts with taking God’s Word at what it says, without changing the meaning to fit what we seearound us

I can't see how this correlate with Romans that I quoted.
My focus concerning Romans was about how God works good in the things of our life and as a result.

The point I was trying to make also is that I disagree with your quote

Now I agree with the verses you quoted but you seem to neglect with what I was trying to convey with your quote and my thoughts concerning Romans that I relate to Ephesians concerning good works which do not relate to the verses in Titus.

Different types of works for me.
One crucifying the flesh and the helping people.

It is God who works in us both to will and to do, whether that is believing unto salvation, crucifying the flesh, perservering in hope, Hebrews 3:6, or helping people or anything else. Across the entire spectrum

Do you agree with this

Well I hope you are doing that then, because John is definitely speaking to the dual nature of the believer and the one who doeth righteousness is functioning in the very nature of God.

It is not about practicing righteousness as in a self-improvement plan...that is just against Paul's entire teachings.

Dc, gb9, undergrace, please read this post, straight from my heart

1 John 3:10 is the interpretive key to verses 6-9. The whole context is about contrasting two groups of people, those who are children of God, born of God and those who are not

1 John 3:10 must be accounted for

I think this is what I have been stating all along......."willingness" or lack thereof ...... God does not force anyone unless you think along the robot lens like some Calvinists sometimes do.

The last two paragraphs are the sum and total of everything I have said. Use these two statements as interpretive keys to everything else I said
a relationship with God

Amen God healed you of the weed.
I know of a guy who smoked weed, came to Jesus.
Still smoked weed.
Asked to be baptised. The elders were reluctant but he said I want to be baptised.
They agreed.
On the morning he smoked a joint or two.
Got baptised.
He rose out of the water and has never smoked a joint since.

I got baptised but still struggled with a severe gambling problem for 20 or so years after. I even got the stage of killing myself (and I had a wife and 4 kids, I knew he would take care of them) I even asked God to kill me.

Then God dealt with it. He had to deal with the cause of the affect.

Do you know what?
God is good, his timing is perfect.
Was my years wasted?
Yes and no.
Wasted years are now being used for my future years.

God knows best

Calvinists, which I am not,do not teach robot salvation. They teach that only God can cleanse and change a sinful heart and fallen nature, and on this i agree with them

Not basing my answer on experience, but i know that if God had not first done a preparatory work on my heart, i would have never believed, and it was the love of God that triumphed over my love of weed and sin, and Iam confident that the love of God will continue to triumph incrementally over the sins that remain in me, for He has predestined me and ypu, i believe,to be conformed to the image of His Som

Yes I do but do you agree with the verses in Romans that he needs to work good in the things of our lives (by this the things that stunt our walk with him) in order to bring us to this point.

For me the fact is that if he does we will crucify the flesh. Or should I say he helps us to crucify the flesh?

I did. praise God for what he did for you!!.

that being said, this is my point I have been trying to make to you off and on for months- as great and praiseworthy as your experience was, you CANNOT overlay that onto others who come to Christ.

sanctification is going to be different for others'.

and when you take your personal experience and mix it with your theology, it is going to make you be judgemental and legalistic. it is a natural outcome of the 2.

that is what I hammer at you, you cannot attach salvation to how well or poorly another person performs, because you do not know another's thoughts and their heart.

God can rightly judge because he does. we cannot because we don't

yes, I agree. Even when we fall, God can use it to produce something good. He can even restore the years that the locust has eaten, so that the plower catches up with the sower, hallelujah. God gives abundance, not sparingly, if we will receive it.

This is the hope that causes me to keep on keeping on, in spite of my many shortcomings.

I never said sanctification is the same for any two people. But Romans does say that who God justified, He also sanctifies. And initial sanctification is for the purpose of IMPUTING all righteousness to us, unworthy sinners who have no righteousness of our own, to be followed by incremental impartation of righteousness, though not at the same rate or the same way for all believers.

I think not...you know there goes that language barrier and how people from that time expressed themselves.

If this passage is saying that those who sin and are of the devil are unsaved, then all professing Christians are unsaved, because all Christians sin.

One of my favourite verses.

God will restore the years that the locusts have eaten.
What a promise.

Let us all encourage others not to focus on the past, let God deal with it.
Our past does not need to dictate our future (Romans again) but allowing God to deal and heal it then it will set the path for our future and him using us will help others.

The text was originally written in Greek, as you know, and in Greek the present tense verb sin has a linear aspect that can be represented by a straight, unbroken line, meaning continual practice of sin (continuous present) and is progressive. Do you continually practice sin, or do you walk in obedience, but imperfectly, your walk at times broken by temporary lapses, whether short or long. The one who sins continuously is not lapsing, they are in a constant state of rebellion, even moral sinners, because their unbelief is also sin

The verb sin in the text is a present tense verb in the Greek and is linear, indicating a continual state of lawlessness, see verses 4-5. The Chrstian sins, 1 John 2:1, but John does not use the present tense form for sin in that text, he uses an aorist tense verb, which is not a linear verb (continually and progressive) but is rather a punctilious verb, which means it is action seen as a point in time, scan be represented by a dot and not a line, not continual, but temporary lapses

Now a temporary lapse can even be long. But it is temporary. A continual sin is not temporary, but permanent

John is talking about people who confess God with their mouth, but wholly and continually without ceasing deny Him in their actions

We perhaps have denied God in the past with our actions, but like Peter, we are grieved by it, and like Peter, when we turn again, we may strengthen our brethren

Sorry for the long post. I wanted to give as comprehensive answer as I could

Every word in red is present tense and has a linear aspect to it. Here's what I mean...

Time & "Kind of Action" in Greek Verbs:

Click to expand...

The three kinds of action are shown above in the second paragraph.

Number one describes what are called present, future, and imperfect verbs.

Number two describe perfect tense verbs,

and number three, aorist verbs.

The verb "sin" in 1 John 3 is a present tense verb, indicating a continuous or progressive kind of action.

The verb "sin" in 1 John 2:1 (applied to believers) is an aorist verb, and is referring to a simple or summary occurance.

Now to continue...

Note the present tense verb denotes continuous time of action and can mean "state of persistence" This is the tense that John is using in 1 John 3:6. continual state of persistence in sin. Active rebellion.

This is the tense John uses in 1 John 2:1. DO you see the MAJOR difference in meaning between the word sin in the present tense (linear aspect) and the verb sin in the aorist tense. (Punctiliar aspect)?

That's what I'm talking about.

DC knows Greek, so you can consult him about this. NT (Koine) Greek is a fascinating study, and not all that difficult.