Not By Works

[Rosemaryx]

Yep, when DC is unable to adequately defend his position, when he is called out for misrepresenting another persons position, he hides behind his bodyguards. I’ll tell you what. I challenge DC to a debate on this, just him and I, without hiding behind his royal guard. Of course, he will refuse, because he is wholly unable to defend his position and depends on numbers of his gang to dogpile on his opponent

Let’s see if DC is adequate to stand alone and defend his position

@Macabeus ...I want to apologize for my OCD comment , to be honest , after seeing @VCO post , it made me feel bad...
Please accept my apology , it was not kind , nor called for , I on this time did allow my flesh to take over , nothing Godly about it at all , I am truly sorry for my foolish remark...xox...

 

[BillG]

Do I care if you respond to me?

NO

Do I care if you put me on ignore?

No

Do I care if you give me negative points?

No

In case you guys didn't know it, this is not a popularity contest. If you are here for a popularity contest, you are sowing to the flesh, and building wood, hay, and stubble

So in a sense you and DC are the same.
Neither of you are here for a popularity contest.
Both of you are here to preach what you think is right.

With it comes the positive and the negative reactions.

Discussing is the aim, but in order to discuss we must listen.
If we do not then we cannot discuss.
If after discussing there is disagreement then we must agree to disagree.
I have done this myself with a few on here, including DC, EG, VCO and you.

EG himself said earlier about his disagreements with DC.
Something along the lines of "We disagree, as brothers (in the flesh) we trade blows, then go out for a cool one and a steak"
I have seen VCO and DC disagree yet still discuss and say along the lines off "You are wrong"
Yet they still discuss and also agree on certain points.

I have disagreed with certain people on here, but I still consider them brothers/sisters in Jesus.

In fact Peter and Paul disagreed. Harsh words I assume.

As you say wood, hay and stubble.

Jesus will judge that and if found wanting it will be burned up but we will still be saved.

He will look at the motives from the heart.

God bless you brother.

 

[BillG]

In love we accept each other regardless of our interpretation of the other.
Grow from Phileo to Agape.

Jesus took Peter through this process, and Peter walked with him.
Let's aspire to that.

 

[Macabeus]

So in a sense you and DC are the same.
Neither of you are here for a popularity contest.
Both of you are here to preach what you think is right.

With it comes the positive and the negative reactions.

Discussing is the aim, but in order to discuss we must listen.
If we do not then we cannot discuss.
If after discussing there is disagreement then we must agree to disagree.
I have done this myself with a few on here, including DC, EG, VCO and you.

EG himself said earlier about his disagreements with DC.
Something along the lines of "We disagree, as brothers (in the flesh) we trade blows, then go out for a cool one and a steak"
I have seen VCO and DC disagree yet still discuss and say along the lines off "You are wrong"
Yet they still discuss and also agree on certain points.

I have disagreed with certain people on here, but I still consider them brothers/sisters in Jesus.

In fact Peter and Paul disagreed. Harsh words I assume.

As you say wood, hay and stubble.

Jesus will judge that and if found wanting it will be burned up but we will still be saved.

He will look at the motives from the heart.

God bless you brother.

Thank you for your post.

 

[Macabeus]

So in a sense you and DC are the same.
Neither of you are here for a popularity contest.
Both of you are here to preach what you think is right.

With it comes the positive and the negative reactions.

Discussing is the aim, but in order to discuss we must listen.
If we do not then we cannot discuss.
If after discussing there is disagreement then we must agree to disagree.
I have done this myself with a few on here, including DC, EG, VCO and you.

EG himself said earlier about his disagreements with DC.
Something along the lines of "We disagree, as brothers (in the flesh) we trade blows, then go out for a cool one and a steak"
I have seen VCO and DC disagree yet still discuss and say along the lines off "You are wrong"
Yet they still discuss and also agree on certain points.

I have disagreed with certain people on here, but I still consider them brothers/sisters in Jesus.

In fact Peter and Paul disagreed. Harsh words I assume.

As you say wood, hay and stubble.

Jesus will judge that and if found wanting it will be burned up but we will still be saved.

He will look at the motives from the heart.

God bless you brother.

I can deal with disagreements. But when people start name calling (dense as lead) and misrepresenting what I said, that is inappropriate and will be addressed.

 

[BillG]

Thank you for your post. Hopefully, there will be no more insults slung around. I will not be the one to initiate it if it happens.

What is interesting, well for me anyway.
Is that for cultures there are ways of interaction.

For me being born in the worst place in Glasgow (The Gorbals in Scotland) to say someone is a w####r is not actually offensive if the dialogue is not aggressive with intent to hurt.

It's just the language.
So we can react to words based on our culture and the experience of it, but if it's different from our experience or unusual to our culture we either get upset or raise an eyebrow.

I have learned to overcome that.

I remember when speaking to someone who I was discipling.
When I was speaking the truth about how much God loves him as much as he loves Jesus their response was along the lines off "You are talking shit"

The thing is that was his experience of love "Shit"

That did not bother me, but what did we my thoughts "Shit is a rude word"
It goes beyond the words and we need to look beyond that because that is their words of communication.

 

[BillG]

I can deal with disagreements. But when people start name calling (dense as lead) and misrepresenting what I said, that is inappropriate and will be addressed.

Read the post I just posted. Hopefully it will help.

Maybe dense as lead is saying that what I am trying to say is not getting through to you.

I remember in my life, I won't go into the details but God said to me "Bill what part of us are you not getting?

Now he could have said "Bill you are dense as lead"
The issue is the same.

Now if he said "You are dense as lead" I probably would have had a meltdown.

But if he said "You are thick as shit" I would have listened.

 

[Macabeus]

I would like to see someone offer a rebuttal to the statement below, without ad hominems or misrepresentations or personal attacks. Just attack the argument below, if you are able. I am sure that you will not be able to, because the interpretation below is based on rules of interpretation.

1 John 3:10 sums up what John is talking about in 1 John 3:6-9

1 John 3:10- 10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

No two natures in the believer. That is in Romans and Galatians, but not here. 1 John 3:6-10 is talking about two different sorts of people. Those who are born of God and those who aren't. Those who are children of God and because of the new nature practice righteousness, and those who are not born of God, and because they don't have a new nature practice sin. Nothing about two natures. Except only one nature of a Christian and one nature of a non-Christian. So simple, a child can understand, if one only reads the passage in context, without goggles of their own presupposition and tradition.

Not even Paul taught such a duality. He taught two natures, but not that one nature goes one way and we go another. He taught that we have two natures and we choose which nature to follow. If you live after the flesh, you will die, but if you put to death the deeds of the flesh, you shall live. And in another place, they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with it's affections and lusts. And in another place, walk after the Spirit and you will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.

So if Paul were to exegete 1 John 3, I am confident that he would not transpose the two natures teaching, taking them from one context and moving them to another (to 1 John 3) where there is no mention whatsoever of two natures. He would agree with 1 John 3:10 that says that verses 6-9 are speaking of a distinction between those who are of God and those who are not, ie- those who have been born of God and those who have not. This is the only interpretation the CONTEXT allows for.

Verse 10 shows that clearly and plainly

 

[UnderGrace]

if you think how a person behaves has ANYTHJING to do with their salvation, which you do, then you are pushing a saved by grace, kept saved by doing good works, or salvation proven by good works, then that is legalism, plan and simple.

* not of yourself, a gift of God.

Boy, I have been writing this over again !! Amen and Amen!!!

gb9 Thank you!!

While I agree completely I would just add that God can chasten and discipline.... I wonder though if people can resist that too??

I think they can but I am not sure??

 

[Macabeus]

Boy, I have been writing this over again !! Amen and Amen!!!

gb9 Thank you!!

While I agree completely I would just add that God can chasten and discipline.... I wonder though if people can resist that too??

I think they can but I am not sure??

Too bad his and your whole argument is a strawman. I never said works had anything to do with our salvation. I have repeatedly said works follow salvation. Not saved by works, saved unto good works. Same Gospel Paul preached.

Acts 26:20- But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

True repentance and turning to God leads to works meet for repentance. Salvation then works follow is the Pauline model, and the model of all the disciples.

Titus 2:11-15- For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

Ephesians 2:10- For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Titus 3:8- This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

 

[Macabeus]

now, I see what you are saying here.

one of the things my church teaches that we are to do for others what God through Christ did for us.

we are to " one another one another", if that makes any sense...

GB9 forgot that I clarified my position and we reached an agreement in this post. Now he is back to calling me a legalist. But my position did not change. It is that his position wavers back and forth.

 

[UnderGrace]

works follow salvation.

If they do not follow is the person still saved?

 

[Macabeus]

Boy, I have been writing this over again !! Amen and Amen!!!

gb9 Thank you!!

now, I see what you are saying here.

one of the things my church teaches that we are to do for others what God through Christ did for us.

we are to " one another one another", if that makes any sense...

My position has not changed.

 

[Macabeus]

If they do not follow is the person still saved?

1 John 3:7 indicates that your hypothetical situation does not exist, UNLESS a person dies very soon after conversion. In that case, yes they are still saved.

 

[Macabeus]

Boy, I have been writing this over again !! Amen and Amen!!!

gb9 Thank you!!

While I agree completely I would just add that God can chasten and discipline.... I wonder though if people can resist that too??

I think they can but I am not sure??

Should we be emphasizing and focusing on "we are so secure that we cannot lose our salvation no matter how much we sin" or should we be emphasizing and focusing on "what is God's intention for me now that I am saved with such a great and perfect and finished salvation?

I think the latter choice is far better and more productive and healthy

gb9 said: in response

now, I see what you are saying here.

one of the things my church teaches that we are to do for others what God through Christ did for us.

we are to " one another one another", if that makes any sense...

 

[Macabeus]

If they do not follow is the person still saved?

Since you thought my last post was funny, (I didn't know the Bible was so funny) I will present another answer.

To not do good works whatsoever is failure to love. (see 1 John 3:18)

True love is to love in deed, not just in tongue. That would be good works, (1 John 3:18)

We know that we have passed from death unto life because we love. (1 John 3:14)

 

[Macabeus]

If they do not follow is the person still saved?

1 John 3:11-19We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not hisbrother abideth in death. Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassionfrom him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.
And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before him.

a. We know that we have passed from death unto life because we love the brethren.
b. Biblical love is love in deeds, not just in word. ie Good works
c. Hereby (by our love) we know that we are of the truth

 

[dcontroversal]

There is no time restraint on the following verse.........

But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness

 

[UnderGrace]

Since you thought my last post was funny, (I didn't know the Bible was so funny) I will present another answer.

To not do good works whatsoever is failure to love. (see 1 John 3:18)

True love is to love in deed, not just in tongue. That would be good works, (1 John 3:18)

We know that we have passed from death unto life because we love. (1 John 3:14)

I was laughing at the fact that you went back to a verse that has been a source of disagreement....lighten up Mr. M. is just seemed a little ironic

 

[dcontroversal]

Transpose- transfer to a different place or context.

DC transferred Paul's teaching of the two natures to a different context, ie he transferred Paul's teaching of the two natures to 1 John 3. My statement about him doing that was absolutely correct.

No it wasn't deceiver.......I made a plain and clear blanket statement about what JESUS, PAUL and the bible teaches....YOU took it and embellished it to accuse me of applying it to JOHN....