Saved by faith alone?
- Thread starter Lamar
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Scripture explains that the sower in the parable is God but that only tells us who owned the seed and disseminates it.
Realistically, no sower will ever walk up on completely good soil without having to break the ground and 'create' it. Roadside is not conducive to growing crop because it's too often trodden upon, so the sower would have to post a "stay off the grass" sign, or the vultures will only consider it a buffet table. And the rocks will hold water so seeds might sprout but they hold the seat up away from the reaching any nutrients in the soil and have nothing they can actually grab onto. And in the case of those growing among the thorns which we are told are cares of the world, that is useful in providing reader some horticultural insight to 'do not worry,' which would help in understanding exactly what would need to be pulled in order to clear that particular patch so that it is more conducive to growing crops.
In another post, I speculated that the man that pleaded, "Lord, I believe. Help my unbelief," might have recognized the rocks in his heart and so was asking for help to remove the rocks out of the soil of his heart. I'd imagined that he had been 'often trodden down' by his child's condition.
IOW, he received the word and asked for strength in doing the work of removing the rocks so that the seed could flourish.
Realistically, no sower will ever walk up on completely good soil without having to break the ground and 'create' it. Roadside is not conducive to growing crop because it's too often trodden upon, so the sower would have to post a "stay off the grass" sign, or the vultures will only consider it a buffet table. And the rocks will hold water so seeds might sprout but they hold the seat up away from the reaching any nutrients in the soil and have nothing they can actually grab onto. And in the case of those growing among the thorns which we are told are cares of the world, that is useful in providing reader some horticultural insight to 'do not worry,' which would help in understanding exactly what would need to be pulled in order to clear that particular patch so that it is more conducive to growing crops.
In another post, I speculated that the man that pleaded, "Lord, I believe. Help my unbelief," might have recognized the rocks in his heart and so was asking for help to remove the rocks out of the soil of his heart. I'd imagined that he had been 'often trodden down' by his child's condition.
IOW, he received the word and asked for strength in doing the work of removing the rocks so that the seed could flourish.
-
1
- Show all
Some good insights, but the parable is what it is. The seed is spread over every soil. That's the great commission...Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel... The condition of the soil determines the success of the sowing.
Parables generally come in groups because they deal with subjects that are broad in scope, and have many aspects. Thus, parables aren't designed to teach every aspect of a topic. Rather, they amplify an aspect or 2 on a given subject. To speak dogmatically from a particular parable will generally lead to problems. But if we stick with what is emphasized, we can garner fuller understanding.
So far, farmers and mystical self-preparing soils have been introduced. These are assumed into the text.
Parables generally come in groups because they deal with subjects that are broad in scope, and have many aspects. Thus, parables aren't designed to teach every aspect of a topic. Rather, they amplify an aspect or 2 on a given subject. To speak dogmatically from a particular parable will generally lead to problems. But if we stick with what is emphasized, we can garner fuller understanding.
So far, farmers and mystical self-preparing soils have been introduced. These are assumed into the text.
-
1
- Show all
We were discussing the erroneous assumption that James was using the term "dead faith" as a label for people who only claimed faith.
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.
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.
I don't disagree with this overall premise, but it isn't what the parable emphasizes. The parable would be written differently if this is what was in view in the parable.
The emphasis is on God sharing the gospel with the world, and the different outcomes based on which type of soil it falls on.
The emphasis is on God sharing the gospel with the world, and the different outcomes based on which type of soil it falls on.
-
1
- Show all
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...?
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...?