Would this be sufficient for Salvation?

[darby]

Thank you Michael, you have articulated the idea well.  I still want to go back and harp on the little analogy about breathing; you inhale AND exhale.  

[michael_legna]

I was also thinking about the THIEF ON THE CROSS. All he could do was BELIEVE on who the Lord was.

I have covered this before but the thief on the cross did all those things covered by the verses I referenced earlier.

The following he did directly (for the rest of his short life).

Do the Will of the Father
Love God and Mankind
Keep the Commandments
Repent  
Be Humble
Suffer Persecution for Righteousness
Lose Attachment to Our Earthly Life
Follow Christ
Live a Godly Life
Be Converted
Emulate the Saints
Obey the Gospel
Control Our Words
Endure or Continue
Work Out Our Salvation

The following he did by intent or desire.

Eat His Body and Drink His Blood
Be Baptized

The Eunch also was told to just BELIEVE WITH THE HEART.

Actually you added th word JUST, but more to the point we need to recognize what it mean to believe.  This conversion of the eunuch was after he had the message of the Gospel (that he could not understand on his own through sola scriptura) explained to him, and he had to believe with all his heart, not just faith but to truly believe in Him you must accept His message into your heart, internalize it make it part of your life.  It is not mere belief.  We also of course see that even the eunuch saw the necessity of Baptism (another work we are directed to do).  If it was strictly and solely by faith the eunuch would not have bothered with baptism.

[aw]

Uh oh! Please do not tell me that the eunch's salvation exhibits baptismal regeneration? If you are, I will remind that there are no less than 146 passages of scripture that link salvation with believe/faith only- John 3:15 and 5:24 for starters. The folks who believe in baptismal regeneration, such as catholics, jehovah's witnesses, and the church of christ will usually respond by going down some rabbit trails on the meaning of the word FAITH. Those trails lead to zilch.

BTW, I also hope you do not believe that the cc catechism and/or oral tradition are necessary for salvation. People who do are as lost as the "goose in the whirlwind!"

aw

[darby]

aw,

Faith is a choice, and choosing is an effort.  Pretty simple.  Faith isn't robotic; it's an effort made by humans endowed with free will.

"The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart"

Luke 6:45  

[michael_legna]

Uh oh! Please do not tell me that the eunch's salvation exhibits baptismal regeneration? If you are, I will remind that there are no less than 146 passages of scripture that link salvation with believe/faith only- John 3:15 and 5:24 for starters.

I would love to see these 146 passages you claim teach faith only as I have done extensive word studies of the scriptures for all the variants of salvation, save, saved, saves, kingdom of heaven, kingdom of God, justification, justifies, justified, condemned etc to see just what the Bible teaches and I have not seen a single verse that is properly interpreted that way.

I am serious - I really want to see your list.  I want to be certain I have not missed anything.

The folks who believe in baptismal regeneration, such as catholics, jehovah's witnesses, and the church of christ will usually respond by going down some rabbit trails on the meaning of the word FAITH. Those trails lead to zilch.

Nice little attempt at guilt by association, but I am sorry it is not a valid argument.

I guess your saying it leads to zilch prove it leads to zilch!?  NOT!

I will need more than you word to change the opinion that one has to have a proper understanding of true living faith for salvation before I abandon the idea.

BTW, I also hope you do not believe that the cc catechism and/or oral tradition are necessary for salvation.

No the Catechism is just an official statement in summary form of the doctrines of the Catholic Church.  The only way it is necessary for salvation is in that it expresses the truth contained in the Word of God which is how we learn about salvation.  The Sacred Tradition (since it too is the Word of God) is another way besides the Holy Scriptures that we learn of salvation.  It was after all the basis for the selection of the canon of the New Testament so it is partly responsible for us having the Scriptures.  So it too is necessary for salvation in the same way as the scriptures, though it is possible to be saved without ever having read the scriptures if one is witnessed to properly.

People who do are as lost as the "goose in the whirlwind!"

Again an interesting personal opinion - but one hopes you do not expect us to take your word alone on this matter.

I would ask you again - how do you see those verses I referenced?  What is your interpretation of each and how do they fit in your understanding of a salvation through faith alone - with no role for works what-so-ever?   Can you make them fit your doctrine of salvation through faith alone or do you just have to ignore them?

I'll make a deal with you - you provide me the 146 verses you claim show salvation by faith only and I will offer an alternative interpretation to them for you to consider.  In return you can offer me an alternative interpretation to the 46 I provided to you showing how they can be made to fit a faith alone doctrine.  That way I am not over burdening you with too much to do - at least in comparison to myself.  Maybe one of us will learn something.  Interested?

Here are the ones I referenced.

Do the Will of the Father
Matt 7:21  
Rom 2:13

Love God and Mankind
Luke 10:25-28  
Mat 25:31-46  

Keep the Commandments
Mat 19:16-17  
Mar 10:17-19  
Mat 5:19-29  
1John 3:15  
Luke 18:18-22

Repent  
2Co 7:10  

Eat His Body and Drink His Blood
John 6:54

Be Humble
Matt 5:3  
Luke 18:9-14  

Suffer Persecution for Righteousness
Matt 5:10  
   
Lose Attachment to Our Earthly Life
Matt 16:25  
Mark 8:35  
Luke 9:24  
Luke 17:33  
John 12:25
Mar 10:28-30  

Follow Christ
John 10:27-28  

Live a Godly Life
2Peter 2:6  
Rom 8:1  

Be Converted
Mat 18:3-4  
Mat 19:14  
James 5:20  
1John 3:20-21  

Emulate the Saints
Rom 11:14  

Obey the Gospel
1 Peter 1:2  
1 Peter 4:17-18  
2 Thes 1:8
Heb 5:9  
James 1:21  

Control Our Words
Matt 12:37  

Endure or Continue
Matt 10:22  
Matt 24:13  
Mark 13:13
1 Tim 2:15
1Ti 4:16
Rom 2:7  

Work Out Our Salvation
1 Tim 6:12  
1Ti 6:19  
Phi 2:12  

Be Baptized
1 Peter 3:20-21  
Mark 16:16  
John 3:5  

[aw]

I gave 2- John 3:16 and 5:24. "For by grace are ye saved THROUGH dfaith and that not of yourselves it is the GIFT of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Eph 2:8-10)

Let's see your response to these 3 before I go to the trouble of posting 143 others as, like I stated, the proponents of the false doctrine of baptismal regeneration always have some thrological rabbit trails they try and lead people down. One such trail is the continuous action aspect of the word BELIEVE, and thus at some point later on they must go through the ceremony of water baptism for salvation. A completely invalid argument. This is easily refuted by the past tense HATH usage; eg., HATH passed from death unto life by believing.

Additionally, please do not attempt to use such passages as Acts 2:38 and argumentation over the preposition EIS. Just address the above as a starting point plase.

aw

aw

aw

[Sower]

We also of course see that even the eunuch saw the necessity of Baptism (another work we are directed to do).  If it was strictly and solely by faith the eunuch would not have bothered with baptism.

This is how Roman Catholic fallacy began and continues. The reason why the eunuch was baptized is because he was already "a new creature [creation] in Christ" and saw that baptism by immersion in water would testify to others what he had ALREADY experienced -- the new birth.

Philip also had [unlike modern evangelists] preached THE WHOLE GOSPEL, which is repent and be converted, believe and be baptized, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thoud SHALT be saved, he that believeth on the Son HATH everlasting life".  So Philip had repeated to the eunuch what the Lord had told the apostles "He that believeth AND IS BAPTIZED shall be saved" (Mk. 16:16).

In this statement the Lord was NOT cancelling justification by faith (which is taught in great detail in the book of Romans and Galatians) but the necessity of water baptism for those who are new creatures in Christ: "Buried in the likeness of His death, RAISED TO WALK IN NEWNESS OF LIFE" (Rom. 6:4). Baptism is death to the uncoverted life, and affirmation of the new life in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The Roman Catholic Church still teaches the FALSE DOCTRINE OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION.  Do you believe it and teach it, Michael Legna?

[michael_legna]

I gave 2- John 3:16 and 5:24. "For by grace are ye saved THROUGH dfaith and that not of yourselves it is the GIFT of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Eph 2:8-10)

John 3:16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 5:24  Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

These two verses are easily interpreted to fit into a doctrine of accepting the gift through faith and works.  Notice both say we have to believe, but they do not say what we have to believe.  For instance we would both agree that they do not mean to imply that we must merely believe that a carpenter named Jesus once lived on earth.  There is some hints at what needs to be believed.  In John 3:16 we see we must believe Jesus is the Son of God, and we have to believe Jesus was given (sacrificed) for us.  John 5:24 adds to these saying we have to hear (understand and take to heart incorporating it into our lives) Jesus’ word and believe in God the Father who sent Him.  So we see that even just these two verses show we cannot accept the concept of belief as mere faith in Christ in just His role as sacrificial lamb, we have much more to do to have true belief.  These verses alone show that and when we consider the rest of scripture we see that true belief entails so much more than  mere mental assent to the sacrificial act.


Eph 2:8-10  For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:  Not of works, lest any man should boast.   For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

This verse is brought up often and when interpreted in isolation it sounds impressive.  But when you consider it in a consistent manner with all the other scriptures, you see that the verse does not refer to faith in isolation from works of the spirit of the law.  Works of the spirit of the law are based on love and are never done in an attempt to merit the gift, but to show our love for God.  But rather it talks about faith in isolation from works of the letter of the law in an attempt to merit grace and salvation.

If you read these verses carefully, you will see they are contrasting WORKS with GRACE.  They are not contrasting WORKS with FAITH.  We are saved by GRACE.  Faith is included to show that it is how we accept the free gift of grace and thus are saved.  This faith is once again an active faith.  Our works (those we might direct at earning our own salvation – which cannot be done) are then contrasted to grace.  Those works are not a part of the process of salvation, as we cannot merit salvation and thus we cannot boast of them.   But we would be wrong to boast of our faith as well, as it could never be strong enough to save us either, without the gift having been offered.  The works that are part of salvation (as much a part as faith) in that they are part of the proper acceptance of the gift are the works of love that Christ commands us to do.

Yes the gift is freely offered.  We must still accept the gift.  The acceptance of the gift is by faith and works together.  As James points out a faith without works is a dead faith and it cannot save.

The correct way to interpret this verse is that we are saved by grace, we accept that grace through faith (an active belief that includes works) the grace is a free gift in that we cannot merit it no matter how strong our belief is or how good our works are.  It is not of works (meaning a fulfillment of the letter of the law in an attempt to merit salvation) so we have no right to boast.  You will find that you can interpret all of Paul’s supposed anti-works writings in this way and thus provide a much more consistent interpretation of the Gospel message as it appears elsewhere from Christ and James for starters.

Let's see your response to these 3 before I go to the trouble of posting 143 others,

Wow that really is lazy of you.  All you need to do is type out 146 references and you won’t even do that to witness to others!?  That sure sounds like a lot of trouble, might take you all of ten minutes.  No wonder you have not put in the couple of whole hours it might take to offer alternative interpretations to the verses I referenced.

like I stated, the proponents of the false doctrine of baptismal regeneration always have some thrological rabbit trails they try and lead people down. One such trail is the continuous action aspect of the word BELIEVE, and thus at some point later on they must go through the ceremony of water baptism for salvation. A completely invalid argument. This is easily refuted by the past tense HATH usage; eg., HATH passed from death unto life by believing.

If that was the only argument in isolation it would not be enough but there are so many more points to consider as well as all the verses in scripture that tell us we have to do certain works to properly accept the gift.  Verses I have provided and you continue to ignore since you cannot make God’s word fit your doctrine.

Additionally, please do not attempt to use such passages as Acts 2:38 and argumentation over the preposition EIS. Just address the above as a starting point plase.

No I will save that discussion until we are discussing Baptism specifically.
 

[michael_legna]

This is how Roman Catholic fallacy began and continues. The reason why the eunuch was baptized is because he was already "a new creature [creation] in Christ" and saw that baptism by immersion in water would testify to others what he had ALREADY experienced -- the new birth.

First it is not a fallacy just because you label it so.  Second there is much more support for the issue of Baptism than this one discussion of the eunuch so it did not start here.  It actually started before the scriptures were ever written and hundreds of years before the canon (determining which writings would be included in scripture) was decided on by the Catholic Church.  So it started in the Sacred Tradition – those teaching passed on directly from the Apostles, so we know this is how they viewed the issue of Baptism – that it was one of great importance and necessity in relation to salvation.

The idea that Baptism is a testimony to others is more of the fruit inspector nonsense that makes men into judgers of men, and has no basis in scripture and certainly none here.

Philip also had [unlike modern evangelists] preached THE WHOLE GOSPEL, which is repent and be converted, believe and be baptized, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thoud SHALT be saved, he that believeth on the Son HATH everlasting life".  So Philip had repeated to the eunuch what the Lord had told the apostles "He that believeth AND IS BAPTIZED shall be saved" (Mk. 16:16).

Yes Philip preached the entire Gospel including repentance (which is works) since it is a turning around of ones life, not just a remorse or a turning around of ones mind.   Conversion is a process so it too is an indicator of a continual daily picking up His cross and following Him – so it too is works.  And you have the last part right Philip simply repeats (in summary form the issues facing the eunuch – believe and be Baptized – believe with your whole heart – internalize the message of the Gospel – make it part of your life and be Baptized.

In this statement the Lord was NOT cancelling justification by faith (which is taught in great detail in the book of Romans and Galatians) but the necessity of water baptism for those who are new creatures in Christ: "Buried in the likeness of His death, RAISED TO WALK IN NEWNESS OF LIFE" (Rom. 6:4). Baptism is death to the uncoverted life, and affirmation of the new life in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Yes justification by faith is taught in Romans and Galatians, but justification by faith alone is not.  

If the Lord is teaching the necessity (as you admit He is) of Baptism then it must be necessary for something.  Something must be lacking or taken away if we do not get baptized.   If we do not bring death to the uncoverted life through Baptism and if we do not affirm the new life then what happens?  If we are not Baptized what do we miss out on?   What is it necessary for if not salvation?

Can you answer these three questions?

The Roman Catholic Church still teaches the FALSE DOCTRINE OF BAPTISMAL REGENERATION.  Do you believe it and teach it, Michael Legna?

Yes I still believe it and teach it, because the scriptures teach it.   So it is not a false doctrine and your saying so without putting out any effort to support this personal contention of yours does nothing to prove it is.

[Little John]

"Accepting the message of salvation and devoting ourselves to God through Christ and being baptized in water is only the beginning of our exercise of faith.  It is only the beginning of our obedience to God. It sets us on the way to everlasting life, but it does not mean our final salvation".

GOD BLESS

[aw]

I gave 2- John 3:16 and 5:24. "For by grace are ye saved THROUGH dfaith and that not of yourselves it is the GIFT of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Eph 2:8-10)

John 3:16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

John 5:24  Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

These two verses are easily interpreted to fit into a doctrine of accepting the gift through faith and works.  Notice both say we have to believe, but they do not say what we have to believe.  For instance we would both agree that they do not mean to imply that we must merely believe that a carpenter named Jesus once lived on earth.  There is some hints at what needs to be believed.  In John 3:16 we see we must believe Jesus is the Son of God, and we have to believe Jesus was given (sacrificed) for us.  John 5:24 adds to these saying we have to hear (understand and take to heart incorporating it into our lives) Jesus’ word and believe in God the Father who sent Him.  So we see that even just these two verses show we cannot accept the concept of belief as mere faith in Christ in just His role as sacrificial lamb, we have much more to do to have true belief.  These verses alone show that and when we consider the rest of scripture we see that true belief entails so much more than  mere mental assent to the sacrificial act.


Eph 2:8-10  For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:  Not of works, lest any man should boast.   For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

This verse is brought up often and when interpreted in isolation it sounds impressive.  But when you consider it in a consistent manner with all the other scriptures, you see that the verse does not refer to faith in isolation from works of the spirit of the law.  Works of the spirit of the law are based on love and are never done in an attempt to merit the gift, but to show our love for God.  But rather it talks about faith in isolation from works of the letter of the law in an attempt to merit grace and salvation.

If you read these verses carefully, you will see they are contrasting WORKS with GRACE.  They are not contrasting WORKS with FAITH.  We are saved by GRACE.  Faith is included to show that it is how we accept the free gift of grace and thus are saved.  This faith is once again an active faith.  Our works (those we might direct at earning our own salvation – which cannot be done) are then contrasted to grace.  Those works are not a part of the process of salvation, as we cannot merit salvation and thus we cannot boast of them.   But we would be wrong to boast of our faith as well, as it could never be strong enough to save us either, without the gift having been offered.  The works that are part of salvation (as much a part as faith) in that they are part of the proper acceptance of the gift are the works of love that Christ commands us to do.

Yes the gift is freely offered.  We must still accept the gift.  The acceptance of the gift is by faith and works together.  As James points out a faith without works is a dead faith and it cannot save.

The correct way to interpret this verse is that we are saved by grace, we accept that grace through faith (an active belief that includes works) the grace is a free gift in that we cannot merit it no matter how strong our belief is or how good our works are.  It is not of works (meaning a fulfillment of the letter of the law in an attempt to merit salvation) so we have no right to boast.  You will find that you can interpret all of Paul’s supposed anti-works writings in this way and thus provide a much more consistent interpretation of the Gospel message as it appears elsewhere from Christ and James for starters.

Let's see your response to these 3 before I go to the trouble of posting 143 others,

Wow that really is lazy of you.  All you need to do is type out 146 references and you won’t even do that to witness to others!?  That sure sounds like a lot of trouble, might take you all of ten minutes.  No wonder you have not put in the couple of whole hours it might take to offer alternative interpretations to the verses I referenced.

like I stated, the proponents of the false doctrine of baptismal regeneration always have some thrological rabbit trails they try and lead people down. One such trail is the continuous action aspect of the word BELIEVE, and thus at some point later on they must go through the ceremony of water baptism for salvation. A completely invalid argument. This is easily refuted by the past tense HATH usage; eg., HATH passed from death unto life by believing.

If that was the only argument in isolation it would not be enough but there are so many more points to consider as well as all the verses in scripture that tell us we have to do certain works to properly accept the gift.  Verses I have provided and you continue to ignore since you cannot make God’s word fit your doctrine.

Additionally, please do not attempt to use such passages as Acts 2:38 and argumentation over the preposition EIS. Just address the above as a starting point plase.

No I will save that discussion until we are discussing Baptism specifically.
 

[michael_legna]

Surely you jest? Its 100% belief "IN HIM!" n/t

...and yet Christ Himself told us it was not in one of the very verses you asked me to interpret.

John 5:24  Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Notice how it refers to believeth on him that sent me in John 5:24.  That "Him" is not The Son but it is requiring belief in God the Father who sent Him.  That is why us appropriating the alien righteousness of Christ for our own, being merely imputed righteousness; does not begin to cover the instructions given with regard to justification and salvation.  Three of your supposed strongest verses to support your man made doctrine don't even say what you think they say - and still you ignore the ones I offered which actually say the opposite of what your doctrine espouses.

So you are the one who is either jesting or just not reading the Word of God carefully enough if you missed that.  

[aw]

Come on Michael. Are you calling into question the TRINITY now as well? The Father and the SON are ONE and the Law of Procession is always operative.

I don't know where you are getting your theology(it sounds like some catholic school) but it riddled with misconceptions and errors. I say this not as a personal attack on you, but for your edification and admonition.

aw

[michael_legna]

Come on Michael. Are you calling into question the TRINITY now as well? The Father and the SON are ONE and the Law of Procession is always operative.

I do not deny the Trinity, but the whole point to it is that there are three person's in one God.  So there are distinctions between believing in the Father and the Son and believing in the Holy Spirit.  Jesus Himself makes this point in Matthew.

Matt 12:31-32  Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.  And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

We see here that you can blaspheme against the Son without blaspheming against the Holy Spirit and vice versa, that is because they are separate persons in the same God.  It appears you are the one who does not understand or accept the Trinity.

I don't know where you are getting your theology(it sounds like some catholic school) but it riddled with misconceptions and errors. I say this not as a personal attack on you, but for your edification and admonition.

And yet you have yet to show me a single misconception or error - unless I were to simply take your word for it.  

Try providing some proof along with your claims if you are truly concerned with my edification and admonishment, for as it is now your simple ranting claims of your opinions authority over mine is a personal attack.

I would still love to see these 146 passages you claim teach faith only because I have done alot of study on the subject and I have not seen a single verse that is properly interpreted that way.

I would also like to know if you ever intend on providing alternative interpretations to the verse I showed so clearly say other things are required for a proper acceptance of the gift.  I would really like to see that you don't simply ignore the Word of God but can fit the verses into your doctrine some how.

[aw]

Any method you use to exegete the verse will result in one simple thing- BELIEVE the WORDS that Christ spoke. Christ is and was God, and for Him to instruct us to believe those words is the same as believing the Father. BELIEVE represents ALL that a person can do for salvation.

Let me clear this up for any lurkers or non-responding readers: 1. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. One hears or reads the gospel of the grace of God for salvation. (Romans 10:17) 2. This gospel is summarized in 1 Cor 15 as the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He died for our sins and was raised for our justification.3. One believes that with their whole heart. (Romans 10:10)

***THEY ARE BORN AGAIN***

It is BELIEVE/FAITH/TRUST in the PERSON of the Saviour of the World. It is not FAITH in FAITH but a PERSON. Believe on Him and you will be saved. If all that I knew was that He died for my sins and offered me eternal life as a free gift, and I believed that with my heart, I would be saved.

The point with the 146 passages was to emphasize that salvation is never contingent upon anything but believing in CHRIST WITH THE HEART.

aw