Conundrum: Not saved by works. Condemned by them?

[jfrog]

How is it that our works condemn us if they cannot save us?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by jfrog

How is it that our works condemn us if they cannot save us?

Great question!

What is it about our works that brings condemnation? It is the fact that we have transgressed the law, because 'sin is the transgression of the law'. So then sin = crime. Once we have that basic understanding, the question becomes solvable.

Imagine a person commits various crimes, and are then caught. They go to court. They are charged with the crimes they have committed. Suppose they plead 'Oh but wait! I obey the speed limits, I obey this and that law,' etc. The court will still find them guilty, because their obedience to some laws does not overcome their violation of other laws: they are still GUILTY CRIMINALS.

Now, suppose the court grants them a pardon upon condition of repentance. In order for the pardon to be granted, certain other requirements must be met - not by the accused, but by the government itself, to ensure the system of law and order doesn't break down and result in anarchy by the offering of pardon - and let's say they are met. So all that remains is for the accused to accept the offer of pardon and return to being a productive citizen.

Now, their works (obedience to the laws) are not what procured their pardon and their escape from punishment - that was an act of clemency by the government in granting pardon to them. But suppose they return to a life of crime... does their pardon cover their new crimes? Of course not, so then they would be found in violation of the terms of their pardon (repentance), would be found to be criminals, and would suffer the penalty of the law.

Thankfully, God is even more merciful than that, in that he allows backsliders who were once pardoned, and who fell back into crime, to repent and be restored to the condition of pardon they had received.

But, we can see that one's actions or deeds can indeed lead to condemnation, and yet still not be sufficient for justification.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Great question!

What is it about our works that brings condemnation? It is the fact that we have transgressed the law, because 'sin is the transgression of the law'. So then sin = crime. Once we have that basic understanding, the question becomes solvable.

Imagine a person commits various crimes, and are then caught. They go to court. They are charged with the crimes they have committed. Suppose they plead 'Oh but wait! I obey the speed limits, I obey this and that law,' etc. The court will still find them guilty, because their obedience to some laws does not overcome their violation of other laws: they are still GUILTY CRIMINALS.

Now, suppose the court grants them a pardon upon condition of repentance. In order for the pardon to be granted, certain other requirements must be met - not by the accused, but by the government itself, to ensure the system of law and order doesn't break down and result in anarchy by the offering of pardon - and let's say they are met. So all that remains is for the accused to accept the offer of pardon and return to being a productive citizen.

Now, their works (obedience to the laws) are not what procured their pardon and their escape from punishment - that was an act of clemency by the government in granting pardon to them. But suppose they return to a life of crime... does their pardon cover their new crimes? Of course not, so then they would be found in violation of the terms of their pardon (repentance), would be found to be criminals, and would suffer the penalty of the law.

Thankfully, God is even more merciful than that, in that he allows backsliders who were once pardoned, and who fell back into crime, to repent and be restored to the condition of pardon they had received.

But, we can see that one's actions or deeds can indeed lead to condemnation, and yet still not be sufficient for justification.

I would think that your system should be seen as a system where good works save you. Sure you couldn't have become free without the pardon but you cannot stay free without the good works (aka not sinning).

So your system is works based. Even though there may be unlimited pardons offered. In the end all the pardon does is give you a fresh start to attempt to not sin again.

I would submit that good works in your system are necessary for salvation but not sufficient by their selves. I would also submit that unlimited pardons are not sufficient for salvation but only a necessary condition as well. Because without good works (aka not sinning) you would immediately be placed back in jail.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I would think that your system should be seen as a system where good works save you. Sure you couldn't have become free without the pardon but you cannot stay free without the good works (aka not sinning).

So your system is works based. Even though there may be unlimited pardons offered. In the end all the pardon does is give you a fresh start to attempt to not sin again.

I would submit that good works in your system are necessary for salvation but not sufficient by their selves. I would also submit that unlimited pardons are not sufficient for salvation but only a necessary condition as well. Because without good works (aka not sinning) you would immediately be placed back in jail.

So then you believe that a non-works based system would mean a person is saved regardless of whether they sin or not? So then a person can be pardoned, and continue in rebellion, and be fine?

So in other words, suppose a criminal lives a life of crime, then receives a pardon, and his sentence is set aside, his record is wiped clean, he gets a new chance with a clean slate. And suppose that person never stops his life of crime, but just continues robbing banks, molesting kids, running his pimp operation, uses his cell phone while driving through school zones, sells government secrets to foreign governments, etc. And it would be good, right, and 'gracious' for the government to say 'hey, we pardoned him, he's good to go!'

I submit that if that actually happened, you would object to the injustice and wrongfulness of such a government policy. Unless YOU were the unrepentant criminal in question, of course...

Obedience to God is a CONDITION of salvation, absolutely. But that doesn't mean 'saved by works'. Salvation includes both the receiving of a pardon for crimes committed, AND restoration of the (former) criminal to a lawful life.

BOTH of those are the act of God securing the voluntary cooperation of the individual. God issues the pardon, and imparts the power to live a holy, sanctified life unto God.

Now, in a truly 'saved by works' system, one would not even need a pardon. One would simply be acquitted in court of any wrongdoing, because one could point to their obedience to the laws as their defense. After all, if you are accused of crime, and you did not in fact break any laws, that is an affirmative defense.

But suppose you did indeed break the law, and are in fact a criminal. And receive a pardon. And from that moment on you never once break any single law whatsoever, but are a good upstanding citizen. The fact you are a free man is NOT 'because you obeyed the laws' nor are they because you do lots of charity work. It is because you were pardoned. And out of gratitude and thankfulness, you have been restored to being a law abiding and productive citizen.

The Bible teaches conditions for salvation, and they include the necessity of an Atonement (provided by Christ), and faith and repentance on the part of the one being saved. Repentance includes a return to full, present, obedience. A return to obedience is necessarily implied in the concept of repentance. Thus a person who does not return to obedience to God, has not repented, and does not truly have faith.

So then, what I have proposed is not a system of salvation by works, nor is it a system of 'keeping saved by works'. It is salvation by grace. The grace of God pardons the sinner, secures by the operation of the Spirit the sinner's faith and repentance, and maintains the believer's continued perseverance in holiness and righteousness and faith and steadfastness unto the end. Therefore, it is not salvation by works, which as the apostle Paul pointed out in a system of salvation by works the reward is reckoned as a matter of DEBT (you get what's coming to you, what is OWED to you). But true salvation is not a matter of debt. It is a matter of grace, the gift of God to people who in reality deserve to be locked up in jail and have the key thrown away.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Esaias

So then you believe that a non-works based system would mean a person is saved regardless of whether they sin or not? So then a person can be pardoned, and continue in rebellion, and be fine?

Yes that would be a non-works based system. You are saved regardless of what you do or don't do.

So in other words, suppose a criminal lives a life of crime, then receives a pardon, and his sentence is set aside, his record is wiped clean, he gets a new chance with a clean slate. And suppose that person never stops his life of crime, but just continues robbing banks, molesting kids, running his pimp operation, uses his cell phone while driving through school zones, sells government secrets to foreign governments, etc. And it would be good, right, and 'gracious' for the government to say 'hey, we pardoned him, he's good to go!'

that's my point. it is good for a man to be condemned by his works. Yet if he can be condemned by them then he can be saved by them.

In your example above what kept the man out of prison. Was it the pardon or was it hid good and law abiding works? It was both. Then man could not have been out of prison without either.

I submit that if that actually happened, you would object to the injustice and wrongfulness of such a government policy. Unless YOU were the unrepentant criminal in question, of course...

Of course, but isn't that my point? That we are saved by works and that if it were by pardon alone then it would be unjust?

Obedience to God is a CONDITION of salvation, absolutely. But that doesn't mean 'saved by works'. Salvation includes both the receiving of a pardon for crimes committed, AND restoration of the (former) criminal to a lawful life.

When salvation is conditional on works then it requires works (aka works based salvation).

BOTH of those are the act of God securing the voluntary cooperation of the individual. God issues the pardon, and imparts the power to live a holy, sanctified life unto God.

Totally agree. God is trying to ensure the individual does the good works and not the bad works.

Now, in a truly 'saved by works' system, one would not even need a pardon. One would simply be acquitted in court of any wrongdoing, because one could point to their obedience to the laws as their defense. After all, if you are accused of crime, and you did not in fact break any laws, that is an affirmative defense.

Any system that requires works is a works based system. I have not denied we needed a pardon. There is a system which requires pardon and works. We are both describing that system except you refuse to call a spade a spade.

But suppose you did indeed break the law, and are in fact a criminal. And receive a pardon. And from that moment on you never once break any single law whatsoever, but are a good upstanding citizen. The fact you are a free man is NOT 'because you obeyed the laws' nor are they because you do lots of charity work. It is because you were pardoned. And out of gratitude and thankfulness, you have been restored to being a law abiding and productive citizen.

Yes your freedom required a pardon. But that doesn't mean it did not require works as well. The simple proof is this. If you had broken the law after your pardon would you remain free? So then your freedom is contingent on two things, the pardon and your keeping the laws.

The Bible teaches conditions for salvation, and they include the necessity of an Atonement (provided by Christ), and faith and repentance on the part of the one being saved. Repentance includes a return to full, present, obedience. A return to obedience is necessarily implied in the concept of repentance. Thus a person who does not return to obedience to God, has not repented, and does not truly have faith.

So Pardon and Works? Your describing it. Can you actually call it by name?

So then, what I have proposed is not a system of salvation by works, nor is it a system of 'keeping saved by works'. It is salvation by grace. The grace of God pardons the sinner, secures by the operation of the Spirit the sinner's faith and repentance, and maintains the believer's continued perseverance in holiness and righteousness and faith and steadfastness unto the end. Therefore, it is not salvation by works, which as the apostle Paul pointed out in a system of salvation by works the reward is reckoned as a matter of DEBT (you get what's coming to you, what is OWED to you). But true salvation is not a matter of debt. It is a matter of grace, the gift of God to people who in reality deserve to be locked up in jail and have the key thrown away.

It is a system of pardon and works. Both are required. But any system that requires works is to be classified as a works based system. Affirming works does not deny grace. That is the great lie.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by jfrog

It is a system of pardon and works. Both are required. But any system that requires works is to be classified as a works based system. Affirming works does not deny grace. That is the great lie.

this is kind of what i meant, ya. It is keeping the focus on potential punishment instead of "you are to be like gods." The question that the doctrine attempts to answer is asked in innocence, but examining why the question was asked also points to why the doctrine is inadequate. Also, several Scriptures, many, indicate that it is too oversimplified.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by jfrog

So your system is works based.

yes, and even worse it is sin-based. If you are forgiven, why are you focusing on sin and redemption, laying the foundation over and over? For the same reason you find it necessary to dismiss and belittle people whose comments may not even be for you, possibly. I'll leave frog, you're telling it better anyway

[shazeep]

you give Anarchy a bad rap here, E; it is not Chaos.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by shazeep

you give Anarchy a bad rap here, E; it is not Chaos.

Can you identify what your post has to do with my post?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Can you identify what your post has to do with my post?

you have presented a view of works as consistent with law and i ascribe to a different model, which is why i thought it best to merely point out that while we are programmed to believe Anarchy is "absence of laws" nothing could be further from the truth, and this misconception is necessary to support the idea that we need human rulers.

applying works to grace presents a different conception, but you were just using the model that comes...well, naturally to us, the crime/punishment law thing, for deeds (which are not works, imo) considered "evil" under the law, when good deeds, which the law does not address, will not save one either, right?