The Cross of Christ Alone Can Save

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Whatever "tasks" can be associated with "believing the Gospel" are the only "tasks" required. If someone has to scratch their chin while they ponder the mysteries of salvation before they then act in faith and believe - then "scratching their chin" is a part of their salvation, in a sense. But it would obviously be silly to say that such a thing is a "work" that they must do in order to be saved.

Of course, they had to consume carbohydrates and proteins to get the food energy for their brain cells to function in the first place, and before that their parents had to be introduced at Bible College... the list of such "works" is really an endless chain going back to the very foundation of the world when Jesus Christ chose us to be complete in Him in the first place!

Given that chain of events, well, I guess we have to wrestle with those pesky Calvinistic notions again.

We are to respond to the call of Jesus Christ when He bids us, "Come!" Whatever it takes for a person to metaphorically "get out of their chair" and to follow our Lord - then that's what it takes.

The attempt to cloud the issue by adding the whole confused jargon of "repentance is a work, believing is a work" is a red herring, IMHO. The fact that they will then add, "baptism is a work," men wearing short hair and women uncut hair is a work, wearing hosiery with seams is a work... etc." to what is "required" for salvation shows their true intentions.

Seeking to achieve "balance" the Calvinist would then go all the way back over to God's plan and foreknowledge.

I prefer to just exist in the "here and now" with real people making real choices that will affect their lives (without completely ignoring all the rest).

Belief in the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the standard of salvation. Jesus shed His blood at Calvary for the remission (Matthew 26:28) and as a propitiation (Romans 3:25) for our sins. Propitiation = "atoning sacrifice."

Faith in Jesus Christ (repentance, conversion, whatever you want to call it) is how "the blood is applied" to the door posts and lintels of our hearts.

Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. This accounting was done before Abraham had done anything else other than "Come" (leave Haran).

Over time, Abraham's works gave tremendous testimony to his faith (James 2:23), but Abraham was counted as "righteous" before those works were accomplished (Genesis 15:6 and Romans 4:3-6 and Galatians 3:6-14).

Oh! I didn't know there was more to that verse...

Count how many times that I've quoted or cited that very passage in this thread. Half a dozen times already? Ten times? Something like that.

And "casting our cares" is another "work" to be added to the long list of "works?"

This is exactly what I been saying, but you've been taking issue with. We simply couldn't do it on our own and there is no way that we can "pay it back." Thus, it is offered freely to all who believe.

Yes, they had to "tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high." But, the blood that cleansed them from sin had already been shed. The "remission" of sins was already in effect (Matthew 26:28).

And they are in fact just the first steps of a life long walk. But the first "step" is faith in the blood of Jesus Christ as the payment for the penalty for our sins. When that faith is utilized, the blood itself is applied.

Are you quoting me accurately here?


If you don't obey the Gospel, you are going to have a fiery end. I guess that is not lovely enough or positive enough to include in a message, huh? lol
Getting into the blood that was shed isn't the most pleasant of topics for many people either, but that's the Gospel.

I believe that our faith is what causes us to obey the Gospel. I don't believe our faith alone saves us. You must also obey. Of course, you cannot have obedience without faith and I don't think true faith would not include obedience.

And as we have discussed, concerning works, I believe these things (repentance and baptism) are actions of obedience and not in the category of a works based faith on the level of the Law - obtaining our own righteousness.

It would be more accurate to the Word to relegate the term "works/toil" - good works - to the things we do after we are saved. And then, again, we must continue in the faith to ultimately have eternal life.

Having faith, we must obey the Gospel. Having salvation, we must continue in that faith.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Ohhh... you don't know the half of it, Sis! But I won't burden you at this time.

And, I think that it is an important point to have "angst" about. The whole Onesness movement is a mess, in large part due to our common inability to come to terms with the Gospel itself.

I could also share some stories, but I view them as part of my "perfection/maturing". I learned more about Jesus Christ through these times than any other - "No weapon formed against thee shall prosper."

But, really, amidst all those memories, the most traumatizing thing that happened in my life was when my parents divorced after I graduated from High School. I think it has affected all of my sisters and my brother and will for the rest of our lives. The church couldn't touch that in anguish.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by pelathais

The dichotomy of that statement struck me, that's all. "Nothing... and yet something."

LOL! I see what you mean. I just meant that I don't think it ends at faith alone. We must also obey the Gospel. I sound like a broken record. LOL!

Enjoyed the conversation, Pel. Hope you have a great Easter weekend!

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

This idea that perfection is a reality? You mean the idea that came from the Lord Jesus Christ?

48: Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Matt. 5:48

Haha... great, let's talk about it.

How's being perfect working out for you these days?

[Jeffrey]

Myth to debunk next: "Romans was written to believers, therefore everything Paul says contains omissions based on the assumption of who is audience was." Hmmm... some of us need to get drunk on some Pauline thought for a moment. In actuality, there were not only times in Romans where Paul addressed unbelieving Jews, but he wrote the letter (though not systematic) in very much a theological form. He discusses the organics of how the things works. I would not even consider that he would "omit" anything at that point based on assumption. That's horrible logic. He included many details one would "assume" believers would know.... so it doesn't work. No one uses that playing card anyway, except a few stragglers trying to minimize the words of Paul and cram their own theology into his mouth, as if he is inadequate to represent himself.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Haha... great, let's talk about it.

How's being perfect working out for you these days?

Why would how its working out for me be more important to discuss than the fact Christ commanded his disciples to be perfect EVEN AS the Father in Heaven is perfect?

Whether or not it was "working out" for someone would not change what the Lord Jesus Christ said.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

This idea that perfection is a reality? You mean the idea that came from the Lord Jesus Christ?

48: Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Matt. 5:48

Wait......are you saying.......

......sorry to jump in here, but are you saying that we are to be perfect like God, as in "perfect"??? Like flawless, no error, infallible, etc.? I must've missed something, 'cause you can't mean that.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Myth to debunk next: "Romans was written to believers, therefore everything Paul says contains omissions based on the assumption of who is audience was." Hmmm... some of us need to get drunk on some Pauline thought for a moment. In actuality, there were not only times in Romans where Paul addressed unbelieving Jews, but he wrote the letter (though not systematic) in very much a theological form. He discusses the organics of how the things works. I would not even consider that he would "omit" anything at that point based on assumption. That's horrible logic. He included many details one would "assume" believers would know.... so it doesn't work. No one uses that playing card anyway, except a few stragglers trying to minimize the words of Paul and cram their own theology into his mouth, as if he is inadequate to represent himself.

Jeffrey,

This is a particular part of the debate that makes me beat my head against the wall, and I'm speaking of "Romans was written to people who were already saved" argument. You're correct, there is content written to unbelievers.

But even if Romans IS only written to believers, SO WHAT?? It is what it is. Are we to assume that Paul sat down and wrote a critical book of theology, in order to shore up the doctrinal foundation of the newly established Church, and gave information that wasn't thorough or complete?? We're to assume that there are three MAJOR things that have to be done, critical to eternity, and instead he said in passing, "Just believe"? That just makes zero sense. It's exegetically irresponsible to use the "Written to the saved" argument.

Why in the world would Paul continually say, "Just believe" and NEVER cover the other stuff? Honestly, I enjoy the give-n-take of this discussion but there's one thing that flips me out and makes me like the Aflac duck when he responds to Yogi Berra...and that's when very learned and capable theologians are reduced to theological kindergarten by saying, "But Romans was written to people who were already saved."

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I believe that our faith is what causes us to obey the Gospel. I don't believe our faith alone saves us. You must also obey. Of course, you cannot have obedience without faith and I don't think true faith would not include obedience.

And as we have discussed, concerning works, I believe these things (repentance and baptism) are actions of obedience and not in the category of a works based faith on the level of the Law - obtaining our own righteousness.

It would be more accurate to the Word to relegate the term "works/toil" - good works - to the things we do after we are saved. And then, again, we must continue in the faith to ultimately have eternal life.

Having faith, we must obey the Gospel. Having salvation, we must continue in that faith.

Faith is itself obedience to the Gospel. Having a heart converted to faith in Christ IS how one 'obeys the Gospel.'

In Romans 10:16 Paul very clearly connects 'believing the report' (Isaiah 53:1) with obedience to the Gospel.

"But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?"

Many miss the fact that the phrase "who hath believed our report" of Isaiah 53:1 is also connected to the heart conversion and healing spoken of in Isaiah 6:10, Matthew 13:15, Mark 4:11-12, John 12:37-40, and Acts 28:23-29. In these passages, the heart that understands and converts is healed (Mark uses "forgiven").

Faith comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17), by hearing the Gospel (Acts 15:7), by believing the report of God which is the record he gave of his son (1John 5:10-13). The heart which hears the Gospel then understands and converts IS HEALED (Isaiah 6:10, Matthew 13:15, Mark 4:11-12, John 12:37-40, and Acts 28:23-29). The understanding and conversion which brings healing is of the heart. The heart which obeys the Gospel, by believing it, is healed/forgiven.

2Thessalonians 1:8 and 1Peter 4:17 should be seen in this light. The obedience to the Gospel IS the obedience of faith (Romans 16:26).

Again, to obey the Gospel is to believe it!


Concerning faith and works: It is in repentance that faith is born. The repentant heart returning to God does so through faith in Jesus Christ. True repentance happens only when the conversion in repentance is to God through Christ. Only when one places faith in the record God gave of His son is one granted life in repentance. Repentance unto life (Acts 11:18) takes place when the one returning to God 'believes' in Christ. He that believes has life (John 3:15-16, John 3:36; John 5:24; John 6:40; John 6:47; John 11:25,26).

Those who have life because their hearts have converted back to God through faith in Christ are to bring forth fruits/works meet for repentance [i.e., conversion] (Matthew 3:8; Acts 26:20) and begin to live a life indicative of one who has indeed turned back to God. The regenerate heart will engender regenerate behavior.

We, who were created in Christ unto good works (Ephesians 2:10), should daily 'work out our own salvation with fear and trembling' (Phillippians 2:12). Meaning, we are to allow the salvation we possess by faith to work itself out in our daily lives with 'fear and trembling' which is a phrase "used to describe the anxiety of one who distrusts his ability completely to meet all requirements, but religiously does his utmost to fulfil his duty."

Food for thought....

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

Myth to debunk next: "Romans was written to believers, therefore everything Paul says contains omissions based on the assumption of who is audience was." Hmmm... some of us need to get drunk on some Pauline thought for a moment. In actuality, there were not only times in Romans where Paul addressed unbelieving Jews, but he wrote the letter (though not systematic) in very much a theological form. He discusses the organics of how the things works. I would not even consider that he would "omit" anything at that point based on assumption. That's horrible logic. He included many details one would "assume" believers would know.... so it doesn't work. No one uses that playing card anyway, except a few stragglers trying to minimize the words of Paul and cram their own theology into his mouth, as if he is inadequate to represent himself.

I wholeheartedly disagree. I am shocked you state this. Exegesis and correct hermeneutics requires us to address the question of whom the writing was given originally and why. There is no assumption of anything. In fact, to miss this vital issue of whom the book was written to will take one precisely in the direction to which you have gone with the very doctrine of salvation! And that chills my bones.

I cannot express how much a person has to realize, especially after reading this thread, of how vitally important it is to know that Romans was written to a church of saved people and reading it with that in mind is absolutely vital, and offers NO ASSSUMPTION whatsoever.

I mean, it is as much error to say otherwise as to read Peters words of how baptism saves and then say baptism is not part of salvation (1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:).



Paul wrote to believing Jews and gentiles, but mostly to the believing Jews who were caught up in the same error that Paul faced in Acts which called for the Council at Jerusalem to deal with the question of Gentiles in the church and circumcision.

Adam Clarke wrote:

Though this epistle is directed to the Romans, yet we are not to suppose that Romans, in the proper sense of the word, are meant; but rather those who dwelt at Rome, and composed the Christian Church in that city: that there were among these Romans, properly such, that is heathens who had been converted to the Christian faith, there can be no doubt; but the principal part of the Church in that city seems to have been formed from Jews, sojourners at Rome, and from such as were proselytes to the Jewish religion.

...

finding that they consisted partly of heathens converted to Christianity, and partly of Jews who had, with many remaining prejudices, believed in Jesus as the true Messiah, and that many contentions arose from the claims of the Gentile converts to equal privileges with the Jews, and from the absolute refusal of the Jews to admit these claims unless the Gentile converts became circumcised, he wrote to adjust and settle these differences.

...

Therefore, in an epistle directed to Roman believers, the point to be endeavored after by St. Paul was to reconcile the Jewish converts to the opinion that the Gentiles were admitted by God to a parity of religious situation with themselves, and that without their being obliged to keep the law of Moses. In this epistle, though directed to the Roman Church in general, it is, in truth, a Jew writing to Jews. Accordingly, as often as his argument leads him to say any thing derogatory from the Jewish institution, he constantly follows it by a softening clause.

John Gill:

The persons to whom this epistle was sent were Roman saints, both Jews and Gentiles, inhabiting the city of Rome; of which city and church;

Albert Barnes:

Concerning the state of the church at Rome at that time, it is not easy to form a precise opinion. From this Epistle it is evident that it was composed of Jews and Gentiles and that one purpose of writing to it was to reconcile their jarring opinions, particularly about the obligation of the Jewish law, the advantage of the Jew, and the way of justification. It is probable that the two parties in the church were endeavoring to defend each their special opinions, and that the apostle took this opportunity and mode to state to his converted countrymen the great doctrines of Christianity, and the relation of the Law of Moses to the Christian system. The Epistle itself is full proof that the church to whom it was addressed was composed of Jews and Gentiles. No small part of it is an argument expressly with the Jews;

It is a minimalizing of an EPISTLE to a CHURCH, and refusal to deal with the fact that sermons preached to sinners included Acts 2:38's elements, and insistence on maintaining one's doctrine that one need not be baptized and Spirit filled with tongues, to deny this fact that the epistle was NOT WRITTEN TO SINNERS.

Wow, you guys. God love you, but, wow.

Originally Posted by notofworks

You're correct, there is content written to unbelievers.

One thousand times NO! I would make this an issue of fellowship! Really.