Joh 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him. ESV
The reason why it is obey is because the KJV is HORRIBLE with the dealing with the word "pistis" and present participle active and context which has been shown by modern scholars and why the ESV shows OBEY. You really need to do some research on the failures in this areas of which James White even shows among many that the aspect of John and his use of and context of "pistis" is a aspect of "faithful or "obey." Also this would be consistent wiht John 15 concerning obedience and the whole of Jesus teaching.
36He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. KJV
Point of note..... want to discuss scripture with me, don't ever use the lame paraphrase/commentary pieces of trash like the Message. Just saying...
NIV is not a serious translation...
I get it, all translations except ESV suck.
Seriously, I don't use The Message for lexical or word-study value, but I wouldn't call Peterson's skills with Bible languages/translations trash. At the least, you could consider his interpretative opinions on particular passages. He approaches the Bible asking "what's the message" -- for with that broad question in mind are we able to rightly interpret the specifics which scholars wrestle over.
I don't believe the NIV is garbage any more than the ESV, KJV, NKJV, RSV or NLT. They are translations with changes in degree along the interpretative spectrum. And all the scholars exceed yours and my training in Greek.
Then you simply miss the text and clear teaching of Jesus which is consistent for your own fallacy. JEsus view of believing is about response of doing. Giving up to obtain. Following him at the negation of others. Thus he does not see your belief until he judges the response. I get your general point, but I think this statement is your BIGGEST fallacy, TL. God doesn't see your faith until your works come???? That is categorically false, and I really believe you know it. Just like Abraham. God's offering may come freely but he demands something. Our trust and faith To say he doesn't negates the words of Christ. Want eternal life.... obey the commandments and follow me..... THAT IS THE GOSPEL! Aren't we missing something in this discussion of eternal life? Maybe check the sentence again. Read John 3 as well.
Exactly believe which must be understood with what is meant not by POOR translation which you used and modern scholarship is revealing and showing the effects of LUTHER and his poor latin translating. You prefer RCC over Luther? Luther's failures are hotly debated today even among Reformed theologians, but his theology pointed in the right direction. He was very close. The context of believe is unto following NOT simply mental assent. Which is the point of all of what Jesus says. For the 5th time, no one here has advocated mental assent. To continue to do that despite that is dishonest.
The present participle active in NT Greek reflects an “habitual behavior.” It signifies a “process [that is] continuous.” (This also is still true in modern Greek grammar. For example Adams, Essential Modern Greek Grammar (1987) on page 81....
This distinction has been recently confessed by a leading Calvinist who is yet a staunch faith-alone advocate. Dr. James White writes about the verb tense in John 6:35-45 as well as John 3:16 in "Drawn by the Father": A Summary of John 6:35-45 pages 10-11:
"Throughout this passage an important truth is presented that again might be missed by many English translations. When Jesus describes the one who comes to him and who believes in him [3:16, 5:24, 6:35, 37, 40, 47, etc.], he uses the present tense to describe this coming, believing, or, in other passages, hearing or seeing. The present tense refers to a continuous, on-going action. The Greek contrasts this kind of action against the aorist tense, which is a point action, a single action in time that is not on-going.... The wonderful promises that are provided by Christ are not for those who do not truly and continuously believe. The faith that saves is a living faith, a faith that always looks to Christ as Lord and Savior." You're preaching to the choir, TL. I'm not a OSAS. I believe faith must be continual.
THus the "continous" view has the whole scope of the context in view not simply as James says "the devils also believe and tremble" but a view of doing unto context of believ"ing" or faithfulness. THus when Jesus talks about giving up one must do that before one obtains covenant JUST LIKE ABRAHAM LEAVING HOME TO OBTAIN! You cannot say I believe and not cast off they are seen withing the scope of believe. Abraham's actions were a result of his believing. The message is about taking upon a yoke which is by contract to obtain.
Anyone who preaches this issue of righteousness correctly will receive the same confusion from people who cannot follow the point properly. Paul's words were always misunderstood for that very reason. He had to repeatedly clarify himself by posing hypothetical erring conclusions and saying "God forbid" in response, as in Romans 6. He knew people were getting this wrong all the time. He knew the pat responses that were simply caused by their lack of understanding the issue. Paul was misunderstood by Jews and Judaizers mostly who heard him preach the Gospel to such an extent that they imagined he DIDN'T believe in good works. That's a picture of how he preached grace. Paul, of course, elaborating in Epistles talks about sanctification and the believer's lifestyle in response many times -- none substituting his view of salvation. The lack of understanding was (mostly) not the Gentiles but the Jews. Food for thought. Paul qualified his remarks constantly for their sakes.
Please. Do you or do you not propose I believe baptismal regeneration? That was the accusation I claimed you made that was false. You even said so yourself, here:
You brethren call me a three stepper if I believe the three elements of Acts 2:38 are required for salvation. If I am incorrect, forgive me. And you say three steppers preach baptismal regeneration, despite my proofs that baptismal regeneration is belief that baptism in and of itself makes us righteous and creates faith rather than is done only DUE TO FAITH.
If you did not refer to what I believe, then I am sorry, but that is how I took it. You made that claim to Rev Randy in the midst of myself posting about baptism's necessity for salvation. What else am I to think? If you did not mean me, then I accept that and am sorry. But that is what stirred the issue of false accusation.
If you did not mean me, then who did you mean?
You may not believe BR the way the infant baptismal fans do, but it's the same in type. Salvation by faith + some other things required before God can consider you righteous (including remission of sins by baptism).
Which is exactly why I said that salvation by works is not saying baptism is not necessary for salvation. Perhaps it is notofworks who needs to hear this more than anyone else here. He has been insisting I preach salvation by works and that we earn salvation and improve ourselves.
But that is very point i was making in saying Jesus claimed faith was a work. It is ridiculous to say something that is a work necessarily falls under the category of salvation by works.
But what exactly are you referring to in my posts when you repeat the idea of words and meanings. You are not quoting anything specifically that I said, but are just pointing these statements of yours at me. The reason I say this is because your very reasoning quoted above is the basis for my claim that baptism is not salvation by works.
Mike, I still haven't heard from you or TL a good response to how Paul points to circumcision never being some "realized" way salvation came. In fact, Paul is explicit about Abraham's faith and accounted righteousness. It just seems we do for water baptism what Jews did for circumcision -- perhaps a requirement of the law, but not the way in.
So, baptism into Jesus Christ in Romans 6 refers only to WATER baptism?
And allowing some one to immerse you in water, or to sprinkle or pour water on you, or to self-immerse puts you into Christ and into His death?
Could it not refer to an action by the Holy Spirit which has put you positionally into Christ and has happened before water baptism takes place?
After reviewing the evidence, I agree with Blume that Rom 6 is about water baptism... or at least that's what is in view and what the Romans would have thought/.
The use of "works" in John 6:28-29, does not carry the same meaning as ... say for example, Romans 4:1-5.
In fact, in Romans 4:5, "works" (whatever they may be) are contrasted with belief.
In effect, Paul is saying that the "work of God" in John 6:29, is not really a "work" at all. How can he do this without contradicting the words of Jesus? He does it because he is using the word in a different sense and a different context than Jesus did.
(And just for the record, the underlying word in the original is the same as well).
When someone seriously says that "believing" is a "work" needed for salvation in a conversation about the cross, they are committing the same error as a person who says Acts 19:32 is an instruction for the church assembly.
my friend... this has been the issue the whole time. They only see through a fogged lense of interpretation. They make you say what they want it to be, to able to deal with what you are saying. cognitive dissonance Just like points I have made multiple times with indepth points..... then they say.... "you have not dealt with XYZ..." only thing I can do is shake my head. In all my years of teaching, witnessing, debating it blows me away at the ingoring that goes on here. Basically let's reform the argument in the image they want so they can deal with it. Which in the end is relabeling everything to make it not what it is like belief, repentance, confession and whatever... ( Thus oh no I do nothing.... he did it for me. salvation is not based on anything I do. ) which is so far from the truth it makes a mockery of what "faith" is and Jesus Words to obtain eternal life.
Quote:
"Salvation by works" means works make us righteous in and of themselves. "Salvation by works" means works make us righteous in and of themselves.
It's clever. I'll give it to you. Add an addendum that these works are saving us, but that it's only because of faith behind these works. Why not strip away the works and admit it's the faith. That's the fuel? The rest is secondary.
And TL, your bolded part -- that's exactly it! HE PAID IT ALL!!!! Accept that. Look how beautiful the cross is. Look how desperate his sending of His Son was! What love! That only makes me want to serve Him all the more faithfully!
Amen, and yet they say they have to repent to be saved. Whatever... they are not able to see contradiction in their own words.
I'm see repentance, the "turning toward God" as a component inseparable with faith, and if it is, the turning is 'because of' faith. Both are at a heart level.
Linear Mode
