Evidence for God from Science

jlay wrote:

PaulSacramento wrote:I don't really see any "contridiction" or conflict of any sort.
Paul and James are NOT preaching different gospels or even POV.
What James is stating is that good works comes from faith, it is a by product of faith.
Paul is stating that good works are NOT what saves a person for the obvious reason that good works done with the ulterior motive of "saving oneself" are "tainted works.
Jesus himself makes that statement when He points out those that put on a show for others with their "good deeds" and their "long winded prayers".
In short both James and Paul agree that one is saved by faith and BOTH agree that from this faith should come good works out of love and not for recompense.

Paul, I'd like to press you a little on this. Are you saying you don't see any contradition with what James says here?
"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." (James 2:24)
And Paul, here: "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." (Eph. 2:8,9)


I hear people make statements like good works are a by-product of faith, but it's not always clear what they mean by that.
If we take Eph. 2:10 we know that genuine 'good works' are in fact the produce of God for which He created us to walk in. It seems clear from this verse that good works are not the result of our efforts. However, it also implies that there is a response required of us if we are to walk in them. Can the believer fail to respond? And if so, can we really say that works are a by-product of faith?

So what if one responds or fails to respond? Isn't that how salvation by grace is granted to begin with? If our response is not required then salvation should be universal. No, the question is not whether we respond or we don't, the question is what does responding (or not) mean? Does it mean we are 'gaining' our salvation when do and 'losing' it when we don't? Of course not. Our good works are prepared for us to walk in them. If we respond (by doing them) we have no reason to boast because they are God's work in us, not of our own. And if we don't respond, clearly we haven't matured in the faith yet but it doesn't mean salvation is lost.

I suspect what you mean by failure to respond is what we (Catholics) call being in mortal sin, i.e. the conscious and willful walking away from the free gift. This is not merely 'not responding' to the good works prepared for us but the actual rejection of the free gift. But even in such an extreme case, one can never 'gain back' their salvation for the same reason a drowning man cannot boast of saving himself for grasping at his savior's hand. I know we will forever agree to disagree on this issue but I thought it important to clarify the other pov, i.e. we don't see it as salvation by works either, which is why pelagianism is rejected as heresy.

Byblos wrote:And if we don't respond, clearly we haven't matured in the faith yet but it doesn't mean salvation is lost.

Agreement here

I don't think t hat James and Paul are discussing/addressing believers that fail to respond to God's grace motivating us for good works.
I think that James was addressing those that were using their faith as an excuse to do nothing or to hold back ( like the case of Annanis and his wife perhaps?)
I think Paul was addressing the issue of those that boast of their good works thinking themselves superiour to those that accomplish less.

Byblos wrote:
I suspect what you mean by failure to respond is what we (Catholics) call being in mortal sin, i.e. the conscious and willful walking away from the free gift. This is not merely 'not responding' to the good works prepared for us but the actual rejection of the free gift. But even in such an extreme case, one can never 'gain back' their salvation for the same reason a drowning man cannot boast of saving himself for grasping at his savior's hand. I know we will forever agree to disagree on this issue but I thought it important to clarify the other pov, i.e. we don't see it as salvation by works either, which is why pelagianism is rejected as heresy.

Actually Byb, no, that wasn't what I was driving at. I'm not addressing apostacy here, but works.

jlay wrote:

Byblos wrote:
I suspect what you mean by failure to respond is what we (Catholics) call being in mortal sin, i.e. the conscious and willful walking away from the free gift. This is not merely 'not responding' to the good works prepared for us but the actual rejection of the free gift. But even in such an extreme case, one can never 'gain back' their salvation for the same reason a drowning man cannot boast of saving himself for grasping at his savior's hand. I know we will forever agree to disagree on this issue but I thought it important to clarify the other pov, i.e. we don't see it as salvation by works either, which is why pelagianism is rejected as heresy.

Actually Byb, no, that wasn't what I was driving at. I'm not addressing apostacy here, but works.

In that case we're in agreement (I think).

Byblos wrote:

jlay wrote:

Byblos wrote:
I suspect what you mean by failure to respond is what we (Catholics) call being in mortal sin, i.e. the conscious and willful walking away from the free gift. This is not merely 'not responding' to the good works prepared for us but the actual rejection of the free gift. But even in such an extreme case, one can never 'gain back' their salvation for the same reason a drowning man cannot boast of saving himself for grasping at his savior's hand. I know we will forever agree to disagree on this issue but I thought it important to clarify the other pov, i.e. we don't see it as salvation by works either, which is why pelagianism is rejected as heresy.

Actually Byb, no, that wasn't what I was driving at. I'm not addressing apostacy here, but works.

In that case we're in agreement (I think).

In many ways, yes.
I've always kept the apostacy thing seperate and for good reason. We likely don't agree on the mortal sin issue, but too me, it's not worth arguing. If (and it's a big if) a person once claimed to be a believer, only to later completely reject the faith, then why should I argue that they are a Christian? After all, they aren't arguing for this. If I came across a person who is NOW rejecting Christianity, I am not going to treat them like a believer. I will witness to them like they are an unbeleiver. That is what they are claiming after all.

I do not believe that once a person professes genuine faith, that they can ever lose(forfeit) their salvation. I believe it totally contradicts what constitutes salvation in the first place. And yes, my position includes a person denying that they were ever a believer. Now, I know on this point we disagree, but IMO, that is fine. Ultimately, we both have to trust God. He knows who are His. All we can do is preach the Gospel in and out of season.

I do not believe that once a person professes genuine faith, that they can ever lose(forfeit) their salvation. I believe it totally contradicts what constitutes salvation in the first place. And yes, my position includes a person denying that they were ever a believer. Now, I know on this point we disagree, but IMO, that is fine. Ultimately, we both have to trust God. He knows who are His. All we can do is preach the Gospel in and out of season.

What is genuine faith? What is not genuine faith?

1over137 wrote:

I do not believe that once a person professes genuine faith, that they can ever lose(forfeit) their salvation. I believe it totally contradicts what constitutes salvation in the first place. And yes, my position includes a person denying that they were ever a believer. Now, I know on this point we disagree, but IMO, that is fine. Ultimately, we both have to trust God. He knows who are His. All we can do is preach the Gospel in and out of season.

What is genuine faith? What is not genuine faith?

Genuine faith would be trusting the Gospel for one's salvation.

Examples of non-genuine faith would be trusting that because one was baptized, or repeated a prayer, joined the church, etc. that they are saved.
Everyone is trusting something.

I have talked to many who have faith that since they prayed the sinner's prayer, they are saved. Or, that because they were baptized, then they are saved. They have faith, but their faith is not in the message of Christ. The 'genuine" quality of faith is the object of faith. Faith is simple. It is trusting, or being convinced that something is true. To put it better, it is placing our trust in someone or something.

Paul summarized the Gospel this way. "That Christ died for our sins..... That He was buried, that He was raised on the 3rd day..." (1 Corinthians 15:3,4) That simple statement says a mouthful. For one, it personalizes sin. "Our sins." I believe that Christ died. I believe in His life, death and resurrection. And I, as a sinner, am placing my trust in that who Christ was, and what Christ did was effectual to save me.

jlay wrote:

1over137 wrote:

I do not believe that once a person professes genuine faith, that they can ever lose(forfeit) their salvation. I believe it totally contradicts what constitutes salvation in the first place. And yes, my position includes a person denying that they were ever a believer. Now, I know on this point we disagree, but IMO, that is fine. Ultimately, we both have to trust God. He knows who are His. All we can do is preach the Gospel in and out of season.

What is genuine faith? What is not genuine faith?

Genuine faith would be trusting the Gospel for one's salvation.

Examples of non-genuine faith would be trusting that because one was baptized, or repeated a prayer, joined the church, etc. that they are saved.
Everyone is trusting something.

I have talked to many who have faith that since they prayed the sinner's prayer, they are saved. Or, that because they were baptized, then they are saved. They have faith, but their faith is not in the message of Christ. The 'genuine" quality of faith is the object of faith. Faith is simple. It is trusting, or being convinced that something is true. To put it better, it is placing our trust in someone or something.

Paul summarized the Gospel this way. "That Christ died for our sins..... That He was buried, that He was raised on the 3rd day..." (1 Corinthians 15:3,4) That simple statement says a mouthful. For one, it personalizes sin. "Our sins." I believe that Christ died. I believe in His life, death and resurrection. And I, as a sinner, am placing my trust in that who Christ was, and what Christ did was effectual to save me.

Yeah, and one has to mean it, not only say it.