Evidence for God from Science

Kurieuo wrote:So then, at the end of the day, God's grace sustains us although we might and do disobey. Therefore, is it fair for me to conclude that faith with obedience isn't required to be saved afterall?

I'm not advocating that we therefore go and willfully sin and break every commandment... but at the end of the day our disobedience doesn't stop Christ's righteousness being imputed?

Gman, I was going to respond to your previous response to me about 2 pages ago, but think your answers to these questions above help get to the heart of the matter, as well as correctly understanding you.

Right now, I'm confused. You place a lot of importance on the Law. Fine. I may not necessarily agree with you on all points, but I can accept that.

Then in many of your words you argue against the grace afforded to us in Christ as being all that is needed, adding also that an obediance to the Law being necessary for Christ's righteousness to be applied. While then you admit we will still fail to be fully obediant after coming to Christ.

But if we follow the meaning of the "works-based verses" as you present them, then our disobediants shows our faith in Christ is illegitimate. Thus, Christ's righteousness is not imputed to us.

However, then you fall back upon G-d's grace - "That's why we need His grace." This leaves me confused. Either the grace of God is enough regardless of our disobediance, or it is not.

Hopefully my questions (re-quoted at the top of this post) do not come across as though I'm just asking them for the sake of it.

I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this matter with you in a more respectful inquisitive manner, rather than pointlessly exchanging words and points without real progress.

Byblos wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Btw, I also asked my mother-in-law (a devout Catholic) on mortal sin and what it means. Her understanding is that once one comes to Christ they're saved and can be forgiven, although there might be "special circumstances" when God doesn't forgive some who willfully commit mortal sins like murder or the like thereafter. God's the judge for her as He knows all. Which seems reasonable.

When asked about the Catholic stance, she said some will write that severe sins are not pardonable, while others they are. So is it fair to say this is something also debated within Catholicism itself?

I hate to tell you this but your mother-in-law is wrong. There is no such thing as an unforgivable sin. The unforgivable sin is to willfully and completely reject the inheritance and to die in that state.

Admittedly, I asked her on the spot, and pushed the scenario I presented questioning, "what if someone comes to Christ and then willfully murders another person." She was reluctant, or found it hard to conceive of someone who would have accepted Christ to do such things, but when pushed saw perhaps maybe there could be special cases where truly rebellious "Christians" were not saved.

When pushed further, that's when she said some theologians will write that willful mortal sins after coming to Christ are non-forgiveable, while others that they are forgiveable. Not sure what writings she was referring to, but obviously she's read both sides. Whether or not strictly Catholic theologians I can not confirm.

But doesn't the Catechism state that "immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into Hell."? (http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... 123a12.htm)

Kurieuo wrote:So then, at the end of the day, God's grace sustains us although we might and do disobey. Therefore, is it fair for me to conclude that faith with obedience isn't required to be saved afterall?

On the grounds that faith and obedience have to be united, they are inseparable... Therefore our type of faith will be proceeded by some type of action or obedience (or fruit). I know we tend to shy away from the idea that righteousness is required for salvation, but when you understand that righteousness is imputed on the basis of faith, it’s nothing to shy away from. Where does it say in Scripture that the unrighteous will be saved?

Kurieuo wrote:I'm not advocating that we therefore go and willfully sin and break every commandment... but at the end of the day our disobedience doesn't stop Christ's righteousness being imputed?

I would believe we’re saved on the basis of right standing with G-d. This means that in a legal sense, our accounts are in order. This can only come through the work of Christ, which resulted in atonement (payment of the sin debt) and taking upon himself the world’s defilement from sin, resulting in the imputation of holiness. Recall “without holiness no one may see God” (Heb 12:14), so this really is a salvation issue as well. Prior to Christ, atonement and purification came through the Levitical priesthood. The ancients seemed to understand this principle also.

Kurieuo wrote:Gman, I was going to respond to your previous response to me about 2 pages ago, but think your answers to these questions above help get to the heart of the matter, as well as correctly understanding you.

Right now, I'm confused. You place a lot of importance on the Law. Fine. I may not necessarily agree with you on all points, but I can accept that.

Then in many of your words you argue against the grace afforded to us in Christ as being all that is needed, adding also that an obediance to the Law being necessary for Christ's righteousness to be applied. While then you admit we will still fail to be fully obediant after coming to Christ.

But if we follow the meaning of the "works-based verses" as you present them, then our disobediants shows our faith in Christ is illegitimate. Thus, Christ's righteousness is not imputed to us.

However, then you fall back upon G-d's grace - "That's why we need His grace." This leaves me confused. Either the grace of God is enough regardless of our disobediance, or it is not.

Hopefully my questions (re-quoted at the top of this post) do not come across as though I'm just asking them for the sake of it.

I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this matter with you in a more respectful inquisitive manner, rather than pointlessly exchanging words and points without real progress.

Ok.. I would try to put it into simpler terms. I wasn't specifically addressing salvation when I was talking earlier. I was merely trying to convey what I think is right... The idea here is that G-d's Laws, ways, or commandments are somehow now void... Much how Christ came, did it at the cross and then threw all of His laws away. If we think about it, it's actually quite crazy to believe this... Why? Well first of all when you take a hard look at many of His commandments, how on earth are we coming to the conclusion that they are somehow bad? Second, if we want to bring fellowship and unity within the body of Christ, why would we be wrong for wanting to practice them? Not to beat people over the head with, but give some direction in our lives?

As Paul says...

Romans 7:7, What shall we say, then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! Indeed I would not have known what sin was except through the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, "Do not covet."

If you think about all the countries that have freedom.. Like the U.S., the UK, or Aussie Land, they are literally littered with laws... Thousands and thousands of laws, even way more than the Bible and yet we call trying to following them legalism? However, if we understand that G-d was wanting to bring unity and fellowship through them, I believe we would get a different answer. Without them I believe we would have chaos.. So we follow them because they are right... Not to get points, not to bragg, etc.. In fact I would even argue that many of the laws are done not that we understand... They make no sense. But we do them in faith anyway..

By the way.. I'm asking these as questions to myself too.. Not directly to you K..

Kurieuo wrote:

jlay wrote:This is exactly why much of Protestantism is an utter waste. What Byb speaks of is better than what Calvinism or Armianism offer. They'd be better off to become RCC, IMO.
Calvinism is security w/out assurance and Armianism is assurance w/out security. http://cleargospel.org/topics.php?t_id=1&c_id=8
If the Law is contingent, in any way (required, or evidence) then we are not free from it's penalty and faith in Christ is not enough.

I didn't know you were Catholic jlay?

I consider myself Protestant, but I'm neither fully Calvinist or Arminian so I guess that makes... a Protestant Catholic... or confused

jlay wrote:Did Jesus really say, "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." (John 5:24)
Maybe we need a footnote. He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, (and then keeps the mosaic law, and doesn't waiver in their faith, or renounce that they once had faith) hath everlasting life.....

I know you're just using sarcasm, but in all fairness it is often wrong to read one verse in isolation. So perhaps a commentary giving the context and pointing to other revelant verses in Scripture would be more appropriate than a footnote?

This is a serious issue that deserves discussion. Afterall if we need to work at maintaining our salvation, than that is more than simply believing or even having a love and appreciate of Christ and God.

K, im not RCC. Only saying that those who are Protestant and yet refuse to repent of dead works would be better off adopting the position Byb put forward. In this area it seems reformation left their latter end worse than their first.

Gman wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:So then, at the end of the day, God's grace sustains us although we might and do disobey. Therefore, is it fair for me to conclude that faith with obedience isn't required to be saved afterall?

On the grounds that faith and obedience have to be united, they are inseparable... Therefore our type of faith will be proceeded by some type of action or obedience (or fruit). I know we tend to shy away from the idea that righteousness is required for salvation, but when you understand that righteousness is imputed on the basis of faith, it’s nothing to shy away from. Where does it say in Scripture that the unrighteous will be saved?

It seems to me that the "fruit of the Spirit" would be naturally produced based on a new-found attitude towards God (a love and respect) and a working of the Holy Spirit in our lives. Such doesn't entail we'll be completely obedient, but rather grow throughout life. That is not to say we don't participate or do not desire to change.

As Paul responds to the question about whether we are fine to continue sinning given that grace now abounds: "May it never be! How can shall we who died to sin still live in it?" The reasoning Paul gives is that we've been changed -- the transaction has taken place -- we have been conjoined to Christ and already died and resurrected being justified by God with Christ. How then, Paul asks, is it we'll continue in it?

Just thinking on it now -- Paul doesn't even make it a matter of sincere or insincere faith -- which I might have done. I would have responded how could someone who truly came to Christ out of love and realising all He did, really want to continue sinning. But Paul doesn't take this tact here. He reinforces the salvation of those who have come to Christ saying that they've died to sin so they can't live in it any more.

Perhaps this comes down to an understanding of some spiritual transformation, a union that happens between us and God in Christ. In Romans 8 Paul mentions the Holy Spirit bears witness with us that we're sons of God. That the Holy Spirit "dwells within" us (1 Cor 6). When this happens, no longer is it really possible for us to just continue sinning as though nothing has changed. Being "conjoined" with God in some spiritual union, who we are has really changed. We desire to be good, because our potential character has inherited God's characteristics. Therefore we'll naturally grow towards that potential. It is impossible for us not to, unless God disconnects from us.

This is a new light I'm looking at the matter in. With this light, I think when someone asks the question whether it is fine that "we" continue sinning after coming to Christ - such is a question that can't be asked. Rather properly understanding the transformation that happens the question is more like: "Is it fine that being conjoined to Christ that we (us+Christ united) continue sinning?" Of course not. That path is no longer accessible to us based on our transformation. How can it be if Christ is included?

Re: keeping your passion for the OT Law. In your life, you've obviously grown an attraction towards the OT, or if you prefer the Tanakh. This includes the Torah and Law. I can appreciate that, because it is out of your love for God that you have grown to delight in the old including the Law, and the richness they bring in meaning to the New. I will therefore withhold my reservations about what I see as some quasi elements, because I don't want to discourage your love for God.

I spent longer than expected with my response to the first part of your post. Mine too is not necessarily directed at you, but also just "thinking aloud" if-you-will my thoughts and letting you in on them.

Kurieuo wrote:Thanks KBCid for the restraint and manner you displayed in your last post. I understand this issue can be a sore one for anyone on either side, but appreciate you've tried to respond to my questions and clarify yourself.What I originally took for ignoring what was being said, I'm beginning to think perhaps could be a misunderstanding of words. Just wondering, whether English is your first language? Please don't take that wrong, you write well, but I'm just noticing what I say is sometimes understood wrong. Just means I'll try to be more clear with my own words when discussing.

Sir, I am constrained because I have no ulterior motive than to gain understanding. I have no wish to ever teach anyone else and no wish to change anyones mind for their beliefs. I know that even when I think I may be correct in understanding it has no empirical backing so I may only be right in my own mind.
We may indeed have some misunderstanding in words and this is to be expected and each side God willing will do their best to clarify when any question arises on any point. Yes english is the only language and it is a tough communication vehicle. I give you the evolutionists form of english as an example. So knowing that each of us is unique I expect variability in understood meanings.
It is my usual method to try and restate what I understand to ensure that I grasped your intent. Without this check we could go through many pages of dialogue talking past each other which just becomes wasted time.

You can absolutely count on me to do my best to work with you or anyone else to get exactly what is meant when we exchange ideas / concepts because without an accurate defining I can't make a proper reference between understood meaning and the scriptures asserted to found them. We have one life to exist and find the truth. Once our time is up it is all over and there will be no crying if we fail because we won't exist to cry about it.

For anyone else who may read this it is my hope that none are offended because I'm not here to judge your beliefs. I am here to judge my own understanding as it compares to others and "how they reached their understanding". This is a huge key for me. I need to understand how you get from written word to final belief. Restating a belief will not progress our conversation but, defining the scriptures and how you interpret them will.
Thanks all for working with me on this.

Kurieuo wrote:It seems to me that the "fruit of the Spirit" would be naturally produced based on a new-found attitude towards God (a love and respect) and a working of the Holy Spirit in our lives. Such doesn't entail we'll be completely obedient, but rather grow throughout life. That is not to say we don't participate or do not desire to change.

Yes.. I would agree with that. If we look at faith in a horticultural type of way, in order to get the natural fruit to produce, doesn't it require some maintenance? Our trees is seems also requires pruning, water, and proper soil, sunlight to survive? Likewise a garden requires weeding for it to succeed, otherwise the weeds choke out the flowers.. I'm often reminded of this parable.. And producing a good crop.

Matt 13:18 “Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: 19 When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in their heart. This is the seed sown along the path. 20 The seed falling on rocky ground refers to someone who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 22 The seed falling among the thorns refers to someone who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, making it unfruitful. 23 But the seed falling on good soil refers to someone who hears the word and understands it. This is the one who produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown.”

Kurieuo wrote:As Paul responds to the question about whether we are fine to continue sinning given that grace now abounds: "May it never be! How can shall we who died to sin still live in it?" The reasoning Paul gives is that we've been changed -- the transaction has taken place -- we have been conjoined to Christ and already died and resurrected being justified by God with Christ. How then, Paul asks, is it we'll continue in it?

Just thinking on it now -- Paul doesn't even make it a matter of sincere or insincere faith -- which I might have done. I would have responded how could someone who truly came to Christ out of love and realising all He did, really want to continue sinning. But Paul doesn't take this tact here. He reinforces the salvation of those who have come to Christ saying that they've died to sin so they can't live in it any more.

Perhaps this comes down to an understanding of some spiritual transformation, a union that happens between us and God in Christ. In Romans 8 Paul mentions the Holy Spirit bears witness with us that we're sons of God. That the Holy Spirit "dwells within" us (1 Cor 6). When this happens, no longer is it really possible for us to just continue sinning as though nothing has changed. Being "conjoined" with God in some spiritual union, who we are has really changed. We desire to be good, because our potential character has inherited God's characteristics. Therefore we'll naturally grow towards that potential. It is impossible for us not to, unless God disconnects from us.

This is a new light I'm looking at the matter in. With this light, I think when someone asks the question whether it is fine that "we" continue sinning after coming to Christ - such is a question that can't be asked. Rather properly understanding the transformation that happens the question is more like: "Is it fine that being conjoined to Christ that we (us+Christ united) continue sinning?" Of course not. That path is no longer accessible to us based on our transformation. How can it be if Christ is included?

Yes.. However if we really want to stop sinning because the spirit is in us, then we would try our best to follow His commandments.. Actually that would be why we would want to follow His commandments, whether they be on the NT or OT. Because we are saved.. Keep in mind, numerous commandments in the OT can't be followed anyway.. Like the temple services, commandments for women, or priests, etc.. Others can easily be.. Like taking a day off work.

I'm often reminded of these two verses about transforming our minds.. So it seems there is a process there in faith that we (or I) often forget..

Romans 8:6-8 The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. 7 The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so. 8 Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God.

Romans 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

Kurieuo wrote:Re: keeping your passion for the OT Law. In your life, you've obviously grown an attraction towards the OT, or if you prefer the Tanakh. This includes the Torah and Law. I can appreciate that, because it is out of your love for God that you have grown to delight in the old including the Law, and the richness they bring in meaning to the New. I will therefore withhold my reservations about what I see as some quasi elements, because I don't want to discourage your love for God.

I spent longer than expected with my response to the first part of your post. Mine too is not necessarily directed at you, but also just "thinking aloud" if-you-will my thoughts and letting you in on them.

Thanks K.. Well is wasn't something that just hit me... It has literally taken me years to get to this point. And I still don't claim to have all the answers..

Sin was literally suffocating me until someone told me to stop doing it and follow His commandments.

1 Peter 4:17,18: "For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who DO NOT OBEY the gospel of God? 18 Now if the righteous one is SCARCELY SAVED, where will the ungodly and the sinner appear?" --- NKJV

Since I have not seen anyone quote the above verses yet, I thought I would quote them since they may add a little additional understanding to some. The above seems to tell us that presently living Christians (those hoping to be in the first resurrection), apparently only those with the Holy Spirit, obtained only through obedience according to Acts 5:32 and Acts 2:38 (I could be wrong, but this is what the Acts verses seem to say) are actually being judged now. Even every word we say and write, unless amended, is somehow being recorded and being or will be judged soon, according to certain verses. Sobering.

The Greek word for "scarcely" is defined as "with difficulty," derived from the word "toil." Probably referring to the struggle to overcome sin.

Gman wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:So then, at the end of the day, God's grace sustains us although we might and do disobey. Therefore, is it fair for me to conclude that faith with obedience isn't required to be saved afterall?

On the grounds that faith and obedience have to be united, they are inseparable... Therefore our type of faith will be proceeded by some type of action or obedience (or fruit). I know we tend to shy away from the idea that righteousness is required for salvation, but when you understand that righteousness is imputed on the basis of faith, it’s nothing to shy away from. Where does it say in Scripture that the unrighteous will be saved?

I answered in a different trend last time, but to revisit this in light of the intention of my question here...

After stating "That's why we need His grace", you are now turning back on both faith and obedience being united. Yet, you have admitted we won't be obedient. This is like an illogical loop that keeps going round and round.

If faith+obedience is required to have Christ's righteousness imputed, then once again I am damned, and by your own admittance you are too. Our faith is undone by our disobedience after apparently coming to Christ, and we are still in our sins. Not terribly good news. Quite dismal gospel in fact.

To clarify some theology here: "Righteousness" per se is not imputed based on faith, rather "Christ's Righteousness" is imputed. The two cannot be conflated. We are righteous because Christ cloaks us with His righteousness, not because we become righteous through some obedience or effort of our own. And so, I believe those in Christ are righteous and saved even though none of us are righteous, not even one. None are good except God.

Gman wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:I'm not advocating that we therefore go and willfully sin and break every commandment... but at the end of the day our disobedience doesn't stop Christ's righteousness being imputed?

I would believe we’re saved on the basis of right standing with G-d. This means that in a legal sense, our accounts are in order. This can only come through the work of Christ, which resulted in atonement (payment of the sin debt) and taking upon himself the world’s defilement from sin, resulting in the imputation of holiness. Recall “without holiness no one may see God” (Heb 12:14), so this really is a salvation issue as well. Prior to Christ, atonement and purification came through the Levitical priesthood. The ancients seemed to understand this principle also.

And I can agree with this, but then, as I understand you, one can only have the work of Christ applied (Christ's righteousness imputed) based on a unity of faith+obedience.

This means nothing has really changed in our relationship with God with advent of Christ's birth, death and resurrection. This "faith in Christ" is just as unattainable for us, as being declared fully righteous through keeping the Law.

Gman wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Gman, I was going to respond to your previous response to me about 2 pages ago, but think your answers to these questions above help get to the heart of the matter, as well as correctly understanding you.

Right now, I'm confused. You place a lot of importance on the Law. Fine. I may not necessarily agree with you on all points, but I can accept that.

Then in many of your words you argue against the grace afforded to us in Christ as being all that is needed, adding also that an obediance to the Law being necessary for Christ's righteousness to be applied. While then you admit we will still fail to be fully obediant after coming to Christ.

But if we follow the meaning of the "works-based verses" as you present them, then our disobediants shows our faith in Christ is illegitimate. Thus, Christ's righteousness is not imputed to us.

However, then you fall back upon G-d's grace - "That's why we need His grace." This leaves me confused. Either the grace of God is enough regardless of our disobediance, or it is not.

Hopefully my questions (re-quoted at the top of this post) do not come across as though I'm just asking them for the sake of it.

I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this matter with you in a more respectful inquisitive manner, rather than pointlessly exchanging words and points without real progress.

Ok.. I would try to put it into simpler terms. I wasn't specifically addressing salvation when I was talking earlier. I was merely trying to convey what I think is right... The idea here is that G-d's Laws, ways, or commandments are somehow now void... Much how Christ came, did it at the cross and then threw all of His laws away. If we think about it, it's actually quite crazy to believe this... Why? Well first of all when you take a hard look at many of His commandments, how on earth are we coming to the conclusion that they are somehow bad? Second, if we want to bring fellowship and unity within the body of Christ, why would we be wrong for wanting to practice them? Not to beat people over the head with, but give some direction in our lives?

My confusion of your beliefs wasn't around believing God's Laws, ways, or commandments are somehow void (noone as I understand them is saying that here -- only Christ fulfilled them because we could not). Noone is even calling God's commandments "bad". How can they be? They're righteous. Noone is even saying don't practice them.

My original confusion which still remains of your beliefs is again this:

K wrote:in many of your words you argue against the grace afforded to us in Christ as being all that is needed, adding also that an obediance to the Law being necessary for Christ's righteousness to be applied. While then you admit we will still fail to be fully obediant after coming to Christ.

But if we follow the meaning of the "works-based verses" as you present them, then our disobedience shows our faith in Christ is illegitimate. Thus, Christ's righteousness is not imputed to us.

However, then you fall back upon G-d's grace - "That's why we need His grace." This leaves me confused. Either the grace of God is enough regardless of our disobediance, or it is not.

That is whether or not the grace of God enough regardless of our inability to remain obedient?

I'm not saying anything of the importance or lack thereof of God's Law, so let's box that topic away.

Gman wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Re: keeping your passion for the OT Law. In your life, you've obviously grown an attraction towards the OT, or if you prefer the Tanakh. This includes the Torah and Law. I can appreciate that, because it is out of your love for God that you have grown to delight in the old including the Law, and the richness they bring in meaning to the New. I will therefore withhold my reservations about what I see as some quasi elements, because I don't want to discourage your love for God.

I spent longer than expected with my response to the first part of your post. Mine too is not necessarily directed at you, but also just "thinking aloud" if-you-will my thoughts and letting you in on them.

Thanks K.. Well is wasn't something that just hit me... It has literally taken me years to get to this point. And I still don't claim to have all the answers..

Sin was literally suffocating me until someone told me to stop doing it and follow His commandments.

Just to be clear, I've held my views on God's grace for around 15 years.

It was quite liberating when I first understood Romans in light of Martin Lloyd-Jones' commentaries.

That said, even if acquainted with certain beliefs, it doesn't stop new ways of looking at the issue from becoming apparent. For example, there are so many responses to the problem of evil in the world if God is good and loves us. Despite reading many responses, I'm sure there is one perspective that I haven't heard which I'd find an interesting way of look at the issue.

This is going to sound quite pugnent to some. You write: "Sin was literally suffocating me until someone told me to stop doing it and follow His commandments." But, for me, anyone who seriously believes they've stopped committing sin, is in my opinion either self-deluded or a hypocrite.

The only way sin can realistically stop suffocating us is through Christ's work that provides forgiveness and the possibility of our being redeemed.

To borrow your analogy of the horticulturalist. It is God who is the Master Horticulturalist. The Holy Spirit who cultivates and tends to us. A tree can't prune and water itself, and a garden can't weed itself. Not sure if you intended your analogy to be extended that far? But it seems good to me.

Wolfgang wrote:1 Peter 4:17,18: "For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who DO NOT OBEY the gospel of God? 18 Now if the righteous one is SCARCELY SAVED, where will the ungodly and the sinner appear?" --- NKJV

Since I have not seen anyone quote the above verses yet, I thought I would quote them since they may add a little additional understanding to some. The above seems to tell us that presently living Christians (those hoping to be in the first resurrection), apparently only those with the Holy Spirit, obtained only through obedience according to Acts 5:32 and Acts 2:38 (I could be wrong, but this is what the Acts verses seem to say) are actually being judged now. Even every word we say and write, unless amended, is somehow being recorded and being or will be judged soon, according to certain verses. Sobering.

The Greek word for "scarcely" is defined as "with difficulty," derived from the word "toil." Probably referring to the struggle to overcome sin.

Mixing your eschatology with this issue just creates more to debate.

I'm not sure I understand the fullness of what you've written. However, I'm interested to know Wolfgang whether you believe you're saved? And secondly, whether you believe you are righteous?

Gman wrote:
Yes.. I would agree with that. If we look at faith in a horticultural type of way, in order to get the natural fruit to produce, doesn't it require some maintenance? Our trees is seems also requires pruning, water, and proper soil, sunlight to survive? Likewise a garden requires weeding for it to succeed, otherwise the weeds choke out the flowers.. I'm often reminded of this parable.. And producing a good crop.

Kurieuo wrote:
To borrow your analogy of the horticulturalist. It is God who is the Master Horticulturalist. The Holy Spirit who cultivates and tends to us. A tree can't prune and water itself, and a garden can't weed itself. Not sure if you intended your analogy to be extended that far? But it seems good to me.

K, not to give you a big head or anything , but this is absolutely brilliant. I think this whole thread can be summed up with your response to Gman's analogy. It clearly shows the difference between following the law, and living by the spirit. It shows how God is the one who transforms a believer. Not how a believer transforms himself by his works or obeying commandments.

RickD wrote:It shows how God is the one who transforms a believer. Not how a believer transforms himself by his works or obeying commandments.

Whoever believes that (the underlined) believes in a self-made god. But I don't believe that's what G is saying at all.

Kurieuo wrote: I answered in a different trend last time, but to revisit this in light of the intention of my question here...

After stating "That's why we need His grace", you are now turning back on both faith and obedience being united. Yet, you have admitted we won't be obedient. This is like an illogical loop that keeps going round and round.

If faith+obedience is required to have Christ's righteousness imputed, then once again I am damned, and by your own admittance you are too. Our faith is undone by our disobedience after apparently coming to Christ, and we are still in our sins. Not terribly good news. Quite dismal gospel in fact.

To clarify some theology here: "Righteousness" per se is not imputed based on faith, rather "Christ's Righteousness" is imputed. The two cannot be conflated. We are righteous because Christ cloaks us with His righteousness, not because we become righteous through some obedience or effort of our own. And so, I believe those in Christ are righteous and saved even though none of us are righteous, not even one. None are good except God.

No... There is a difference and I'll tell you why. Sure we will be disobedient to G-d at times... We are imperfect beings. In fact we won't be totally perfect until Christ comes back 1 Corinthians 13:9-10. But what I'm talking about here is the willingness to correct the problem. Therefore we might be rebellious at heart, but if we have the will to correct our problems, that is what I believe G-d sees as justified not really the righteous act itself. We are righteous when we accept Christ, and part of that righteousness is willing to change course to what G-d calls righteous IN CHRIST.

Let's put it this way... Would you really believe that someone is a believer if they didn't change their ways? Like a robber or pedophile?

Kurieuo wrote:And I can agree with this, but then, as I understand you, one can only have the work of Christ applied (Christ's righteousness imputed) based on a unity of faith+obedience.

This means nothing has really changed in our relationship with God with advent of Christ's birth, death and resurrection. This "faith in Christ" is just as unattainable for us, as being declared fully righteous through keeping the Law.

No I never ever said one is justified by following the law. However, having a willingness to obey it.. Being open to it not because you HAVE to, because you WANT to.

Kurieuo wrote: My confusion of your beliefs wasn't around believing God's Laws, ways, or commandments are somehow void (noone as I understand them is saying that here -- only Christ fulfilled them because we could not). Noone is even calling God's commandments "bad". How can they be? They're righteous. Noone is even saying don't practice them.

That is whether or not the grace of God enough regardless of our inability to remain obedient?

I'm not saying anything of the importance or lack thereof of God's Law, so let's box that topic away.

The problem here is saying that since Christ fulfilled the commandments that makes them somehow now void. It not a black or white issue.. Confessing Christ is a huge part of it, but we are also told to purge evil from our hearts...

Colossians 3:5-8 Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed, which is idolatry. 6 Because of these, the wrath of God is coming. 7 You used to walk in these ways, in the life you once lived. 8 But now you must also rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.

And test ourselves..

2 Corinthians 13:5-6, “Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you —unless, of course, you fail the test? 6 And I trust that you will discover that we have not failed the test.