Salvation?

[purelyironic]

The issue of salvation in Christianity seems to be very hard to understand.

Some denominations believe you are going to be judge by both your works and your faith, and whether or not you enter into heaven will be in Gods hands.

Others believe that by faith alone you can enter into heaven. That if you accept Jesus Christ as your personal lord and savior, you are once saved always saved and will enter into heaven.

From what i understand so far, it seems like the verses that are "salvations is not by faith alone" are not in a context where God is talking to his followers, but of the fate of the non beleivers?

However, James seems to contradict everyone else who wrote the bible.


Here are the versus on the subject


Salvation is by faith alone:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16

He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already .... He 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. John 3:18, 36

Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Acts 16:30-31

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God salvation to every one that believeth.... As it is written, The just shall live by faith. Romans 1:16-17

By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight. Romans 3:20

A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Romans 3:28

For if Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory? Romans 4:2

For the promise ... was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. Romans 4:13

Therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Romans 5:1

If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Romans 10:9

A man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ. Galatians 2:16

The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith. Galatians 3:11-12

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. Ephesians 2:8-9

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. Titus 3:5




Salvation is not by faith alone:


For you render to each one according to his works. Psalm 62:12

The labour of the righteous tendeth to life: the fruit of the wicked to sin. Proverbs 10:16

I the Lord ... give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings. Jeremiah 17:10

When the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness ... and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul. Ezekiel 18:27

For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. Matthew 12:37

For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works. Matthew 16:27

If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments. Matthew 19:17

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal. Matthew 25:41-46

He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. Luke 10:26-28

And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. John 5:29

Who will render to each one according to his deeds. ... For not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified. Romans 2:6, 13

For we must all appear before the jugment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. 2 Corinthians 5:10

Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works. 2 Corinthians 11:15

"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." Philippians 2:12

What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? James 2:14

Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2:17

Was not Abraham our father justified by works? You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. Likewise, was not Rabab the harlot also justified by works? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. James 2:21-25

The Father, who without partiality judges according to each one's work. 1 Peter 1:17

I will give unto every one of you according to your works. Revelation 2:23

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. Revelation 20:12-13

Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life. Revelation 22:14

[purelyironic]

Here are the most straight forwards works versus:

What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? James 2:14

Pluged in version:

What does it [benefit], my (fellow followers of christ), if someone says he has [secure belief in God and trusting acceptance of God's will] but does not have works? Can [secure belief in God and trusting acceptance of God's will] save him(from hell)? James 2:14

Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2:17

Thus also [secure belief in God and trusting acceptance of God's will] by itself, if it does not have works, is [without life]. James 2:17

Was not Abraham our father justified by works? You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. Likewise, was not Rabab the harlot also justified by works? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. James 2:21-25

Was not Abraham our father [free from penalty of sin] by works? You see then that a man is [free from penalty of sin] by works, and not by [secure belief in God and trusting acceptance of God's will] only. Likewise, was not Rabab the harlot also [free from penalty of sin] by works? For as the body without the [The vital principle or life giving force of God] is [without life], so [secure belief in God and trusting acceptance of God's will] without works is [without life] also. James 2:21-25


It seems to me like james contradicts all of the other apostles who wrote the bible. Can we trust the gospels of James?

[Jac3510]

This has been sort of a hot button issue around here lately, pure. I'll link you to some threads at the end of this, but I'm glad for the post, because it reminded me of some things. First, good verse list on salvation by faith alone . . . let me add to that just a bit. Here's a list of 185 verses that teach faith alone:

Matthew 18:6

Mark 9:42

Luke 7:48-50; 8:12; 18:42

John 1:7, 12, 50; 2:11, 23; 3:15, 16, 18, 36; 4:39, 41, 42, 53; 5:24, 38, 45-47; 6:29, 35, 36, 40, 47, 64; 7:5, 31, 38, 39; 8:24, 28-30, 31, 45, 46; 9:35-38; 10:24-26, 37, 38, 42; 11: 15, 25, 26, 27, 42, 45; 12:11, 36, 37, 38, 42, 44, 46, 47-48; 13:19; 14:1-6, 12; 16:9; 17:20, 21; 19:35; 20:29, 31

Acts 2:44; 3:16; 4:4, 32; 5:14; 8:12, 13, 37; 9:42; 10:43, 45; 11:17, 21; 13:12, 39, 48; 14:1, 23, 27; 15:5, 7, 9; 16:1, 31, 34; 17:4, 5, 12, 34; 18:8, 27; 19:2, 4, 18; 20:21; 21:20, 25; 22:19, 24:24; 26:18; 28:24

Romans 1:16, 17; 3:22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30; 4:3, 5, 9, 11, 13, 16, 17, 23-24; 5:1, 2; 9:30, 32, 33; 10:4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17; 11:20, 30-32; 13:11

1 Corinthians 1:21; 3:5; 7:12-13; 15:2, 11

2 Corinthians 4:4; 6: 15

Galatians 2:16, 3:2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 22, 24, 26

Ephesians 1:13, 19; 2:8-9

Philippians 3:9

1 Thessalonians 1:7; 2:10, 4:14

2 Thessalonians 1:10; 2:12, 13; 3:2

1 Timothy 1:16; 3:16; 4:3, 10

2 Timothy 1:12; 3:15

Hebrews 11:7, 31

James 2:23

1 Peter 1:21; 2:6, 7

1 John 5:1,4,5, 10, 13

Categories of verses on faith alone in Christ alone

Categorized by Dr John Brumett

1. Clear verses on faith alone in Christ alone-John 1 :12; 3:15, 16, 18, 36; 5:24; 6:29, 35, 40, 47; 11 :25, 26; 12:46; 20:31; Acts 10:43; 16:31; Rom. 1:16; Galatians 3:22, 26; Eph. 2:8-9; 1 John 5:1,13

2. Justification by Faith-Acts 13:39; Rom. 1:17; 3:26, 28, 30; 4:5; 5:1; Galatians 2:16; 3:8, 24

3. Righteousness by faith-Rom. 3:22; 4:3, 9, 11, 13, 23-24; 9:30; 10:4, 6; Galatians 3:6; Phil. 3:9; James 2:23

4. Salvation by grace through faith-Luke 8:12; Rom. 1:16; 1 Corinthians 1:21, 15:2; Eph.2:8-9; 2 Tim. 3:15

5. Faith for salvation is the only thing compatible with grace-Rom. 4:16

6. The Holy Spirit convicts the unbeliever of one sin-the sin of unbelief-John 16:9

7. Holy Spirit given by faith-John 7:38, 39; Acts 19:2; Galatians 3:2, 5,14

8. Individuals and groups who exercised faith alone in Christ alone.

A. Groups of individuals

Children-Matthew 18:6; Mark 9:42

Jews-John 2:23; 8:30; 8:31; 7:31; 10:42; 11:45; 12:11; Acts 4:4,32; 9:42; 10:45; 21:20; 22:19; 28:24

Samaritans-John 4:39, 41, 42; Acts 8:12

Gentiles-Acts 11:17, 21; 13:48; 14:23; 27; 15:7; 17:4, 12; 18:27; 21:25; Rom. 13:11; 1 Cor. 15:11; 1 Thessalonians 1:7; 2:10

Jews and Gentiles-Acts 14:1; 19:18

Chief rulers-John 12:42

Disciples-John 2:11; Acts 2:44

Pharisees-Acts 15:5

World-1 Tim. 3:16

B. Individuals

Nathaniel-John 1 :50

Royal official and household-John 4:53

Blind man-John 9:35-38

Martha- John 11:27

Simon-Acts 8:13

Ethiopian Eunuch-Acts 8:37

The proconsul-Acts 13:12

Timothy-Acts 16:1

Philippian jailer and household-Acts 16:34

Dionysius, Damaris, and others-Acts 17:34

Crispus, his household and the Corinthians-Acts 18:8

Abraham-Rom. 4:17

Noah-Hebrews 11:7

Rahab-Hebrews 11:31

9. Unregenerate are called unbelievers-John 8:24,45; 10:25-26; Acts 17:5; 1 Cor. 7:12,13; 2 Cor. 4:4, 6:15

10. Regenerate individuals are called believers-Acts 5:14; 1 Tim. 4:3,10

11. Miscellaneous verses on faith alone in Christ alone-Luke 7:48-50, 18:42; John 1 :7; 5:38, 45-47; 6:36,64; 7:5; 8:46; 10:37,38; 11:15,42; 12:36, 37, 38, 44,47-48; 13:19; 14:1-6, 12; 17:20,21; 19:35; 20:29; Acts 3:16; 15:9; 19:4; 20:21; 24:24; 26:18; Rom. 3:25, 27; 5:2; 9:32, 33; 10:8,9,10,11,14,16, 17; 11:20,30-32; 1 Cor. 3:5; Gal. 2:7,9,11; Eph.1:13, 19; 1 Thess. 4:14; 2 Thess. 1:10; 2:12, 13; 3:2; 1 Tim. 1:16; 2 Tim. 1:12; 1 Peter 1:21; 2:6, 7; 1 John 5:4, 5, 10

(Source).

The deeper question is not "are works required for salvation," but rather "is saving faith one that necessarily produces works?" I say no, on the simple grounds that the Bible is constantly exhorting us to do good works and avoid sin. If this was a natural, and indeed necessary, result of faith, then true Christians would not have to be commanded to do good, just as they wouldn't have to be commanded to keep the faith if such was natural for "true faith."

I happen to enjoy doing exegeses of Scripture verses, but right now I'm at work, I have a sermon and a Bible study to prepare, a book report to write, and a paper to revise . . . all by Monday morning! But, I'm looking forward to offering my take on the "salvation not by faith alone" passages. In the meantime, here is a link to my exegesis of James 2, as that seems to be the primary stumbling block for many who believe that works are necessary, be they prerequisite to or simply a necessarily result of genuine salvation. You'll find that I don't see salvation to be "from hell." It is from physical death, which is exactly in line with Jewish Wisdom literature and the general philosophy of Palestinian Christianity, of which James was the leader. James is a great, great letter that needs to be understood as wisdom literature. It in no way contradicts Paul, but not for the theologically twisted reasons pushed by most evangelicals today. If James is talking about eternal salvation, then James 2:24 is a serious problem. But, anyway, I'll let you guys hash that out. Give the linked explanation a read. Maybe it will help, maybe not. Have a good one!

God bless

[bluesman]

My view on it.

Saying you believe in Jesus means more than maybe you are thinking.
That he died for our sins is another part,but its not all.
You can say accepting Jesus into you heart.

When you say you believe in Jesus you are also saying you believe in all he stood for and taught.

What did he teach? Follow the Commandments, Love your neighbour, Feed the poor, etc.

Demons know Jesus exist, but they won't get God's reward.

Believing in Jesus is like your foot in the door of Heaven.

Your Reward will be from your works.

Actions speaks louder than words. Your works will prove if your heart was where your mouth was or if you was speaking hot air.

Mike
Bluesman

[Canuckster1127]

This has been a hot topc for most of the history of the Church.

In the western Christian world it has been taken up most recently by Dr. John MacArthur and the most important book he wrote on it is called The Gospel According to Jesus

Chuck Swindoll has been one of the primary voice raising in rebuttal.

As is usully the case, over time, the heart of argument has developed to where there is a great deal of agreement. The core of the position espoused by MacArthur has come to be referred to as Lordship Salvation.

MacArthur argues against "cheap grace" and believes we do people a disservice when we tell them to walk the aisle, pray a prayer and then to hold fast to an irrevocable salvation based on that. MacArthur argues that salvation has to involve repentence and demonstrable change. What he is arguing against has been known in the Church for ages as antinomianism.

MacArthur's position has come to be known as Lordship salvation.

A new updated edition of his book came out recently with some new material.

I have a book review of his book up on Amazon. I'll post it in the book review section for any who are interested.

Just don't think its a new argument. It's been raging for the entire history of the Church.

I think it has to do with a blurring distintion in many passages between justification and sanctification. I do tend to agree with MacArthur that any profession of salvation without the fruits of repentance and evidence of a changed life is a problem.

The question is what is cause and what is effect.[/u]

[August]

I don't think there is anyone here that denies that you are saved by anything but through faith alone, no works required. Both Jac and Canuckster have given good answers. The disagreement between the different points of view is whether there must be any visible signs of your salvation, for your salvation to be true salvation.

From Jac's perspective, the answer is no, you don't have to necessarily show any "fruit" for you to be saved, because that adds works to faith, and is therefore not consistent with the prooftexts he provided. I should add that there is also a distinction in his belief system between disciples and carnal Christians, where both are saved, but the measure of reward in the eternal life differs. Jac, jump in and correct me if I am wrong on anything, and add as needed, this is obviously a short summary.

The perspective that I have(and held by many) is different, in that I believe that after you are born again, by grace through faith, and saved, you are in essence a new person. While some remnants of your sinful nature will remain, you have reborn of the Spirit, and will in faith and conscience act differently than you did before. This is what James refers to as well, that through the grace and love of God, we have been made new, and that having been made new, with the love of God so close to us, and in us, we will act differently.

The debate is whether this acting differently is works unto salvation, or the result of a rebirth through God.

[Jac3510]

I'd agree with every word of the above, with one small exception. August, you make it sound as if the difference in our position is the effect of regeneration. If I may offer an extended quote by Thomas G. Lewellen:

When the Holy Spirit imparts new, spiritual life to the sinner, what is the effect in his character and conduct? If a person is genuinely saved, how will this salvation show itself in his life?

Often this seems to be regarded by proponents of lordship salvation as the issue. Quotations are frequently extracted from history to demonstrate that regeneration produces a visible change in a person's character and conduct and that a lack of change is the certain evidence of a lack of salvation.

However, great essential agreement exists between proponents and opponents of lordship salvation. Both sides agree thtat regeneration, or the impartation of eternal life by the Holy Spirit to a sinner, is required for salvation. Both sides agree that regeneration produces a positional change: a Father-child relationship is established between God and the believing sinner. Both sides also agree that regeneration produces a constitutional change: a person receives the Holy Spirit and eternal life, which is God's quality of life placed within his soul. This constitutional change provides the possibility and the power for a superb transformation of character and conduct. Both sides agree that such transformation is expected, desired, demanded, and possible for the believer.

Both sides also agree that Christians can sin, and sin severely. Both sides agree that sin in a believer is serious and brings on him or her the convicting work of the Holy Spirit and should result in confrontation and discipline by the church. And both sides agree that such disobedience can last for some period of time in a believer.
.
.
.
The issue is not whether Christians should produce good works. The issue is whether those good works have decisive value in determing whether individuals are saved. (Bibliotheca Sacra 147, 1990; p. 64, 66)

Anyway, good summation of my position, I think. The primary question is this: what is the basis of assurance? In the Lordship view, because works are the necessary result of genuine faith, they are the basis of assurance. In the Free Grace view, works have absolutely NO bearing whatsoever either positive or negative on assurance, as they are not a "necessary result." Anyway, you pointed out that distinction very well . . . I just didn't like the implication that the difference is due to a different view of the new nature, that is, regeneration.

God bless

[August]

Anyway, good summation of my position, I think. The primary question is this: what is the basis of assurance? In the Lordship view, because works are the necessary result of genuine faith, they are the basis of assurance. In the Free Grace view, works have absolutely NO bearing whatsoever either positive or negative on assurance, as they are not a "necessary result." Anyway, you pointed out that distinction very well . . . I just didn't like the implication that the difference is due to a different view of the new nature, that is, regeneration.
God bless

Yup, Jac, we have chased each others tails on this issue a few times. I categorically deny "In the Lordship view, because works are the necessary result of genuine faith, they are the basis of assurance." That is simply not true. Assurance is based on the testimony of the Spirit, as per Romans 8:16. Assurance can never be left to the devices of man, it can only be from God. Do I believe that the testimony of the Spirit can and should manifest itself in my life? Of course I do, and from what you quoted above, I don't think you deny that either. I have read many reformed writers, and not a single one of them have ever stated what you say above. I know you provided some quotes elsewhere, I have read most of those guys who you quoted and they go out of their way to deny what you quote-mined from them.

I am curious though, how can you agree with the effects of regeneration, yet deny that those effects are visible testimony of one's salvation?

Anyhiw, I did not want to hijack this thread for yet another discussion on the topic, I just wanted to make sure that our new friend has a clear view of both positions.

[Jac3510]

Can you provide some quotes from Boice or MacArthur saying that works are not the basis of assurance? I did quote severaly from them them in the now locked thread showing the opposite to be the argument. MacArthur gets pretty vicious about it, and Dabney talked about Westminster correcting Calvin's error.

Besides that, the "witness of the Spirit" is awful subjective. For the record, I don't take that as a witness TO our spirit, but a witness WITH our spirit TO the Father. It's the most direct understanding of the grammar, anyway, and it's far from a marginal position.

As for your question, the simple answer is that unsaved people can do "good" works. A person can be really, really, REALLY good . . . they can demonstrate all the outer trappings of being converted, but that is absolutely NO indicator of their spiritual condition. On the flip side, a person can be converted and fall into sin, or lose their faith, so you would never know they had a conversion experience. It is, of course, true that they will find themselves under the chastisement of God, but it would be rather difficult, if not impossible, to figure out what is chastisement as opposed to the plain old bad luck of an unbeliever

[August]

Can you provide some quotes from Boice or MacArthur saying that works are not the basis of assurance? I did quote severaly from them them in the now locked thread showing the opposite to be the argument. MacArthur gets pretty vicious about it, and Dabney talked about Westminster correcting Calvin's error.

From Appendix 3, "The Gospel According To Jesus"

Question: If your view of salvation is correct, how can we lead people to Christ and offer them immediate assurance? You seem to be saying that people need to seek assurance in their works?

Answer: First of all, I do not believe that it is the task of the evangelist to "offer assurance". That's the Holy Spirit's work: "The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God" (Rom 8:16). Having said that, however, I do believe there is an immediate aspect to assurance, grounded in the promise of the gospel. How did the thief on the cross know he was saved? He had the Lord's own promise. We find many promises in the Scripture that assure believers of their eternal destiny (e.g. John 3:16, 1 John 5:1). Those promises offer objective assurance to genuine believers. Even a brand new believer can look to such promises and find a measure of assurance. Other Scripture passages speak of subjective measures of assurance. For example, 1 John 2:3 says, "By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments". This aspect of assurance grows and deepens as one walks consistently with the Lord. And Christians who persist in sin for a time forfeit this aspect of assurance for as long as they are grieving the Holy Spirit. Both the objective and subjective means of assurance are spoken of in Romans 15:4: "Whatever was written in earlier times was written for our own instruction, that through perseverance [subjective], and the encouragement of Scripture [objective], we might have hope." Also it is important to understand what Scripture is teaching about subjective assurance. It is not that we seek assurance in our works, but that we gain assurance from sensing the Spirit's work in us. Again, it is the Holy Spirit that bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God. We do not gain assurance by convincing our intellect that we are saved. True assurance is not an academic issue. There are no formulas that can bring it about. It is an importnat part of the lifelong growth process of the Christian life.

I hope this is clear enough. It is a direct answer to the accusation that is leveled against MacArthur. I have read about 5 of MacArthurs books, and even though there are some things I disagree with on him, I have never had the impression that he views anything but grace as the determining factor for all of the Ordo Salutis.

I have not read any of Boice, but I have read Berkhof, Grudem, Mcgrath, Owen, Calvin, etc, and not once have I seen what you have said.

[Jac3510]

Fair enough, but it looks to me like double speak on MacArthur's part. Notice what he says . . .

Having said that, however, I do believe there is an immediate aspect to assurance, grounded in the promise of the gospel. How did the thief on the cross know he was saved? He had the Lord's own promise.

MacArthur starst here, and continues through his quote, to pay (what I would call) lip service to the doctrine of assurance, but turns around and takes it right away. It's all contingent on an unknowablw reality. Regardless, the theif is a bad example, because Jesus Himself testified to the man's salvation. If Jesus comes and personally announces that someone is saved, I'm going to believe Him regardless of how they behave/what they say

We find many promises in the Scripture that assure believers of their eternal destiny (e.g. John 3:16, 1 John 5:1). Those promises offer objective assurance to genuine believers. Even a brand new believer can look to such promises and find a measure of assurance. Other Scripture passages speak of subjective measures of assurance.

But how do you know if you are a genuine believer? Do you see the self-contradiction? Supposedly, this assurance is OBJECTIVE IF you are genuine. And how do you know if you are genuine? But, then we have this "measure of" assurance . . . what does that mean? Not too much . . .

For example, 1 John 2:3 says, "By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments". This aspect of assurance grows and deepens as one walks consistently with the Lord. And Christians who persist in sin for a time forfeit this aspect of assurance for as long as they are grieving the Holy Spirit.

The quote itself doesn't help John's case, because we don't take that passage as having anything to do with salvation. But, even if we did, it actually robs a person of assurance, as MacArthur is forced here to admit. Note that this subjective assurance (NOT OBJECTIVE) grows AS ONE WALKS CONSISTENTLY. In other words, as we grow/persevere in faith/good works. And, to make matters worse, that assurance is lost, by MacArthur's own admission, when we fall into sin. Therefore, what he is saying is that, when we find ourselves in sin, WE CANNOT KNOW THAT WE ARE SAVED. So, how can I know that I won't at some point fall into sin? The answer is that I can't.

Both the objective and subjective means of assurance are spoken of in Romans 15:4: "Whatever was written in earlier times was written for our own instruction, that through perseverance [subjective], and the encouragement of Scripture [objective], we might have hope." Also it is important to understand what Scripture is teaching about subjective assurance. It is not that we seek assurance in our works, but that we gain assurance from sensing the Spirit's work in us.

The words sound nice, but they just don't mean anything. I guess if they mean something to LSers, good for y'all. But if you follow what he's saying, it just doesn't add up. The subjective "assurance" trumps the objective "assurance." Why? Because the objective "assurance" is only to the genuine believer, but you don't know you are genuine except subjectively. We could put it this way: the objective assurance is that we can subjectively be assured.

Like I said, double speak. As for the Spirit's working in us, again, it's just rubbish. It's just double speak. It doesn't mean anything. It doesn't actually deal with the issue, because you can't account for people who thought the Spirit was working in them, yet then they fall away from the faith, proving they never believed. You can be more and more "sure", as John admits himself, but you can't KNOW. And that, August, is my primary point. LS offers know KNOWLEDGE of salvation on an OBJECTIVE level.

Again, it is the Holy Spirit that bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God. We do not gain assurance by convincing our intellect that we are saved. True assurance is not an academic issue. There are no formulas that can bring it about. It is an importnat part of the lifelong growth process of the Christian life.

I don't suppose we are here to debate John's arguments. You already know that I disagree with his interpretation of the Romans passage on the Spirit bearing witness. But, anyway, this last part totally supports my claim. For John, assurance is a byproduct of growing in Christ. The more we become like Him, the more the Spirit works in us, the more we can know for sure that we are saved. The direct result of the Spirit working in us is good works and the purging of sin. Thus, in order to be really sure you are saved, you have to really act like a Christian and even better you have to feel like one on the inside.

Let me ask you a more objective question, August:

Can you agree with me that John and I are presenting two different doctrines of assurance? He is talking about an inductive process whereby a person has more and more reason to believe he is saved, whereas I am talking about a deductive process where as a person has absolute knowledge of their salvation (on the assumption, of course, that my argument is correct concerning salvation in the first place).

Put another way, if we define assurance as "The absolute knowledge that one is savsed," then can a person have assurance of their salvation in the LS position? I think your quote from MacArthur above pretty strongly demonstrates that answer is a strong "No."

[August]

C'mon Jac my friend, this is why I have a hard time discussing this with you. You ask for a quote, I give you one, and it seems that since you did not like what you read, because it does not say what you believed it should say, you resort to an ad-hominem attack on MacArthur. Accusing him of "double-speak", "paying lip-service", "words don't mean anything", "rubbish" etc is not the way that I would like to discuss this. You are essentially calling him a liar, misrepresenting his own position, and I cannot accept that you respond in good faith when you do that. You are simply reading things into his answer that are not there.

I'll gladly respond to any objective arguments, but I am not going to answer arguments presented in that tone. It will lead us down a slippery slope that we have regretfully been before, and I do not wish to do that.

[Jac3510]

*sigh*

There's nothing wrong with the argument I presented, August. What would you say if a Catholic told you he didn't believe in salvation by faith plus works. That was just a misunderstanding. Salvation is by faith alone, and then he goes on with some sort of justification as to why works being necessary don't mean salvation by works. It's a real example. Byblos has done as much here. Is it not proper to point out the logical conclusions of their position?

Now, of all the adjectives I used, "rubbish" is probably the only one could be considered overboard. I committed abosolutely no ad hominems. John sees the problem with his position: it can't offer assurance. So, he tries to show why that isn't the case. Fine. His solution: two types of assurance. One is objective, and the other is subjective. But, in his system, OBJECTIVE ASSURANCE DOES NOT MEAN ANYTHING. Yes, we can say that the true believer is guaranteed salvation, and thus he can KNOW that he can be saved. However, how does one know if he is a true believer? By his subjective experience.

This needs to be discussed without getting personal. I've no problem doing that. So, we can do a couple of things: you can get the quotes that I've listed (which were more than a few) in which LS'ers outright claim that works are necessary for assurance. You can then try to explain them, since you "catagorically deny" that is one of the beliefs. You can then try to explain how subjective assurance does not trump objective assurance. You can finally answer my questions above: is there a way to have 100% knowledge of one's own salvation?

[August]

Yup, *sigh* indeed.

It is clear that we have different opinions on what healthy discourse looks like. We keep going back and forth with these arguments, and make no progress, as we haven't over the last few months, because I have to continuously defend against what I perceive to be ad-hominem attacks. I do not want to keep on having to filter out the arguments from your rhetoric, as that ultimately will lead us to the same point as before, where in my mind your style and arguments become inseparable. I already said I do not want to have this conversation in that tone. The fact that you don't means that we just won't have the conversation, simple as that.

God bless.

[YLTYLT]

August,

The words "OBJECTIVE" and "SUBJECTIVE" in John's explanation of his position is kind of confusing me.

Here are their definitions:

ob·jec·tive ( P ) Pronunciation Key (b-jktv)
adj.
Of or having to do with a material object.
Having actual existence or reality.

Uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices: an objective critic. See Synonyms at fair1.
Based on observable phenomena; presented factually: an objective appraisal.


sub·jec·tive ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sb-jktv)
adj.

Proceeding from or taking place in a person's mind rather than the external world: a subjective decision.
Particular to a given person; personal: subjective experience.
Moodily introspective.
Existing only in the mind; illusory.
Psychology. Existing only within the experiencer's mind.
Medicine. Of, relating to, or designating a symptom or condition perceived by the patient and not by the examiner.
Expressing or bringing into prominence the individuality of the artist or author.
Grammar. Relating to or being the nominative case.
Relating to the real nature of something; essential.

Based on the definitions above: If perseverance is SUBJECTIVE, it is only in the mind of the person experiencing it. Therefore we should not rely on it, because it is not of God, but of man. Also if perseverance is SUBJECTIVE, then a person may think he is persevering, but in fact is not.
But this is just my subjective opinion.

OBJECTIVE assurance, which is what Jac seems to be referring to is the only true assurance. We receive that objective assurance from scripture.

August,
Can you explain this in a way that may not be so confusing. Or maybe John M. has more text that you can pull from that can help me understand this position.