Faith Without Works...

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I would say faith produces works and that once those works are produced then they are entertwined with your faith in such a way that the two cannot be separated. In other words, faith is first, then a work is produced, and from that moment on our faith is seen in that work.

I would say that if faith produced works, works was already there intertwined with faith waiting for an opportunity. It's just that you cannot see faith without works. The Word doesn't bear out that Abram struggled with what God told him to do - leave his people and land. He immediately acted on his faith. I think they arrive at the same moment. Our faith is alive and always waiting for an opportunity.

The only other option is to view works and faith occuring simultaneously. I disagree with this view because it implies that every every hour we are without a work that we are in a state of dead faith awaiting our faith to come alive again only at the moment of our next work.

I don't agree. You cannot see faith. Works is physical and faith is a heart thing.

How would our faith die because our works are not physically and visibly operative 24/7? Is someone going to knock on your door naked and destitute asking for food 24/7?

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I would say that if faith produced works, works was already there intertwined with faith waiting for an opportunity. It's just that you cannot see faith without works. The Word doesn't bear out that Abram struggled with what God told him to do - leave his people and land. He immediately acted on his faith. I think they arrive at the same moment. Our faith is alive and always waiting for an opportunity.


I don't agree. You cannot see faith. Works is physical and faith is a heart thing.

How would our faith die because our works are not physically and visibly operative 24/7? Is someone going to knock on your door naked and destitute asking for food 24/7?

I have highlighted in red the parts that agree with my position and in blue the parts that do not.

Half of what you are saying claims that faith sticks around between works. The other half claims that faith and works arrive at the same moment.

I mean even thinking about this post is starting to make my head hurt...

[noeticknight]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I have highlighted in red the parts that agree with my position and in blue the parts that do not.

Half of what you are saying claims that faith sticks around between works. The other half claims that faith and works arrive at the same moment.

I mean even thinking about this post is starting to make my head hurt...

Half of what you are saying claims that faith sticks around between works. The other half claims that faith and works arrive at the same moment.

That doesn't make sense to me. Our quiet faith is always present. I have faith sitting in a chair. If you walk in, I will get up and feed you. My faith then becomes visibly apparent. I don't have to be doing something 24/7 to prove I have living faith. I just need to do something when the opportunity is laid before me.

You highlighted this in red to indicate you were in agreement. If you do agree with that, then your head shouldn't be hurting.

How would our faith die because our works are not physically and visibly operative 24/7?

I am saying that I see that Abram wasn't counted as righteous until AFTER he obeyed God and left the land of the Chaldees. His believing included his trust and obedience. Our faith cannot be separated from our obedience. Faith is not a mental assent, it is always accompanied by and with obedience.

Now, our postings are starting to get that tumble around in a dryer effect and I don't see what else can be said on this subject. We have all laid out our cases/views and no one is thinking any differently than they did at the outset.

[Pressing-On]

Incidentally, Paul's writings for "faith/pistis" in the Greek text is referring to our trust and reliance in God which motivates our actions.

In, A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews and Gentiles, Stanley Stowers notes that Paul associates "pistis" with obedience.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Incidentally, Paul's writings for "faith/pistis" in the Greek text is referring to our trust and reliance in God which motivates our actions.

In, A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews and Gentiles, Stanley Stowers notes that Paul associates "pistis" with obedience.

If you read John also "pistis" is continuing reliance on not a simply a point action. As in keeping on which is consistent with the rest of scripture. Which makes it "alive" not a will do but THE response in context to his Word.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Socialite

Our judgment has already been given to Jesus. We are pardoned as long as we remain in Him -- and we are "in Him" by grace through faith. This is the Gospel. The Gospel isn't a "let's try this again" game. The Gospel is "I know you've tried it so many times, so I'll do it for you" story. Any good works we produce come by the Spirit, a picture of the grace he's already done for us.

through faith... "it is not a mental assent" so as long as we do his commandments we abide correct? To simply acknowledge the cross and believe your sins are gone because acknowledge it is true and for you is not a living faith per James. Doing his will/commandment is abiding per Jesus. Yes he has already "done" for us but because he has done something for us doesn't mean we are abiding in him. The new covenant is a bilateral contract and your "conditional clause" of "IF" proves it.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by LUKE2447

If you read John also "pistis" is continuing reliance on not a simply a point action. As in keeping on which is consistent with the rest of scripture. Which makes it "alive" not a will do but THE response in context to his Word.

Amen!

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Maybe sounds a bit like judging, but the Bible says to "judge with righteous judgment." You don't know the details and I'm not telling about it here.

But, it's false to do those things and call what you do faith. Like someone said earlier, "They sound like they need discipleship." I agree. That is probably the problem. And for the record, the people I am thinking of are not in the org. Hope that didn't disappoint anyone.

It is difficult to follow your reasoning when propriety forces us to remain either silent or ignorant of the details and the people under discussion. Perhaps it would be best to discuss those people and events that we are free to discuss.

I don't build my theology around the activities of those I consider to have some how failed in their service to Jesus Christ. I try not to react against what they've done and I certainly don't try and follow their examples. My theology is born of a life time of reading and studying. In fact, I can tell you the exact month and year - September 1972 - that I first began a serious and (for my age) detailed investigation of the Scripture. I was eleven years old, but even before that I was always questioning and seeking answers to the most difficult of questions.

I struggled for years (decades!) to try and fit in with a system of works based justification. Every aspect my life and ministry was subjected to a faulty method of evaluation that for some reason excluded the work of Jesus Christ on the Cross at Calvary. As I began to understand the truth of the Doctrine of Justification I began to feel more and more freedom in my spirit and ever closer to a living God.

My own life and the moral aspects of my behavior were largely - pretty much entirely - unchanged and remain so to this day. The only "changes" are related to "standards." I even have something of a standing invitation to rejoin "an org." as a licensed minister if I would just sign the new revised Articles of Faith. I prefer the "Old Paths" and the original Articles of Faith, thank you very much.

Ironically, those around me that had sought to subvert my freedom in Christ actually fell into the worst sorts of sin. Sexual perversions, adultery, child molestations and an innocent man was even killed so that a more prominent preacher's adultery could be covered up. I can and have discussed those events candidly here in the past. The details tend to be so upsetting that I have been frequently asked to not bring this up.

Yet, it happened. I was the "greasy grace" kind of guy and was faithful to my only wife and still remain as faithful to her today as I was at the start. My faith was shaken at the time and I honestly opened my heart up to question everything I had ever known and believed, but I remain a Christian and I find that I have more confidence in the Bible as God's Word than ever. "They" were the "holiness or hell" guys and they backslid and fell into a very angry sin - and they retain their seats of "power" and still receive all the same "praise" and prestige from "True Apostolics®."

I don't know you personally and I wouldn't presume to try and "judge" your thoughts, intentions and actions. But my own stand point - a stand point that has been discussed and hashed out and thrown around quite a bit on this forum (as well as in District Board meetings) still stands - I see very little good in trying to live for God in a manner where a person seeks to justify themselves with their behavior or "standards" and such.

Eventually that person may find themselves backed into a corner where, in order to "justify" themselves and to prove they haven't "gone soft on "The Message®," they have to do things that they wouldn't otherwise have done if they were free to truly live for God.

Only Jesus Christ can save us. I wish that was "The Message®."

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by pelathais

It is difficult to follow your reasoning when propriety forces us to remain either silent or ignorant of the details and the people under discussion. Perhaps it would be best to discuss those people and events that we are free to discuss.

I don't build my theology around the activities of those I consider to have some how failed in their service to Jesus Christ. I try not to react against what they've done and I certainly don't try and follow their examples. My theology is born of a life time of reading and studying. In fact, I can tell you the exact month and year - September 1972 - that I first began a serious and (for my age) detailed investigation of the Scripture. I was eleven years old, but even before that I was always questioning and seeking answers to the most difficult of questions.

I struggled for years (decades!) to try and fit in with a system of works based justification. Every aspect my life and ministry was subjected to a faulty method of evaluation that for some reason excluded the work of Jesus Christ on the Cross at Calvary. As I began to understand the truth of the Doctrine of Justification I began to feel more and more freedom in my spirit and ever closer to a living God.

My own life and the moral aspects of my behavior were largely - pretty much entirely - unchanged and remain so to this day. The only "changes" are related to "standards." I even have something of a standing invitation to rejoin "an org." as a licensed minister if I would just sign the new revised Articles of Faith. I prefer the "Old Paths" and the original Articles of Faith, thank you very much.

Ironically, those around me that had sought to subvert my freedom in Christ actually fell into the worst sorts of sin. Sexual perversions, adultery, child molestations and an innocent man was even killed so that a more prominent preacher's adultery could be covered up. I can and have discussed those events candidly here in the past. The details tend to be so upsetting that I have been frequently asked to not bring this up.

Yet, it happened. I was the "greasy grace" kind of guy and was faithful to my only wife and still remain as faithful to her today as I was at the start. My faith was shaken at the time and I honestly opened my heart up to question everything I had ever known and believed, but I remain a Christian and I find that I have more confidence in the Bible as God's Word than ever. "They" were the "holiness or hell" guys and they backslid and fell into a very angry sin - and they retain their seats of "power" and still receive all the same "praise" and prestige from "True Apostolics®."

I don't know your personally and I wouldn't presume to try and "judge" your thoughts, intentions and actions. But my own stand point - a stand point that has been discussed and hashed out and thrown around quite a bit on this forum (as well as in District Board meetings) still stands - I see very little good in trying to live for God in a manner where a person seeks to justify themselves with their behavior or "standards" and such.

Eventually that person may find themselves backed into a corner where, in order to "justify" themselves and to prove they haven't "gone soft on "The Message®," they have to do things that they wouldn't otherwise have done if they were free to truly live for God.

Only Jesus Christ can save us. I wish that was "The Message®."

Thanks for your post, Pel. I am merely saying that I saw two sides of "faith" presented before me. And as I stated previously, I believe that everyone teaches a "justification by faith". But, there are two views being presented. One view has a more mental assent or verbal communication. The other view understands that, just as Romans teaches, faith cannot ever be separated from obedience. That is my view as well.