Works ARE Neccessary for Salvation

I believe that works ARE neccesary for salvation, but works of the kind that stem from the nature that faith IS, inherently, in EVERY Scriptural instance, tied to something you DO. It is not law-works or conscience-works, but faith-works.

When we Christians read the word "works" in Paul's letters, we read it to say "all works of any sort at any point whatsover, period."

But in context, Paul did not mean that. He was meaning, foremost, law-works undertaken to merit right-standing with God apart from grace through faith. He secondarily meant "conscience-works" undertaken by Gentiles. None of those works will merit right-standing with God.

But the works that are utterly inseparable from "believing" and "faith"--faith-works--are categorically non-optionals if we would inherit eternal salvation.

Think of the Biblical characters:

Noah - "BUILD NOW an Ark"

Abraham - "LEAVE [Ur]"; "GO TO the land"; "HAVE children;" "TAKE now Isaac...TO"

Moses - "GO NOW TO;" TAKE NOW the Blood; etc.

Joshua - MARCH AROUND the walls

General: "REPENT and believe the gospel."

"TAKE UP you cross and FOLLOW Me."

"Whoever LOSES his life for My sake will keep it."

The sheep and the goats: the difference between them?: What they did and didn't DO.

All those CAPITALIZED WORDS above are VERBS, something you DO--in short, faith-works. Faith comes by hearing the word of Christ, and that word, EVERY TIME in Scripture is a telling of one TO DO something.

It can even be viewed very simply: "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved."

"Believe" is A CONTINUOUS VERB, not a noun, not a one-time event. And a verb is action, movement, something you DO.

It is often asked, "What about the thief on the cross? What did he DO?"

Reply: How do we even know about the thief on the cross? What things of the thief does Luke record for us? We know about the thief at all because of what he DID. Luke records the thieve's DEEDS.

Faith is not to have and to hold. Faith is unto being and going and doing.

Neitzche declared that "God is dead." I pray for the time where Faith without works IS indeed dead. I wonder if the ills from the latter are worse than from the former.

[ March 06, 2002, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: LP ]

 

I think the issues being raised are answered in simply seperating pre-regenrative works from post regenerative works. The former ain't gonna do a thing for ya. The latter are inseperable from faith. That is why I prefer to call them faith-works, which makes no sharp distinction.

[ March 06, 2002, 10:37 PM: Message edited by: LP ]

 

See my reply to the same.

 

I don't have a problem with the source of faith-works being God. They MUST be, else they are not faith-works, but law-works!

I think going to the Time to Mature in Our Soteriology discussion might be the better place to continue this:

http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000625#000002

 

Yep. Sad what they and those like them did/do.

Of course, that passage has nothing to with what I am trying to get across. You appearently are not understanding what I am saying.

We tend to think Paul's conception "works" was that works are works are works are works--any and all works, period, no ifs and or buts about it. We tend to think that, to him, all works, irrespective of anything at all, are lumped into one. Is that what Paul really meant? Of course not. Even above he said the works are of the type where people go about trying to "establish their own righteousness."

Everything about the whole context of the word "works" in Paul's use of it screams a certain TYPE of works, specifically, law-works, and secondarily, conscience-works and by-nature-works. Otherwise, perhaps Luther was right and we need to take James from the cannon???

Now, did James have the works are works are works are works conception of works in mind when he used "works"? Just like with the case of Paul, of course not.

Everything about the whole context of the word "works" in James' use of it screams a certain TYPE of works, specifically, faith-works. Otherwise, perhaps we need to remove Paul's letters from the cannon.

A certain type of works ARE NOT necessary for salvation, and indeed, are antithical and inimical to it. Paul said so. EQUALLY, another type of works ARE necessary for salvation, and indeed, are integral and essential to it. James said so.

I submit that erroneous notions of soteriology arise when we fail to make this distinction, and instead lump all "works" into one.

I'd prefer not to deal with this thread anymore but the similar one as mentioned above.

[ March 09, 2002, 12:15 PM: Message edited by: LP ]

 

I and others are puzzled by the silence over the issue here and wonder if it is only that what I am saying cannot be countered. Such wonderment is, of course, only natural.

[ March 09, 2002, 04:23 PM: Message edited by: LP ]

 

Good comment.

 

Salvation being OF God is one thing. Excluding man's part in RESPONDING TO THAT is quite another.

The above shows man's part: "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." And it shows God's part: "for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to do for His good pleasure." This gets across the same:

To accept your notion--that there is God's part, but man has no part--we would have to say that all man's actions are determined and he has no free-will. Or else man has a psuedo free-will of the type where man just thinks he has free-will, and since this is so, the Bible writes as if he has free-will, but that through it all, God is really mandating all of man's actions, period, as if strapped upon an anvil. In other words, that determinsm is true.

To accept your notion, the above highlighted portion, "If ye continue in the faith," would have to read "since you will indeed continue in the faith." It neither says that, nor implies it. You have the same problem here:

If man had no part, the above would have to say, "For we are made partakers of Christ, and we will indeed hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end." As before, it neither says that, nor implies it.

God will do His part, no one questions that. But man MUST do his part in responding to God's promptings, if he is to receive introduction into grace, continue on in salvation's process, and inherit eternal salvation in the end. Those responses of man to God's workings are, in short, "faith-works." If one does not do them, the same has "neglected so great a salvation," and therefore has "only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire" awaiting them. Is this as "easy" doctrine or popular doctrine? No. Is it sound? Yes. Because as it has said all along, "faith without works is dead."

[ March 10, 2002, 12:34 AM: Message edited by: LP ]