"Wrath of God" as used in the Scriptures

break it down for me

 

Thought for those needing a bit of assistance about this Word “faith”

4102 pístis (from 3982/peithô, "persuade, be persuaded") – properly, persuasion (be persuaded, come to trust); faith.

Faith (4102/pistis) is always a gift from God, and never something that can be produced by people. In short, 4102/pistis ("faith") for the believer is "God's divine persuasion" – and therefore distinct from human belief (confidence), yet involving it. The Lord continuously births faith in the yielded believer so they can know what He prefers, i.e. the persuasion of His will (1 Jn 5:4).

Taken from here.

 

The gift of faith is a fiction, and unbiblical. God credits our faith, not instills divine faith. Jesus says, you faith has healed you, not the faith I compelled you to have healed you. On and on they go, making one unbiblical claim after another.

In Ephesians 2:8, the gift is salvation not faith. We are saved by grace through faith, thus our faith exists before we are saved.

 

You views are unbiblical.

Repeating a false charge over and over is all they have. Salvation by grace through faith is biblical.

More nonsense, more change of subject, more evasion. Note, he did not ask a question based on what I said.

Meaningless absurdity, another effort to change the subject.

Asked and answered. We are saved through faith, therefore our faith exists before salvation, and salvation changes our heart.

How about Romans 10:10? :)

 

Here is the biblical position, all our works of righteousness, when we were unsaved, are as filthy rags to God. So our faith has no merit or worth before God. Agedman claims that our faith must have merit, which is unbiblical once again. The reason God credits our faith as righteousness, is by itself our faith is not righteous, it is worthless. God turns, so to speak, a sows ear into a silk purse. Thus we are saved by God's grace and not by our will. Roman's 9:16 teaches salvation does not depend on the person who wills to be saved, or works to be saved, but upon God who has mercy upon whom He chooses.

 

No I said that YOU desire, evidenced by your own words, that human faith must have some authority or power to get God's attention.



Perhaps it would be wise to consider giving what is below some serious thought. Below is exactly how the word is used in the Language of the Scriptures.



4102 pístis (from 3982/peithô, "persuade, be persuaded") – properly, persuasion (be persuaded, come to trust); faith.

Faith (4102/pistis) is always a gift from God, and never something that can be produced by people. In short, 4102/pistis ("faith") for the believer is "God's divine persuasion" – and therefore distinct from human belief (confidence), yet involving it. The Lord continuously births faith in the yielded believer so they can know what He prefers, i.e. the persuasion of His will (1 Jn 5:4).

[4102 (pistis) in secular antiquity referred to a guarantee (warranty). In Scripture, faith is God's warranty, certifying that the revelation He inbirthed will come to pass (His way).

That is copied from the long standard source.

I am not claiming what has not been the consistent use by the scriptures and understood definition by accurate scholarship.

You are one who prides himself on learning, are you not?

Then learn the truth and reject it not because of some bias you hold dear.

 

How about realizing your human faith is as fallen as the old nature.

Read what I copied and pasted. It has long been the standard use of the wor faith.

 

Van stated "Repeating a false charge over and over is all they have. Salvation by grace through faith is biblical."

What false charge?

It isn't false if backed up by proof.

Proof taken by your own words.

You are merely attempting to distract from the absurdity of your own words.

 

A great difficulty (imo) is the reconciliation of the human concept of the wrath of God with that presented in Scriptures.

Part of that difficulty no doubt is the preconceived concept that in some manner God is angry at His creation and more particularly the humankind.

Yet, as already shown earlier in the thread, such thinking is misplaced.

God sent His one and only natural born Son into this world, not to condemn it.

God doesn't need to condemn it. That was already a done deal with the fall.

The wrath of God then must take some other form, than that in which comes to the believer's mind as a result of preconceived thinking.

This thread has attempted in a small way to address the erroneous thinking and present a more biblical model.

Perhaps this thread has teased some to think upon this subject from a different perspective.

To understand the biblical display of God's wrath is one thing, but to experience it is horrible.

He alone is the creator and sustain-er of all. Those things which are seen and those that are not. It is fearful to incite God to stand in opposition and settle into indignation.

God does not have to direct His actions against humankind.

Him rising to opposition and settling into indignation are enough to remove His blessings from both the good and the bad people. When such is removed, the humankind find themselves experiencing what we term as the wrath of God.

Really what is experienced is the results of our own sinfulness. It is the wrath we (both believers and unbelievers) have stored and in which God allows to be dispensed.

Romans 1 has some foundational thinking associated with the wrath of God and the results.

If this thread continues, it may be wise to look specifically at that portion of Scriptures.

 

Agedman, no need to copy and paste screed. The definition of faith found in scripture and in lexicons does not support your unbiblical view.

Repeating the falsehood that my words (salvation by grace through faith) supports works based salvation demonstrates the paucity of your support.

I said our faith is as filthy rags, worthless, without merit. So why do you indicate I do not recognize our faith is as fallen as our fallen nature? No, the shoe is on the other foot, why do you not realize God crediting our faith as righteousness turns our worthless faith into access into grace?

Denial of the obvious is your ploy, not mine. We are saved by grace through faith, not saved by grace and given faith. That is your false assertion, and it is obviously false.

Lastly this is the latest false claim, that dispenses the wrath of God toward born anew believers. That view is unbiblical, the wrath of God is removed from those transferred into Christ and thus saved. He provides, through His blood, propitiation of the wrath of God toward us.

 

Such broad claims, yet you have not recanted YOUR OWN words.

Prove that what I posted concerning faith copied from a long held as authority source is wrong, or wrongly copied. It directly contradicts your own view as stated by YOUR OWN words.

It is your own words that you argue against. I was very careful to present your words accurately, yet you would claim that I am the one in error. How am I in error when I quoted YOU?

I get the impression you don’t really know the topic of the OP other than what you assume. And desire to continue on this rabbit trail of distraction to the OP.

 

I am rather troubled at your tactic here with Van. Van makes a statement, you then characterize it how you want to, state that characterization as fact and then claim he said the very thing in the way you chose to characterize it.

He does not support a works based salvation. That is your characterization. He never said "I support a works based salvation". Characterizing his words that then stating that is what he actually said lack s integrity. Please correct your stance on his words.

 

Below is Paul’s opening statement to a letter he wrote to the Roman assembly.

This letter is one of the richest in expressing the heart of both the Apostle and the gospel he presented.

Other than the writings of John, this letter of Paul’s is one that lays out foundation principles and doctrine.

I wonder if Paul wrote it in this way because he feared he might not get to Rome, and wanted to establish the message just in case.

It is important that the words “For the wrath” are a single word used also throughout Ephesians.

The basic working definition of wrath is as one rising up in disposition to steadfastly oppose. It is as if the judge in a court has been offended by a lawyer or witness and makes a declaration of judgment against them.

The judge does not actively participate in the judgment, however the judgment is no less certain and sever.

One must not neglect that all have “within them” the evidence of God. So none are with an excuse.

However, the wrath of God is a targeted wrath and not a general rath to all.

The quote by Paul could be written, “But the righteous man shall live by the persuasion of God.” (Faith is defined as “persuasion of God”)


Romans 1:

16For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.”

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
.

 

Did you not read the quote of His that I posted more than once?

Perhaps you can see the quote in some other way, but it is plain that the quote has humankind achieving some level of merit in order to activate God’s action.

If you do see the quote as different than expressed, take the quote and show how Van is correct.

Does man do something to gain salvation?

If that is true, then such is work based.

If not, then the person is a respondent to the work of God, and that is in direct conflict with the quote from Van.

 

Well, you set up the frame work in this conversation so you have something to shoot down. I reject your framework.

Again, in what situation in our world does the person who receives a gift by reaching out and taking if from the person who is giving it, do we consider the receiver part of the giving? Such an idea is only used by reformed/cals/particular/whateveryourflavoris and it is never used by anyone else anywhere in the world. Ever. It is a weak logic and in fact untrue.

That aside, for you to claim he supports a works based salvation is untrue if he denies that his understanding of scripture is not such. He has to actually claim he supports a works based salvation for that to be true. And it is rude and lacks integrity for you are anyone to say that is his position when he denies it.

You need to find a better way to deal with your disagreement with this view here other than intentionally misrepresenting him.

 

No I quoted him in more than one post.

He nor you are apparently ready to recant from his work based statement.

Exactly how did I miss represent him when I used his own words?

Either, according to HIS words humankind must do something to which God then responds (work based) or God authors in such a manner that humankind respond (salvation by grace).

This is not of some middle ground being able to be found.

Do you actually hold to Van’s statement that I quoted and that he has not recanted?

 

Aw, you did not read what he wrote that i quoted.

Van states;

The ungodly lost spiritually dead individuals first put their wholehearted trust in Christ, and then if God credits that faith as righteousness, He transfers them into Christ where they undergo the circumcision of Christ, the washing of regeneration and arise in Christ a new creation, made righteous, blameless and perfect. Thus the justification occrs after God puts a believer into Christ.
​

Now, you can either admit that Van is basing salvation upon human effort FIRST and withdraw support from his view, or join with him in the matter.

But do not contend that it is my words, my thinking, my view that has been brought into question. For it most certainly is not.

Van repeatedly attempted to appoint all statements of mine as unbiblical. In effect he was labeling me as heretical. I stood against such a claim by repeatedly posting his own words.

He avoided recanting in favor of trying to hide the issue in matters other than his statement.

Throughout Scriptures, in every instance of human interaction, it is God who does the first work. Humankind are always pictured as the respondents.

Yet, the quote above shows Van’s view is that humans must FIRST do and God responds to the human effort.

 

Again please answer my question:

"Tell me where in the world when someone receives a gift it is then considered to be part of the giving also."

 

Thanks for exposing the fact that salvation by grace through faith is not a works based salvation. The claim is absurd, a falsehood, and demonstrates the sacrifice of truth on the alter of partisanship.

Note the ploy of making false charges against me, thus changing the subject from his false beliefs, that we are saved by grace then given faith. Unbiblical and ignores that God credits our faith as righteousness.

Again, thanks for standing up for truth.