I'm very sorry for the protracted delay in responding to you. I've been busy with multiple items, and the response you deserve is not one that I can provide in a 15-30 minute setting. I realize the following response is lengthy, but you have already demonstrated an honorable determination, interest, and capacity for more, so I will open up a little more.
What This Discussion is NOT About
We are
not discussing Christians, who are giving all diligence and slip up occasionally in weakness or ignorance. We are discussing people who
deliberately choose to ignore God's commands, because they essentially believe they are optional. In fact, such people remain willingly disobedient. Furthermore, we are
not discussing Christians patiently interacting with each other, as they grow in diligence, studying, and lovingly correcting each other. We are discussing brethren who willingly fellowship Christians who deliberately choose to ignore God's commands. If we were discussing those other points exclusively, I think we would have much in common. However, I understand that this discussion relates to people's attitude toward carefully obeying God's Word and fellowshipping those who do not maintain such an attitude in practice.
Bottom-Line Up Front
You've raised a lot of good points, and I did not want to overlook any. However, there are so many points, it would be easy for us to become overwhelmed or lost. So, before I offer categorized answers to your new questions, I would like to offer my primary argument. This should be answered satisfactorily before proceeding to the remaining points, because the others are logically built upon this one:
It seems to me that you primary argument is, "If God saves us without any respect to obeying the commands of the NT, except the command to love your neighbor as Christ loved us, then who are we to demand any more from our fellow man?" That's a good question. And, if that indeed was and is God's attitude toward us, then I will not discuss institutionalism, church organization, instrumental music, and such like ever again. However, if God asks more, by the same token, who are we to sanction less? So, ultimately this all boils down to our personal salvation and justification*. (* This is a slight simplification, even though it should not detract from this discussion. Please see more below.) If we are saved by grace, apart from obedience to commands such as baptism, then I will concede. However, if God demands our obedience to any command beyond
our subjective interpretation of the command to love our neighbor as Christ love us, then I believe all your arguments in this exchange will have been answered. So, does God demand any more than diligent adherence to our interpretation of love?
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. (I Corinthians 6:9-11)
Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Galatians 5:19-21)
What do you think? Does "love your neighbor" prohibit
all of these? Sure, if someone steals, reviles, murders, or commits adultery against their neighbor, then they have obviously not "loved their neighbor", from which if we do not repent, we absolutely will not inherit the kingdom. However, what about fornicators, homosexuals, sodomites, and drunkards? What about idolaters, sorcerers and -
heretics?! What if your interpretation, your judgment, your feeling from love on any of these issues is one of acceptance? Would your subjective interpretation of love overrule God's will on this matter? What if someone else's subjective interpretation of love condoned any of these issues, would you rebuke and ultimately distance yourself from them? ... Where is the danger of deception? Why the additional warning and emphasis? ... Please note, at the time of writing
I Corinthians, some of the Corinthians
"were" (past tense) these kinds of people. But, by that time, they no longer were such people. If they were required to repent from such works, would not our conversion - washing (when does that occur?), sanctification, and justification - also require the same? Would these not constitute a "law", a code of "works", or things to do or not do?
For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell. (Acts 15:28-29)
How did the apostles - under the guidance and recording of the Holy Spirit - arrive at the conclusion that these things were necessary, if we are just supposed to love our neighbor? Would your interpretation of loving our neighbor require that we stay from blood and things strangled? I don't see how that has anything to do with my neighbor.
How about this one on the topic of divorce, since you brought it up previously: Is the following a requirement? Would it be a sin to transgress it? Paul said it was a commandment that he was re-delivering on the Lord's behalf: (Please compare to
Matthew 5:32; 19:9.)
Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband. But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife. (I Corinthians 7:10-11)
What law contains such a command? ... In the same book, Paul commands several other "finer points of worship", like:
If anyone speaks in a tongue, let there be two or at the most three, each in turn, and let one interpret. But if there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in church, and let him speak to himself and to God. Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge. But if anything is revealed to another who sits by, let the first keep silent. For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church. (I Corinthians 14:27-35)
Yet, at the close of the chapter - just 2 verses later, he concludes:
If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. (I Corinthians 14:37)
Were those detailed instructions not really commands? Were the Corinthians free to ignore them and do whatever they pleased, since they were covered by grace? Were they not free to interpret love and manage their spiritual gifts in another way?
How about the qualifications of elders? Are they a command? Or, can we redefine them in a way that seems best to our definition of love?
For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you -- if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. For a bishop must be blameless ... (Titus 1:5-9)
Could we ignore this command and organize different offices for the church, or could we formalize our own set of requirements for elders?
What if someone decided to be a bum and quit working? Would love grant him that right? Paul commanded against such and required the Thessalonians to withdraw fellowship from such a one:
Finally then, brethren, we urge and exhort in the Lord Jesus that you should abound more and more, just as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God; for you know what commandments we gave you through the Lord Jesus. For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality; that each of you should know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor, not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles who do not know God; that no one should take advantage of and defraud his brother in this matter, because the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also forewarned you and testified. For God did not call us to uncleanness, but in holiness. Therefore he who rejects this does not reject man, but God, who has also given us His Holy Spirit. But concerning brotherly love you have no need that I should write to you, for you yourselves are taught by God to love one another; and indeed you do so toward all the brethren who are in all Macedonia. But we urge you, brethren, that you increase more and more; that you also aspire to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business, and to work with your own hands, as we commanded you, (I Thessalonians 4:1-11)
But we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly and not according to the tradition which he received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to follow us, for we were not disorderly among you; nor did we eat anyone's bread free of charge, but worked with labor and toil night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, not because we do not have authority, but to make ourselves an example of how you should follow us. For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat. For we hear that there are some who walk among you in a disorderly manner, not working at all, but are busybodies. Now those who are such we command and exhort through our Lord Jesus Christ that they work in quietness and eat their own bread. But as for you, brethren, do not grow weary in doing good. And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother. (II Thessalonians 3:6-15)
Paul clearly sets his command on working, as well as other "words" in his "epistle" to the Thessalonians, as grounds for withdrawal of fellowship. If the Thessalonians obeyed this command from the Lord, via Paul's epistle, and disfellowshipped the disobedient, would they be showing love to their neighbor? Where would be mercy? Where would be grace, when they would have withdrawn from a brother
"walking disorderly"?
You see, even in the NT, we are still required to keep the Lord's commands - not perfectly - but, we must do our best (
"giving all diligence"). If we deliberately fellowship brethren, who are in sin, then we become partakers of it with them (
II John 10-11), but even worse, we help harden such a person's heart, helping them to feel pride instead of shame (
I Corinthians 5:2, 5-6; II Thessalonians 3:14). Where is true love, where is faithful mercy, where is wise grace, when we turn a blind eye to a brother's sin? If someone saw a brother with a broken arm and failed to stop and help, would you consider that grace or love? How much more should we seek to help our brethren, who are suffering from
spiritual pain and injury?
I know you have seen some of these already, but I think it is worth recalling. Not only does God warn Christians against disobedience, He also positively requires it:
Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters. (I Corinthians 7:19)
Is that not the exact opposite of what you are arguing, that keeping God's commandments don't really matter? Again:
"If you love Me, keep My commandments. ... He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." (John 14:15, 21)
Should we love the Lord? We must (
I Corinthians 16:22)! If we do love the Lord, we will do
whatever He commands. If we do not keep the Lord's commands, then something is wrong with our love for the Lord...
"If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love, just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. These things I have spoken to you, that My joy may remain in you, and that your joy may be full. This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, than to lay down one's life for his friends. You are My friends if you do whatever I command you. No longer do I call you servants, for a servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you. You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you. These things I command you, that you love one another." (John 15:10-17)
Can we make it to heaven
outside of the Lord's love? Jesus said that we must keep His commands to abide in His love, and we will be His friends, if we do
whatever He commands. If we quibble with the Lord and second guess His commands, then are we His friends? Are we walking by faith (
II Corinthians 5:7)? His friends are not just merely willing, but committed to doing
whatever He commands.
But you, O man of God, flee these things and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, gentleness. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, to which you were also called and have confessed the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. I urge you in the sight of God who gives life to all things, and before Christ Jesus who witnessed the good confession before Pontius Pilate, that you keep this commandment without spot, blameless until our Lord Jesus Christ's appearing, (I Timothy 6:11-14)
Everyone who sins breaks the law; in fact, sin is lawlessness. But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins. And in him is no sin. No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him. Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work. No one who is born of God will continue to sin, because God's seed remains in him; he cannot go on sinning, because he has been born of God. This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother. (I John 3:4-10)
The Christian is to pursue more than just love. He is also to pursue godliness, faith, patience, and gentleness. This command, this law comprises more than just loving our neighbor. Please notice the end of
I John 3:10, those who
"do not do what is right" is a second and separate category than those who
"do not love their brother". God requires more than just loving our brother. Furthermore, God defines many laws as to how we are to love our brother. Ignoring those is to disobey God and subject us to condemnation. Furthermore, we see that we must even disfellowship from those determined to take part in such. Therefore, God's grace is not an excuse to ignore God's commands - for us or for others. Somehow, some way He requires this of us without justifying us by our works. How? More on that below. But, for now, the Scriptural evidence for my responsibility is overwhelming, so the rest I take it on faith that God will work it out somehow. Whether or not I can explain how, does not alleviate my responsibility. There is a great danger to accept great error, because
"we do not know the Scripture or the power of God" (
Matthew 22:23-32).
...
Leaving that topic, although I believe I have answered your arguments, I realize that this is not just a matter of arguing, determining right and wrong. It is also a matter of just trying to
understand God's will for us. So, I still would like to answer your other questions, so we can have a more complete understanding - at least that is my goal. :) Since we have covered so much ground, I would like to group my response into sub-points with headings. This will help me organize my thoughts, but I also hope it will make the reading more natural. I have also included a few quotes from you, just in case you wonder, "Now why would he think that?" If I have misunderstood you, or if you would like to refine your thoughts, please let me know. BTW, I have removed the formatting of your quotes, so I could emphasize key words that contributed to my interpretation of your expressions.
Picking and Choosing Scriptures
Would you please explain what John5:39-40 means, "You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life." I know from reading your emails that you "study the Scriptures diligently" BUT ARE YOU SURE YOU GOING TO JESUS FOR ETERNAL LIFE. The Jewish leaders were diligently studying the Scriptures because they thought in them [Scriptures] they have eternal life, the Scriptures testified about Jesus Christ the true "ETERNAL LIFE". Do YOU believe that "eternal life" is found in the Scriptures or in Jesus Christ? Even the devil studied Scripture diligently for he quoted Scripture truthfully to Jesus in the desert when He was tempted.Therefore YOU or ME quoting Scripture does not mean we are right with God
True, quoting Scripture is not a guarantee of our truthfulness. The Devil's usage of Scripture is ample testimony to that fact. However, we know the Devil did not quote the Scripture "truthfully", because the Lord corrected Him! Did the Devil repeat the words correctly? Yes, but He took them out of context. He applied an interpretation beyond the original meaning of the passage, and the Lord simply showed other passages to prove that very point. The answer here is not to run away from Scripture or throw our hands in the air in resignation, but rather we should trust God and the power He places in His word:
... how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ), which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: (Ephesians 3:3-5)
Now do we believe Paul or not? Can we understand the Bible when we read it or not? May it take effort? Yes, diligent effort (
II Timothy 2:15)! Are all things easy to understand? No, some things are
"difficult to understand" (
II Peter 3:14-18). And, if fact, they can even
"lead to our destruction", if we are not diligent and instead welcome their
"twisting" (
II Peter 3:14-18; II Timothy 2:14-18). However, the Scriptures can be understood! The keys are diligence (
II Timothy 2:15), a sincere love of truth (i.e., not looking to justify our prejudices,
II Thessalonians 2:9-12), a healthy trust in God (
Philippians 3:15-16), and good brethren (
Galatians 2:11-21; Proverbs 27:17; Acts 8:26-31; Ephesians 4:7-16).
We have no excuse for believing that we cannot harmonize Scriptures, enabling us to pick and choose the Scriptures we want to believe. We
all must be careful, but we
must be careful!
You said I was adding something to the text of John10:27-29 which says "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand." The last time I checked "no one" means "no one" I have not ADDED a single word. To be fair I will quote Heb6:4-6, " It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace." YOU HAVE ME! All I know is that when there are seemingly opposing verses the CoC ALWAYS sees the glass not only halph empty but bone dry!PLEASE EXPLAIN THESE TWO VERSES. If I can be TRULY saved and then fall away then SOMEONE "ME" can snatch "ME" out of the Father's hand???
Prejudices can take over whenever we do not understand, but often, our prejudices are the reason we do not understand! Let us
"rule over it" and not let our desires push us into taking a convenient shortcut. Please do not accept that verses can oppose each other. It seems that you know they do not, and so I am encouraged, but I want you (and me) to grow in this more and more. (More on the referenced proof text below...) Don't lose faith in the God behind the Bible.
Obedience versus Justification
I am somewhat confused if we are to follow the NT word for word or are we to try to espouse the principles set forth in Scripture. I am sure you think we can do both. If we try to live our lives by keeping every word of the NT then we are living by LAW just as the Jews did in the OT and Gal5:24 says "You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace." To me it seems IMPOSSIBLE to both live by LAW and GRACE, MERCY and LOVE, that is like serving two masters it cannot be done. Am I not correct to say if we could obey the NT to 99% perfection we will have missed the mark and be doomed to Hell, James2:10 says, "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it."
First of all, I agree with your stated observation on
James 2:10. If we fail to keep one part of the law, then we are guilty of all! That is staggering and fearful, and that was James' point, I believe, that we should recognize our desperate need for mercy. (Are we not already guilty of at least one sin?)
My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality. For if there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, "You sit here in a good place," and say to the poor man, "You stand there," or, "Sit here at my footstool," have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brethren: Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? But you have dishonored the poor man. ... If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well; but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. For He who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment. (James 2:1-13)
These Christians were guilty of showing partiality to the rich, which was a violation of the "royal law". Maybe some people would consider this a minor point, a trivial sin of no consequence, and so they might be willing to slough off James' rebuke. However, James corrects them by reminding them that to be guilty in one point is to be guilty of the whole law. He essentially eliminates the notion of "big" and "small" sins before the Lord. However, he also establishes that the law extends beyond just loving our neighbor
as we see best, because he includes adultery and murder as transgression of the same law. Incidentally, do you think adultery is a sin? James called it a transgression of the law, upon which we could be judged. Is it a sin because you think it is a violation of the "one law" as you see it, or is it a sin, because God said,
"Do not commit adultery" (
Romans 13:9-10)? More on this in a minute...
Back to the main point, your point from James was correct - we need mercy. However,
living by the law and
seeking to obey law
is not the same as seeking to be
justified by the law. You seem to mix these terms interchangeably, but there is a huge distinction made in Scripture. Justification by perfectly keeping the works of the law is mutually exclusive of justification by faith (i.e., God's mercy, not our works):
What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone. As it is written: "Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame." (Romans 9:30-33)
From this we see that to seek the "works of the law" is hostile and contrary to seeking the "righteousness of faith". Fair enough. I think we both see and agree on that point. However, if we could find someone who was diligent in keeping God's law AND walked by faith, what would that show? God will not contradict Himself (
Titus 1:2), so if someone walked by faith AND obeyed the law carefully, then we must assume that obeying the law carefully is NOT the same as seeking to be justified by the law. Correct? How about these OT saints?
- Noah - Was Noah careful in obeying God, following God's commands, as they were? Yes ("Thus Noah did; according to all that God commanded him, so he did," Genesis 6:22)! He and his family were "saved ... and became heir of the righteousness ... by preparing an ark" (Hebrews 11:7). But, was Noah a man of faith? Yes ("By faith Noah ... prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith," Hebrews 11:7)!
- Abraham - Was Abraham walking by faith while he was careful to follow God's command to offer up Isaac? Was that "loving his neighbor"? He was both diligent AND faithful in this command (Hebrews 11:17).
- Moses - Was Moses walking by faith, while "he kept the Passover and the sprinkling of blood"? Yes, he was careful in keeping God's law "by faith ..." (Hebrews 11:28)
These saints were careful in keeping God's commands, but is that what saved them? No, they were justified by faith (
Romans 3:24-26,
"in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed", i.e., before the cross - see also,
Hebrews 9:15; see also,
Romans 4:3-5). So, yes, if OT saints could live according to the law and walk by faith, so can we. The key point is set forth in the beginning of the "Hall Of Faith":
But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. (Hebrews 11:6)
It seems you believe more along the lines of:
But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who love their neighbor.
It seems that you believe diligently seeking God is contrary to having faith in God; however, the Bible declares that diligently seeking God to be a core and critical component of true faith. Just because we are diligent in trying to obey God, that does not
necessarily mean that we are seeking to be justified (i.e., declared righteous) by those same actions. However, if we ever began to think that those works earn or merit our salvation, thereby eliminating the need for God's grace, then we will have indeed
"fallen from grace", just as you have expressed concern. More on this below...
Justification: Reconciling Works (Law) and Faith (Grace)
Everything in the NTeither comes down to LAWor GRACE. Is the WORK, WORSHIP and ORGANIZATION of the church a matter of LAW or GRACE. Let me give a few examples.The NTtalks of elders in every church [LAW] or is the pastor system permissible [GRACE], women remain silent in the church [LAW (most? women were uneducated in religious matters in the 1st century)] or allow women to participate [GRACE (women are much more educated today)] or did God just want to keep women subservient to men Gal3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.", only widows over 60 on church rolls from then to the end of time or allow elders lee-way [GRACE most widows in the U.S. get SS], no eating in the church building or allow fellowship rooms . Gal5:24 says "You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace." If we make and treat the NT just like the Jews treated the OT THEN WE ARE JUSTIFIED BY THE LAW [the NEW ONE] AND WE HAVE FALLEN AWAY FROM GRACE. It appears to me that while the rest of the "CHRISTIAN" world is trying to "SAVE" the lost the Church of Christ is more concerned about being JUSTIFIED by their LAW [the law they see written out in the NT Scriptures] and in reality they have fallen away from GRACE.
First, I don't know exactly what you mean by "treat the NT just like the Jews treated the OT", but I would again remind you of Abraham, Noah, Moses, Samuel, David, Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel, and so many other OT Jews, who were careful in keeping God's Word and His laws. Yet, how were they saved? Was it not by faith? (Please see section above.) My friend, you have set up a false dilemma for which there is no merit. Can people not diligently follow God's law and be saved by grace?
Second, there is great confusion in the religious world about "works" and "faith", "law" and "grace". Part of this, I believe, stems from an "apparent contradiction" between
Romans 4 and
James 2 that is generally accepted as unresolvable or deeply conflicted. Another source of the confusion is ... well, I digress. The key is to first accept that there is no conflict. (God cannot lie,
Titus 1:2. Truth cannot contradict itself (self-evident). Therefore, God cannot contradict Himself. The Scriptures are inspired by God. Therefore, the Scriptures cannot contradict themselves.) Then, one will have the determination to look more closely. Is there some way these seemingly disparate virtues can function together?
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love. You ran well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion does not come from Him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump. (Galatians 5:6-9)
What
"avails in Christ"? The inspired answer?
"Faith working through love!" Faith, works, and love all fit together! The key to dissolving this "apparent contradiction" is to define "works" in the context in which it is used:
For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; ..." (Romans 4:2-7)
This is a critical and telling passage. Paul's usage of works, at least throughout almost, if not all, of the Roman epistle is
"meritorious works". They are deeds that warrant God's reward through perfect keeping of His requirements. To people who work this completely, God
owes them the reward! However, who can rightfully say that they have kept God's law perfectly? As you noted, to fail in one point is to fail in the whole law (
James 2:10-11; Galatians 5:1-4). Perfect law keeping is required to avoid the curse embedded in the Old Law (
Galatians 3:10, 13). However, God's law, whether written in stone our man's conscience (
II Corinthians 3:7; Romans 2:12-16), cannot be ejected even by God's whim. (This is a constraint that arises from Himself, His own character,
II Timothy 2:13; Titus 1:2.) Even He binds Himself to His own law. Therefore, it can only be dismissed judicially:
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just shall live by faith." Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall live by them." Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree"), that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Brethren, I speak in the manner of men: Though it is only a man's covenant, yet if it is confirmed, no one annuls or adds to it. Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, "And to seeds," as of many, but as of one, "And to your Seed," who is Christ. And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. (Galatians 3:10-17, see also, Romans 7:1-4)
So, as you noted, the righteous requirement of the law of Moses (and even the law to Gentiles) was fulfilled at the cross (
Galatians 3:10, 13; Romans 8:3-4; Colossians 2:13-14). Jesus bore the punishment due us (
Isaiah 53:5). This enabled God to justly forgive the Jews who - though not perfect - walked by faith according to God's OT law (
Romans 3:23-26; Hebrews 9:11-15). And, it serves as the foundation for a New Law that clearly and directly offers forgiveness of sins to Christians (New Covenant members), who simply confess their sins and pray for forgiveness (
I John 1:7-2:2; Acts 8:14-24). Do they have to do something? Yes, but do those actions
earn God's forgiveness? Do we
merit or
deserve God's forgiveness, just because we have done so? Obviously, no, so they cannot be ruled out by
Romans 4, because these works do not satisfy the definition given in the context. But yet, at the same time, God has obviously made them requirements, among others.
Therefore, these conditional works do not eliminate grace or faith, because they do not
earn or
merit God's
indebtedness to us (
Romans 4:4-5). So, how does God require these works without making them the basis of our salvation? Here is the "subjectivity" and release from "[perfect] keeping of objective law" that you seek: Our faith is substituted for our perfect, 100% keeping of the law (
Romans 4:5, 14-16) by Jesus' death and resurrection (
Romans 4:22-25). However, who has faith? Simply saying we have faith, confessing the Lord's name is not enough:
" Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'" (Matthew 7:21-23)
Our faith is judged by our actions, by our deeds. Whether or not our claim to faith is sincere is evidenced by what we do, and therefore, our faith - we - will be judged by our deeds:
For we walk by faith, not by sight. We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. Therefore we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. (II Corinthians 5:9-10)
Therefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and rest your hope fully upon the grace that is to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; as obedient children, not conforming yourselves to the former lusts, as in your ignorance; but as He who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, because it is written, "Be holy, for I am holy." And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves throughout the time of your stay here in fear; knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot. (I Peter 1:13-19)
There is an amazing balance and harmony that exists among grace, hope, obedience, fear, holiness, and work. Any doctrine that eliminates one is missing part of the whole picture. ... So, works serve as the evidence and basis of judgment for our faith, which if present, in addition to Christ's blood and God's grace, will justify us! This is evidenced and supported in James' epistle:
What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Depart in peace, be warmed and filled," but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, "You have faith, and I have works." Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe -- and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." And he was called the friend of God. You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. (James 2:14-26)
Without these works, our faith is dead. Can a dead faith save a man? Obviously, no, but how do these works not eliminate faith? Notice, James speaks of these works actually requiring faith -
"faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect." These kind of works are required for justification, in addition to faith. But, which works are required of us? We have already mentioned some, but what about baptism? More on this below...
Law can be defined and judged objectively did you keep the "commandments" and if this is the standard we are all going to Hell. Love, grace and mercy are defined and judged subjectively was your heart right with God. Is God going to say at the judgment did you follow the LAW or did you attempt to the best of your ability to live the PRINCIPLES I set forth in Scripture? I believe it is the latter.
This is a false dilemma. You have attempted to eliminate the middle ground. Can law not also manifest the heart? Can love, grace, and mercy be exemplified in obeying certain commands? Christ learned obedience in the suffering of the cross (
Hebrews 5:7-9). Was His sacrifice therefore not an act of love, grace, and mercy? God's word is declared to be living and powerful, able to reveal the thoughts and intents of our hearts. Does that not occur by our choice to diligently obey it or reject it (
Hebrews 4:11-13)?
Do you see how God may require us to do certain works, like belief, repentance, confession, and baptism - and not eliminate His grace? These works do not earn our salvation, and unless we foolishly seek justification by perfectly keeping these new commands, then there is no concern that we have abandoned God's grace by such obedience. Do you see that God does not require perfect lawkeeping for our salvation, because our faith, which is ultimately judged by God according to our works, is substituted for the perfect keeping of God's law? Furthermore, this New Law directly provides ongoing forgiveness through Christ's sacrifice.
The Life Giving Law
I know this is getting long, but I think this note is helpful: God's OT law was designed to bring life. It should have brought life. This was always the primary intent of God's commands, even in the NT:
By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. (I John 5:2-3)
And I will delight myself in Your commandments, Which I love. My hands also I will lift up to Your commandments, Which I love, And I will meditate on Your statutes. (Psalm 119:47-48)
Oh, how I love Your law! It is my meditation all the day. (Psalm 119:97)
Rivers of water run down from my eyes, Because men do not keep Your law. Righteous are You, O LORD, And upright are Your judgments. Your testimonies, which You have commanded, Are righteous and very faithful. My zeal has consumed me, Because my enemies have forgotten Your words. Your word is very pure; Therefore Your servant loves it. I am small and despised, Yet I do not forget Your precepts. Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, And Your law is truth. Trouble and anguish have overtaken me, Yet Your commandments are my delights. 144 The righteousness of Your testimonies is everlasting; Give me understanding, and I shall live. (Psalm 119:136-144)
God's law contains the guidance we need for both healthy, well, and extended physical life - as well as spiritual life. The problem is not the law, but the problem is our weakness in failing to keep the law perfectly (
Romans 8:3). Our weakness is what prompted the need for a second law, one with a just forgiveness clause, justified by faith through grace (
Hebrews 8:7-13).
We are very foolish if we think we can do better than God's commands. Although the OT law ultimately brought death because of our sinfulness, it was designed to bring life, and the NT law can also provide life (not justification, but learning, wisdom, righteousness, and knowing God) through study of it and obedience to it.
Justification: Humility
I try to follow God's Word very carefully, but I know it is not my carefulness that will redeem me. I have no intention of standing before God and saying, "Well, I did everything you said, so pay up." "Where's my reward?" Jesus made our situation on Judgment day very clear:
"And which of you, having a servant plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, 'Come at once and sit down to eat'? But will he not rather say to him, 'Prepare something for my supper, and gird yourself and serve me till I have eaten and drunk, and afterward you will eat and drink'? Does he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I think not. So likewise you, when you have done all those things which you are commanded, say, 'We are unprofitable servants. We have done what was our duty to do.' " (Luke 17:7-10)
Even if we
think we have done all that we
think has been commanded us, we must realize and readily confess that we are
"unprofitable servants". In such a case, we have only done what was our duty - nothing more (which would have made us profitable), but even more bluntly, we
know that we have failed in even performing our duty (which would be a "break even" for the Lord). So, we are
most unprofitable servants, since we have not even performed our duty. Mercy and humility are indeed the watchwords respectively for our justification and attitude before the Lord.
Eternal Security - "Once Saved, Always Saved"
The issue of eternal security, the well known doctrine of "once saved, always saved", and the Bible basis for hope and confidence are discussed at length in the following articles:
I ask you to read those and study the Scriptures discussed therein, because they deal with many false doctrines as well as setting forth the Scriptural grounds for our security. However, I want to discuss this one proof text, since you mentioned it:
You said I was adding something to the text of John10:27-29 which says "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand." The last time I checked "no one" means "no one" I have not ADDED a single word. To be fair I will quote Heb6:4-6, " It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance. To their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace." YOU HAVE ME! All I know is that when there are seemingly opposing verses the CoC ALWAYS sees the glass not only halph empty but bone dry!PLEASE EXPLAIN THESE TWO VERSES. If I can be TRULY saved and then fall away then SOMEONE "ME" can snatch "ME" out of the Father's hand???
Here's the proof-text mentioned by the speaker in the video:
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand. (John 10:27-29)
Simply, this verse is not relevant. It discusses the possibility of someone taking us from God against our will or God's will (
"snatch them out of My Father's hand"). What if we decide to leave God's hand? What if God empties His hand? These are simply not discussed. Plus, other verses, even verses you have raised, make it clear that Christians can indeed
"fall from grace" (
Galatians 5:1-4). So, any ambiguity in
John 10:27-29 is clarified by other passages.
BTW, I listened to much of the video, and the speakers seems to be a Calvinist. You may want to read all of our articles on that subject, because it is difficult to consistently maintain a middle ground on this issue:
http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles ... #calvinism
Also, please keep in mind that although God has left something in our control, He has not left us without help or strength. In the final analysis, he has only left us with the choice. Everything else comes from Him.
I will run the course of Your commandments, For You shall enlarge my heart. (Psalm 119:32)
I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. (Philippians 4:13)
Do not let anyone deceive you. Doubts about eternal security, even if it involves us, is ultimately an expression of doubt in God, His plan, and His Word. ... Much more is said in the above articles, which should answer many of your questions. I hope you will study them carefully.
Fellowship: Fellowship and Condemnation
Should WE not show and have that same mercy, grace and LOVE on our fellow Christians? YOU [YOUR SECT OF THE CoC] WILL NOT EVEN SHOW OR HAVE MERCY,GRACE AND LOVE ON A SISTER CONGREGATION WHICH FINDS IT NOT SINFUL TO HAVE A FELLOWSHIP OR SOCIAL HALL IN WHICH THEY ENJOY A MEAL WITH EACH OTHER, which results in another division of the church!How can you accept God's mercy, grace and LOVE when you judge them by the LETTER of the LAW? This is just one example there are many others. Matthew7:2 says "For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." You judge all of Christendom by the LETTER of the LAW and show NO or VERY LITTLE mercy, grace and LOVE toward anyone. James2:10 says, "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it." OLD LAW OR NT IF YOU TREAT IT AS A LAW. Can you give me just one example or area where the sect you attend shows mercy, grace or LOVE toward the other sects of the CoC or the denominational world, is everything they do SIN?
I believe it is a mistake to equate and mix our fellowship with God's judgment. As you noted, our judgment may not be the same as God's. Granted, you have a completely different view of how God judges us. I think He judges us based on His Word (
John 12:47-48), and I'm not sure you believe that. That's the more fundamental point, but I think it is also important to understand that we do not always draw lines of fellowship AND judge the entire person. We judge fruits and works, generally not hearts (
Ephesians 5:11), although people's fruits are an indication of their hearts that even we can see (
Matthew 7:15-20). If we are ultimately forced to draw lines of fellowship, it should not necessarily be interpreted as a statement of personal condemnation. In fact, it should be a statement of desperate hope:
For I indeed, as absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged (as though I were present) him who has so done this deed. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your glorying is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us. ... But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner -- not even to eat with such a person. For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges. Therefore "put away from yourselves the evil person." (I Corinthians 5:3-13)
According to Paul, this withdrawal of fellowship had two purposes: One was to keep the congregation pure and to protect it, true. However, the primary reason was to provoke one to repentance! It was an act of mercy! Otherwise, the person would have been hardened by his sin, continuing on until destruction (
Hebrews 3:12-13, 18-19). Therefore, withdrawal of fellowship, if properly performed and motivated, is actually a sign of mercy and love, whereas the tolerance of such sin is in reality the ultimate sign of hatred!
Love: Fulfillment of the Law
Let me say that YOU may be right BUT WHEN JESUS WAS HANGING ON THAT CROSS HE WAS SHOWING YOU, ME AND THE WORLD THE LOVE HE HAD FOR US AND HIS FATHER! HE WAS CLOSING THE WINDOW ON LAW BY FULFILLING IT AND OPENING THE DOOR ON LOVE GRACE and MERCY!Psalm106:1 "Praise the LORD.Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good;his love endures forever." Romans13:8 says " Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law." Jesus surely fulfilled the LAW [OLD OR NEW]by the LOVE he showed on the cross!
Paul did not mean that we could ignore the commands and subjectively interpret "love your neighbor" to our heart's satisfaction. Otherwise, he would not have commanded the specifics mentioned in the same context:
Owe no one anything except to love one another, for he who loves another has fulfilled the law. For the commandments, "You shall not commit adultery," "You shall not murder," "You shall not steal," "You shall not bear false witness," "You shall not covet," and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. (Romans 13:8-10)
Although technically, if we were sufficiently competent in wisdom, foresight, and objectivity, we could live by this one law with respect to our fellow man. Fortunately, God has detailed many specific commands of how we are to love our neighbor, because we are far from the necessary competency for such a broad application. This one command simply
summarizes the other laws. It is not a
replacement for it, unless you are willing to sit in God's place, reject His definition, and redefine the laws of love? This is a critical failing expressed in some of your letters, that we can reject God's will, provided we are following our own subjective interpretation of this 1 command. This is equivalent to pushing God (His laws) out of our way and assuming His place of "Lawgiver", since He has already expressed laws refining the more fundamental one. This seems a critical mistake of presumption, which we must avoid!
In 1Cor13 LOVE is shown to be superior to tongues,prophecy, mysteries, knowledge, hope and faith because in verse 8 it says "LOVE NEVER FAILS". You would be correct to say it is NOT love only if the other items were not listed but THEY ARE mentioned. In verse 13 it reads, "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." LOVE is contrasted to faith and hope not combined with them. I believe the kind of LOVE which is talked about here is the kind of LOVE that Jesus had with the Father that He was willing to give up His life for you and me. IF "LOVE" BY IT'S SELF NEVER FAILS THEN I WOULD CLASSIFY THAT KIND OF LOVE AS BEING EVERYTHING A CHRISTIAN WILL EVER NEED IN THIS LIFE OR THE ONE TO COME.
First, I don't exactly understand your logic. Since faith, hope, and love are mentioned and dealt with separately in
I Corinthians 13, does that not imply that they are - separate? Therefore, how can you say that love is all we need, since we also must have faith (
Hebrews 11:6)?
Second, I appreciate your statement of belief, but I reject it, since the Bible says that are other virtues are also required, like faith, for example (
Hebrews 11:6).
Love: Showing Mercy to Others
LET ME SAY AGAIN YOU MAY BE RIGHT!!! I HAVE A CONFLICT IN MY MIND OVER WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE NT, WHETHER WE ARE TO FOLLOW IT AS PRECISE AS WE CAN OR ARE WE TO SHOW CONGREGATIONS OF THE CoC AND THE DENOMINATIONAL WORLD GRACE MERCY AND LOVE??? IF WE SHOW NO GRACE, MERCY AND LOVE SHOULD WE EXPECT TO RECEIVE ANY!!!
...
REMEMBER WHAT MAT7:2 AND JAMES2:10 SAYS "For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." and "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it." I KNOW WHICH SIDE I WANT TO BE ON!
...
I listened to a preacher on the radio for twenty years for one hour a weekfrom the non-institutional persuasion and I doubt if he mentioned the word love 20 times in that span. He would spend the entire time talking about all of the CoC "doctrines" and never showed his audience "THE MOST EXCELLENT WAY"
...
Can you give me just one example or area where the sect you attend shows mercy, grace or LOVE toward the other sects of the CoC or the denominational world, is everything they do SIN?
One example? How about what you and I are doing right now? Admittedly, this discussion started off on the wrong foot, but are we not showing mercy to each other in graciously speaking to each other, listening to each other, and considering each other? We show mercy when we don't "blow people off", when we honestly consider "the other side", when we treat them kindly, even if we disagree with them. When we open up God's Word, we show mercy, patience, and grace, because such acts are the very expressions of hope and confidence in such a case.
No, not everything "they" do is a sin. However, we cannot fellowship with others', whose collective actions would sanction or enjoin us to sin (
II John 10-11). Remember, man's disfellowship and even fellowship is not always an exact expression of God's judgment. Sometimes, we part ways, simply because we are going different ways in judgment (
Acts 15:36-40), or because we believe the other is in danger, but we have done all that we can do, so we leave them up to God (
I Corinthians 5:5; I Timothy 1:18-20). ... Would you declare everything that Muslims or Buddhists do as a sin? But, yet would fellowship them as believers and saints? Judgment and condemnation - even on one point - can lead to a withdrawal of fellowship; however, we should not assume that implies that everything that person does is a sin. Maybe that would be an overreaction?
Revelation: Distinction between "Gospel" and "Doctrine"
If I am correct you fellowship the small ban of brothers known as the non-institutional CoC because you claim all the other CoC and "denominations" preach or teach another "gospel". It seems like we [or at least me] need to determine what the "gospel" is. In 1Cor15:1-4 it reads, "Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures" and verse 11, "Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed." Paul tells us that the "gospel" is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, that is what Paul preached and what we believe. I guess the key word is the word "word" your sect claims every word of the NT to be the "gospel" and the "gospel" must be followed meticulously. The "rest"? of Christendom claims the "gospel" to be the death, burial and resurrection of Christ and our receiving itnothing more nothing less. I believe the overwhelming evidence of Scripture falls on the second option. Peter did not preach the entire NT on the day of Pentecost but 3000 were converted, the same can be said of the Ethiopian eunuch, the Philippian jailer and others. 2John9 states, "Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son." What is the "teaching of Christ" if I understand you correctly you believe it is all of the NT and if that is true then according to verses 10-11 which says, "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take them into your house or welcome them. Anyone who welcomes them shares in their wicked work." you should have NOTHING to do with me since I "bring not this teaching to you". It is CLEAR to me that the "teaching of Christ" is that Jesus came in the flesh verse 7, " I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist." TO DENY THAT JESUS CAME IN THE FLESH IS TO DENY THE DEATH, BURIAL AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS CHRIST!
...
Is GRACE just what GOD did for us in CHRIST on the CROSS or does it involve the work, worship and organization of the church and our daily lives. How do we apply GRACE & LOVE to the church if every thing is spelled out in black & white [LAW & LETTER]?
Some time ago, there was a heated discussion on this point, the "gospel-doctrine" distinction. There's more here than I can fit into this humongous note, but it might be worth tackling this after we make more progress on the other points.
The Place of Baptism
I am having some trouble in understanding when a person is saved. The CoC says your not saved until you are baptized [an act which pictures the death, burial and resurrection of Christ]. It seems like a person's FAITH is way more important than an act which in essence pictures a person's FAITH. The "picture" is more valuable then the "real thing"? A picture of a diamond being more valuable then the diamond itself. WOULD THIS BE ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF GOD CHOOSING THEFOOLISH THINGS OF THE WORLD TO SHAME THE WISE? It is hard for me not to see baptism as some sort of "work" [it is something which we do] and if it is then it cannot be part of the saving process Eph2:8-10.
We have a few articles and forum posts on this topic:
Again, I would encourage you to study these, rather than rewriting them here. If you have any questions on any of the points raised there, please let me know. I would be happy to elaborate.
...
Whew! That's a lot -- too much really. But, I know you are profoundly seeking answers. Truthfully, you have overlooked some "sticking questions" from previous correspondence, at least in my mind. However, we have several points of difference, and it's difficult to answer, much less absorb everything in one round. So, I have tried explaining some things repeatedly, as you have also, but I would encourage you to reread our conversation from the beginning. I think you will get more out of it, especially if you reconsider all the referenced Scriptures. I know I have benefited from such a rereading.
I look forward to hearing from you soon. Thank you for your patience, zeal, and interest.
May God help us to have a sincere love of the truth,
m273p15