God in mormonism

[Thanda]

What is the difference between being "willing for God to change every part of us" and being "willing for Jesus Christ to save every part of us"? Are we really arguing over semantics here? That it's not what we actually do but what we're willing or wanting to do? Because I don't know any person who is already totally perfected--apart from Jesus Christ.

Well if you don't know anyone who is totally perfect then you don't know anyone who has complete trust and faith in God; it means you don't know anyone who is ready to enter heaven. For we know that no unclean thing can enter into the kingdom of God.

It is certain that by faith we can do anything good. Therefore if we fail to do a good thing it is because of a lack of faith in Jesus Christ. Therefore who ever is not perfect does not have perfect faith. And without perfect faith no man can perfectly please God. Now you may argue that God ignores the imperfection because of Jesus Christ. But this would be inconsistent with our idea of heaven. If the unrighteous can inherit heaven on account of God looking the other way because of Jesus, then heaven cannot be a very nice place to be. Indeed, other than the presence of God and the lack of death, heaven would not be any different from this world. You would still have people talking behind other peoples back, lying etc.

Also, if you say people will not commit sin in heaven because they will be in God's presence then that is circular reasoning - God doesn't want bad people in his presence but people are only bad because they aren't in God's presence? That makes no sense.

I believe the only thing that holds me back from perfection (sinlessness) is my own lack of faith. Even though I am in the world and I live in the flesh I believe Christ's power is stronger than both the flesh and the world ("Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world"). I believe that I am not yet saved until I attain to the faith that leads to perfection. It is the challenge of this life to learn to come to that faith.

There is a record in Luke that speaks to the difficulty of obtaining the faith required for eternal life. In Luke nine we have the following:

57 ¶And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.

58 And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.

59 And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.

60 Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.

61 And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee; but let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.

62 And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.​

Following Christ cannot be done as casual pursuit. Neither is it something that can be done without cost. And it takes time for most people to come to the point where they are willing to pay the price. And the price, as previously mentioned, is our all.

 

[Thanda]

I became saved when I made a decision of the mind and will to trust Jesus only for salvation and not me--that is, grace--that is a gift with no works to earn the gift.

Do you believe your trust in Jesus is perfect?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Well if you don't know anyone who is totally perfect then you don't know anyone who has complete trust and faith in God; it means you don't know anyone who is ready to enter heaven. For we know that no unclean thing can enter into the kingdom of God.

It is certain that by faith we can do anything good. Therefore if we fail to do a good thing it is because of a lack of faith in Jesus Christ. Therefore who ever is not perfect does not have perfect faith. And without perfect faith no man can perfectly please God. Now you may argue that God ignores the imperfection because of Jesus Christ. But this would be inconsistent with our idea of heaven. If the unrighteous can inherit heaven on account of God looking the other way because of Jesus, then heaven cannot be a very nice place to be. Indeed, other than the presence of God and the lack of death, heaven would not be any different from this world. You would still have people talking behind other peoples back, lying etc.

Also, if you say people will not commit sin in heaven because they will be in God's presence then that is circular reasoning - God doesn't want bad people in his presence but people are only bad because they aren't in God's presence? That makes no sense.

I believe the only thing that holds me back from perfection (sinlessness) is my own lack of faith. Even though I am in the world and I live in the flesh I believe Christ's power is stronger than both the flesh and the world ("Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world"). I believe that I am not yet saved until I attain to the faith that leads to perfection. It is the challenge of this life to learn to come to that faith.

There is a record in Luke that speaks to the difficulty of obtaining the faith required for eternal life. In Luke nine we have the following:

57 ¶And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.

58 And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.

59 And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.

60 Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.

61 And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee; but let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.

62 And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.​

Following Christ cannot be done as casual pursuit. Neither is it something that can be done without cost. And it takes time for most people to come to the point where they are willing to pay the price. And the price, as previously mentioned, is our all.

Thanda, my point was this--You cannot logically criticize my decision theology while saying you have to be saved by making a decision.

The price for Jesus wasn't our all, since He died for us before we were reconciled to Him, while we were yet sinners, while we His enemies. The apostles gave their all to follow Jesus but were concerned that He wished to die.

I agree that a lack of faith holds us back from sinlessness. You may have answered your own question as faith and hope will not be required after this world passes. We will be in Christ's presence and filled with love. We will in Christ's presence thus be ready for a perfect world and a perfect Heaven. Yes? No?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Do you believe your trust in Jesus is perfect?

Perfect = without sin, without error. Something perfectly true or false is not ever partially true or false, it is one or the other. The Bible teaches that one may trust Jesus, His atoning death and resurrection, to be saved. I only one time had to trust Jesus accurately (not perfectly) to be saved. I had to trust Him and not myself to be saved. This was like getting a test question 100% correct, that is, perfectly correct. So yes, when I was saved my trust in Jesus Christ was perfectly right and perfectly enacted.

* If you add works to your salvation model, you better be sure you have the right works and in the right amount.

* If you add continual, perpetual trust to your salvation model, no human is saved. You yourself testify that you are trying to live ALL but do not live ALL. You have redacted your belief to a decision or desire to live all. I understand it is a decision or desire to trust Jesus and not one's self/works for salvation.

The fact that I trusted Jesus one time only for salvation means:

1. I will, given some time, bear good fruit. There's no question in my mind that saying "He's a Christian rapist/murderer and so forth" belies the reality of people who profess trust in Christ, and not only are insincere, but likely misunderstand the gospel. I witness in person to between 10 and 20 people weekly currently, and from long experience, believe me, most people who identify as professing Christians are relying on works or perpetual trust models.

2. Deathbed conversions are valid. There's a parable where Jesus allows for the reality of last-minute workers getting the same reward.

Thanks, Thanda.

 

[Thanda]

Thanda, my point was this--You cannot logically criticize my decision theology while saying you have to be saved by making a decision.

The price for Jesus wasn't our all, since He died for us before we were reconciled to Him, while we were yet sinners, while we His enemies. The apostles gave their all to follow Jesus but were concerned that He wished to die.

I agree that that lack of faith holds us back from sinlessness. You may have answered your own question as faith and hope will not be required after this world passes. We will be in Christ's presence and filled with love. We will in Christ's presence thus be ready for a perfect world and a perfect Heaven. Yes? No?

If you work by the definition that faith is nothing more than believing something as opposed to knowing for sure, then yes faith will not be required in the next life. But if you work by the more biblical definition of faith as a deep trust in God then no, we will always require faith even and especially in heaven.

Faith is the most powerful force in the universe. No one can dwell in the presence of God without. Indeed without no one can be happy whether man or angel.

Therefore since we agree that we sin because we lack faith it is clear that Jesus the Master healer will not seek to cure the symptom while leaving illness in tact. Then it is clear that Jesus, in order to make us sinless, will cure our faith. This he must do before we enter heaven. And before he does this no man can claim for certain he has been saved.

To be saved is to be delivered. If a man claims to be saved from his sins by Jesus then the evidence of that will be the sinless life he is living. If he continues to sin then he is deceiving himself and others.

What I'm trying to understand is this: the wages of sin is death (spiritual) - how then is a man saved by Jesus if he has not been saved from death? And how can he be saved death with being saved from sin? And how can he be saved from sin without becoming sinless?

 

[Thanda]

Perfect = without sin, without error. Something perfectly true or false is not ever partially true or false, it is one or the other. The Bible teaches that one may trust Jesus, His atoning death and resurrection, to be saved. I only one time had to trust Jesus accurately (not perfectly) to be saved. I had to trust Him and not myself to be saved. This was like getting a test question 100% correct, that is, perfectly correct. So yes, when I was saved my trust in Jesus Christ was perfectly right and perfectly enacted.

* If you add works to your salvation model, you better be sure you have the right works and in the right amount.

* If you add continual, perpetual trust to your salvation model, no human is saved. You yourself testify that you are trying to live ALL but do not live ALL. You have redacted your belief to a decision or desire to live all. I understand it is a decision or desire to trust Jesus and not one's self/works for salvation.

The fact that I trusted Jesus one time only for salvation means:

1. I will, given some time, bear good fruit. There's no question in my mind that saying "He's a Christian rapist/murderer and so forth" belies the reality of people who profess trust in Christ, and not only are insincere, but likely misunderstand the gospel. I witness in person to between 10 and 20 people weekly currently, and from long experience, believe me, most people who identify as professing Christians are relying on works or perpetual trust models.

2. Deathbed conversions are valid. There's a parable where Jesus allows for the reality of last-minute workers getting the same reward.

Thanks, Thanda.

By perfect I only meant complete, without error.

I agree that one needs to faith Jesus to be saved. I only disagree with you on the nature and duration of the faith. You believe the faith only needs to exist at one time. I believe the faith must be abiding and enduring. You believe the faith need only be belief that Jesus can save. I believe faith needs to be trusting God with every part of our lives and who we are. You believe faith does not necessarily go with good works. I believe faith always produces good works and there is no good works without faith and no faith without good works.

I have no problem with death bed conversion. It can happen. But how likely is it? You have identified sincerity as an important aspect of true faith? How likely is it that someone who has spurned countless opportunities to exercise true faith in God will suddenly develop true and sincere faith just as he is about to die? Just because he tells the priest he's accepted Jesus it doesn't mean he has. Faith and fear are opposites: what are the chances that his declaration of faith is out of love for God and not out of fear?

 

[Orontes]

It follows well--Paul says in Romans 3, "This was to demonstrate His righteousness... that He might be just AND the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

I'm not trying to break your chops, but if you would please provide an alternative model you think is sensical...early in this thread you said something like, "LDS has at least nine alternative views on atonement..."?

I don't know what the pronoun "it" is referring to. If you're referring to your earlier statement I already pointed out the contradiction in post 232.

Romans 3 does not support a penal substitution model of the atonement.

Per alternate atonement theories: I didn't say Mormonism has 9 different atonement theories. I said I was aware of at least 7 different atonement theories. These are from larger Christian theology. If you note post 236. I lay out 6 of them. Now, if you're asking for my view on the atonement, I'm happy to oblige, but by your asking I'm assuming you have recognized the penal substitution model is undefendable and are looking for a more coherent model. Is this right? Clear also seems interested. I won't be able to do so until next week as I'm traveling and have limited email access.

 

[Orontes]

The annual scapegoat, where the priest placed his hands on it to transmit/transmute the sins of Israel as a type of Christ...? That isn't a foreshadowing of a transfer of guilt?

Jesus was cursed for our guilt though innocent, for it was written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree..."

The scapegoat is not literal and does not refer to individual sins. It refers to the collective and the covenant Israel made with the Lord. One cannot transfer guilt. If you steal a car, you cannot transfer the guilt to me.

Per the Galatians 3 reference: Paul is addressing the issue of Judaizers. There was no need for gentile converts to undergo circumcision or any fealty to Mosaic Law. All such necessity was removed by and through Christ and the new covenant.

 

[Orontes]

* If you add works to your salvation model, you better be sure you have the right works and in the right amount.

* If you add continual, perpetual trust to your salvation model, no human is saved. You yourself testify that you are trying to live ALL but do not live ALL. You have redacted your belief to a decision or desire to live all. I understand it is a decision or desire to trust Jesus and not one's self/works for salvation.

The fact that I trusted Jesus one time only for salvation means:

"Continual, perpetual trust to your salvation model, means no human is saved" This doesn't follow. It is a non sequitur.

The idea a single instance of trust constitutes salvation...why? What is the moral value in such a moral posture? How is such moral? This kind of statement is suggestive of the earlier bus analogy that was so horribly flawed. Anytime you assert a guaranteed salvation you run afoul of base logic and moral sensibility.

 

[BilliardsBall]

If you work by the definition that faith is nothing more than believing something as opposed to knowing for sure, then yes faith will not be required in the next life. But if you work by the more biblical definition of faith as a deep trust in God then no, we will always require faith even and especially in heaven.

Faith is the most powerful force in the universe. No one can dwell in the presence of God without. Indeed without no one can be happy whether man or angel.

Therefore since we agree that we sin because we lack faith it is clear that Jesus the Master healer will not seek to cure the symptom while leaving illness in tact. Then it is clear that Jesus, in order to make us sinless, will cure our faith. This he must do before we enter heaven. And before he does this no man can claim for certain he has been saved.

To be saved is to be delivered. If a man claims to be saved from his sins by Jesus then the evidence of that will be the sinless life he is living. If he continues to sin then he is deceiving himself and others.

What I'm trying to understand is this: the wages of sin is death (spiritual) - how then is a man saved by Jesus if he has not been saved from death? And how can he be saved death with being saved from sin? And how can he be saved from sin without becoming sinless?

Paul said we don't need faith in Heaven. I guess it depends on how you feel about the inerrancy and authenticity of the Holy Bible.

The Bible further says we are saved from death's "sting". We are saved from being lost and need not fear death. For the Christian, death is a welcome transition to a better place. In that better place, one must be sinless as you know.

 

[BilliardsBall]

By perfect I only meant complete, without error.

I agree that one needs to faith Jesus to be saved. I only disagree with you on the nature and duration of the faith. You believe the faith only needs to exist at one time. I believe the faith must be abiding and enduring. You believe the faith need only be belief that Jesus can save. I believe faith needs to be trusting God with every part of our lives and who we are. You believe faith does not necessarily go with good works. I believe faith always produces good works and there is no good works without faith and no faith without good works.

I have no problem with death bed conversion. It can happen. But how likely is it? You have identified sincerity as an important aspect of true faith? How likely is it that someone who has spurned countless opportunities to exercise true faith in God will suddenly develop true and sincere faith just as he is about to die? Just because he tells the priest he's accepted Jesus it doesn't mean he has. Faith and fear are opposites: what are the chances that his declaration of faith is out of love for God and not out of fear?

There is no Bible statement that people must trust God for un-selfish reasons. Indeed Romans says "God commends His love toward us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." The same chapter says, "...we were his enemies [when we were] reconciled to His Son..." There is nothing in the Bible to suggest that only decent, pure, spiritual people throw themselves onto God's propitiation and mercy for salvation.

I guess the problem with your abiding faith model is again your emphasis is on you... saving you... it is rather "the gift of God, not of works, so that none can boast."

Further, correct me if I'm wrong, but Jesus gave a parable addressing this sort of deathbed conversion thing. The worker called in to work at the end of the day gets the same (heavenly) wage as the rest, despite the protestations of the others. God can save on a deathbed because He "can have mercy on whom he'll have mercy, it isn't for the clay to question the potter."

 

[BilliardsBall]

I don't know what the pronoun "it" is referring to. If you're referring to your earlier statement I already pointed out the contradiction in post 232.

Romans 3 does not support a penal substitution model of the atonement.

Per alternate atonement theories: I didn't say Mormonism has 9 different atonement theories. I said I was aware of at least 7 different atonement theories. These are from larger Christian theology. If you note post 236. I lay out 6 of them. Now, if you're asking for my view on the atonement, I'm happy to oblige, but by your asking I'm assuming you have recognized the penal substitution model is undefendable and are looking for a more coherent model. Is this right? Clear also seems interested. I won't be able to do so until next week as I'm traveling and have limited email access.

Ah, I see. My issue is that as some have suggested, there may be multiple purposes to the atonement. The penal model has room for other models to be included, but I fear those opposing the penal model are relying on works and personal morality rather than relying on Jesus Christ for salvation.

When you have more time to respond, please know that Master Billiards repudiates all five points of Calvinism as anathema, and does not believe in the Calvinist perseverance of the saints model. And Master Billiards doesn't want to hear any more that just because Calvin got lucky with a penal model and got lucky describing the Bible, that his idea is invalid because it is modernist. While I'd be delighted if Jesus appeared post-resurrection to a native American group, I recognize that I cannot find such an occurrence in any Christian theology prior to the advent of LDS theology, which is several hundred years after Calvin.

Please understand my kind intent in this last--I appreciate that you and Clear are excited about early church sources for all doctrine, but that seems unfair if you are going to allow for revelation to occur and be distributed to us as Christians 1,500 years later or longer.

Thank you.

PS. You may feel Rom 3 does not support the penal model, but it does disallow works as salvific and it does say that God offered Jesus as propitiation specifically to satisfy justice even as He justified those who trust Christ. What is your interpretation of this?


"...Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

 

[Thanda]

Paul said we don't need faith in Heaven. I guess it depends on how you feel about the inerrancy and authenticity of the Holy Bible.

The Bible further says we are saved from death's "sting". We are saved from being lost and need not fear death. For the Christian, death is a welcome transition to a better place. In that better place, one must be sinless as you know.

If Paul meant faith in the sense of believing in God and not knowing for sure of his existence the I completely agree with him. If by faith he meant trust in God the I completely reject his words. Paul is not the authority for my life. God is. And by the power of the Holy Ghost I know we will always need to trust God until perhaps at some time when we become omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient as He is.

By death I meant spiritual death - that is, separation from God. When we are have faith in God and repent and are baptised, we can have the Holy Ghost (a member of the Godhead) with us all the time. But to the degree that we allow the Holy Ghost to enter into our lives to that same degree he (the Holy Ghost) will cleanse us from the effects of our past sins and the desire to commit future sins. And as soon as we learn to trust God with our all we will be cleansed from all our sins - but not a moment before it. And we will not enter heaven until we have thus been cleansed.

 

[Thanda]

There is no Bible statement that people must trust God for un-selfish reasons. Indeed Romans says "God commends His love toward us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." The same chapter says, "...we were his enemies [when we were] reconciled to His Son..." There is nothing in the Bible to suggest that only decent, pure, spiritual people throw themselves onto God's propitiation and mercy for salvation.

If we assume that God doesn't care why you say you trust him so long as you say so then we run into some difficulties. Jesus admitted that even the devils believe in God but because of their belief they fear and tremble. Now if fear, instead of love, is a valid motivator for true faith then we must admit that even the devils will be saved. Furthermore we must also ask ourselves when God commanded the children of Israel to kill all those people he deemed wicked. He could have told the Israelites to capture the people and put them in dungeons and torture them until the accept Jehovah as their God. And if God doesn't care what motivates our faith then Jesus was wrong to say that the greatest commandment is to love God. He should have said the greatest commandment is to believe in God and accept him whether you love him or fear him.

God is a Just God. He always has been and always will be. The atonement of Jesus Christ didn't suddenly make him unjust, irrational and arbitrary. Through Jesus Christ God has only provided a way for those who realise the error of their ways and wish leave their sins behind.

Think about that for the moment. Sin is what stands between us and complete joy and happiness - in other words it's what stands between us and heaven or salvation. So for God to bring us to heaven or salvation he must help us overcome our sins. But many people misunderstand this. They think just being in heaven makes a person happy. So they think that Jesus died so that he can take people to heaven. And from this they deduce that even if they continue to sin, so long as they believe in Jesus they will one day be in heaven and they will somehow be happy. But this is false. Our distance from heaven is not what keeps us unhappy - our sins keep us unhappy. Our sins keep us from everything that is good. So when a person accepts Jesus he is not doing to so that he can get a ticket or a guarantee into heaven. He is doing it so that he can be cleansed from his sins - so that he may live a sinless life just as his Lord did. He knows that so long as he can live free from sin heaven is already with him whether in life or in death. So long as he is free from sin he has already been saved whether he has set foot in heaven or not. Most importantly he knows that if he is not free from sin he will not be happy even if he were to be taken up into heaven. Even if he dwelt forever in the presence of God he would still be unhappy if he continued to sin. So he knows that the quest of this life is to increase his trust in God so he can be willing for God to change his life. Daily he seeks to yield more and more to the enticings of the Holy Spirit. Daily he learns to surrender his whole life to the will of God. It is a process, it is painful, but for the humble seeker of happiness it will be oh so worth it in the end.

Further, correct me if I'm wrong, but Jesus gave a parable addressing this sort of deathbed conversion thing. The worker called in to work at the end of the day gets the same (heavenly) wage as the rest, despite the protestations of the others. God can save on a deathbed because He "can have mercy on whom he'll have mercy, it isn't for the clay to question the potter."

Your interpretation of this is not the only one. One could interpret these verses to the relating to groups of people rather than individuals. In that sense it could be relating to the fact the Israel was the first group that was called to labour for the Lord. But after Israel other groups have been called to labour. And God's word will continue to God forth until it has reached even people in the remotest of places. All those who have received the gospel have an obligation to God to go forth and labour. And all those who labour will receive the same reward - eternal life - regardless of when then were called. This seems to address the view that was prevalent in Israel at the time that since they were literal children of Abraham they had a special place and reward reserved in heaven that others would not get.

Even if we interpret this as relating to individuals we need not come to the conclusion you have come to. You are correct in stating that all received the same reward including those who laboured for only an hour. But consider this - all of them laboured for a period of time. They met with the Master, they agreed terms and they went to labour. When the Master returned at the end of the day (when there wasn't any more time to labour) he did not go to the people standing at the gate to ask if they would like to enter into an agreement with him to labour because there was no more time left to labour. So now from this parable it is clear that once we accept Jesus and come to an agreement with God to become his disciple, we must go forth and work for God. But at our deathbeds what labour can we perform? We can come to an agreement with God but we cannot do any labour. We can't even get baptised. Then how shall we receive a reward at Judgement day when we haven't performed any labour? Indeed why would the Master enter into an agreement with us to pay us for labour he knows we won't be able to perform because there is no time?

 

[BilliardsBall]

If Paul meant faith in the sense of believing in God and not knowing for sure of his existence the I completely agree with him. If by faith he meant trust in God the I completely reject his words. Paul is not the authority for my life. God is. And by the power of the Holy Ghost I know we will always need to trust God until perhaps at some time when we become omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient as He is.

By death I meant spiritual death - that is, separation from God. When we are have faith in God and repent and are baptised, we can have the Holy Ghost (a member of the Godhead) with us all the time. But to the degree that we allow the Holy Ghost to enter into our lives to that same degree he (the Holy Ghost) will cleanse us from the effects of our past sins and the desire to commit future sins. And as soon as we learn to trust God with our all we will be cleansed from all our sins - but not a moment before it. And we will not enter heaven until we have thus been cleansed.

I'm sorry you do not regard Paul's teachings as potentially salvific--but we can look at a variety of writers in both testaments to discern that trusting God is an excellent choice. I would even venture that we can discover elsewhere besides Paul that trusting God is a saving choice.

I am taking your second paragraph as indicative of two statements. May I rephrase your second paragraph thusly?

1. We will not enter Heaven until we are perfectly pure.

2. We will be unable to begin to approach such perfection until we make a decision to allow God to help us do so.

Therefore, since I adhere to both statements, we agree on salvation. Yes?

We only disagree on this--that I say, biblically speaking, one must decide to trust Jesus for salvation, and you believe that one must decide to trust Jesus and also to do the best one can, via works.

I can almost live with that difference but I need to understand your viewpoint better. Is Jesus saving you, are you saving you or are both of you saving you?

 

[BilliardsBall]

If we assume that God doesn't care why you say you trust him so long as you say so then we run into some difficulties. Jesus admitted that even the devils believe in God but because of their belief they fear and tremble. Now if fear, instead of love, is a valid motivator for true faith then we must admit that even the devils will be saved. Furthermore we must also ask ourselves when God commanded the children of Israel to kill all those people he deemed wicked. He could have told the Israelites to capture the people and put them in dungeons and torture them until the accept Jehovah as their God. And if God doesn't care what motivates our faith then Jesus was wrong to say that the greatest commandment is to love God. He should have said the greatest commandment is to believe in God and accept him whether you love him or fear him.

God is a Just God. He always has been and always will be. The atonement of Jesus Christ didn't suddenly make him unjust, irrational and arbitrary. Through Jesus Christ God has only provided a way for those who realise the error of their ways and wish leave their sins behind.

Think about that for the moment. Sin is what stands between us and complete joy and happiness - in other words it's what stands between us and heaven or salvation. So for God to bring us to heaven or salvation he must help us overcome our sins. But many people misunderstand this. They think just being in heaven makes a person happy. So they think that Jesus died so that he can take people to heaven. And from this they deduce that even if they continue to sin, so long as they believe in Jesus they will one day be in heaven and they will somehow be happy. But this is false. Our distance from heaven is not what keeps us unhappy - our sins keep us unhappy. Our sins keep us from everything that is good. So when a person accepts Jesus he is not doing to so that he can get a ticket or a guarantee into heaven. He is doing it so that he can be cleansed from his sins - so that he may live a sinless life just as his Lord did. He knows that so long as he can live free from sin heaven is already with him whether in life or in death. So long as he is free from sin he has already been saved whether he has set foot in heaven or not. Most importantly he knows that if he is not free from sin he will not be happy even if he were to be taken up into heaven. Even if he dwelt forever in the presence of God he would still be unhappy if he continued to sin. So he knows that the quest of this life is to increase his trust in God so he can be willing for God to change his life. Daily he seeks to yield more and more to the enticings of the Holy Spirit. Daily he learns to surrender his whole life to the will of God. It is a process, it is painful, but for the humble seeker of happiness it will be oh so worth it in the end.



Your interpretation of this is not the only one. One could interpret these verses to the relating to groups of people rather than individuals. In that sense it could be relating to the fact the Israel was the first group that was called to labour for the Lord. But after Israel other groups have been called to labour. And God's word will continue to God forth until it has reached even people in the remotest of places. All those who have received the gospel have an obligation to God to go forth and labour. And all those who labour will receive the same reward - eternal life - regardless of when then were called. This seems to address the view that was prevalent in Israel at the time that since they were literal children of Abraham they had a special place and reward reserved in heaven that others would not get.

Even if we interpret this as relating to individuals we need not come to the conclusion you have come to. You are correct in stating that all received the same reward including those who laboured for only an hour. But consider this - all of them laboured for a period of time. They met with the Master, they agreed terms and they went to labour. When the Master returned at the end of the day (when there wasn't any more time to labour) he did not go to the people standing at the gate to ask if they would like to enter into an agreement with him to labour because there was no more time left to labour. So now from this parable it is clear that once we accept Jesus and come to an agreement with God to become his disciple, we must go forth and work for God. But at our deathbeds what labour can we perform? We can come to an agreement with God but we cannot do any labour. We can't even get baptised. Then how shall we receive a reward at Judgement day when we haven't performed any labour? Indeed why would the Master enter into an agreement with us to pay us for labour he knows we won't be able to perform because there is no time?

I can not only speak for me but indeed, I can do so authoritatively. I do good works because I'm already saved, love as my motivation. This "I can do whatever I want now that I'm saved" is an unworthy thought that almost never enters my mind but seems to constantly enter the minds of people who judge other people based on works. Didn't Paul say something about not judging a master's servants for him?

Based on what you wrote about labor, I must logically produce the following conclusions:

1. You don't believe someone is saved by faith apart from works, despite Paul's treatise demonstrating the opposite at the conclusion of Romans 3.

2. Knowing that the deathbed convert will not have even one hour to labor, I will be better suited abandoning deathbed ministry, and the next time a loved one is near death and asks me how to be saved, I will say, "You cannot be," and leave them to die not in a state of grace. There is no "free gift" for them as discussed in Romans 5 and 6, rather, the gift of eternal life is to be earned.

If I misunderstood your post here, I apologize.

 

[Clear]

billiardsball said (post 252) : “ You may feel Rom 3 does not support the penal model, but it does disallow works as salvific and it does say that God offered Jesus as propitiation specifically to satisfy justice even as He justified those who trust Christ. What is your interpretation of this?

"...Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

1) Your claim disallowing works as salvific is irrelevant since no one is arguing that works themselves are salvific (so far...).

2) Romans 3 does not make the work of moral repentance obsolete nor does it guarantee salvation to murderers and those who torture and rape children or others who may have temporarily believed in Jesus as their savior and then turned to defy, dishonor and repudiate God.



Since you brought up Ephesians in support of this modern theory and then as we looked closer at it, discovered it also did not support this theory, perhaps we can take a close look at your quote of Romans 3 24-26 and see if it supports your theory. Since you say you have been trained in Greek, I include the Greek below (NA-27)

Νυνι δε χωρις νομου δικαιοσυνη θεου πεφανερωται μαρτθρουμενη υπο του νομου και των προφη των δικαιοσθνηδε θεου δια πιστεως Ιησου Χριστου εις παντας και επι παντας(א2 D F G 33 M it vgcl sy; Ambst) τους πιστεθοντας ου γαρ εστιν διστολη παντες γαρ ημαρτον και υστερουνται της δοξης του θεου δικαιουμεν οι δωρεαν τη αυτου χαριτι δια της απολυτρωσεως της εν χριστω Ιησου ον προεθετο ο θεος ιλαστηριον δια πιστεως εν τω αυτο αιματι εις ενδειξιν της δικαιοσυνης αυτο δια την παρ εσιν / εν τω νυν αιωνι (1908) / εν τω νυν καιρω δια την πωρωσιν(1875) των προγεγονοτων αμαρτηματων εν τη ανχη του θεου προς την εν δειξιν της δικαιοσυνης αυτου εν τω νυν καιρω εις το ειναι αυτον δικαιον και δικαιουντα τον εκ πιστεως Ιησου.


21 But now, God’s justice has been manifest without law as the law and the prophets bear witness [to] Justice of God through faith in Jesus Christ in all and upon all (א2 D F G 33 M it vgcl sy; Ambst) of the believing. Indeed, [it] does not distinguish. For all sin and come short of the Glory of God.
Why would any of these verses support your theory of “Momentary belief guarantees Salvation” when “πιστεθοντας” in vs 22 itself does not reference a temporary or momentary noun, nor is there any adjective that makes it so in this sentence? In fact, once they do not have faith, then, by definition, they are not πιστεθ-οντας. (existence of faith)


24 measured justice is given by him (God), [and] grace through the fulfillment that [is] in Christ Jesus who God chose as an appeasement, through faith [in the present season because of [your] hardness 1875] in his blood, to demonstrate his justice in the current season through the remission (of punishment) of former sins.
If the point is that God himself gives a measured justice and that this justice is mercifully tempered through the fulfillment of Christs mission, where in these sentences does it support your theory that murderers and rapists and those who oppress and torture are guaranteed a heaven simply by having a sincere but momentary belief?

26 Gods’ delay in demonstrating his justice in the present season [serves] to be himself just, and [to] justify those of faith in Jesus.
If God delays meting out justice for a time, how does this point support your theory that murderers and rapists and those who oppress and torture are guaranteed a heaven simply by having a sincere but momentary belief?



Clear
δρσιτζτωω

 

[Thanda]

I'm sorry you do not regard Paul's teachings as potentially salvific--but we can look at a variety of writers in both testaments to discern that trusting God is an excellent choice. I would even venture that we can discover elsewhere besides Paul that trusting God is a saving choice.

Of course - we do not disagree that trusting God is important. We appeared to disagree with how long we would have to trust in God. You suggested that Paul believed we would not have to trust God when we are in Heaven. I suggested that unless we become like God we will always have to trust him even in Heaven.

I am taking your second paragraph as indicative of two statements. May I rephrase your second paragraph thusly?

1. We will not enter Heaven until we are perfectly pure.

2. We will be unable to begin to approach such perfection until we make a decision to allow God to help us do so.

Therefore, since I adhere to both statements, we agree on salvation. Yes?

Yes

We only disagree on this--that I say, biblically speaking, one must decide to trust Jesus for salvation, and you believe that one must decide to trust Jesus and also to do the best one can, via works.

No what I am saying is that trust in Jesus automatically leads to works. But I am also saying that the kind of trust in Jesus that leads to perfect works (that is sinlessness) is developed over time. It is something to work at. Therefore the work of this life is to attain to that level of trust or faith. Works therefore become a measure of that level of trust. The more we keep his commandments the more it means we trust him. Furthermore works play another role - they help us gain more trust. Since we are both agreed that trust in God is the essential ingredient to salvation then I'm sure it won't be difficult to agree that anything that helps increase our trust is not only good but necessary. And if you agree that works (keeping God's commandments, doing good) help us gain more trust in God then you must agree that works are necessary for salvation. We don't get salvation because of our works, we get it because of our faith. But we get our faith because of our works and the gift of God.

I think perhaps this is where the problem might lie. You assume that if a person (who believes he has not yet been saved) decides to do good works his motivation must be doing so because he relies on himself and doesn't quite trust God. But this is not necessarily the case. Jesus commanded to do good works. He commanded us not to commit adultery. He commanded us not be angry. He commanded us to give to the poor. How can a person who trusts Jesus fail to do those and many other things which he has commanded? Surely if faith is the central saving principle in the gospel then it follows that Jesus gave those commandments so that we could both show and develop our faith. So what evil is there in a person doing those things that his Master commanded him to do? "If ye love me keep my commandments" Jesus said. "How knoweth a man the Master whom he has not served" He said again. "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou has sent". Clearly without serving Jesus by keeping his commandments we can never know him and we therefore can never have eternal life.

Is Jesus saving you, are you saving you or are both of you saving you?

Both of us are saving me. Jesus cannot save me against my will. When Naaman came to Elisha to be healed Elisha commanded him to go and wash in the water seven times and he would be healed. Do you suppose he would have been healed had he not followed the prophets counsel?

Jesus said "And I know that his commandment is life everlasting". Jesus proclaimed that keeping God's commandments leads to eternal life.

 

[Thanda]

I do good works because I'm already saved

I have a question: What have you been saved from?

Based on what you wrote about labor, I must logically produce the following conclusions:

1. You don't believe someone is saved by faith apart from works, despite Paul's treatise demonstrating the opposite at the conclusion of Romans 3.

I believe there is no true faith, and never has been nor ever will be, that is not accompanied by works. Romans Chapter three was referring to a specific set of works - the Law of Moses. Paul was stressing that the Law of Moses was given to the Jews in addition to the gospel. And he was asserting that while the Jews were expected to keep the Law of Moses, the were only saved if the had faith in God according to the gospel. That is, if they only went through the motions of the law of Moses and had no actual faith in God or did not keep the law out of faith in God, then they would not be saved even if they kept the law of Moses.
This is consistent with what Jesus had to say about giving to the poor. He said we should do it out of faith in God and not to get recognition. He warned that if we gave for recognition and not out of faith, then we would not get a reward from God. Note this, Jesus said "I would that ye should do alms". He gave us a commandment to do good works. Do you suppose that anyone can have faith in Jesus and not do alms when he has the means to do so?

2. Knowing that the deathbed convert will not have even one hour to labor, I will be better suited abandoning deathbed ministry, and the next time a loved one is near death and asks me how to be saved, I will say, "You cannot be," and leave them to die not in a state of grace. There is no "free gift" for them as discussed in Romans 5 and 6, rather, the gift of eternal life is to be earned.

Knowing that salvation is not a one time event it would never be prudent to go around telling people "Say xxx and you will be saved". You would be better served telling anyone that asks "This is the road to salvation: You start by choosing to trust Jesus (have faith). As you grow in your faith Jesus will eventually give you power so you can forsake all your sins. When you have forsaken all your sins then you will be saved" Because ultimately salvation means to be free from sin and all its effects.

And yes there is no free gift except in the sense that we don't need to pay money for it. If salvation was free (in that it required no effort on our part) then everyone would be saved.

 

[Clear]

Thanda said to Billiardsball : (post # 258) “Of course - we do not disagree that trusting God is important. We appeared to disagree with how long we would have to trust in God. You suggested that Paul believed we would not have to trust God when we are in Heaven. I suggested that unless we become like God we will always have to trust him even in Heaven. "
Thanda, I think your point is important. Faith, as a motivating force will always be operative in all intelligent beings that make future plans and attempt to carry them out. While the specific Faith in God’s existence will be replaced by knowledge of his existence when one is in his presence, faith in other points and principles will continue to exist and operate.



Thanda said to Billiardsball : (post # 258) “I am also saying that the kind of trust in Jesus that leads to perfect works (that is sinlessness) is developed over time. “
This is yet another profoundly important point you are making Thanda.

“Lightswitch theology” (i.e. salvation by a simple, momentary decision” - i.e. a "switch") is inconsistent with “process reality” (where individuals and personal traits change gradually, over time and with experience and insight).

Also, your point that “works plays [other] roles” is profoundly important as well. The attempt to artificially separate religious belief from religious actions creates a multitude of logical and rational and historical religious errors within the modern theories that ignore logical relationships.



Billiardsball claimed : “….I am already saved”.

Thanda asked Billiardsball : (post # 259) “ What have you been saved from?”

This is an interesting question you have asked Billiardsball (I've also asked him this same question on a different thread). Obviously Billiardsball is not in heaven and others who are not yet “saved” have the spirit in their lives and are given spiritual “gifts”, etc.



Also, : Regarding your points made regarding the Law of Moses versus the Gospel (post # 259). I also think this distinction you made is, historically, another point of historical importance. If the version of the Law of Moses the Jews of Jesus’ time were living was not the uncontaminated gospel of Jesus Christ, (but was instead, a version of Moses' “schoolmaster law” meant to prepare the Jews for greater spiritual truths) and Pauls’ comments were made in this context, then it affects the base context of Pauls teachings; it affects their meaning; it affects his motives for saying the things he said; and it affects his expectations regarding the effect of his teachings on the specific hearers he spoke to.

I also like your point regarding “free gifts” and the historical context. In a society where the rich acquired monetary “salvation” and “freedom” and their homes and lands and things generally associated with joy and peace because of money, it was important that the poor understood that the sorts of salvation and freedom and eternal joy and peace could be had “without price”. It was “free” and did not require money or position or power to obtain. This is NOT to say there were not conditions attached.



Thanks for your common sense points on these issues Thanda

Clear
δρσιφινεω