[–]▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851569>>851570 >>851574 >>851589 >>851868 [Watch Thread][Show All Posts]
>gospel is called 'new covenant'
>another word for covenant is 'contract'
>NOOOO! THERE CAN'T BE STIPULATIONS ON SALVATION. THAT'S A MAN CENTERED GOSPEL!
>New testament is literally full of these stipulations
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ b6b4f8 (1) No.851570 >>851831
>>851569 (OP)
>gospel is called 'new covenant'
>another word for covenant is 'contract'
Something interesting I've noticed is that Satanism doesn't exactly completely rebel against Christianity. It takes Christian ideas and makes them look evil, providing ammo to Christ haters.
>contracts with God? Sounds like contracts with demons to me
>do as wilt? That's satanic, who cares if Augustine said it first
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ aff1a5 (1) No.851574 >>851575
>>851569 (OP)
The stipulations on the contract in question do not include works, in fact expressly denying it. Ephesians 2.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851575 >>851576
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ abffb8 (1) No.851576 >>851584
>>851575
Can you state the argument in a post? I don't have the opportunity to listen to an hour lecture right now
Here's a relevant link https://carm.org/ecf-quotes-by-topic/early-church-fathers-on-faith-alone/
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 94fc65 (1) No.851580 >>851583
Do good works anyway. I promise Jesus won't find fault in you for helping the old, the poor and the sick.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 1d8aca (2) No.851583
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851584 >>851597
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 16e401 (1) No.851589 >>851593
>>851569 (OP)
>contract has stipulations
that doesn't automatically make the stipulation works-based, it makes it faith-based
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851593 >>851597
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5428cd (1) No.851597 >>851599 >>851600
>>851584
Not an argument
>>851593
What about James? You don't think "faith without works is dead" is at all in tension with sola fide do you? That's a very ignorant papist take
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851599 >>851608
>>851597
No, that's the much eisegeted verse that evangelicals who don't read their Bible like to bring up. I think James 2:24 "24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" is a much bigger problem for evangelicals.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851600 >>851624
>>851597
Also his first quotation is by the only one who is remotely an early church father and it doesn't support sola fide (just like the Bible doesn't support sola fide). The first quotation, just has words blown up for people with low attention span, but altogether it is once again talking about the Christian liberty of individual conviction as Paul sets forth in Romans. It has nothing to do with sola fide, except that it defines faith as something which produces virtues.
Matt Slick has an appropriate name because he's one of the most dishonest apologists in the game. He would go through the Bible with a pairing knife as did Luther before him, if he could reduce it to a work of Calvinistic prooftexts. I don't regard what the man has to say because he is disingenuous. And the fact that he does nothing to distinguish antenicene fathers from supposed other ones (who are no 'fathers' at all but late-comers who have no business messing with well-entrenched doctrines). Like all Calvinists, he probably only likes the 'reformed' (so to speak) manichaen gnostic Augustine.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 1d8aca (2) No.851608
>>851599
If you read the passage fully (and in an accurate translation) you will see from the example given in verses 15-16 that this is about justification before men. In other words, it is about how your faith alone cannot save another person. It is not involved in justification before God, which, as Paul explained in Romans 4, is without works, and he even contrasted the two justifications in 1 Corinthians 4:1-4. And that's a short answer to the question.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 06bc86 (7) No.851624 >>851753
>>851600
What do you think sola fide means
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851753 >>851758
>>851624
The jungle of evangelical positions on this makes it difficult to answer concisely, but I like a good technical writing challenge, so here goes. It is attaining and maintaining salvation without doing committing any action for which you could have done otherwise.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 06bc86 (7) No.851758 >>851761 >>851763
>>851753
It wasn't a trick question, and no theres no ambiguity about what it means. Sola fide is the doctrine of justification by faith alone.
This is not antinomianism, which rejects the law (anti-against nomos-law) and so teaches that good works don't matter in a Christian's life. Its also not "once saved always saved", like the very Protestant Armenians and Wesleyans teach.
So now properly defined what do you believe instead of sola fide? Salvation of faith and works?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 06bc86 (7) No.851761
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851763 >>851765
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>851758
I guess those would be Lutheran Armenians and Steve Wesleyans because neither Arminius nor Wesley taught eternal security. Besides which, I am an Anabaptist, so I neither need Arminius nor Wesley to debunk eternal security because it is already soundly refuted by the apostolic antenicene fathers. I literally posted a video about what I believe, you turkey. I believe in salvation that is granted by grace through faith, which is thereafter maintained by works of obedience, not to the letter of the Law but the Spirit of the Law which now dwells inside the believer. Here is a video by a Calvinistic pastor whose preaching I nevertheless have always liked, which basically explains why we are able to work after we are baptized by the water and Spirit and how it is necessary to our salvation. Of course, in true Calvinistic fashion, Pastor Conway would probably merely change the definition from doing works to catching yourself doing works to avoid the leering specter of 'synergism'. Nevertheless this is works salvation, true to form. So yes, salvation is of works, when those works become the Spirit wrought works of God and not works of the flesh to a dead letter. This is the only sane way to reconcile most of Paul with all of James. Because Paul is emphasizing we didn't earn our salvation. We also don't earn our salvation afterward, in the sense that we never pay the first cent towards it by any works. If we do these works of God we are submitting to the will of the Spirit as through faith, so we also cannot say we are realizing these works or meticulously carrying them out, but rather putting our own will on the altar. This is the real Arminian position. But rather this submission and obedience is merely not abusing the grace, freely given by God.
If my dad bought me a car and held onto the lease and said 'son, I want you to drive this within the rules of the road and I want you to take it in for regular oil changes and tune-ups' would that car then not be a gift? And if instead I went out and did street-racing and doughnuts with the car for years, would he not be just to take the car away? And would the car then not remain an abused gift? Yet God is so gracious that our sins become even more grave when we have the very witness of the Holy Spirit within us and he still forgives our sins, no matter how grave. But what if you die after a lifetime of beating the heck out of your Christian life and not considering God's will in anything? Will you go to heaven? Don't bank on it. If God is sovereign over anything, its your appointed day of death and when you die, that's God saying, its time to make an account of your faith. If we define Sola-Fide as true faith which produces works then fine, that's just a semantic shift. But God will cast every fruitless vine into the fire. Amen and amen
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 06bc86 (7) No.851765 >>851766
>>851763
>If we define Sola-Fide as true faith which produces works then fine, that's just a semantic shift.
You're the one trying to redefine the term this time friend.
As an Anabaptist you are part of the radical reformation and your tradition has always taught salvation by faith alone, rejecting works salvation
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851766 >>851767
>>851765
I'm not redefining anything. I said that's redefining faith+works as faith alone (with a delicious nougaty center of works). You're just smuggling the works in under a definition. Basically its a semantic conversation of whether salvation is maintained (but not earned) by works or by that special kind of faith that gets you working. Its six of one, half a dozen of the other. And barring any odious discussions of divine determinism, its completely a non-issue.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 06bc86 (7) No.851767 >>851768 >>851769
>>851766
I am having a hard time following and I don't think we're having a two way conversation.
I argue that salvation is by faith alone. Works do not contribute towards salvation. Works will still be necessarily present in believer.
This is what sola fide means and what Protestants have always taught. Before us Augustine taught it, before that Paul, before that Jesus, before that Moses, before that Abraham.
Do you disagree? If so where? I'm reading you say that salvation is of works. How do you reconcile that with Ephesians 2?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851768 >>851776
>>851767
Once again you are confusing Spirit-wrought works with flesh-wrought ones. We cannot boast when we make ourselves vessels for God's honorable use. Think about the parable of the two sons. Will the one who labored in the field boast about how he did the work his father gave him? How much less then, will we boast for ceasing to resist the Holy Spirit and having the works of God realized through our members? If we truly did good without the regenerating work of the the Spirit and by way of the flesh, earned salvation, then that would be Pelagianism. If we stop favoring the flesh and allow the Holy Spirit to work through us, then those works will bring us ever closer to salvation. But if we do enough works according to the flesh then we might even be finally hardened and cut off from that salvation.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851769
>>851767
Also Augustine is trash. Nobody born after the Council of Nicea can be called a church father, except of another church besides the one established by Peter. Everyone else should get in line and stay in line.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 06bc86 (7) No.851776 >>851779
>>851768
Can you answer the questions
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851779 >>851780
>>851776
I've answered that question, numerous times now.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 06bc86 (7) No.851780 >>851786
>>851779
Sorry I really am trying to follow you but I get the feeling you're just trying to find an argument
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 5ca269 (13) No.851786
>>851780
Its all in the first video I posted.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 1dfb18 (1) No.851831
>>851570
most false religions try to mirror Christianity in some way. look at how some groups (like Scientology) call their groups "churches"
I know people have their opinions on Jay Dyer, but he has interesting points on this topic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Kqcb8hos4I
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
▶ 000000 (1) No.851868
>>851569 (OP)
Not gonna lie, I don't really understand why this is so debated. Seems like a waste of time. Personally, I believe in salvation through faith alone, but even if Christ came to me and said I was right, and one could be a complete degenerate and scumbag and still go to Heaven if they were Christians at heart, why not try to be Christlike anyways? Why not try to adhere to the absolute standard of morality (The Bible)? Why not just be as pure, generous, and kind as you can muster?
Anyways, like I said, I believe faith is the heart of salvation, but if I can make the world a better place and perhaps even inspire more believers through it I think that is more valuable than trying to guarantee a spot in Heaven. Just saying.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.