Saved by faith, rewarded by work. Why do people find this so hard to understand?
Saved by faith
Ephesians 2
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Rewarded by works
Revelation 22:12
And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
Because their church elders tell them that they know better than the word of God.
Pastor Anderson is a phony. So he memorized a bunch of the Bible that is it. Basically it is equivalent as one of us memorizing a bunch of scripture and going around namefagging.
not an argument
It is. What makes his interpretations of any importance. They are just his own ideas. He holds no theological background of importance aside from his ability to memorize. Is memorization such a fantastical feat, when one can simply turn to the verse that they want to look up?
Besides that isn't an argument. The thread is that your saved by gaith and rewarded by works which your post had nothing to do with
Yes it is, especially if you post a video of Anderson as some form of expert. We have this thread almost once a week if not once a month.
Because cdefenders of faith only don't base their arguments around logic, but around emotion.
They start from the "so you're think you're better than me for doing something for God, huh? You ain't shit, you do bad things too" and move from there.
And since logic and emotion are two horses of the same carriage, they'll always, and I truly mean always, find a little twist and a little sophistry that justifies their self shame, mainly the fact they purposefully kid themselves that bible verses about faith mean faith only.
And defenders of works only (mainly Bergoglio, nu-caths and normies) are also looking for an excuse of their feelings, except it's for their want to not be confrontational with infidels.
No it isn't
Nothing. The objective truth is given by the Holy Spirit who indwells the saved believer. That is how one discerns the spirit of truth from error. No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation (2 Peter 1:20).
If you aren't saved you may continually go from one doctrine to another without knowing which is true. But it isn't the same with everyone.
John 14:16-17
And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
2 Corinthians 1:21-22
Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God; Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.
1 John 2:27
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
Heresy of pelagianism, you are saved by grace alone. Faith and works are justification and evidence of salvation
This guy is seemingly twisting verses that say the Church will spread to cover all EARTHLY nations, that heaven will be glorious, and good works are important; in order to transform Heaven into a mirror of his own Earthly political values. Calling certain doctrines "communist" is a huge red flag.
Was gonna include verses but apparently my comment was too long, I'll break it up.
There will be no human kings, no nations in heaven:
Zechariah 14:9
Hebrews 11:13-16
Galatians 3:26-29
Psalm 10:17
Everyone receiving equal reward from God is NOT unfair, because ultimately He owns everything; it is up to him to do as he pleases. Wanting to be wealthier and more powerful than your neighbors in Heaven is dangerously unChristian.
Matthew 20:1-16
Philippians 2:3-7
Romans 9:14-16
Deuteronomy 10:17
Revelation 21:27
Ephesians 5:5
1 Corinthians 15:9-10
Saved with faith maybe?
(You)
(OP)
His claim that you can be saved if you have faith but eschew good works is the most contrary to scripture of all, IMO. The other stuff is questionable, but that borders on outright heresy.
John 14:19-23
James 2:14-26
Matthew 25:41-46
What constitutes good works exactly? Volunteering? Charity? Helping the homeless?
Yes, that and more.
We're called to do good in almost every aspect of our lives; from saving lives to raising the next generation to being polite and considerate in everyday conversation.
Can I ask a question guys? A serious one, apart from the conversation already happening? I kind of think that it’s all about knowing God, helping others to know God, and helping other people in general and treating them with kindness. Is my overly simplified view of things OK in God’s eyes?
And when I say, “know God” I mean living by his 10 Commandments of the OldTestament and Mark 12:30-31 of the New Testament. I don’t actually have to worship people like this Anderson guy do I?
no
24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.
26 And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.
(checked)
God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and truth. (John 4:24)
Where did you even get this idea from?
Justification is by faith alone.
I'm really tired of every single protestant quoting the Bible to defend their retarded fanfic. Every single heretic, every single snowflake, every single degenerate likes to quote the Bible. Every single one of them, completely ignorant of theology or actual Christianity.
In what universe is this true?
I can tell you right now if you're "tired" of hearing the Bible, then you definitely have a false history and false view of what actual Christianity is. Get right with God.
Pic
Try reading his post unlike you read the bible
...
Nope. Saved by grace, through Faith
James 2:24, a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
I will take the bible over your Lutheran dogma thank you.
500 years later, still butthurt
Your fanfics are as much biblical teachings as those from JWs, who also love to quote the Bible. Or mormons, or those retards in korea who think there is a god the mother incarnated in a woman. That is how much your quotes and fanfics are worth
Im tired of hearing protestants, who perverse the Bible to no end, without understanding what it is, or what it meand
Wasn't vitamin K advertising that YouTube was trying to evict his channel a few weeks back?
What happened – Google get scared of the Templar from Tempe?
Don't see that is a fair assessment
He's only a teacher regurgitating pretty standard theology. None of this is novel. He's no theologian.
… maybe it sounds novel to a postolicbros … Am I missing something here … should I have watched vid to the end?
Yeah, and K-man repeatedly says "a free gift", "a free gift". He's no Calvinist, sure, but he's hardly a pelagian.
No wonder there are so many gadolig priests abusing their power when this is the power they're given by folks like you
Retard
Someone going and quoting the Bible is acknowledging the inspired authority of God's word. I'll gladly talk with them over someone who shuns the word of God and desires to throw it in the trash can. You're simply trashing God's word. And truly I am telling you, there is little hope for someone who trashes God's word and throws it in the dumpster, making it second class and making it of none effect. At least the other person isn't belittling and laughing at the truth. They might still believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and his words that he spoke.
If you have faith, it results in works. No works, means no faith. Thus, they are inherently interconnected. Faith+works, simple as that. And that's how all Christians until Luther have always understood it.
Faith is the seed, works is the tree, salvation is the fruit of the tree. It's not complicated, people should stop trying to separate them these things. Anyone with genuine faith WILL produce works which is proof of his faith.
Nope
Romans 4:5
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
nope
That's a strawman, I didn't say we're not justified by faith, but that faith WILL and does produce fruit 100% of the time, hence faith and works cannot be separated, Christ's cup of salvation always leads to regeneration. Hence the Parable of the Sower and Matthew 7:17.
Abraham was justified by faith, but he was also not a lazy bastard, his faith led to works because it was genuine – after all – he didn't "imagine" himself climbing the mountain to offer up his son, he walked the mountain and was going to do it – Faith was leading to works – though works is not the source of faith, faith is the source of works… The two are conjoined and can never be separated.
Faith is the beginning of righteousness and therefor its source (which is God), but when it's genuine, it will naturally lead to works as per the Parable of the Sower.
The problem isn't reading the bible, the problem is the eisegesis pr*ts do to justify their heresy
Out of faith stems rightousness, that's what I said. No works without faith can't be righteous, that's the whole point of the verse. Now you explain to my why would st. Paul bother to explain this distinction if works weren't important.
You think James is wrong then and scripture is fallible? James literally directly contradicted your extra biblical Lutheran dogma invented in the 1500s and you know there's no way around it.
Ok then why are you saying you're tired of it? Because you can't say anything against it is why. Because it's the truth. You want to get people off the path and away from the light of the word and into irrelevant discussions that will take them nowhere.
When did I say James was wrong? And if anything James would be wrong over the other 26 books.
James 2 is justfied to man by your works, that's why he keeps saying "brethren". And he even says in James 2
14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
And with Abraham it is to because Romans 4 says Abraham was justified before circumcision and it literally tells you he wouldn't have glory to God by works
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
Nope
If you automatically did works then that wouldn't make any sense
So you agree a man is justified by works and not by faith alone
Or maybe, just maybe, you are still wrong and NONE of those 27 books teach Lutheran dogma?
That's not the case, an you just prooved that. Key sentence and base of James discurse is not "brethren" it's this: "can faith save him?" (Beside, "brethen" argument is stupid because Paul say this in Romans 4: What shall we say then that Abraham hath found, who is our father according to the flesh.. Paul speaks to his "breathen" as well).
The "works" Paul was speaking against were "works of the [Mosaic] Law" (Rom 3:28ff, 4:9ff), while James was speaking of good works done in union with Christ. (NB: sacrificing one's son isn't even a commandment of the Mosaic Law.) Protestants often miss this simple 'solution' because they refuse to categorically distinguish between "works of the Mosaic Law" and good works in general, done in union with Christ - the 'works' are not the same.
this
(checked)
WIN!!
To man yes, to God no
protties: we have to be justified before men
Jesus: THE WORLD WILL HATE YOU
Or you're wrong considering there's about 150 verses that teach sola fide and about 10 that seem to teach the opposite
Paul and James are talking about brother in Christ not physical brother you tard
Are you retarded? James 2, Romans 4, and Galatians 3 all qoute Genesis 15:6 but only James 2 is talking about good works and not works if the law? That's conoletely retarded abd Romans 4 and Galatians 3 talk about people being saved without works but by just faith
When did I say that?
And again Romans 4 says Abraham was justified to God before he was circumcised so he couldn't have been justified when he would sacrifice Issac bevause that was way after he got circumcised
Need to answer these basic questions:
"What does FAITH mean?"
"What does JUSTIFY mean?"
"What does SALVATION mean?"
"Am I relying upon a PERSON (CHRIST) or a PROCESS?"
Reminder
Of course, because ultimately we have no agency, but works are facilitated by an illusion of control, as well as divine agency. The division of the person to God by dilusion is dependent of godliness. Jesus being the radiant example of perfect flesh, completely controlled by God.
Really? Good thing they've always existed,
Why invent justification before men when 1. It never says "before men" and 2. the world is suppose to hate us anyway? Not adding up.
There is absolute zero verses that teach sola fide. Not a single one. The best shoot is one in Ephesians but it's only because it's inherently anti-pelagian but it still does not speak about justification by faith alone.
Then why, o vain man, do you insist that it changes ANYTHING?
But there is the problem. James 2 does not speak about Genesis 15. It's about Genesis 22. And that justification took place in this, 22th, chapter. Of course, if you don't believe in protestant bullshit that makes perfect sense.
Romans 4 and Galatians 3 are primarily about Mosaic Law i.e. that it does not save and never could save. You chop those chapter to fe verses and except rest of people to be us blind. A defining characteristic of all heresies is that they appeal to Scripture in selective sound bites, since appealing to the broader context would expose the error. I'll examine some of that ignored context and show why it does harm to the Protestant appeal to Romans 4. Here let me expalin it what those chapter means.
The passage I had in mind was Romans 4:13-16, coming right on the heels of Romans 4:9-12 (another context routinely ignored by Protestants). In 4:9-12, Paul emphasizes that Abraham's faith was regarded as a righteous act prior to his being circumcised, and that is to prove that justification does not depend on whether one is a Jew or Gentile. That passage shows clearly that Paul was not worried about people trying to save themselves by their own works instead of trusting in Jesus alone by faith alone, but rather that the real problem was Jews thinking themselves superior to the Gentiles and missing the fact justification is apart from the Mosaic Law (Rom 3:28). This sets up Paul for summarizing the heart of his Gospel message:
13 For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. 15 For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression. 16 That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring - not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all
If Paul was talking about some generic "law" and generic "works" in Romans 4, then this passage really makes no sense. But if Paul is talking about the works of the Mosaic Law, then the beauty of this passage really pops out. What Paul is saying is that God granted a saving "promise" to Abraham back in Genesis, and reception of this "promise" was not conditioned upon adhering to the Mosaic Law which was instituted in Exodus. In fact, Paul says if this "promise" came through following the Mosaic Law, then the prior condition of Abrahamic faith would be nullified.
Using the Catholic principle of Scripture-interprets-Scripture which Protestants don't like, I'll now turn to Galatians 3 which brings about this same message in a more plain manner:
15 To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. 16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. 17 This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. 18 For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise. 19 Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary.
Paul brings out some very amazing points here. First, Paul points out an important nuance which is that the promise God made to Abraham in Genesis mentioned "offspring" (more accurately "seed") in the singular, not the plural. What most Jews were accustomed to doing is reading texts like Genesis 12:7 as speaking of "offspring" in the plural, as in 'one big family'. Really, this "seed" God promised to Abraham was a future son, Jesus! It is through Jesus directly, and Abraham indirectly, by whom all nations would be blessed (Gen 12:3-4 + Galatians 3:8). So Paul is saying it's absurd and wrong to think that the Mosaic Law, "which came 430 years" after Abraham, would somehow steal that privilege and promise from God's covenant with Abraham.
Thus, the grand realization that Protestants miss is that Paul is not talking about people who are trying to 'work their way into heaven', but rather people who are looking to the wrong covenant to be saved. The Jews thought salvation came through being a member of the Mosaic Covenant, when Paul is saying the Mosaic Covenant never offered salvation in the first place! So even if a Jew kept the Mosaic Covenant, that wouldn't save them (Gal 2:21). Salvation always came through one source, faith in the "seed" of Abraham, Jesus. Protestants made a horrific error by thinking that salvation does come by the Mosaic Law but since we could not keep the Mosaic Law perfectly then Jesus had to keep it perfectly for us!
Paul explains that the Mosaic Law had a temporary function, not an eternal one as Jews and Protestants mistakenly think. The Mosaic Covenant lasted for only about 1500 or so years and ended at the Cross. The Mosaic Law was "added" (Gal 3:19) to the picture as God's way of getting mankind ready for the Messiah. The Mosaic Law would formally expose sin ("the law brings wrath") and the need to deal with sin, which simultaneously prefigured and prophesied for us the Sacrifice on Calvary. This is why Romans 5:12-14 says sin and death were in the world before the law was given to Moses and why sin is not formally charged without a law in place.
After realizing this, it is clear that if someone ignores or misunderstands Romans 4:13-16 when reading Romans 4 (and Gal 3:15-19 when reading Galatians 3), then they've missed Paul's entire point! They've come up with "another Gospel" (Gal 1:8), which is unfortunately what Protestantism has done the last 500 years.
Also, this paste of verses without context is what any proof text without context is - pretext.
so we shouldn't worship him? maybe just venerate him?
This is the actual controversial doctrine, not what was posed by the OP. That is: does faith result in works? This is where the fundamentalist baptists fall apart, and do what they accuse others of doing with James 2:24 but with Romans 4:5.
if only it was so easy YOU HERETICS