Something about the trinity

thinkagain · Oct 19, 2016

ludin said:
I am not sure what bible you are using but they do not contradict each other at all.

It does not matter what Bible one uses. Jesus gives works as a salvation formulation (or at least part of the salvation formulation).

The doctrine of Sola Fide (salvation by faith alone) comes from the writings of Paul.

What part of "the majority of Christianity does not accept Sola Fide" do you not understand ??

What part of "Catholics and Orthodox have works as part of their salvation formulation" is not making it into your head ?

It is not like I woke up this morning and am making this stuff up or got this from some strange Bible. This contradiction is at the heart of the main doctrinal difference between the 3 main Christian denominations.

James (Brother of Jesus and head of the Church of Jerusalem) speaks out against the Pauline inspired Sola Fide doctrine calling those that believe in this doctrine (the doctrine you are professing) fools.

Sorry to burst your bubble but ... holy carp.

Right becaus Christ had not died on the cross. Yet really the first person to be saved was a thief and a murderer. So what works did he do to deserve to be saved?
Mathew was and actual disciple and so was john. All 3 accounts say the same.

What are you talking about ? Matt and Mark were written decades after Jesus had died.

The thief on the cross recognized the error of his ways (that he was guilty and deserved to be punished) and also that Jesus was not guilty and so did not deserve to be punished.

Jesus was all about forgiveness if one was repentant (recognized the error of one's ways). This is the basis of good works and the Golden Rule = Do unto others.

Yet it is still consistent with the teachings of Christ, and so was Paul.

How is the animosity of the Church towards the Jews and the OT at the turn of the century consistent with the teachings of Jesus ?

As described above ... Paul is not consistent with the teachings of Jesus. That James and Peter had issue's with the teachings of Paul is written about in Acts (and obviously in James).

You are talking out your backside.

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

thinkagain said:
I did not say that you said Paul was a disciple ?? Then you completely avoided responding to my comments on "Sola Fide" ... such as that the majority of Christianity does not accept this doctrine ... Doctrine which you dogmatically state as if you were Jesus himself.

Then why argue something that was never mentioned? Actually no I didn't. your next fallacy is ad populum. Actually it is what the bible states not me.

Then you ramble on incoherently.

Your next argument is an ad hominem.

In the Sermon on the mount Jesus talk about getting into heaven, what it takes to get there numerous times.

Which are fruits of the spirit not works. The poor in spirit, the meek, mercy, peacemakers. These are all traits
of the fruits of the spirit and what would become the Christian lead life. There was only 1 person able to accomplish
these all the time and that was Christ.

More incoherent rambling. The subject is the sermon on the mount. Jesus does not say this in this sermon.

Yet another ad hominem. Which tells us a lot since you can't actually address what is said. Christ never mentioned it
because He was still living under the law. The law had not been fulfilled.

Further - If you go to Matt 25 "Sheep and Goats parable". Jesus is case as the gate-keeper at the pearly gates. You have to go through Jesus to get in and in this parable Jesus judges on the basis of works. Those who do not know Jesus get in and those that do know Jesus do not get in.

Correct faith and the forgiveness of sin is the only way to heaven. works cannot save you.
if you read the entire context it says nothing of works but of living according to the fruits of the spirit.

You are making stuff up. What on earth are you talking about ? What do you mean by "Jesus fulfilled the law" and what does this have to do with Jesus talking about works.

Why can you not simply address something. Are you saying Christ is making stuff up when He said it himself that he was coming to fulfill the law?
The law is the law of works. The old testament law is the law of works. Which only 1 person was able to uphold. there is no salvation in the old law.

More incoherent rambling. What does your response have to do with the meaning of being more rig x j zsshteous than the Pharisees in order to get into heaven ??

again you have to understand the context in which he is talking. Of course you are also talking about the same people he called vipers. Under the law
they were righteous imperfectly so. They lost the meaning of the law to ritual and tasks. that is why they were stumped when Christ told them
the most important commandment.

You are just rambling stuff that has no relation to what I have posted.

It does you just don't understand it.

What does this have to do with Jesus saying "do unto others" is the rule that sums up the law and the prophets ??

He never said that. He said Love your God with all your heart, mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself.

Jesus is referring to people who had faith but no works (people that believed what you are preaching).

Umm no because they were doing works and had no faith. you have it backwards. They did not have a true believers faith in Christ.

The sermon of Jesus is about "the will of the Father" ... his sermon is about works (not one thing mentioned about "faith" or belief in Jesus). Jesus then sums up by saying "only those that do the will of the Father" get into heaven.

again I don't know what bible you are reading but I would question it's translation if that is what it said.
being poor in spirit is not a work it is a trait. being meek is not a work it is a trait.

You did not address one thing said by Jesus directly. When you were not saying something completely incoherent you spouted some man made dogma that did not relate to what Jesus was saying ?!

Actually I have and I have corrected your distortions of scripture in the process.
That is why Christ constantly said your faith has made you whole.

Why did you not answer my other question? What work did the thief on the cross do to get to heaven?

This was such a delusional and incoherent and whacked response I do not know what to say. What is with the head in the sand denial and avoidance ?

you constant ad homenim tell how weak your actual responses are.

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

thinkagain said:
It does not matter what Bible one uses. Jesus gives works as a salvation formulation (or at least part of the salvation formulation).
The doctrine of Sola Fide (salvation by faith alone) comes from the writings of Paul.

Ol actually it very much does matter. If you are using a Mormon bible or a New World Translation, or some other such translation
then yes it very does much matter. John 3:16 pretty much kills the works. There is no amount of work that you can do.
Works is an expression of faith in Jesus Christ. It is a reaction to. You can do a million works and still not be saved.
Christ himself even said so and you ignored it.

Acts 2:
Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” 38 And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

so what works did they do?

What part of "the majority of Christianity does not accept Sola Fide" do you not understand ??

What part of fallacy don't you understand?

What part of "Catholics and Orthodox have works as part of their salvation formulation" is not making it into your head ?

Good for them. They can work as much as they want to. Works without faith is dead.
It is not like I woke up this morning and am making this stuff up or got this from some strange Bible. This contradiction is at the heart of the main doctrinal difference between the 3 main Christian denominations.

James (Brother of Jesus and head of the Church of Jerusalem) speaks out against the Pauline inspired Sola Fide doctrine calling those that believe in this doctrine (the doctrine you are professing) fools.

Actually if you would have read the link I posted he does not in any way speak out against it unless you ignore the context in which he is speaking.
https://gotquestions.org/faith-alone.html

In summary, James 2:24 does not argue against salvation by faith alone. Rather, it argues against a salvation that is alone, a salvation devoid of good works and obedience to God’s Word

What are you talking about ? Matt and Mark were written decades after Jesus had died.

matthew would be a closer source or even John would be a closer source than mark or luke. Matthew and JOhn were both disciples and had first hand knowledge.

The thief on the cross recognized the error of his ways (that he was guilty and deserved to be punished) and also that Jesus was not guilty and so did not deserve to be punished.

As described above ... Paul is not consistent with the teachings of Jesus. That James and Peter had issue's with the teachings of Paul is written about in Acts (and obviously in James).

So far he has proven to be. No they didn't Peter had issues because he was trying to appease the law and be a Christian at the same time. Peter at one time was speaking double
speak. Which was causing confusion which is why Paul had to remind him of where the scripture came from and that it came from Christ.

You are talking out your backside.

Your ad hominems are pointless if you can't make an argument without them then well you have no argument at all.

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
Then why argue something that was never mentioned? Actually no I didn't. your next fallacy is ad populum. Actually it is what the bible states not me.

Your next argument is an ad hominem.

Which are fruits of the spirit not works. The poor in spirit, the meek, mercy, peacemakers. These are all traits
of the fruits of the spirit and what would become the Christian lead life. There was only 1 person able to accomplish
these all the time and that was Christ.

Yet another ad hominem. Which tells us a lot since you can't actually address what is said. Christ never mentioned it
because He was still living under the law. The law had not been fulfilled.

Correct faith and the forgiveness of sin is the only way to heaven. works cannot save you.
if you read the entire context it says nothing of works but of living according to the fruits of the spirit.

Why can you not simply address something. Are you saying Christ is making stuff up when He said it himself that he was coming to fulfill the law?
The law is the law of works. The old testament law is the law of works. Which only 1 person was able to uphold. there is no salvation in the old law.

again you have to understand the context in which he is talking. Of course you are also talking about the same people he called vipers. Under the law
they were righteous imperfectly so. They lost the meaning of the law to ritual and tasks. that is why they were stumped when Christ told them
the most important commandment.

It does you just don't understand it.

He never said that. He said Love your God with all your heart, mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself.

Umm no because they were doing works and had no faith. you have it backwards. They did not have a true believers faith in Christ.

again I don't know what bible you are reading but I would question it's translation if that is what it said.
being poor in spirit is not a work it is a trait. being meek is not a work it is a trait.

Actually I have and I have corrected your distortions of scripture in the process.
That is why Christ constantly said your faith has made you whole.

Why did you not answer my other question? What work did the thief on the cross do to get to heaven?

you constant ad homenim tell how weak your actual responses are.

you do not understand what ad homenem is. I did not attack you. I attacked the fact that your arguments were incoherent (did not related to the thing being discussed)

Half the time your responses do not related to the post you are responding to which is mere avoidance.

I said

I did not say that you said Paul was a disciple ?? Then you completely avoided responding to my comments on "Sola Fide" ... such as that the majority of Christianity does not accept this doctrine ... Doctrine which you dogmatically state as if you were Jesus himself.

You responded:

Then why argue something that was never mentioned? Actually no I didn't. your next fallacy is ad populum. Actually it is what the bible states not me.

1) you accused claiming that you said Paul was a disciple ( I correct you saying that I never said any such thing)

You respond with "why argue something that was never mentioned". This is completely incoherent because YOU mentioned it.

2) then you claim "no I didn't" to avoiding my comments on Sola Fide and that the majority of Christianity does not believe in Sola Fide (the doctrine you have been promoting)

You completely ignored the fact that the majority of Christianity disagrees with your claim.

I say:

What does this have to do with Jesus saying "do unto others" is the rule that sums up the law and the prophets ??

You say:

He never said that. He said Love your God with all your heart, mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself.

"Do unto others as you would have done to you" is one of the most well known sayings of Jesus. Here is the chapter and verse Matt 7:12

12*So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+7

In fact "love neighbor as self" is just a restatement of the same principle as is "Judge not lest ye be Judged" and "Let ye who is without sin cast the first rock"

It is one thing to not know the Bible very well. It is another to deny what is in the Bible when I have given you the actual chapter and verse.

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

thinkagain said:
you do not understand what ad homenem is. I did not attack you. I attacked the fact that your arguments were incoherent (did not related to the thing being discussed)[/QUOTheTE]
No you did not attack my argument. You said you are just blathering that is an ad hominem. that isn't attacking my argument but me.

Half the time your responses do not related to the post you are responding to which is mere avoidance.

Click to expand...

Actually they did.

1) you accused claiming that you said Paul was a disciple ( I correct you saying that I never said any such thing)

Click to expand...

It is in your first sentence right off the bat. if you would like I can repost it for you. I never said anything about Pau being
a disciple and you raised an irrelevant argument as if it meant something.

You respond with "why argue something that was never mentioned". This is completely incoherent because YOU mentioned it.

Click to expand...

Because you did argue it. it is in the first sentence you posted.

2) then you claim "no I didn't" to avoiding my comments on Sola Fide and that the majority of Christianity does not believe in Sola Fide (the doctrine you have been promoting)

Click to expand...

Because it is yet another fallacy of ad poplum. why should I address a fallacy instead of addressing an actual argument?

You completely ignored the fact that the majority of Christianity disagrees with your claim.

Click to expand...

Nope I ignored a fallacy please look it up.

"Do unto others as you would have done to you" is one of the most well known sayings of Jesus. Here is the chapter and verse Matt 7:12

Click to expand...

Yet it is never mentioned in the bible. Matt 7:12 does not say do unto others as you would have done to you.

In fact "love neighbor as self" is just a restatement of the same principle as is "Judge not lest ye be Judged" and "Let ye who is without sin cast the first rock"

Click to expand...

That so called principle didn't exist until 16-1700's.

So do you love everyone as you wish to be loved?
the answer is no you don't. It isn't possible. The only one to accomplish that is Christ.

It is one thing to not know the Bible very well. It is another to deny what is in the Bible when I have given you the actual chapter and verse.

Click to expand...

See here is your flawed. I denied what you said because what you said isn't in the bible.

https://gotquestions.org/Golden-Rule.html

Do until others as you would have done to you is not anywhere in the bible. since you want to be technical then lets be technical.

You still have yet to answer Acts 2. Peter says to ask for repentance and be baptized. The thief on the Cross. You have yet to deal with the fact that Neither of them did any works.
Yet were saved through faith.

For you are saved by faith through Grace not of works least any man should boast.

Works is a sign of faith. works cannot save you though. only faith in Christ and the forgiveness of sin can do that.

Do Paul and James Disagree About Justification?

there is no conflict between the two they are both in agreement.

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
Ol actually it very much does matter. If you are using a Mormon bible or a New World Translation, or some other such translation
then yes it very does much matter. John 3:16 pretty much kills the works. There is no amount of work that you can do.
Works is an expression of faith in Jesus Christ. It is a reaction to. You can do a million works and still not be saved.
Christ himself even said so and you ignored it.

Catholics and Orthodox Christians do not use the "Mormon Bible". The Bible that I quoted from was the NIV but, I can give you 10 other standard translations that all say the same thing. What Bible at you using. Unless it is one of the non-standard Bibles it will say the same thing as well.

What part of fallacy don't you understand?

It is not fallacy to state what is true. I is a fact that Catholic and Orthodox do not accept Sola Fide. This refutes your claim that Christianity in general accepts Sola Fide and /or that your interpretation of the Bible on Sola Fide is the main interpretation or that another mainstream interpretation does not exist.

Good for them. They can work as much as they want to. Works without faith is dead.
It is not like I woke up this morning and am making this stuff up or got this from some strange Bible. This contradiction is at the heart of the main doctrinal difference between the 3 main Christian denominations.

James does not say "works without faith is dead". He says faith without works is dead and calls people who believe in Sola Fide "foolish".

Actually if you would have read the link I posted he does not in any way speak out against it unless you ignore the context in which he is speaking.
https://gotquestions.org/faith-alone.html

Linking to an apologist website is not an argument for much and the arguments given on that site are complete nonsense... For example: From you link:

First, the context of James 2:24 is not arguing against the doctrine of salvation by faith alone

Have you actually read James 2 ? Let's have a look.

14*What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them?

Clearly James is talking about salvation by faith without works "Sola Fide" (salvation by faith alone).

He poses the question Can such a faith save them ? His answer is an NO NO NO.

15*Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16*If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17*In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

Faith - if not accompanied by deeds is "DEAD"

18*But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19*You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder

James says that his faith is shown by his deeds. He then says something funny saying that even Demons have faith in one God.

20*You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless

He then calls people who believe in Sola Fide "Foolish" and gives evidence from the OT.

In summary, James 2:24 does not argue against salvation by faith alone. Rather, it argues against a salvation that is alone, a salvation devoid of good works and obedience to God’s Word

In Summary ... James 2: 14-26 is 100% arguing against the doctrine of Sola Fide (Salvation by Faith alone).

You should read it sometime. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+2&version=NIV

matthew would be a closer source or even John would be a closer source than mark or luke. Matthew and JOhn were both disciples and had first hand knowledge.

The Gospel of Matt is not thought to have been written by a disciple. Some (I am talking folks that have some academic credibility) claim that the Gospel of John (written 90-120 AD) could have been written by the disciple but that is not the consensus view. You have certainly not studied the issue in any great detail ... that much is for sure.

This is a good place to start: Gospel of John

So far he has proven to be. No they didn't Peter had issues because he was trying to appease the law and be a Christian at the same time. Peter at one time was speaking double
speak. Which was causing confusion which is why Paul had to remind him of where the scripture came from and that it came from Christ.

Your ad hominems are pointless if you can't make an argument without them then well you have no argument at all

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
See here is your flawed. I denied what you said because what you said isn't in the bible.

https://gotquestions.org/Golden-Rule.html

Do until others as you would have done to you is not anywhere in the bible. since you want to be technical then lets be technical..

What a bunch of disingenuous ignorance.

12*So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Saying "do unto others as you would have them do to you " is saying exactly the same thing.

Positive version: Treat others how you would be treated or

Negative version: do not do to others what you don't want done to you.

Is exactly the same thing.

Positive version: Love thy neighbor as thyself
Negative version: Judge not lest you be Judged .... Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone.

Jesus uses both the negative and positive version of the rule (not that he would need to as they both mean the same thing ... Treat others as you want to be treated means ... do not treat others how you do not want to be treated)

Do you want others to treat you badly ? Then do not treat others badly. Treat others how you want to be treated.

Good grief. Can you not figure this stuff out for yourself ?

gilbertc1908 · Oct 20, 2016

thinkagain said:
"Sola Fide" Salvation by Faith alone is only accepted by Protestants. The majority of Christianity (Catholic and Orthodox) believe in a "works" component to salvation.

Your premise about Catholics is false. Catholics do not have "works" as a step or element towards salvation. That would be putting the cart before the horse so to speak. An act in an of itself is meaningless without the motivation of God's Grace. CS Lewis has the simplest way of expressing this truth.

“The Christian is in a different position from other people who are trying to be good. They hope, by being good, to please God if there is one; or — if they think there is not — at least they hope to deserve approval from good men. But the Christian thinks any good he does comes from the Christ-life inside him. He does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it.” - C. S. Lewis

And in case you don't warm up to Mr Lewis

2006 The term "merit" refers in general to the recompense owed by a community or a society for the action of one of its members, experienced either as beneficial or harmful, deserving reward or punishment. Merit is relative to the virtue of justice, in conformity with the principle of equality which governs it.

2007 With regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man. Between God and us there is an immeasurable inequality, for we have received everything from him, our Creator.

2008 The merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace. the fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man's free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man's merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit

Catechism of the Catholic Church

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

gilbertc1908 said:
Your premise about Catholics is false. Catholics do not have "works" as a step or element towards salvation. That would be putting the cart before the horse so to speak. An act in an of itself is meaningless without the motivation of God's Grace. CS Lewis has the simplest way of expressing this truth.

“The Christian is in a different position from other people who are trying to be good. They hope, by being good, to please God if there is one; or — if they think there is not — at least they hope to deserve approval from good men. But the Christian thinks any good he does comes from the Christ-life inside him. He does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it.” - C. S. Lewis

You have not well studied this issue. Works are a requirement for salvation in Catholicism.

Sola Fide is not accepted by the Catholic Faith.

As per the Council of Trent:
"If anyone says that the godless are justified by faith alone . . . let him be anathema" (Trent, VI, canon 9).

gilbertc1908 · Oct 20, 2016

I certainly did not mean to imply that Catholics support Sola Fide we do not.

But I did mean to state categorically that your assertion that works/merit are an element in the Catholic path to Salvation is false, simply because it is.

I noticed you excluded my use of the Catechism of the Catholic Church in your response, may I ask why? And how would you interpret those rather clear statements as anything but dismissing works as an element.

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

thinkagain said:
Catholics and Orthodox Christians do not use the "Mormon Bible". The Bible that I quoted from was the NIV but, I can give you 10 other standard translations that all say the same thing. What Bible at you using. Unless it is one of the non-standard Bibles it will say the same thing as well.

You are the one that said translation didn't matter. I was simply pointing out that it does matter you seem to agree that translation does matter.

It is not fallacy to state what is true. I is a fact that Catholic and Orthodox do not accept Sola Fide. This refutes your claim that Christianity in general accepts Sola Fide and /or that your interpretation of the Bible on Sola Fide is the main interpretation or that another mainstream interpretation does not exist.

Yes I know this is what is referred to as an appeal ad populum. it is indeed a fallacy.
argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes that a proposition is true because many or most people believe it: "If many believe so, it is so.

James does not say "works without faith is dead". He says faith without works is dead and calls people who believe in Sola Fide "foolish".

Christ does say that. So Jesus is the ultimate authority in the matter.
I pointed this out a few posts ago.

People that thought they were saved and did a lot of works but they were not.

Linking to an apologist website is not an argument for much and the arguments given on that site are complete nonsense... For example: From you link:

Actually it is. Apologetics actually means defense of the word. It provides support and evidence of the bible.
You calling it nonsense though is an appeal to authority fallacy unless you can show your doctorates in theology or some
other credentials.

Have you actually read James 2 ? Let's have a look.

Yes I have and as I have shown it does not counter Paul in any way and is in agreement with Paul.

Clearly James is talking about salvation by faith without works "Sola Fide" (salvation by faith alone).

Only if you take what he says out of context.

He poses the question Can such a faith save them ? His answer is an NO NO NO.

Christ says otherwise. So who is more correct Christ or James? or is James agreeing with Christ but in
a different way?

Faith - if not accompanied by deeds is "DEAD"

JOhn 3:16 refutes this as well.

James says that his faith is shown by his deeds. He then says something funny saying that even Demons have faith in one God.

Acts 8:36-40 The Eunuch was saved with no works.
Acts 2 Peter says repent and be baptized. again people saved with 0 works.

He then calls people who believe in Sola Fide "Foolish" and gives evidence from the OT.

https://www.gty.org/resources/questions/QA81/Does-James-2-contradict-Romans-4
and yet you are still wrong.

In Summary ... James 2: 14-26 is 100% arguing against the doctrine of Sola Fide (Salvation by Faith alone).
You should read it sometime. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+2&version=NIV

I have it doesn't say what you think it says.

The Gospel of Matt is not thought to have been written by a disciple. Some (I am talking folks that have some academic credibility) claim that the Gospel of John (written 90-120 AD) could have been written by the disciple but that is not the consensus view. You have certainly not studied the issue in any great detail ... that much is for sure.

Actually it is. It is still attributed to Matthew even to this day. John is the same way.

This is a good place to start: Gospel of John

I know what John says.

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

thinkagain said:
What a bunch of disingenuous ignorance.

Ad Hominems' are not arguments they are fallacies.

Saying "do unto others as you would have them do to you " is saying exactly the same thing.

Not really. we are being specific not general remember.

Jesus uses both the negative and positive version of the rule (not that he would need to as they both mean the same thing ... Treat others as you want to be treated means ... do not treat others how you do not want to be treated)

No he says love your God with all your heart mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself. that is what he says.

Good grief. Can you not figure this stuff out for yourself ?

I am simply pointing out what Christ actually said. he did not say the golden rule.
that was a man made creation around the 16-1700's.

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

gilbertc1908 said:
Your premise about Catholics is false. Catholics do not have "works" as a step or element towards salvation. That would be putting the cart before the horse so to speak. An act in an of itself is meaningless without the motivation of God's Grace. CS Lewis has the simplest way of expressing this truth.

“The Christian is in a different position from other people who are trying to be good. They hope, by being good, to please God if there is one; or — if they think there is not — at least they hope to deserve approval from good men. But the Christian thinks any good he does comes from the Christ-life inside him. He does not think God will love us because we are good, but that God will make us good because He loves us; just as the roof of a greenhouse does not attract the sun because it is bright, but becomes bright because the sun shines on it.” - C. S. Lewis

And in case you don't warm up to Mr Lewis

Catechism of the Catholic Church

Even the earliest church followers recognized Faith as the core tenant without faith and trust in Jesus Christ and the forgiveness of sin everything else is lost.

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
You are the one that said translation didn't matter. I was simply pointing out that it does matter you seem to agree that translation does matter

You were inferring that the Catholic and Orthodox were using some crazy Bible translation which is abject nonsense. The fact of the matter is that both use standard translations and both reject Sola Fide. A point that you seem desperate to avoid.

I am glad that you have somewhat started to agree with the obvious. That James is critical of Sola Fide.

Your response

JOhn 3:16 refutes this as well.

I agree that John 3:16 contradicts the words of James. Contradiction however is not refutation. What we have is two contradictory opinions.

Christ does say that. So Jesus is the ultimate authority in the matter.
I pointed this out a few posts ago.

I agree that Jesus is the authority. The problem is that the Jesus of John is contradicted by the Jesus of Matt and Mark .. as pointed out to you a few posts ago.

It is not like the majority of Christianity just woke up one morning and decided "Sola Fide" was an anathema. The rational for this is based on scripture.

Acts 8:36-40 The Eunuch was saved with no works.

I have never denied that Paul/Pauline Scripture contradicts the Jesus of Matt/Mark and the thoughts of James.

It is you that has head stuck deep in the sands of denial of scripture. Not me.

That you can find other scripture that contradicts the words of James does not change the words of James.

The words of James contradicts Pauline Scripture just as the words of Pauline scripture contradicts James.

As I stated previously... it is this contradiction that is the reason why the debate over doctrine between Protestants, Catholic, and Orthodox exists.

That you deny that this debate exists absurd avoidance of reality.

"If anyone says that the godless are justified by faith alone . . . let him be anathema" (Trent, VI, canon 9)

You seem to think that this means that your perspective is wrong. This is not the case. It just means that yours is not the only perspective within Christianity.

The majority of Christians interpret scripture as saying that works are required for salvation (or at least lack of bad deeds - so called mortal sin, or lack of repenting for bad deeds)

You have a different interpretation and that is fine.

The problem is that you are in abject denial of the parts of scripture that contradict your interpretation.

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
No he says love your God with all your heart mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself. that is what he says..

That you would deny that Jesus said: Matt 7:12

12*So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

is quite something.

I am simply pointing out what Christ actually said. he did not say the golden rule.
that was a man made creation around the 16-1700's

The Golden Rule has been around since Hammurabi (1800 BC). Buddha cited this rule as did Confucius.

Prior to Jesus there was a famous Rabbi (leading authority at the time) who also said the same thing as Jesus did. This is where Jesus got his famous saying

As usual so far - you have no clue what you are talking about.

_Sal · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
You never answered my previous question how does imperfection weigh itself against perfection?

sorry, I thought it was rhetorical

I am created perfectly according to God's plan...I don't have to weigh in, it is not required of my god who is all loving, giving, understanding and forgiving...my god also makes his guidance available to me and has given me the ability to communicate directly, no book needed, no guessing required.

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

_Sal said:
sorry, I thought it was rhetorical

I am created perfectly according to God's plan...I don't have to weigh in, it is not required of my god who is all loving, giving, understanding and forgiving...my god also makes his guidance available to me and has given me the ability to communicate directly, no book needed, no guessing required.

No you are not perfect. There was only 1 perfect person that lived.

So again I have to ask since you are not perfect how do you weigh what is good or not good against perfection?
That is not a challenge I would want since nothing I do can measure up to perfection.

_Sal · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
No you are not perfect. There was only 1 perfect person that lived.

So again I have to ask since you are not perfect how do you weigh what is good or not good against perfection?
That is not a challenge I would want since nothing I do can measure up to perfection.

your opinion that I am not perfect, does not make it so...

there is no question to ask, while you may not believe you can measure up to perfection, I have no need to ask, and the fact that you are unaware of your current perfection does not make you less than perfect either

I am divine with a human body, I am a soul who has currently became human...I am exactly how I should be

am I what I will become, no, I am not, I have further growth potential that is immense...

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

thinkagain said:
That you would deny that Jesus said: Matt 7:12

is quite something.

The Golden Rule has been around since Hammurabi (1800 BC). Buddha cited this rule as did Confucius.

Prior to Jesus there was a famous Rabbi (leading authority at the time) who also said the same thing as Jesus did. This is where Jesus got his famous saying

As usual so far - you have no clue what you are talking about.

You should have read the link is posted instead of ignoring them.
Otherwise you wouldn't be in this position.

Next we are talking about what Christ said to the pharassee's
In answer to his question in Mark. So moving the goal posts is yet another fallacy.

The golden rule was not called the golden rule till the 16-17th centuries is when the expression was coined.

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

_Sal said:
your opinion that I am not perfect, does not make it so...

So do you make mistakes?

there is no question to ask, while you may not believe you can measure up to perfection, I have no need to ask, and the fact that you are unaware of your current perfection does not make you less than perfect either

For there is no one perfect no not one.
I am not perfect nor will I be as long as I am alive.

I am divine with a human body, I am a soul who has currently became human...I am exactly how I should be

That doesn't make you perfect as there is only one person that was ever perfect.
If you are claiming to be God then I would need to see some proof.

[QUOTE
am I what I will become, no, I am not, I have further growth potential that is immense...[/QUOTE]
WHich means you are not perfect as perfection requires no growth and is already at max potential.

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
You should have read the link is posted instead of ignoring them.
Otherwise you wouldn't be in this position..

What does your link have to do with your denial of what Jesus said in Matt 7:12.

Next we are talking about what Christ said to the pharassee's
In answer to his question in Mark. So moving the goal posts is yet another fallacy.

You are rambling senselessly ... I have no clue what you are talking about.

The golden rule was not called the golden rule till the 16-17th centuries is when the expression was coined

More pointless commentary in an attempt to avoid owning up to your ignorance of history.

Just because "treat others how you would be treated/do unto others" was not called "The Golden Rule" does not mean that this rule did not exist.

James called it "The Royal Law".

ludin · Oct 20, 2016

thinkagain said:
You were inferring that the Catholic and Orthodox were using some crazy Bible translation which is abject nonsense. The fact of the matter is that both use standard translations and both reject Sola Fide. A point that you seem desperate to avoid.

I am glad that you have somewhat started to agree with the obvious. That James is critical of Sola Fide.

Your response

Well as I have prove so far backed up by sources no he isn't.
You should probably read links that say otherwise.

I agree that John 3:16 contradicts the words of James. Contradiction however is not refutation. What we have is two contradictory opinions.

Not really. Unless you want to call God a liar or one of his disciples.

I agree that Jesus is the authority. The problem is that the Jesus of John is contradicted by the Jesus of Matt and Mark .. as pointed out to you a few posts ago.

Not at all they are in full agreement.

It is not like the majority of Christianity just woke up one morning and decided "Sola Fide" was an anathema. The rational for this is based on scripture.

Actually it was the entire purpose of the Protestant reformation. To escape the same law that had oppressed Jewish society. The law of works is not possible to uphold in fact no one can do it except Christ.

I have never denied that Paul/Pauline Scripture contradicts the Jesus of Matt/Mark and the thoughts of James.

Lol talk about back peddling that is exactly what you have been ranting about for the past 2 pages.

It is you that has head stuck deep in the sands of denial of scripture. Not me.

And the poor ad homenims continue. You really need to find a better way. You make weak arguments backed up by insults.

That you can find other scripture that contradicts the words of James does not change the words of James.

Since they agree and James agrees with them as I have proven I never said they change his words so a
Strawman.

The words of James contradicts Pauline Scripture just as the words of Pauline scripture contradicts James.

The links I posted said otherwise.

As I stated previously... it is this contradiction that is the reason why the debate over doctrine between Protestants, Catholic, and Orthodox exists.

I go with what the Bible says that we are saved by faith through grace not of works least any man should boast.
I go with what john said that God so loved the world that He sent his only Son so that those who believe would not perish but have everlasting life. That our own righteousness is considered filthy rags.

That you deny that this debate exists absurd avoidance of reality.

Yet another straw-man

You seem to think that this means that your perspective is wrong. This is not the case. It just means that yours is not the only perspective within Christianity.

Here is only one perspective of Christianity and that is through Jesus Christ and the word of God
Anything else is false teaching.

The majority of Christians interpret scripture as saying that works are required for salvation (or at least lack of bad deeds - so called mortal sin, or lack of repenting for bad deeds)

Ad poplulum fallacy is still a fallacy

You have a different interpretation and that is fine.

The problem is that you are in abject denial of the parts of scripture that contradict your interpretation.

The thief on the cross did no works was saved. The story of Lazarus and the rich man, Lazarus did no works was saved.

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
If you are claiming to be God then I would need to see some proof..

Funny to hear this coming from someone who claims to speak for God.

_Sal · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
So do you make mistakes?

lol...I am perfect as I am...I do not have to measure myself against my creator...I am not less than, I am not menstrual fluid on a rag as you believe you are and I have to tell you that is one of the saddest things I have ever heard...

I am a creation of the divine and as such I am perfect for I was made from perfection

For there is no one perfect no not one.
I am not perfect nor will I be as long as I am alive.

:shrug: doesn't mean you aren't

That doesn't make you perfect as there is only one person that was ever perfect.
If you are claiming to be God then I would need to see some proof.

I am not God per se....

WHich means you are not perfect as perfection requires no growth and is already at max potential.

I am perfect for where I am, as are you

thinkagain · Oct 20, 2016

ludin said:
Well as I have prove so far backed up by sources no he isn't.
You should probably read links that say otherwise..

The only thing you have proven is your ability to willfully ignore scripture.

James calls those who believe in salvation by faith alone (Sola Fide) foolish and Jesus gives a salvation formulation that includes works.

Not really. Unless you want to call God a liar or one of his disciples.

That Pauline scripture contradicts the epistle of James and the gospel of Matt/Mark does make God a liar. It does mean that the various authors of scripture had a contradictory message.

Paul did not know Jesus (and was not part of the Jerusalem Church) and Mark/Matt had not yet been written so it is not surprising that Paul is on a different page. Paul wrote a number of things that were way off the mark.

We do not have any writings from the disciples themselves so calling them liars is a stretch.

Not at all they are in full agreement.

Not according to Christianity but ... you are welcome to your unsupported and uneducated opinion.

Actually it was the entire purpose of the Protestant reformation. To escape the same law that had oppressed Jewish society. The law of works is not possible to uphold in fact no one can do it except Christ.

Christianity was moving away from Jewish Law long before the Reformation. Pauline Christianity started distancing itself from the Jews and Jewish religion after the destruction of the Temple.

Lol talk about back peddling that is exactly what you have been ranting about for the past 2 pages

Now you are lying. I have never denied that Pauline scripture contradicts James the words of Jesus in Matt/Mark.

It is you who is denying the contradiction. What is laughable is that you bring up a passage from John to refute a passage in James and then deny that there is a contradiction.

If James was in agreement with Sola Fide then you would not have to bring up John 3:16.

In James 2 we have James saying

20*You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless

14*What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15*Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16*If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17*In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

Since you can not deal with the words of James you tried to counter with a passage from John in which Jesus appears to contradict James.

And the poor ad homenims continue.

My calling you out on your denial of the obvious is not ad hom.

What part of "Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead" are you having trouble understanding?

What part of "faith without deeds is useless" is tough for you to understand?

Replying with a passage from John does not negate the fact that James says what he says.

I agree that John 3:16 seems to support Sola Fide. What you can not come to grips with is the fact that James 2 is against the idea of salvation through faith alone ... That James says "Faith without works is dead" as the answer to the question "Can such faith (faith without deeds) save them?"

What part of "Faith without deeds" do you not understand ?
What part of "Can such a faith save them" do you not understand ?

Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16*If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it?

What part of "In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead" do you not understand ?

James then calls those who belief that faith without works can save them "Foolish" and says that even demons believe this.

James does not just say it once. He says "Faith without works is dead" over and over again giving examples of what he means.

But ... he can not get through to you .... can he.

Something about the trinity

thinkagain

Well-known member

ludin

ludin

thinkagain

Well-known member

ludin

thinkagain

Well-known member

thinkagain

Well-known member

gilbertc1908

Member

thinkagain

Well-known member

gilbertc1908

Member

ludin

ludin

ludin

thinkagain

Well-known member

thinkagain

Well-known member

_Sal

ludin

_Sal

ludin

ludin

thinkagain

Well-known member

ludin

thinkagain

Well-known member

_Sal

thinkagain

Well-known member