Posted by Helen on: 07.28.2006 /
isaone (a ‘bright’ – you can find out what a bright is on isaone’s blog) posted the following questions on the CatE discussion board
I do not understand the believers who state that it is not a person’s works which get them into heaven. They seem to say that instead it is the person accepting christ that makes the difference.
- If someone accepts christ sincerely and then murders someone they next day, are they still saved?
- If someone lives a sin filled life but truly converts and accepts christ 2 minutes before they die. Are they saved?
- Isn’t the act of accepting Christ a ‘work’ so if works do not matter then the same applies to this one?
Semi-Related Posts
13 Responses to "isaone’s questions"
Comment by: JG
1If say there was an offer of free tickets for a world cruise that was open to anyone regardless of merit then no one who went on the world cruise could claim they were on the boat because of anything they had done.
Some people might take up the offer straight away, some might leave it till the last minute and only get on just as the boat is leaving.
And some might not take up the offer. You could argue its not fair that some go and some get left behind. You could insist that everyone should be dragged on to the boat, kicking and screaming if necessary against their will. Or you could could attempt to argue that everyone is on the boat whether they realise it or not. Or you could argue that the offer is a con and that it is only poor deluded people who believe they are or will be on the boat. Or that in fact everyone in the end will choose to take up the offer, one way or the other.
Yet others will say actually there is a price, and only those who are able to pay the fee – through good works they have done will get on the boat. To this, others would say, if the test was being “good enough” then none of us at all would qualify.
Lastly there are those who say if we accept the offer then we should be so grateful that good works should result. If there is not evidence of such good works then the person hasn’t really accepted the offer in the first place.
Not sure how helpful this is as an analogy – I have major reservations about attempting to compare faith to a world cruise but it perhaps helps to illustrate some of the different viewpoints.
Comment by: Helen M.
2Thanks JG.
Comment by: Rachel
3I think that’s a great analogy, JG.
Comment by: Eliza
4Here are the pair that seem to most clearly address the “faith v. works” dilemma, yet disagree (or, seem to):
James 2:14 (NIV) What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?
Ephesians 2:8-9 (NIV) For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.
Comment by: Bruce
5Eliza, I’ve never thought of them as disagreeing.
I think James is just saying that faith animates a life. If faith is present, things start happening, like when you start the engine of a car or turn on a light switch.
While James is talking about faith in God here, I do think that you could argue that any sort of faith has an effect on its holder: faith in science, faith in Buddha, even no-faith. All cause their holders to live in a particular way, based on the faith held.
I think that Paul is saying that we have to be careful that we not believe that the things we do in God’s name somehow render us “holy” or “earn” us God’s approval based on merit. Paul is arguing against self-righteousness.
Comment by: Eliza
6Bruce, I just don’t see these 2 as agreeing. Stripped down to their basics:
James 2:14 What good is it…if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?
Ephesians 2:8-9 For…you have been saved, through faith…not by works.
Putting them together: Faith without deeds is no good, yet you are saved through faith, not deeds.
Expanding to the broader passages each comes from:
The whole section James 2:14-26, emphasizes not just faith, but also deeds, closing with James 2:26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
I really don’t see how he’s talking about “any sort of faith” – James 2:19 says, You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. James 2:21-23, Abraham and Isaac are given as an example of faith plus deed. Then, James 2:24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.
And, earlier in Ephesians 2:4-5, But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
This whole passage says it’s grace, received by faith, that matters. Not a word of deeds, other than the disclaimer in 2:9.
I still think these are saying (promising) incompatible routes to salvation…
Comment by: Helen M.
7But Eliza, if you read on one more verse, you get to
which says that the point is to do good works! (I know this verse pretty well; I wrote a devotional on it once)
James says that if you’re not doing good works then your faith is useless.
I don’t actually see these two passages as fundamentally in contradiction with one other, Eliza.
Comment by: Rachel
8Yes – I see faith and good works as two sides of the same coin. The Bible teaches that the gospel of Jesus is a message of reconciliation. Through Christ, we are reconciled both to God and to others. We are told again and again that love for God and love for neighbor are inseparable. Those who say “I love God,” and hate their brothers and sisters, are liars; for those who do not love a brother or sister whom they have seen, cannot love God whom they have not seen. (I John 4:20)
Comment by: Rachel
9My understanding is that Paul and James do not disagree here; they each have a different emphasis. Paul is emphasizing that we come to God as we are – we do not have to earn our salvation by being good enough. Paul is saying that no one should boast that he has been saved, or reconciled to God, because he is so righteous. And as Helen pointed out, Paul goes on to say that we are “created in Christ to do good works.” The purpose, the goal, the aim, of our conversion is to be a blessing to others.
James is emphasizing that true faith will always demonstrate itself through good deeds. In another passage, James tells us that true religion is to visit the orphans and widows in their distress. James is saying that no one should think that he can simply experience a conversion on an emotional or intellectual level but continue living for himself and then call himself a true follower of Christ.
Being saved, transformed, changed, converted to the Way of Jesus, means leaving our own selfish agenda behind to pursue “God’s dream for the world,” as Desmond Tutu so beautifully phrases it. Jesus said that if anyone wishes to follow him, they must be willing to become a servant of all. If someone is truly transformed, there will be evidence of that transformation in the way he lives.
In noticing the difference in emphasis between Paul and James, I’m reminded that they were each writing letters – letters to specific faith communities that they knew well. Perhaps Paul was concerned that the Ephesians had become prideful, boasting that their good deeds made them righteous and superior to others. Perhaps the believers James was writing to had gone to the other extreme, believing that because they had been saved, they could now live as they pleased.
The orthodox Christian understanding of Scripture is that all Scripture must be taken together to form a balanced understanding of the gospel message. My own belief is that faith and good works are inseparable. I think that Donald Miller sums it up well in his book “Blue Like Jazz” with this statement – “What I believe is not what I say I believe; what I believe is what I do.”
Comment by: Eliza
10Thanks for that additional line of Ephesians (which clearly I’d missed!) and the additional descriptions of what these mean and how they complement each other. That’s very useful for me!
That makes alot of sense, as a goal! Rachel, I hope it’s OK with you – I’m going to take this quote of yours and move it to the new post from this morning, Updating, or picking or choosing?
Comment by: JG
11This is really a new thread but I have been looking at Isaone’s blog and noticed his entry on 21 May “Language Should Be for Communication Not Control”
http://www.brightlyspeaking.com/wordpress/?p=58
“They have successfully redefined the word to have no meaning whatsoever so that they can use it to manipulate others.”
We should be wary of assuming wrong motives! I fully agree that language should not be used to control and that attempts to stifle debate or questioning are misguided at best and wholly wrong. In that regard, I agree.
But picking up what I see as the basic thread of the argument (I may be mistaken), we often use terms and phrases we don’t fully understand.
Electricity – how many people really understand what electricity is – or am I just displaying my own ignorance? I know that, when I push the plug into the socket and push the on switch, the equipment I am using usually works. I don’t say I will refuse to use electricity simply because I don’t fully understand it. And even if I did fully understand it, would I be able to explain it in a way that other people could understand my explanation of it?!
It is one thing to understand something yourself, it is quite another to be an effective communicator. They sometimes say the best teachers are those who have struggled to understand themselves at times – but overcome, because at least they can understand why their students might struggle.
The concept of the Trinity is not something I struggle with but I can fully understand why it can come across as complete nonsense to others. I can understand why people prefer something simpler.
This thought does not solve the difficulty but it helps me at least as a starting point. As mentioned before, I am a son, a husband and a father. My parents see me in a very different way to my children. But this does not make me a split personality. It does not mean I am three separate persons. I am all three – at the same time.
I have observed that with cults, things have often be made much simpler and easier to understand. Apparent difficulties have been ironed out. But does that make them true?
If there is such a thing as truth – and I believe there is, it probably can’t be put in box and displayed for all to see. It will not be a few simple one liners. My sense is that it is more a question of being given various indications, principles, tools etc which help give us an indication of what the truth is.
Again, some ideas I have found helpful.
A railway track has two rails. If you attempted to bring the two rails together or insist just on one rail rather than both, you would derail the train. You need both rails at the right distance apart for the train to run properly.
When walking in mountains, you can find youself walking along a narrow ridge, with a steep drop either side. Some peopel may say they prefer one side rather than the other or that one side is right and the other is wrong but often the real truth is not so much in the middle but rather found by finding the right balance or tension between different concepts. Over emphasise one or the other and like my mountain example, you end up falling down the side.
We have two eyes rather than one. Why? Because only by having sight through two eyes can we get any sense of depth. Two viewpoints. With mapmaking, you normally take measure the angle from two different viewpoints of the same object and then see where the two lines cross. You can’t measure how far away something from just one viewpoint.
Truth is much more complex than just needing two viewpoints. Perhaps the way in which the more complex Sudoku puzzles are solved might be a better example. But because it is complex, we should give up altogether.
What amazes me about the Christain faith is that even the most simple person can grasp it and have a very real and genuine faith (if you believe the Christian faith is real) which can be stronger and more real than the most intelligent people in the church. I now some people in this regard who have been a real inspiration for me. But at the same time, there are complexities that even the greatest mind cannot fathom. For me, we come to faith through our heart response not through our brains. But this does not mean we leave our brains behind and abandon reason.
I’ve rambled on enough so will stop here.
Comment by: Rachel
12The author Donald Miller says that coming to faith in Jesus is less like solving a mathematical equation and more like falling in love.
Comment by: Helen M.
13Quotes like this split me down the middle because half of me thinks it’s beautiful and the other half says “yeah but what about the romance-challenged mathematicians – doesn’t Jesus have anything to offer them?”