[count-your-change]

As I've followed this thread with one saying, “Faith and no works you can do will earn salvation”, and yet the response will be, “Faith plus works!”. Can both be right? The first will quote Paul, the other James as though they spoke in contradiction of the other.

For example Paul said, “we reckon a man is declared righteous apart from from works of law.” (Romans 3:28)

Yet as James truthfully says, “..Faith if it does not have works is dead in its self”. (James 2:17)

The salient question is: What are the works spoken of by each?

In Romans 2 Paul contrasted being under law, specifically the Mosaic Law with the exercise of faith. Elsewhere Paul tells of Abraham being declared righteous by faith (faith followed by action) long before The Law existed.

In Hebrews 11 Paul listed many of those who were remembered for their faith but Paul in every instance shows what actions these performed that demonstrated their faith.

So too James. He shows works of the “kingly law that belongs to the Scripture, “You must love your neighbor as yourself”. (James 2:8)

“So even if we led entirely perfect lives except for ONE sin, we would still need the death of Christ to pay for that sin and no amount of works done to make up for it would be able to pay for it.”

And no amount of works, whether of charity and kindness or ritual and rite would make up for a lack of faith.
Since faith produced the works of that “kingly law”, faith came first.

And it had to be a life long action producing faith as Jesus said, “He that endures to the end will be saved”. (Matt. 24:13)

But I am in a saved state right now! one may say. O.K., so was Paul when he wrote he could become “disapproved” (1 Cor. 9:27) and advised Christians to ‘keep testing whether they were in the faith or they might become disapproved’. (2 Cor. 13:5,6)

Though saved they could lose that and have their names struck.

So the works that demonstrated faith were not those of ritual but those of preaching the good news, charity toward others, high moral standards,...”the kingly law”.

[daniel1212]

See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2885096/posts?page=837#837 on this.

And while the faith that appropriates justification, is the kind of that effects obedience, as Reformers taught, (http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Reformation_faith_works.html) confession-type faith being what is salvific faith, (Mt. 10:32; Rm. 10:9,10) and baptism is normally to be the first formal expression of faith.

Baptism can be when a soul first effectually believes unto salvation, as it requires as well as expresses God-given faith, and is commanded, yet as Cornelius and company shows, regeneration, cleansing and justification can precede baptism by water. (Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9)

Finally, is it God who draws souls, (Jn. 6:44; 12:32; opens hearts, (Acts 16:14) grants repentance, (Acts 11:18) and gives faith, (Eph. 2:9), moving and enabling man to do what he normally would not, to the glory of God, though there is an act of the will involved. And works to chasten disobedient souls back to true faith. (1Cor. 11:32)

[boatbums]

And it had to be a life long action producing faith as Jesus said, “He that endures to the end will be saved”. (Matt. 24:13) But I am in a saved state right now! one may say. O.K., so was Paul when he wrote he could become “disapproved” (1 Cor. 9:27) and advised Christians to ‘keep testing whether they were in the faith or they might become disapproved’. (2 Cor. 13:5,6) Though saved they could lose that and have their names struck.

What MUST be considered is:

When Paul spoke of disciplining himself so that when he preached the Gospel to others he would not be disapproved (I Cor. 9:27), he was NOT speaking of losing his salvation. I see people read into words such as this as well as the most wrongly used one which is James 2, where it speaks of a faith that is "dead". The context as well as a study of what words were used along with other Scriptures makes the meaning better understood. First of all, we know that multiple verses say that salvation is by faith WITHOUT the works of the law OR works of righteousness. So this becomes the standard. Then, when Paul says something to the effect that he is careful to bring his body into subjection so that when he preaches the gospel, he will not be disqualified/disqualified for the prize/castaway/rejected/become disapproved, we should understand first of all that he cannot be talking about losing his salvation. There is already a precedent set that works do not earn salvation which also means not sinning does not keep us saved - we are saved, period.

Many so-called "aesthetics" put themselves through self-mortification and all kinds of self-denial and rigid painful acts because of a false understanding of this verse. They took it to mean that Paul beat himself up so that he could prove he was not ruled by his sin nature and would be counted worthy of eternal life. That after all that he had endured for the cause of Christ, he might somehow mess up and be sent to hell after all. Yet if this really was what he was saying, then he would be contradicting not only his own writings but the other Scripture writers as well. We are NOT saved by the works we do and it means we are not kept saved by the things we do. It is all by grace THROUGH faith NOT of ourselves. To me, Paul is talking about how his message will be received by the lost. He could explain the gospel but if his life did not demonstrate the life-changing Spirit of God and he lived carnally, his gospel would be rejected - HE would be rejected by those he sought to lead to Christ.

We have assurance from the Lord that our names ARE written in the Lamb's Book of Life - they will NOT be blotted out - because God is who enables us to endure to the end. Those that are His, remain His, and Jesus said he would not LOSE one of us.

I think that some leaders get "spooked" by this truth and they imagine that teaching this will somehow make people think they can live anyway they choose and sin all they want because they are saved and they can't get kicked out. We see this same argument given a lot on these threads, yet Paul dealt with the same question even back then. He said:

What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin because anyone who has died has been set free from sin.

Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. (Romans 6:1-9)

There is no need to scare people into behaving with threats that they can go to hell if they mess up. No, our Heavenly Father knows what we are made of and He is the good father that loves His children enough to not only enable us to live holy lives but disciplines us when we don't. That is how we know we are His and will always be His.