Necessary means necessary. You guys, in your quest for "assurance," try to redefine things like "necessary."
Here's the simple definition: Necessary means that without it, things are changed.
In order to be saved, one needs to have faith and works. Works without faith will never bridge the chasm betwen man and God. Faith without works is shallow or illusory.
So if you have faith and works you have salvation. If you remove the works part, you no longer have the salvation.
It is therefore, by the rules of logic and language, necessary to have works to accompany your faith.
QED.
Justification is distinct from and prior to sanctification; yet it is also inseparably linked to sanctification. RC theology comingles the two.
Perhaps so. I see no reason to seperate the two. You guys want to be "assured," that you are "Saved," so you make "Justification" a seperate issue and place all your trust in it.
Rahter than seeing the larger picture that we are justified by being sanctified. We are not, as you guys love to offer, "covered" from our sins, but are actually "cleansed."
We will be worthy to stand in front of God because He has made us actually worthy, not because He pretends we are worthy.
I don't know why anyone would choose an imputed righteousness over actually being made righteous.
Further, there is a distinction between security and assurance. We are secure because of His work FOR us alone. Our assurance is based in part upon seeing the evidence of saving faith.
This is the first I've heard of these terms having different meanings. I'm sure you have Scripture to back this up. Can you clarify for me exactly what the difference is, cause I'm not sure from your example.
SD, these are distinctions of mammoth proportions! Still agree?
Of course not! Did you expect me to? I was trying to show that these "mammoth" differences are actually very subtle at times.
SD