Grace (and/or) Belief/Faith (and/or) Works?

[POI]

Seems there exists an unresolved topic amongst Christians... Seems as though the way to salvation is not unified among the many in which I engage. I'd wager they all have a case to support their position(s).?.?

For debate: How does one get to Heaven? What is God's criteria for His selection process? Is it by grace alone, belief/faith alone, works alone; or it is a combination of the three? Or is it maybe other? Please, not only present your case, but please also explain why the other asserted methods are incorrect.

[tam]

Peace to you,

I have made no bones about the fact that <grace> and <love> are variable, and requires further inquiry. Meaning, your brand of "grace", my brand of "grace", and God's brand of "grace" can all differ. The fact that you keep harping on the term 'true' is becoming quite telling.... I have happily admitted that this word can be interchangeable with other synonyms.

I don't remember you admitting that, but in any case:

A - unconditional and universal are not synonyms for true.

B - and more to the point of your OP (one of the reasons I am 'harping' on it), if grace does not have to be unconditional and universal, then what possible conflict can you see between grace and faith and works?

Case/point, I brought up a 'bomb shelter" analogy in my last reply, for which you omitted a response.

I did not see that. Did you add it in afterward?

Regardless...

This analogy demonstrates 'true grace' or 'unconditional grace'. Meaning, if my bomb shelter can fit all, and I warn everyone that a bomb is on the way, do I let EVERYONE IN, or not? If so, wouldn't you define me as being "truly graceful" or "unconditionally graceful" (all-the-same)?

I would not use the word 'truly'. Because that word does not apply. I would use the word unconditional.

However, what if I were to decline entrance to my bomb shelter, because some did not worship me enough, sinned too much, did not perform enough deeds, or other?

Which is MORE "graceful" -- (A or B)?:

A shows grace to more people. But it is not necessarily the wisest or most loving course of action. What if you said everyone needed a specific vaccine to enter your bomb shelter so that a certain disease would not run through everyone. It would still be grace to let everyone in, but where would the love be for the people who did what you said (for theirs and others safety), that you endanger them by allowing people in who do not care about harming them. If such people cared nothing for your rules before they came in - rules meant to keep people from harm - what makes you think they will follow your rules once inside? Ramp that up a bit, where you know that these people are going to wreak havoc in your bomb shelter because they don't care that YOU own the bomb shelter, they don't care about your rules, they don't care about your children (also in the bomb shelter), or anyone else who you have protected.

Do you think it is wise to allow just anyone into your house, even those who do not respect your house, your loved ones, your rules?


**

Regardless (again), if grace does not have to be unconditional and universal, where is the conflict between grace and faith and works?

(YOU) This question has been answered in posts 63, 64, 82, 85, 94.

(ME) I would appreciate if you could just cut/paste the response you feel is appropriate. But I do not see direct rebuttals to my observation thus far anyhow. Maybe you can enlighten me with direct quotes?

No. I already wrote it out and repeated it - what is that... five times? I am done.

(YOU) Oh, you mean the following:

God hates all 'sin', right? All believers will sin, right? Hence, if God's criteria, for the Christians is belief, then we still have a huge problem. Why? All Christians, regardless of how devout they are, will remain imperfect and perform transgression(s) against God (i.e. "sin"). No one is worthy. All fall short of His glory. Any/All sin in Heaven would "wreak havoc", as Heaven is apparently a sinless environment. Hence, once the elected arrives in Heaven, something must change in them, to where they no longer have the ability to 'sin'. Thus, if this is the case, and all which arrive are transformed in some way to no longer sin, then just elect ALL Basic logic.

I addressed that near the bottom of post 94.

(ME) Again, I do not see where you addressed this observation in blue. Please cut/paste the direct response to the above. Thanks.

I addressed its predecessor, in post 94. What you have written above in blue seems to be a series of unsupported premises, and I don't even know where to begin with something like that. Except perhaps to say that the 'ability' to sin is not magically erased - or why would it not have been erased to begin with? But we know that is not the case, because Adam sinned, the Adversary (the one called Satan) is a liar and a murderer, and there are beings - human and spirit - that follow him and his ways.

Since the premise is unsupported (even contradicted), your 'thus' does not apply.




Peace again to you.

[1213]

I find it odd that no Christian wants to chime in here? How does a Christian get to Heaven?

- Grace alone
- Grace by faith/belief alone
- Grace by faith/belief + works
- Other

Bible tells eternal life is for righteous. And if person is righteous, he does righteous works. But, the life is not a reward, it is a gift for those who are righteous. And I have understood it is for righteous, because they understand correctly what is good and right and want to freely to do so.

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Mat. 25:46

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

...He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. To this end the Son of God was revealed, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn't do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn't love his brother.
1 John 3:7-10

[POI]

(YOU) more to the point of your OP (one of the reasons I am 'harping' on it), if grace does not have to be unconditional and universal, then what possible conflict can you see between grace and faith and works?

(ME)

My OP asks what is God's criteria for salvation?

Post #67:

<grace> = undeserved selection for salvation.
<faith> = hope/trust/confidence/belief
<works> = God's given 'moral' deeds, measurable acts for approval/denial by God

Now let's also tie in the concept of Heaven; apparently a sinless and completely blissful place.

So, "more to the point", all can go to heaven. ---> (complete/universal/unconditional/true) grace. Why? Let's take (you), for example. Are you 'In Christ", or whatever verbiage you have selected to use? If so, I must also ask.... Won't you continue to commit any type of sin, as a professed Christian? If yes, we have a problem. If no, we also have a problem.

If you will continue to sin until you die, how exactly does your sin stop? Does God remove your free will in Heaven? Other?

If you say you now no longer sin at all, then I guess that means only atheists and/or believers of other god(s) commit sin? And if Jesus is telling atheists there exists another way to get in (which means He lied to the Christian(s) in Mark 16), how does their 'sin' stop --- as to not "wreak havoc" in Heaven? This also begs another large question... Since the U.S. prison population has a large sect of Christians, are they not really Christians?

Conditional grace would seem to have to include the (2) presented topics: <belief> and/or <works>. The question still remains... If God does not offer full on unconditional grace ALONE, then which "condition(s)" does He require? And this is where we see contradiction. Jesus tells theists one thing, and atheists another....

(YOU) A shows grace to more people. But it is not necessarily the wisest or most loving course of action. What if you said everyone needed a specific vaccine to enter your bomb shelter so that a certain disease would not run through everyone. It would still be grace to let everyone in, but where would the love be for the people who did what you said (for theirs and others safety), that you endanger them by allowing people in who do not care about harming them. If such people cared nothing for your rules before they came in - rules meant to keep people from harm - what makes you think they will follow your rules once inside? Ramp that up a bit, where you know that these people are going to wreak havoc in your bomb shelter because they don't care that YOU own the bomb shelter, they don't care about your rules, they don't care about your children (also in the bomb shelter), or anyone else who you have protected.

Do you think it is wise to allow just anyone into your house, even those who do not respect your house, your loved ones, your rules?

(ME) Great answer! Way to use logic here. I agree with you that "worldly grace" might indeed need 'conditions'. It is best if we investigate those 'conditions'. But I asked you a very specific question. I will ask again, paraphrased...

What if I was to turn people away, based upon how much they did or didn't worship me, did or did not love me, how many deeds they performed which pleased me, or how much they have "sinned"? On the contrary, what if my criteria for admission was instead based upon your suggestion, infection control? Which of the two mechanisms, ("God's morality" or disease control), would be a more logical set of "conditions" to offer my grace to save all?

(YOU) Regardless (again), if grace does not have to be unconditional and universal, where is the conflict between grace and faith and works?

(ME) (Again), 'grace' can be "unconditional" for Heaven.

(YOU) No. I already wrote it out and repeated it - what is that... five times? I am done. (Posts 63, 64, 82, 85, 94)

(ME) Well, I started by looking at post 63 entirely. I do not see a response to my observation: (i.e.):

He tells believers that unbelievers will remain condemned, because they are unbelievers. However, He tells unbelievers that they will not be condemned -- by doing enough deeds. SO WHICH ONE IS IT?

Your entire response in post 63:

To enter into the Kingdom and receive eternal life? If one is in Christ, then one has already entered. And there is no judgment for that one, because His blood covers them. (including, covering their sins). If one is not in Christ --- Followed by a "where's Waldo" link.

********************

Your above response is talking about apples, while I'm talking about oranges. Further, Mark 16:15-16 applies no IF. Unbelievers are condemned, period.

So please, I ask again of you, can you please cut/paste what you feel resolves the presented conflict above in red? I'm not asking you to type it out again, just cut/paste the specific(s).

(YOU)What you have written above in blue seems to be a series of unsupported premises, and I don't even know where to begin with something like that.

(ME) I would agree all these premises are unsupported. Why? Because it's likely Heaven might not even exist. There is really no way to prove it's existence. It's all hypothetical. All we can do is 'trust' what the Bible suggests. But it would seem you have no qualms about the following, as you made no comments until after these unsupported premises:

- God hates all sin
- all earthly believers sin
- God deems all humans unworthy, and hence sent His son to 'save' us
- Any/all sin, committed in Heaven, would wreak havoc

If we can logically agree to the above, let us continue below...

(YOU) Except perhaps to say that the 'ability' to sin is not magically erased

(ME) Then please explain how a believing sinner suddenly stops sinning, once they "cross over" into the next realm of "Heaven"?

(YOU) why would it not have been erased to begin with?

(ME) That's using the old noodle Great question. I reckon it has to do with the fact that the promise of a sinless and blissful afterlife gives us humans something to aspire to... Meaning, "Don't worry Sally, your suffering and sinful nature will soon go away, in the next life." Comfort....

(YOU) But we know that is not the case, because Adam sinned, the Adversary (the one called Satan) is a liar and a murderer, and there are beings - human and spirit - that follow him and his ways.

(ME) Again, all will sin, including you, (a believing Christian), until you die. But you no longer sin after you die? And your mention of "Adam" and "Satan" only adds to the conflict.

[POI]

Bible tells eternal life is for righteous. And if person is righteous, he does righteous works.

Can you please define exactly what constitutes as being 'righteous'?

[POI]

Progress update:

Post #11 JW states "the Bible translates itself". (My last response) - Great. Then the answer should be direct and simple, provided one is literate. Is the answer A), B), C), D), or E); and why?

Post #27. Eloi states "I have no time to answer all your questions". (My last response) - This is when I merely asked direct follow up questions to his response (i.e.):

1. Is baptism required? (yes or no)
2. By default, at birth or before natural birth, are humans deemed "righteous" or "unrighteous"? (righteous or unrighteous)
3. Must a person be free from all the said above to achieve salvation? (yes or no)

He apparently, all of a sudden, "has no time" to answer 3 (one-word-answer) questions? Which begs the question... But he has time to answer others in this thread there-after?.?.?.?

Post #49. Bjs1 alludes to 'morals' being irrelevant to salvation. My follow up question remains:

If everyone, for which He selects is undeserving of His selection, and the elected are the ones which will accept it, does this mean 'morals' are irrelevant?

Post #103. Tam states that all are deemed "condemned", and Jesus is here to save some of us. The question remains... What (criteria or selection process) does God/Jesus use in deciding who He elects/picks/favors? Is it based upon your <beliefs>, your <works>, other? Jesus tells believers that unbelievers are condemned. HOWEVER, Jesus tells unbelievers there exists another way. Which group, (theists or atheists), is He not giving the correct information to? Seems as though the Bible reader needs to ignore some Verse(s), to instead favor others?

Also, a Christian believer is imperfect. But, since Heaven is a perfect place, how the heck is that going to work? The believer cannot 'transform' himself. So just send all to Heaven.

Post #102. 1213 states only the "righteous" achieve salvation? Still awaiting for more clarification here...

[POI]

Apparently you have no idea how someone gets to 'Heaven.' This is reasonable because there are many competing theories in Christendom.

Yes, you nailed it. JW ducked out quite quickly. He offered virtually nothing on the topic. In post #11, "JW" stated "the Bible translates itself". Well then, I guess all one need do is take a hermeneutics class, for reassurance. But guess what, I've spoken to hermeneutic scholars. And they do not agree either. This either means most are not literate, or most are stupid, or maybe; JUST MAYBE, the Bible actually contradicts itself in places and/or also defies logic in places.

"Tam" is the only brave sole, thus far, willing to tackle some of it head on. Peace to you too Tammy; you are a rock star

[Tcg]

Apparently you have no idea how someone gets to 'Heaven.' This is reasonable because there are many competing theories in Christendom. How about Valhalla? How does one get there?

Exactly. And those theories, at least most of them, are due to the fact that the Bible presents many options.

What about 'Sky Burial' believed by Buddhists. How does one qualify?
Nordic countries have a tradition about 'water burial. How does one qualify?
There are many traditions in a variety of cultures that have a fantasy of a heaven, a paradise one goes to after death. Such a tradition is understandable. Part of our human nature rebels against the con dcept of death, of extinction. It is understandable that we invent myths to avoid accepting the inevitability and finality of death. We don't like it. So all of these denial mechanisms arise to assuage our fear of death.

Right again. Death seems to be the main driving force for religion. It's astounding that so many can totally overlook this. I suppose it is because if they didn't it would lose its power to provide the function to deny the finality of death. It's blue-sky mining so to speak.


Tcg

[POI]

Apparently you have no idea how someone gets to 'Heaven.' This is reasonable because there are many competing theories in Christendom. How about Valhalla? How does one get there?

Exactly. And those theories, at least most of them, are due to the fact that the Bible presents many options.

What about 'Sky Burial' believed by Buddhists. How does one qualify?
Nordic countries have a tradition about 'water burial. How does one qualify?
There are many traditions in a variety of cultures that have a fantasy of a heaven, a paradise one goes to after death. Such a tradition is understandable. Part of our human nature rebels against the con dcept of death, of extinction. It is understandable that we invent myths to avoid accepting the inevitability and finality of death. We don't like it. So all of these denial mechanisms arise to assuage our fear of death.

Right again. Death seems to be the main driving force for religion. It's astounding that so many can totally overlook this. I suppose it is because if they didn't it would lose its power to provide the function to deny the finality of death. It's blue-sky mining so to speak.


Tcg

If you have 11 minutes to burn:

[1213]

Bible tells eternal life is for righteous. And if person is righteous, he does righteous works.

Can you please define exactly what constitutes as being 'righteous'?

As said in previous post, it means for example:

...He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. To this end the Son of God was revealed, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn't do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn't love his brother.
1 John 3:7-10

In addition to that, righteousness means that person is upright/just, has the wisdom of the just, correct understanding of what is good and right.

For Yahweh is righteous. He loves righteousness. The upright shall see his face. For the Chief Musician; upon an eight-stringed lyre. A Psalm of David.
Ps. 11:7
He will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah, 'to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,' and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.
Luke 1:17

And here is few more scriptures about righteousness:

The wicked borrow, and don’t pay back, But the righteous give generously.
Ps. 37:21

The righteous shall be glad in Yahweh, And shall take refuge in him. All the upright in heart shall praise him! For the Chief Musician. A Psalm by David. A song.
Ps. 64:10

A righteous person is cautious in friendship, But the way of the wicked leads them astray.
Pro. 12:26

A righteous man hates lies, But a wicked man brings shame and disgrace.
Pro. 13:5

A righteous man walks in integrity. Blessed are his children after him.
Pro. 20:7

The righteous care about justice for the poor. The wicked aren’t concerned about knowledge.
Pro. 29:7

But if a man is just [can be translated also righteous], and does that which is lawful and right, and has not eaten on the mountains, neither has lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, neither has defiled his neighbor’s wife, neither has come near to a woman in her impurity, and has not wronged any, but has restored to the debtor his pledge, has taken nothing by robbery, has given his bread to the hungry, and has covered the naked with a garment; he who has not given forth on interest, neither has taken any increase, who has withdrawn his hand from iniquity, has executed true justice between man and man,
has walked in my statutes, and has kept my ordinances, to deal truly; he is just, he shall surely live, says the Lord Yahweh.
Eze. 18:5-9

[POI]

Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin,

Then case closed. No one is 'righteous'. No one receives salvation:

"Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins." Ecc. 7:20

"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." John 1:8

"As it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one" Romans 3:10