What's with all the choices?

[Miles]

.

ALL YOU NEED DO TO BE SAVED IS TO PICK 1 OF THE 17 OPTIONS BELOW

This assumes,

.....Receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit
.....Seeing/entering the kingdom of God
.....Getting eternal life
.....Not dying in one's sins
.....Not perishing
.....Surely living, not dying

is the same as salvation

1. HAVE FAITH
Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith.

2. BELIEVE IN JESUS
Acts 16:31
And they said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

3. CONFESS THAT JESUS IS LORD AND WAS RESURRECTED
Romans 10:9-10
if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

4. BE BAPTIZED
1 Peter 3:18-22
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you

5. REPENT AND BE BAPTIZED
Acts 2:38
“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.

6. BELIEVE AND BE BAPTIZED
Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

7. BE BORN AGAIN
John 3:3
Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.

8. HAVE FAITH
Ephesians 2:8-10
For by grace you have been saved through faith.

9. WORK AND SEEK
Romans 2:6-8
He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;

10. BELIEVE JESUS IS THE "I AM HE"
John 8:24
I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am he you will die in your sins.”

11. BELIEVE IN JESUS
John 3:15-18
That whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

12. REPENT
Luke 13:3
No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.

13. REPENT AND BE BAPTIZED
Acts 2:38-39
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.

14. CALL UPON THE NAME OF THE LORD
Acts 2:21
And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’

15. RELY ON YOUR SAVIOR'S MERCY
Titus 3:4-5
But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,

16. DO THE WILL OF GOD
Matthew 7:21
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

17. (for the wicked) TURN FROM YOUR SIN, DO WHAT IS RIGHT, RETURN WHAT YOU HAVE STOLEN, AND WALK IN THE STATUTES OF LIFE
Ezekiel 33:14-19
Again, though I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ yet if he turns from his sin and does what is just and right, if the wicked restores the pledge, gives back what he has taken by robbery, and walks in the statutes of life, not doing injustice, he shall surely live; he shall not die.




.

.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to Miles in post #1]

There does not appear to be a meaningful distinction between these "options."

Let me phrase it like this: A person is saved by putting his/her faith in Jesus Christ. "Believing" and "relying on" are synonyms for "faith." The faith is publicly confessed through the ceremony of baptism. Faith results in a changed life, which is often called repentance.

Have I successfully condensed all 17 "choices" into a single explanation of how to be saved?

Pretty much; as James wrote "faith without works is dead" so faith in Jesus entails a number of actions (works) which are manifestations of the effects if that faith.

[boatsnguitars]

[Replying to Miles in post #1]

There does not appear to be a meaningful distinction between these "options."

Let me phrase it like this: A person is saved by putting his/her faith in Jesus Christ. "Believing" and "relying on" are synonyms for "faith." The faith is publicly confessed through the ceremony of baptism. Faith results in a changed life, which is often called repentance.

Have I successfully condensed all 17 "choices" into a single explanation of how to be saved?

Pretty much; as James wrote "faith without works is dead" so faith in Jesus entails a number of actions (works) which are manifestations of the effects if that faith.

Information on the Epistle of James
Kummel presents the reasons that most scholars suspect James to be a pseudepigraph (Introduction to the New Testament, pp. 412-3):

1. The cultured language of James is not that of a simple Palestinian. Sevenster's evidence that the Greek language was much used in Palestine at that time and could be learned does not prove that a Jew whose mother tongue was Aramaic could normally write in literary Greek. Most of those who defend the thesis that James was written by the Lord's brother must assume that it achieved its linguistic form through the help of a Hellenistic Jew, but there is no evidence in the text that the assistance of a secretary gave shape to the present linguistic state of the document, and even if this were the case the question would still remain completely unanswered which part of the whole comes from the real author and which part from the "secretary."
2. It is scarcely conceivable that the Lord's brother, who remained faithful to the Law, could have spoken of "the perfect law of freedom" (1:25) or that he could have given concrete expression to the Law in ethical commands (2:11 f) without mentioning even implicitly any cultic-ritual requirements.

3. Would the brother of the Lord really omit any reference to Jesus and his relationship to him, even though the author of JAmes emphatically presents himself in an authoritative role?

4. The debate in 2:14 ff with a misunderstood secondary stage of Pauline theology not only presupposes a considerable chronological distance from Paul - whereas James died in the year 62 - but also betrays complete ignorance of the polemical intent of Pauline theology, which lapse can scarcely be attributed to James, who as late as 55/56 met with Paul in Jerusalem (Acts 21:18 ff).

5. As the history of the canon shows (see 27.2), it was only very slowly and against opposition that James became recognized as the owrk of the Lord's brother, therefore as apostolic and canonical. Thus there does not seem to have been any old tradition that it originated with the brother of the Lord.

Udo Schnelle also argues against the authenticity of James (The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings, pp. 385-386):

The History and Theology of the New Testament Writings: Buy at amazon.com!Nonetheless, there are weighty arguments against James the Lord's brother as author of the Letter of James. Central themes of strict Jewish Christian theology such as circumcision, Sabbath, Israel, purity laws and temply play no role in this letter. James is numbered among the few New Testament writings in which neither Israel nor the Jews are mentioned by name. The reception of Old Testament figures (cf. James 2.21-25; 5.10-11, 17-18) and also the references to the Law in an exclusively ethical context were general practices possible anywhere within early Christianity. In contrast to the Antioch incident, the problem of Gentile Christians/Jewish Christians does not appear at all in the Letter of James. The far-reaching differences in soterioogy (see below 7.1.9) indicate that the author of the Letter of James cannot be identical with James the Lord's brother, who according to Gal. 2.9 gave the right hand of fellowship to Paul and explicitly acknowledged his proclamation of the gospel among the Gentiles. In 1.1 the author designates himself δουλος θεου και κυριου Ιησου Ξριστου (servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ), and in 3.1 indicates that he is an early Christian teacher. To be sure, a special position and dignity is associated with the term δουλος (servant) in James 1.1., but it remains worthy of note that the author neither introduces himself as the Lord's brother nor claims the title στυλος (cf. Gal. 2.9). By including himself in the large group of early Christian teachers (cf. Acts 13.1; 1 Cor. 12.28-29), he disclaims the special authority of the Lord's brother or the three 'pillars' of the Jerusalem mother church, which were used in the Antioch conflict. In addition, James 3.1ff. presupposes an attack on the teaching office and a critical situation associated with it, which again does not correspond to the exclusive position of James the Lord's brother in the history of early Christianity.
If James the Lord's brother were the author of the Letter, then it is amazing that in James 5.10-11 it is Job and not Jesus who serves as an example of willingness to suffer. Also, the presupposed church situation and the polemic in James 2.14-26 point to a later time. The social conflicts within the community that become visible are paralleled especially in the writings of Luke, the Pastorals, and in Revelation. They are evidence of a fundamental social change that happened within the Christian community at the end of the first century. More and more wealthy people entered the church, the gulf between rich and poor church members became greater, and the debate between them grew sharper. In any case, the conflict concerning the unity of faith and works points to the post-Pauline period, as in the churches previously belonging to the Pauline mission field the unity of new being and new actions that Paul had considered self-evident came apart. The polemic of James does not fit Paul himself (see below 7.1.9), so that one must assume either that James the Lord's brother was completely ignorant of Pauline theology or that we are dealing with a debate in post-Pauline times. The deuteropaulines and 2 Peter 3.15-16 docuemnt the fact that these debates in fact took place on very different levels and with distinct emphases. If the Letter of James were to have been writen by James the Lord's brother, then it is remarkable that there is no reflection of the sharp criticism of Paul by James in the deuteropauline writings. Finally, the history of the canon speaks against James the Lord's brother as author of the Letter of James. Prior to 200 CE there is no solid evidence of the literary use of James. In the Muratorian Canon (ca. 200) James is missing, just as in Tertullian, and Eusebius (HE 2.23, 24b, 25) reports of James: 'This is the story of James. He is supposed to be the author of the first of the so-called "Catholic Letters," but let it be noted that its authenticity is doubted, since not many of the Elders have referred either to it or the so-called "Letter of Jude," which likewise has been counted among the 'Catholic Letters.' Still, we are aware that these two letters, like the others, have been read aloud in most of the churches.' The Letter of James began to be generally accepted only after 200 CE, cited for the first time as Scripture in Origen (Select Ps 30.6 [PG 12.1300]). The canonical status of James continued to be disputed, however, and did not attain general acceptance as a canonical document until very late. This would be an extraordinary development if James had really been written by James the brother of the Lord and this had been known in early Christianity.

Norman Perrin offers the following comments on James (The New Testament: An Introduction, p. 255):

James shows knowledge of parenetical tradition that uses sayings ascribed to Jesus in the gospels: 5:12 (compare Matt 5:36-37); 1:5, 17 (compare Matt 7:7-12); 1:22 (compare Matt 7:24-27); 4:12 (compare Matt 7:1); 1:6 (compare Mark 11:23-24). There is, further, parenetical material also used in 1 Peter: Jas 1:2-3 (compare 1 Peter 1:6-7); Jas 4:1-2 (compare 1 Pet 2:11). It is not that James necessarily knows the gospels or 1 Peter, but rather that there is a Christian parenetical tradition into which sayings ascribed to Jesus in the gospels have been taken up, although not in the form of sayings of Jesus, and of which both James and 1 Peter make use. . .
Moral exhortation is very much the same throughout the various elements in a given culture. By the same token parenesis itself has little doctrinal concern, and James, a wholly parenetical work, has almost nothing distinctively Christian about it. Jesus Christ is mentioned only twice (1:1, 2:1), and both verses could be omitted without any harm to the flow of thought in the text. When the "coming of the Lord" is mentioned (5:7) there is nothing to denote the specifically Christian hope of the parousia; it could equally be a reference to the coming of the Lord God. "Faith" in this text is not specifically Christian faith but rather the acceptance of monotheism (2:19). These facts have led some scholars to suggest that the text is a Jewish homily lightly Christianized. But a number of features seem to speak of a Christian origin, especially the evidence of contacts with Christian parenetical tradition already noted and the discussion of "faith and works" in 2:14-26. The latter seems to presuppose an awareness of Paul's teaching in Galatians 3 and Romans 4.

The fact that the author calls upon the authority of James the brother of the Lord, who died c. 62 CE, and the debate concerning faith and works suggest the period immediately after James and Paul, in the last third of the first century.

https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/james.html

[JehovahsWitness]

Kummel presents the reasons that most scholars suspect James to be a pseudepigraph ...

Who cares?! May I remind you we are in "Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma" and the bible canon is authoritive here. If I wanted to question the authenticity of the book of James I would personally skidaddle off to a subforum where such an "Cut and Paste " would be welcomed or relevant.


JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[boatsnguitars]

the bible canon is authoritive here.

Which Canon? The one you follow or the one Jesus intended?

[JehovahsWitness]

the bible canon is authoritive here.

Which Canon? The one you follow or the one Jesus intended?

Have you asked a modifier? I don't make forum rules, if you are unclear what they refer to my advice is you seek clarification frim the proper channels.


Respect,

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[kjw47]

.

ALL YOU NEED DO TO BE SAVED IS TO PICK 1 OF THE 17 OPTIONS BELOW...

Where do you get the idea that salvation depends on picking only one of those?

Because they come from god.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All Scripture is given by God. And all Scripture is useful for teaching and for showing people what is wrong in their lives. "

so they must be a true: a fact.

Proverbs 30:5-6
"Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar."

And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation.


.

You are mistaken. Matt 7:21--Those living to do Jesus Fathers will get to enter his kingdom( be saved.) Jesus summed that will up in a single teaching--Man does not live by bread alone but by EVERY utterance from God=OT-NT 1535 pages of utterances. Not pick 1 out of 17.

[Miles]

.

ALL YOU NEED DO TO BE SAVED IS TO PICK 1 OF THE 17 OPTIONS BELOW...

Where do you get the idea that salvation depends on picking only one of those?

Because they come from god.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All Scripture is given by God. And all Scripture is useful for teaching and for showing people what is wrong in their lives. "

so they must be a true: a fact.

Proverbs 30:5-6
"Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar."

And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation.


.

You are mistaken. Matt 7:21--Those living to do Jesus Fathers will get to enter his kingdom( be saved.) Jesus summed that will up in a single teaching--Man does not live by bread alone but by EVERY utterance from God=OT-NT 1535 pages of utterances. Not pick 1 out of 17.

Err . . . Not quite getting your point here, but I assume your quarrel is with my statement "And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation." If this is the case what do you do with 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and Proverbs 30:5-6 as quoted above? Simply ignore them?

.

[kjw47]

.

ALL YOU NEED DO TO BE SAVED IS TO PICK 1 OF THE 17 OPTIONS BELOW...

Where do you get the idea that salvation depends on picking only one of those?

Because they come from god.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All Scripture is given by God. And all Scripture is useful for teaching and for showing people what is wrong in their lives. "

so they must be a true: a fact.

Proverbs 30:5-6
"Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar."

And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation.


.

You are mistaken. Matt 7:21--Those living to do Jesus Fathers will get to enter his kingdom( be saved.) Jesus summed that will up in a single teaching--Man does not live by bread alone but by EVERY utterance from God=OT-NT 1535 pages of utterances. Not pick 1 out of 17.

Err . . . Not quite getting your point here, but I assume your quarrel is with my statement "And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation." If this is the case what do you do with 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and Proverbs 30:5-6 as quoted above? Simply ignore them?

.

There is a whole bible. God didn't speak those words for nothing. He meant them all. Many teachings are just partial truths.

Like Acts 16:31--Because these believe-Matt 7:22-23 but will hear those words as judgement, making believing in Jesus a partial truth. Like i said--there is a whole bible. Proof of ones love is by obeying and Jesus said--Man does not live by bread alone but by every utterance from God--and he meant it.

[Miles]

.

ALL YOU NEED DO TO BE SAVED IS TO PICK 1 OF THE 17 OPTIONS BELOW...

Where do you get the idea that salvation depends on picking only one of those?

Because they come from god.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All Scripture is given by God. And all Scripture is useful for teaching and for showing people what is wrong in their lives. "

so they must be a true: a fact.

Proverbs 30:5-6
"Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar."

And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation.


.

You are mistaken. Matt 7:21--Those living to do Jesus Fathers will get to enter his kingdom( be saved.) Jesus summed that will up in a single teaching--Man does not live by bread alone but by EVERY utterance from God=OT-NT 1535 pages of utterances. Not pick 1 out of 17.

Err . . . Not quite getting your point here, but I assume your quarrel is with my statement "And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation." If this is the case what do you do with 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and Proverbs 30:5-6 as quoted above? Simply ignore them?

.

There is a whole bible. God didn't speak those words for nothing. He meant them all. Many teachings are just partial truths.

Many of god's teachings aren't the whole truth just partial truths???? And this just after I pointed out that

Proverbs 30:5-6
5 You can trust this: Every word that God speaks is true.

But if many of his teachings are, in fact, just partial truths and not whole truths, I assume this isn't something you concocted but lies in some scripture. If you will, please share this scripture; book, chapter, and verse will do.

.

[kjw47]

.

ALL YOU NEED DO TO BE SAVED IS TO PICK 1 OF THE 17 OPTIONS BELOW...

Where do you get the idea that salvation depends on picking only one of those?

Because they come from god.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All Scripture is given by God. And all Scripture is useful for teaching and for showing people what is wrong in their lives. "

so they must be a true: a fact.

Proverbs 30:5-6
"Every word of God proves true; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar."

And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation.


.

You are mistaken. Matt 7:21--Those living to do Jesus Fathers will get to enter his kingdom( be saved.) Jesus summed that will up in a single teaching--Man does not live by bread alone but by EVERY utterance from God=OT-NT 1535 pages of utterances. Not pick 1 out of 17.

Err . . . Not quite getting your point here, but I assume your quarrel is with my statement "And because nothing more is added to any of them each stands alone as a way to salvation." If this is the case what do you do with 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and Proverbs 30:5-6 as quoted above? Simply ignore them?

.

There is a whole bible. God didn't speak those words for nothing. He meant them all. Many teachings are just partial truths.

Many of god's teachings aren't the whole truth just partial truths???? And this just after I pointed out that

Proverbs 30:5-6
5 You can trust this: Every word that God speaks is true.

But if many of his teachings are, in fact, just partial truths and not whole truths, I assume this isn't something you concocted but lies in some scripture. If you will, please share this scripture; book, chapter, and verse will do.

.

I showed you Matt 7:22-23--These believe in Jesus but will hear these words as judgement--GET AWAY FROM ME you who work iniquity(practice a sin) i must confess i never even knew you.--You see there is whole bible. certain teachings are partial truths that go along with other teachings to make them whole truths. And Matt 7:22-23 is proof that acts 16:31 is a partial truth, because those at Matt 7 believe in Jesus. Their jaws will be dropped to the floor hearing those words from Jesus, because they probably believe as you do.