Why no Christian suicide bombers? — and other thoughts on Islamic terror

This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent

Mmm. But you can't just look at one verse in isolation, and interpret it through the lens of Luther's later doctrine of "faith alone." This verse has to be sythesized with others, such as "faith without works is dead."

How can these apparently contradictory verses be reconciled?First, consider the passage in context:

John 6
25 When they found him on the other side of the lake, they asked him, "Rabbi, when did you get here?"
26 Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate the loaves and had your fill.
27 Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. On him God the Father has placed his seal of approval."
28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."
30 So they asked him, "What miraculous sign then will you give that we may see it and believe you? What will you do? 31 Our forefathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written: 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.'"
32 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven.
33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world."
34 "Sir," they said, "from now on give us this bread."
35 Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.
36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.

This chapter isn't a discourse on faith versus works, as is the Letter to James. Rather, Jesus is emphasizing that the Jews should put their faith in 'the one who God has sent.' He's decrying their lack of faith. He concludes, "But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe."

The Jews didn't understand "faith" as simple intellectual assent. They understood "faith in God" to include good works, as two sides of the same coin.

God bless and have a great Easter!

I don't see a difference between predestined for grace and for glory.

Mark 4
13 Then Jesus said to them, "Don't you understand this parable? How then will you understand any parable?
14 The farmer sows the word.
15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them.
16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. [Predestination to grace]
17 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away.
18 Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word;
19 but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful.
20 Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop--thirty, sixty or even a hundred times what was sown." [Predestination to glory]

Ephesians 2:8 - For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

The Jews, and Paul, did not understand "faith" to be simple intellectual assent. Good works must accompany faith. "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit (Matt. 7:18)." "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. (Matt. 7:21)"

Romans 3:24 - Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

Romans 3:24 "and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus." This is justification, or initial sanctifying grace.

Romans 4:4 - Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Romans 11:6 - And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

You can't "work your way to Heaven." Truly good works demonstrate faith. 1 Corinthians 13:13: "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love (charity). But the greatest of these is love (charity)."

James would also appear to contradict the many times Jesus referred to those believing in himself as having eternal life and having already passed from death to life.

If you understand the term "faith" through the eyes of Luther, and not through the eyes of Jesus, the Jews and the Apostles. They did not conceive of faith as simple intellectual assent.

James isn't disputing the fact that it's Faith not works that saves, he's just saying that my faith produces works and so you can see the evidence that I have faith.

Agreed.

But I see no evidence that you have faith.

What do you base that judgment on?

James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

So what's the difference between "saving faith" and what the demons belief? Well the demons know that Jesus is God, but they don't have faith in Him. They know He is, but they don't put their trust in Him for salvation.

Where does it say that? It says the demons "believe." The demons will not serve! In Heaven, there is no need for faith, because there we will see God face to face. The demons rejected God.

When Jesus talks about "believe in me" or Paul talks about "faith not works", they aren't refering to mere knowledge but trust.

When Jesus says "believe in me," he's talking about "saving faith."

Matthew 19
16 Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, "Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?"
17 "Why do you ask me about what is good?" Jesus replied. "There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments."
18 "Which ones?" the man inquired.
19 Jesus replied, " 'Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,' and 'love your neighbor as yourself.'"

So do we know that a person who doesn't have works doesn't have faith?

Yes! See above.

Few people become Christian and instantly switch to a perfect righteous lifestyle. It takes time for the fruit of the spirit to manifest itself. It takes growth from "babe" status to "mature status. It takes study of scripture before a person is "prepared for every good work". So works don't manifest instantly. You can't look at a person who doesn't have works and say with certainty that they don't have faith. Some are babes in Christ and need growth. Some are carnal Christians who "are saved yet as a man running from a house on fire".

I agree, but strength of faith (state of sanctity or sanctification) is indicated by works, as your statement implies.

"you can't just look at one verse in isolation"

I agree wholeheartedly, verses must be interpreted both in the contest of the passage as well as the context of the whole of scripture.

There are so many verses that say belief in Jesus results in eternal life and these verses are said using aboslute terms confidently and without qualifications. Paul has extensive discourse on the difference between faith and works and on the implications of Jesus dying "once for all sin".

In light of Pauls writing I can see no way to interpret James the way the Catholic church has. Especially when James equates faith to the belief that demons have. It's clear that James in this passage is using the term "faith" in the sense of a non-trusting belief which is very different than the way Jesus or Paul used the term.

The Jews didn't understand "faith" as simple intellectual assent. They understood "faith in God" to include good works, as two sides of the same coin.

Early on you said, "Faith manifests itself in works" and I completely agree with that. But I know that works are built over time, they aren't instant. The thief on the cross had no works. The carnal Christian has no works that survive, but he is still saved.

Another common statement is that "Works are the evidence of faith". And in general I agree. However Mathew 7:22 clearly indicates that works can be performed without faith, but they are in vain. A lack of works and thus a lack of evidence is not necessarily an indicator of a lack of faith. The thief on the cross had no works that are mentioned. He had only his confession of Jesus as Lord and poorly worded request for mercy "Remember me when you come into your kingdom Lord". Apparently his belief in Jesus developed too late for faith to manifest itself in works. But Jesus knew his heart and the thief went to Paradise.

Even so, I see our discussion of works as somewhat different than the view of there being a difference between those who recieve grace and those who receive glory. It seems logical to me that those that receive grace are sinless before the almighty and thus have achieved glory regardless of the level of works.

The concept of dying with an unconfessed sin would seem to be contradicted by Paul's repreated comments that Jesus died "Once for all sin". If the Christian were capable of sin after receiving Jesus, he would need to recrucify Jesus. But Jesus's sacrifice was once for all time.

Now I understand that's a difficult concept, because in one sense the Christian "can't" sin, because he is under grace. No sin will be imputed to him.

But in another sense, I know of no Christian who has been perfect after accepting Jesus. In that sense, we are told to be faithful in confessing our sins. Paul clearly struggled with sin. But the point is, Paul is free. He's not under the law, he is under grace. So while Paul struggles to do that which is right, in the final analysis it is not counted unto him as sin when he fails, for Paul is covered with blood of Christ.

So what is Paul's motivation to struggle? Love. And we are told that love comes as a result of knowing how much God loves us while we were sinners and as a result of having been forgiven much. Total complete, once for all time, forgiveness comes first at the moment the individual accepts Jesus as his savior. Understanding how much God loved them while they were yet sinners generates love, and that love generates obedience which produces works. Works is the logical outcome. Works is not part of faith, it is the result of faith. Eternal life is granted before works ever manifest.

You are either under grace or you are not. Either the Lord imputes sin to you or he doesn't. There is no middle ground where the blood covers you except in certain circumstances. You are worried about something (dying with unforgiven sin) that can't happen. And I would that you have that confidence because it would more fully free you to love instead of fear God.

You have a happy Easter too!

Presumptious Danny

Regarding Mark 4 Parable of the seeds. I see the seeds that took root but were choked by thors as people who accepted the gospel. The seed that grew up and was choked by earthly concerns. I see those as being the carnal Christian who has no works survive, but is saved. But clearly the goal, the desire, the expectation is for Christians to produce much fruit. Our salvation doesn't depend on how much fruit we produce, but there will be some form of reward for works.

1 Corr 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. 14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

I agree that the Jews, Jesus and Paul didn't see faith as mental assent. Neither do I. Only James uses it that way and only in Chapter 2. But I don't see where they think works are anything more than the result of faith. I believe it is very possible to have faith but because of circumstances or immaturity to not yet have works. Although given time, faith will produce the fruit of the spirit, develop the virtues of Godly wisdom and produce works.

"But I see no evidence that you have faith.- DannyTN" "What do you base that judgment on? - Aquinasfan

I think you may have misunderstood me. I wasn't saying that Aquinasfan doesn't have faith. For I believe you do and therefore you have eternal life and nothing in this life will change that. What I was saying is that James was saying to certain people in his congregation that they claimed to have faith but James could see no work, so he could see no evidence that they had faith. And thus he was challenging them to examine whether or not they really had trusted Jesus.

You can't "work your way to Heaven." Truly good works demonstrate faith.

We are in agreement here.

The demons rejected God.

Yes. So does every man who doesn't come to the Light. There is not really a difference here. Man doesn't have to see God to know with certainty that He is. I don't understand faith as being the difference between seeing and not seeing. I understand faith as the difference between believing in who God is and trusting HIm as opposed to not trusting Him.

So do we know that a person who doesn't have works doesn't have faith? Yes! See above. Mathew 19

No, I don't see that passage that way. What I see in that passage is Jesus pointing out a person's sin. Three times Jesus is asked in the gospel what they a person must do to have eternal life. Twice the person he was talking to thought they were righteous, and Jesus answers with the commandments in a way that shows the person their sin. The third time is with Nicodemus and Jesus tells him, that he must be born again.

In this passage Jesus names several of the commandments but he skips the first one, "Have no other Gods before me." The rich young ruler answers, 'I've done that since my youth". (The young ruler was really a decent guy by earthly standards!!!) Jesus said, "If you would be perfect go and sell all that you have and follow me. Unfortunately the young ruler valued his wealth more than God.

Jesus does something similar with the Lawyer who accuately summarized the law into "Love God and Love your neighbor." Jesus said "Do this and you shall live." Then the man sought to justify himself and asked "who is my neighbor". Do you see what Jesus did? In both cases he referred to the commandments to get the people to see their sin.

It's true if you obeyed the commandments you would have eternal life. But nobody does that. That's why we need Jesus.

20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? 21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. 22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. 23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. 25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? 26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.

"strength of faith (state of sanctity or sanctification) is indicated by works, as your statement implies"

I agree that strength of faith and maturity in the Word is indicated by works in general. But any faith, faith the size of a mustard seed, is sufficient for salvation.

Sanctification is not dependent on strength of faith or maturity, only on the existence of faith. And the carnal Christian is the example of this. Based on his works, you would say he is practically not sanctified, yet he is saved.

You're right about the good thief not performing good works. But his case is exceptional. He had no oportunity to perform good works. And his confession can be considered a "work," at least in the sense that it's an action. Then again, plenty of people convert on their deathbeds, and I wouldn't argue that they're probably not saved.

I think we're pretty close to agreement on faith/works.

We still differ on grace/glory. I think the root of the disagreement regards the nature of Christ's sacrifice. We believe that Christ's death is materially sufficient to save all men. But we believe that Christians can reject this grace at any time. We see justification as initial sanctifying grace, the first stage in sanctification. Which leads to our next disagreement...

So while Paul struggles to do that which is right, in the final analysis it is not counted unto him as sin when he fails, for Paul is covered with blood of Christ.

Is this Luther's idea that Jesus "covers over" our sins that we may be allowed to enter Heaven? If so, this position is contrary to Catholic doctrine. Catholics believe that nothing unholy can enter Heaven. Therefore, a person must be free of sin to enter Heaven, not just the guilt of sin, but also any attachment to sin, which can be expurgated in Purgatory. Catholics believe that we normally receive sanctifying grace, God's life within us, through the Sacraments. For Catholics, justification or initial sanctifying grace is received through Baptism. The normal means of receiving further sanctifying grace is through reception of the Eucharist.

"We believe that Christ's death is materially sufficient to save all men. But we believe that Christians can reject this grace at any time."

At one time I thought an active rejection of grace, literally saying to God, "Take back your salvation", would be the only way that a person could lose their salvation. But I didn't think anybody in their right mind would do that.

But I don't think even that is possible. For the following reasons. 1) The verses that say Jesus would not lose any of those given to him, 2) the verses that say our names were in the book of life from the foundation of the world, and 3)the verses where Jesus said he would not cast them out, 4) the verse that says the gives and calling of god are irrevocable (Unrepentable KJV), 5) the argument made by Charles Stanley that God having provided grace would not allow the revocation because it would not be an act of love. Which makes sense that God could and would do that only provided that the person doesn't continue in sin in the next life.

"Catholics believe that nothing unholy can enter Heaven. Therefore, a person must be free of sin to enter Heaven, not just the guilt of sin, but also any attachment to sin, which can be expurgated in Purgatory. "

Well, I agree that nothing unholy can enter Heaven. But I think that's already been taken care of in God's plan. Here's why.

1 John 3:2 - Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

1 Corr:13 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. 11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

1 Corr 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. 48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. 49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. 50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

I see us being changed instantly into an incorruptible form. I'm not sure how God accomplishes this. I assume that somehow between our faith in God and the more perfect knowledge that we will have and being able to see Him as he is, that somehow that combines to make our perception such that we cannot be tempted any more. At least that's my theory.

For that matter, I'm not sure what "sin" will be in Heaven. In the garden it was simply don't eat the forbidden fruit. A ridiculously simple task that we failed at mislerably. Since the fall there are a lot of Don'ts as well as do's. But so much of it is tied to our earthly condition. There is no marriage in Heaven so potentially there's a whole category of immorality that doesn't exist. There's no hunger, so is there still covetousness? I don't know. I assume that "failure to love" will always be a sin but maybe that's something we will no longer struggle with.

Regardless It's hard to imagine achieving perfection in this life. So to imagine that I could both attain it and keep it up for eternity without a pretty drastic overhaul is near impossible.

I certainly hope the Catholic version isn't right. It could be a loooooonnnnnnnggggg time in purgatory!!! I recently went through a study where you compare yourself to Jesus by looking at the different fruit of the spirit and the virtues of Godly wisdom. It was basically an indepth study of each one. What it was, what it wasn't, common perversions of the trait, and how Jesus exemplified that attribute. It's an eye opening experience pretty much guaranteed to help you realize you've got a long way to go yet.

And yes, I don't view either the Baptism ceremony or the Eucharist as having the power that Catholics ascribe to them. I do view them as important ceremonies.

Water Baptism is a public expression of faith as well as the first act of obedience. And water baptism is not something the thief on the cross got to do.

The Eucharist I see as both an act of obedience and more importantly a remembrance of Christ's sacrifice. But I don't see it as extending any additional grace. For I don't see that any is necessary since Christ's death paid for sin "once for all".

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.