Do You Believe In This Eternal Life?

[Calm]

Imagine that you stand at the edge of a precipice 8 miles high (just like the classic Byrd's song). Imagine further that you want to cross the gap from that precipice to another one you can dimly see in the distance. But how? There is no bridge, and you can't climb down the cliff to cross on foot because it's sheer, and the bottom is covered with molten lava without the slightest degree of solid ground you could stand on. In other words, you can't get there from here. You're hosed.

Suddenly, a helicopter approaches and lands near you. The pilot is so expert that he landed it close enough that all you have to do to board it is to take a step onto the skid, and hoist yourself into the passenger cabin. The pilot informs you that he is there to take you to that distant cliff, where he will deposit you. What do you do now?

You have two choices. You can A) get into the helicopter, or B) stand there and do nothing. If this were a "Choose your own adventure" book, you would probably choose choice A.

Let's take this a little further. Let's say that the land the precipice is part of is 100 miles across, but you are on the other end of it from the spot where the helicopter will pick you up to take you to the other side. You have to walk all 100 miles to get there. It is not easy, for the plateau you're on is arid, with few comforts or opportunities for obtaining food. But you want to get to the other plateau. So off you go. It takes you weeks, and you're tired, hungry and thirsty when you get there. The helicopter is waiting.

You have two choices. You can A) get into the helicopter, or B) stand there and do nothing.

What is it, FormerLDS? A or B? A? Great!

But you see, it didn't matter whether you were standing right next to the helicopter, or you had to walk a very arduous 100 miles to get to the helicopter, because without the helicopter you had absolutely ZERO chance of making it to that far plateau.

Now, I hope you don't think that it is too disrespectful of me to say that in my little parable Jesus Christ is the Pilot of that helicopter. The helicopter of course is a representation of His atoning sacrifice. He gives you the gift of the lift in His helicopter, but you still have to get on board the helicopter to take advantage of it. But without Christ and His helicopter, you're not going anywhere at all.

Just in case you're still missing it, I am telling you that in order to obtain the gift of the helicopter lift, you have to take action to board it, whereas you're telling me that just standing there is sufficient.

Have it your way, but I don't think inaction is your ticket to heaven.

Love the analogy.

Christ as the Pilot determines where the boarding of the helicopter takes place. He can choose to land practically on top of you or a hundred miles away and send you a message and a map of how to get to him...the message and maps are gifts as well as the ride, of course, and ultimately any provisions or clothing you acquire through effort in order to allow you to make the journey.

Is it earning the helicopter lift to make those efforts to get there? Should one assume instead it is a test of faith and wait for some other form or for God to reward your faithfulness by flying closer, sending down someone with a harness who then pulls you up inspite of the fact you make no effort to assist the process? How is refusing to do something in faith less of a work than doing something? Are you not earning your reward (being saved by helicopter) by exercising your faith in doing nothing (assuming he actually rewards you for not moving a foot after having been sent instructions to meet him of course)?

Reading the Bible, his message and map is a work. Listening to the Spirit tell you of Christ is a work... This is obvious by comparing it to listening to anyone who is communicating with you as it takes effort to pay attention and understand.

For the brain to function, which it does whenever someone even thinks "I accept Christ as my saviour" it must have blood sugar to convert to energy....the body is therefore working even if one does not believe the spirit has its own energy source which allows it to function. Should we therefore discount all declarations of Christ as saviour by those living because their body was working at the same time, because some took in food so they could continue to live and their brain to function, thus allowing them to receive the gift of faith?

Edited December 11, 2014 by calmoriah

[danielwoods]

I think I explained it fairly clearly, and yet you earnestly fail to get the point.

 

First, though, let me address belief vs works.

 

How can a belief be a work, you ask?  Oh, but it is! …..

Have it your way, but I don't think inaction is your ticket to heaven.

I think that you've redefined work beyond what is intended in Romans. Lest we talk past each other, let's analyze what it's saying.

 

Romans 4 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”[a]

so, righteousness is credited based on belief in God.

 

4 Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Notice, that in this context, "trusts God" is not work. (It is not saying that trusting God doesn't take energy)

 

6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

7 “Blessed are those

whose transgressions are forgiven,

whose sins are covered.

8 Blessed is the one

whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”

9 Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10 Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11 And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. 12 And he is then also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but who also follow in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

Paul's argument, that Abraham was credited righteous, before he did any "work" (circumcision).

 

13 It was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. 14 For if those who depend on the law are heirs, faith means nothing and the promise is worthless, 15 because the law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.

16 Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring—not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. 17 As it is written: “I have made you a father of many nations.”[c] He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed—the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.

believing in the promise comes by faith, this is juxtaposed to the law, which is based on works.

 

18 Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, “So shall your offspring be.”[d] 19 Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead—since he was about a hundred years old—and that Sarah’s womb was also dead. 20 Yet he did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, 21 being fully persuaded that God had power to do what he had promised. 22 This is why “it was credited to him as righteousness.” 23 The words “it was credited to him” were written not for him alone, 24 but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. 25 He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.

Our justification comes through our belief in him, not through works required by the law. Belief isn't a "work" in this context.

[Stargazer]

I think that you've redefined work beyond what is intended in Romans. Lest we talk past each other, let's analyze what it's saying.

 

so, righteousness is credited based on belief in God.

 

Notice, that in this context, "trusts God" is not work. (It is not saying that trusting God doesn't take energy)

 

Paul's argument, that Abraham was credited righteous, before he did any "work" (circumcision).

 

believing in the promise comes by faith, this is juxtaposed to the law, which is based on works.

 

Our justification comes through our belief in him, not through works required by the law. Belief isn't a "work" in this context.

Oh, we are definitely talking past each other, because I have not been talking about the law. Meaning the Law of Moses.

But just to be fair, let's talk about the Law for a moment. I do not understand in the slightest, how you can blithely ignore the Law of Moses as if it were nothing. Yet this is what you do. I note parenthetically that Abraham did not live under the Law, by the way. The Lord provided the law of carnal commandments for Israel, and why do you think He did this? Because obeying the Law was not necessary? That if a Hebrew ignored the Law of Moses and did as he pleased that all that amounted to nothing at all? Because if obeying commandments isn't necessary to us, then it can't be necessary to them, either, or else God is a respecter of persons. Jack and Jill can eat drink and be merry, but as long as they confessed Jesus with their mouths at some point, nothing else matters, presumably not even repentance. But Joshua and Sampson are being held to a completely different standard.

You go to a great deal of trouble to explain how it isn't necessary in the slightest to do anything to merit the Grace of Christ, defining "work" in such a slick way so that you can slide out from under it. It reminds me of the Pharisees and their redefinitions, and of the 6,200 pages of the Talmud.

I know what the basis of it is, though. Luther was so fed up with the Catholic Church's system of indulgences that he spawned a backlash that echoes in history to this day. So you needn't do a blessed thing to merit the Gift of the Grace of Christ despite the clear expectations of the Lord Himself that his followers keep the commandments. Not the Law of Moses, but the Higher Laws, which He stated as Love the Lord God with all your heart, might, mind and soul, and Love they neighbor as thyself.

So, if you can despise your neighbor and despitefully use and abuse him all your life, without letup, you can still get a pass on it, as long as you "believe"? And that's counted as righteousness?

[danielwoods]

Oh, we are definitely talking past each other, because I have not been talking about the law. Meaning the Law of Moses.

But just to be fair, let's talk about the Law for a moment. I do not understand in the slightest, how you can blithely ignore the Law of Moses as if it were nothing. Yet this is what you do. I note parenthetically that Abraham did not live under the Law, by the way. The Lord provided the law of carnal commandments for Israel, and why do you think He did this? Because obeying the Law was not necessary? That if a Hebrew ignored the Law of Moses and did as he pleased that all that amounted to nothing at all? Because if obeying commandments isn't necessary to us, then it can't be necessary to them, either, or else God is a respecter of persons. Jack and Jill can eat drink and be merry, but as long as they confessed Jesus with their mouths at some point, nothing else matters, presumably not even repentance. But Joshua and Sampson are being held to a completely different standard.

You go to a great deal of trouble to explain how it isn't necessary in the slightest to do anything to merit the Grace of Christ, defining "work" in such a slick way so that you can slide out from under it. It reminds me of the Pharisees and their redefinitions, and of the 6,200 pages of the Talmud.

I know what the basis of it is, though. Luther was so fed up with the Catholic Church's system of indulgences that he spawned a backlash that echoes in history to this day. So you needn't do a blessed thing to merit the Gift of the Grace of Christ despite the clear expectations of the Lord Himself that his followers keep the commandments. Not the Law of Moses, but the Higher Laws, which He stated as Love the Lord God with all your heart, might, mind and soul, and Love they neighbor as thyself.

So, if you can despise your neighbor and despitefully use and abuse him all your life, without letup, you can still get a pass on it, as long as you "believe"? And that's counted as righteousness?

 

The first question is how we are justified before God? It is not by works of the law, but by faith.

Second, Paul has answer your question. "6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 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." (Romans 6)

[Calm]

But faith is a work….or at the least it will produce works.  Can one claim to have faith if one sits and does nothing when the Spirit is directing one to do something to serve the Lord?  Or do you believe the Spirit will never inspire us because of our faith to repent and change in our seeking of God?

Edited December 12, 2014 by calmoriah

[danielwoods]

But faith is a work….or at the least it will produce works.  Can one claim to have faith if one sits and does nothing when the Spirit is directing one to do something to serve the Lord?  Or do you believe the Spirit will never inspire us because of our faith to repent and change in our seeking of God?

 

Faith takes energy, and in that sense, yes faith is a work. However, in the context of Romans, faith is not a work of the law. 

 

So, when Paul writes that the "gift of God is eternal life" he's contrasting the gift to the works of the law, that we aren't justified before God based on things we do, with reference to physical activity, such as required by the law. 

 

Rather, our faith compels us, which fulfills the law because we walk in the spirit. 

[Stargazer]

Faith takes energy, and in that sense, yes faith is a work. However, in the context of Romans, faith is not a work of the law.

So, when Paul writes that the "gift of God is eternal life" he's contrasting the gift to the works of the law, that we aren't justified before God based on things we do, with reference to physical activity, such as required by the law.

Rather, our faith compels us, which fulfills the law because we walk in the spirit.

So what you're saying then is this: works are not required for salvation, but, having faith we produce the good works of staying away from sin and of blessing our fellow man.

This sounds rather like a form of the chicken-and-egg problem, whereas I say its the egg and you're on the side of the chicken (or vice-versa), but at least it conforms to the message of James as found in his epistle.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

 but at least it conforms to the message of James as found in his epistle.

It does?

 

How can one claim saving faith with out, first having works. The problem is that evangelicals put the cart before the horse. Of corse works are a prodcut of faith. But you cannot be saved with out those works, it being a dead faith. That is what James is saying. They are part of the fomula for salvation. No works = no salvation.

 

I can appreciate trying to find common ground, though.

[danielwoods]

So what you're saying then is this: works are not required for salvation, but, having faith we produce the good works of staying away from sin and of blessing our fellow man.

This sounds rather like a form of the chicken-and-egg problem, whereas I say its the egg and you're on the side of the chicken (or vice-versa), but at least it conforms to the message of James as found in his epistle.

 

The question is how are we justified and made righteous before God? Are we justified by our works or faith in what Jesus has done for us?

Paul puts it like this:

Romans 5 "Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4 perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5 And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation."

[pogi]

 

The question is how are we justified and made righteous before God? Are we justified by our works or faith in what Jesus has done for us?

Paul puts it like this:

Romans 5 "Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4 perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5 And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation."

 

We can toss scriptures at each other all day.  Where will it get us if our fundamental understanding of faith is different from one another.  We don't disagree with the above scriptures obviously.  They are in our cannon as well.  We simply understand "faith" different from you.  For us, justification comes through a living faith, not a dead one - "faith without works is dead."  To believe in God and not follow Him is a dead faith indeed and is perhaps the more offensive to God than a disbelief.  Belief comes easy when you are born into a Christian culture, in fact, it would take more effort to go against the grain of your family and culture and not believe.  Belief comes cheap - faith, not so much.  

[Anakin7]

 Access to God By True Faith - pistis = allegiance/Commitment/Confidence/Faithfulness/Fidelity/Loyalty/Obedience/Trust and a Legion of action definitions from the courts of Heaven and the courts of the True Saints Anchiently and today. Thanks DW for uplifting True Biblical and True LDS Doctrine Amen !.

 

In His Debt/Grace

       Anakin7

[Anakin7]

    We must Run with Paul The Apostle in the Race to obtain the Prize ! = 1 Corinthians 9:24

 

In His Debt/Grace

       Anakin7

[danielwoods]

We can toss scriptures at each other all day.  Where will it get us if our fundamental understanding of faith is different from one another.  We don't disagree with the above scriptures obviously.  They are in our cannon as well.  We simply understand "faith" different from you.  For us, justification comes through a living faith, not a dead one - "faith without works is dead."  To believe in God and not follow Him is a dead faith indeed and is perhaps the more offensive to God than a disbelief.  Belief comes easy when you are born into a Christian culture, in fact, it would take more effort to go against the grain of your family and culture and not believe.  Belief comes cheap - faith, not so much.

We don't necessarily disagree. What I find that happens is for some reason or another, our two groups talk past each other. So, I'm not "tossing" scriptures at anyone, rather for me it's a reference point so as to avoid "the talking past each" other problem.

In this case, I don't know if you see faith differently or not. James is simply describing what that faith looks like from a human point of view.

It's still faith that justifies us, but what kind of faith exactly, is the question that James answers, a person who has that kind of faith that justifies ("saving faith" if you will) will do the works as James describes.

[pogi]

We don't necessarily disagree. What I find that happens is for some reason or another, our two groups talk past each other. So, I'm not "tossing" scriptures at anyone, rather for me it's a reference point so as to avoid "the talking past each" other problem.

 

The problem is that we think the scriptures are pointing in different directions, so instead of talking past each other, we are simply reading past each other and end up at different locations and conclusions.

 

In this case, I don't know if you see faith differently or not. James is simply describing what that faith looks like from a human point of view.

It's still faith that justifies us, but what kind of faith exactly, is the question that James answers, a person who has that kind of faith that justifies ("saving faith" if you will) will do the works as James describes.

 

 

So according to you, "saving faith" is not a mere belief but is a principle of action as James teaches?  Then we are agreed in-deed (works), pun intended. 

Edited December 16, 2014 by pogi

[danielwoods]

The problem is that we think the scriptures are pointing in different directions, so instead of talking past each other, we are simply reading past each other and end up at different locations and conclusions.

 

 

 

So according to you, "saving faith" is not a mere belief but is a principle of action as James teaches?  Then we are agreed in-deed (works), pun intended. 

 

Saving faith is a decision to put all of one's trust in the hands of Christ. Not the church, not our own good deeds, not anything else only Christ. 

 

A person with saving faith will bear the fruit of good deeds, as James describes. "Mere belief" is not saving faith. If saving faith is an action, it is an action of ones will to trust Christ fully. 

[Anakin7]

      True Faith has a much more Anchient Love/Obedience Covenant meaning than that.

 

In His Debt/Grace

      Anakin7

[telnetd]

Hi Gail,

True enough, but I am not sure what I am supposed to glean from this.  Are you suggesting that eternal life is given like this gift with no contingency?

 

Yes. Maybe you need to differentiate rewards from gifts.

 

Gail

[saemo]

 

Here's a daily devotional by Charles Price on the topic of eternal life?  Is this more a belief

amongst the Community of Christ than the LDS Church (where eternal life is exaltation)?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

I understand heaven and things associated to it, like eternal life, to be of the already, but not yet. Eternal life, in and through Christ, is already established. It is not yet fulfilled. Our Bishop once used the analogy of an expectant mother, whose unborn child is already here in the world, but is not yet born. Or, more poetically, all creation groans with anticipation. It is also our Advent reflection.

Edited December 20, 2014 by saemo

[why me]

I understand heaven and things associated to it, like eternal life, to be of the already, but not yet. Eternal life, in and through Christ, is already established. It is not yet fulfilled. Our Bishop once used the analogy of an expectant mother, whose unborn child is already here in the world, but is not yet born. Or, more poetically, all creation groans with anticipation. It is also our Advent reflection.

Your first line is a little confusing. You may need to explain it more plainly and not with poetics. What does it mean to be of the already? And what does eternal life, in and through christ, is already established. It is not yet fulfilled mean?

 

Maybe something like this: heaven and what is associated  to it is eternal life since heaven and what is associated with it is eternal life. Eternal life exists but not yet for us because we are still alive on this earth. But it is already established for those who have passed on.

[intra]

sorry to butt in, but didn't Jesus tell us exactly what eternal life is? 


And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
(John 17:3) 

as for endurance, if you turn away from Him, have you ever truly known Him? 

[Stargazer]

It does?

 

How can one claim saving faith with out, first having works. The problem is that evangelicals put the cart before the horse. Of corse works are a prodcut of faith. But you cannot be saved with out those works, it being a dead faith. That is what James is saying. They are part of the fomula for salvation. No works = no salvation.

 

I can appreciate trying to find common ground, though.

 

That's what I was looking for, since he definitely had the cart before the horse.

 

What can you say when you have someone who is only interested in arguing scripture?  It's your interpretation vs mine at 40 paces.  Jesus didn't do this, except to do it to spank the Pharisees for it.

[intra]

What can you say when you have someone who is only interested in arguing scripture?  It's your interpretation vs mine at 40 paces.  Jesus didn't do this, except to do it to spank the Pharisees for it.

on the other hand what can you say when you have someone who can't justify what they say by scripture, and won't respond to scripture that's presented to them? it's their 'testimony' and the Word of God notwithstanding. Jesus did not rebuke the devil when He was tempted of Him with human arguments, but with scripture. 

why do we have scripture if it's not profitable for instruction? may God correct me with His staff, and not let me fall into the hands of men. 

A reproof entereth more into a wise man than an hundred stripes into a fool.

(Proverbs 17:10) 

i would rather be confounded with one sound word from the book than a thousand human opinions. 

[Spammer]

What if someone quotes the exact same passage of scripture as you but interprets it differently?  Whose interpretation is correct, yours or his, and how do you know?

[Stargazer]

 

The question is how are we justified and made righteous before God? Are we justified by our works or faith in what Jesus has done for us?

Paul puts it like this:

Romans 5 "Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4 perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5 And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation."

 

I keep saying this, and you and mass148 keep ignoring it, or missing the point entirely.

 

All the works you care to do, even should you give your entire life in service to God and His children, and even if on the end of your life you die a martyr's death, all of it and $3.00 buys you a latte at Starbucks.  Having never bought a latte, I am unsure of the current price, but you understand what I mean, I hope.

 

But add the blood of Jesus Christ, and you are then subject to the Atonement, and your sins are forgiven, as if you had never done them.  But the works that Jesus commanded are still necessary.  And starting with baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost, Jesus commanded that we keep the commandments.  NOT the carnal commandments of the Law of Moses, for that Law had been fulfilled, but the eternal law of God, which includes the Ten Commandments.  Unless you happen to believe that a Christian is free to rob banks, worship Beelzebub, covet his neighbor's wife and Mercedes, and beat up his parents for the crime of not dying in time to give him his inheritance.

 

Now, I predict that you will come to me with a scripture that is carefully explained to show me why I am wrong about this.  Please don't disappoint me.

[intra]

What if someone quotes the exact same passage of scripture as you but interprets it differently?  Whose interpretation is correct, yours or his, and how do you know?

the book is more than one verse. 

can a wrong understanding hold up when you hold it to the full counsel of the scripture? 

but mankind walking not after the Spirit is vain and contentious. we will find reason to argue over anything, especially what things are not made clear. 

this is no reason to abandon scripture for instruction and reproof, but to search it all the more diligently if you accept that it is inspired. 

how gracious God is! He gives the Word, and also the Spirit to instruct us in it, revealing the things of Christ!