Who is a Christian?

[One Bad Pig]

Are we talking about the same Simon Magus that was later accused by the early church fathers of founding the Gnostic cult called Simonianism, and whose disciples may have included Marcion?

Yes.

[footwasher]

Again, "according to the flesh" is a matter of merit. "By the Spirit" is wholy of grace. "The deeds," merit, "of the body," that meaning the flesh.

Romans 8:13For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

You understand Paul is setting off “flesh” against “Spirit”, but in fact he is setting of “live according to the flesh” against “put to death deeds of the body”. The METHOD of putting to death the deeds of the body is “by the Spirit”.

IOW "living according to the flesh" is set off against "putting to death the deeds of the body",

Apples to apples, actions to actions.

Not:

Living according to the flesh is set off against by the Spirit.

Apples to oranges, actions to methods.

The syntax is clear, the method in which the deeds of the body CAN be put to death is BY the Spirit.


Actually, the paraphrase could go like this

Paraphrase
Romans 8:13For if you live according to the desires of the flesh you will die, but if, by the Spirit which you received from Christ, you put to death the desires of the flesh, you will live.

Why does Paul use

"according to the flesh"

in one place and

"deeds of the body"

in another place?

To improve readability! Writers have long known that repetitious phrases are dull and boring, so they use alternate phrases, synonyms, to brighten up their work, improve the readability.

Example of using synonyms correctly:

http://essay-advice.papercheck.com/?p=52

Quote
4a) Hundreds of happy people were happily celebrating the happy occasion.

is improved by rephrasing thus:

4b)Hundreds of happy people were ecstatically celebrating the joyful occasion. (Use synonyms whenever possible; use the Microsoft Word Thesaurus.)

Luther thought the Jews were trying to earn their way into heaven by observing the Law when he invented the term “legalism”. That’s funny, because they were actually trying to muscle their way in without working because they thought they were entitled, because they were related to Abraham, the proof being their circumcision! It's like people trying to get into a "meet the General reunion event" by showing a photograph of them hanging out together with the General at a family reunion, when the real qualification was the campaign ribbon the General gave to the person for serving with him in battle, a justification ribbon, a sign of loyalty.

Jesus told them that God could make stones into Abraham’s relatives, so that was not what identified who were the people of God, it was those who had FAITH, loyalty, like Abraham!

Before Luther, no one ever thought about doing good deeds as being legalism! Luther made several other errors as well, translating "faith" as "belief", when it actually meant loyalty, thereby creating a whole new system of theology that was picked up by Calvin and the rest of the major reformed theologians. In attacking the sale of indulgences, buying your way into heaven, he attacked all ways that did not depend only on belief, when the writers of Scripture all taught loyalty to God, demonstrated by deeds, as the way to be accepted (justified) by God.

http://www.cresourcei.org/jameslaw.html

Quote
This perspective was basically adopted by the Reformers, especially Martin Luther and John Calvin. In fact, this misconception of the Old Testament understanding of Torah partly contributed to the difficulty that the Reformers had in distinguishing between their own struggle with 16th century legalistic "works righteousness" and the biblical perspective of torah as faithful response to God’s grace (see Torah as Holiness: Old Testament "law" as Response to Divine Grace). It was easy for them to see in the New Testament the struggle between Old Testament legalism and New Testament grace with the primary issue salvation by works or salvation by faith, because that was the struggle they were waging in their own historical context. Therefore, it was easy for Luther, for example, to see and emphasize not only the differences between the Old Testament (law) and the New Testament (grace), but also between Paul’s perspective seen in terms of grace and James’ views seen in terms of legal requirement.
Yet the reader would be misled if s/he stopped at this point of the intertextual conversation, for there is a far more impressive list ofsimilarities between the two texts. Paul and James agree that the "law" must still be kept in some manner (Gal 5:3, James 2:10). Paul and James further agree on the need to translate Christian identity into consistent moral behavior (Eph 2:10, James 1:16), behavior that is called "law" in James. The oneness of God is prominent in both authors (James 2:19, Gal 3:28), and in a stunning similarity both authors specifically claim that being an "heir to the kingdom" is linked with the promise of God (Gal 3:29, James 2:5). More importantly to this discussion both authors thoroughly ground the responsibility of Christians in the words of Jesus quoted from the Torah, Leviticus 19:18, "love your neighbor as yourself."

In one other interesting note, when each author is forced to respond to the most pressing issue of their respective communities, both Paul and James immediately turn to the example of Abraham and Isaac on Moriah (James 2, Gal 4, Rom 8, referencing Genesis 22). Far from existing in tension, the vast similarities these authors share suggest a common approach to the concerns and needs of the young Christian community.

[footwasher]

PARTLY true.

You're right CP. My bad. They were getting royal food in Egypt:


Exodus 16:3
The Israelites said to them, "If only we had died by the LORD's hand in Egypt! There we sat around pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but you have brought us out into this desert to starve this entire assembly to death."

Numbers 16:13
Isn't it enough that you have brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey to kill us in the wilderness? And now you also want to lord it over us!

Psalm 78:19
They spoke against God; they said, "Can God really spread a table in the wilderness?


Hmm. Must try to brush up my reading comprehension.

[Cow Poke]

You're right CP. My bad. They were getting royal food in Egypt:


Exodus 16:3
The Israelites said to them, "If only we had died by the LORD's hand in Egypt! There we sat around pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but you have brought us out into this desert to starve this entire assembly to death."

Numbers 16:13
Isn't it enough that you have brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey to kill us in the wilderness? And now you also want to lord it over us!

Psalm 78:19
They spoke against God; they said, "Can God really spread a table in the wilderness?


Hmm. Must try to brush up my reading comprehension.

Well, that and the fact that not ALL of Israel made it into the land of milk and honey. (I have no doubt you know this )

[One Bad Pig]

You're right CP. My bad. They were getting royal food in Egypt:


Exodus 16:3
The Israelites said to them, "If only we had died by the LORD's hand in Egypt! There we sat around pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but you have brought us out into this desert to starve this entire assembly to death."

Numbers 16:13
Isn't it enough that you have brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey to kill us in the wilderness? And now you also want to lord it over us!

Psalm 78:19
They spoke against God; they said, "Can God really spread a table in the wilderness?


Hmm. Must try to brush up my reading comprehension.

Slaves would not have been getting royal food.

This seems to me to be the equivalent of reminiscing about "the crispy bacon like we used to get before the war" while kvetching about the current food available.

[footwasher]

Slaves would not have been getting royal food.

This seems to me to be the equivalent of reminiscing about "the crispy bacon like we used to get before the war" while kvetching about the current food available.

Bingo!

[rogue06]

Slaves would not have been getting royal food.

This seems to me to be the equivalent of reminiscing about "the crispy bacon like we used to get before the war" while kvetching about the current food available.

You take complaints about bacon not being as delicious as it used to be as a personal insult don't you?

[One Bad Pig]

Bingo!

Ah, you were waxing sarcastic. Could you please not put the worst possible spin on a two-word answer?

[footwasher]

Ah, you were waxing sarcastic. *Could you please not put the worst possible spin on a two-word answer?

That was the irenic version! The polemic would have been unpostable, by the new standards I've set myself:

2 Timothy 2:24The Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, 25with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth


The problem of identifying Christians was increased by Luther's view on the place in a Christian's life of works of the law, good deeds compliant to law. He views them as a natural result of faith and confused the Roman Catholic Church, which labeled him a rebel not a heretic (Newman wondering if Protestants were saved by the mere fact of believing in the doctrine of salvation by faith alone!).

It also confused Protestants, at least the thinking ones, the ones who proceeded to the logical conclusions of Luther's view. The lazy ones just parrot "Saved by grace, not works! Anything else is legalism!", not thinking about how good works are manifested.

Does faith automatically result in good works? What if works do not ensue? What if good works are not the result of true faith, but an effort by a false professor, to imitate the fruit of true faith? Is worrying about false fruit an indication that one's faith is true? How do I explain the continued presence of sin in my life?


http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1997ii/Wilkin.html

Quote
Dr. R. C. Sproul is a very articulate spokesman for the view that assurance is not certainty. A few years back he described his own struggles with assurance, and in so doing he explained his view of assurance:

There are people in this world who are not saved, but who are convinced that they are. The presence of such people causes genuine Christians to doubt their salvation. After all, we wonder, suppose I am in that category? Suppose I am mistaken about my salvation and am really going to hell? How can I know that I am a real Christian?

A while back I had one of those moments of acute self-awareness that we have from time to time, and suddenly the question hit me: "R.C., what if you are not one of the redeemed? What if your destiny is not heaven after all, but hell?" Let me tell you that I was flooded in my body with a chill that went from my head to the bottom of my spine. I was terrified.

I tried to grab hold of myself. I thought, "Well, it's a good sign that I'm worried about this. Only true Christians really care about salvation." But then I began to take stock of my life, and I looked at my performance. My sins came pouring into my mind, and the more I looked at myself, the worse I felt. I thought, "Maybe it's really true. Maybe I'm not saved after all."

I went to my room and began to read the Bible. On my knees I said, "Well, here I am. I can't point to my obedience. There's nothing I can offer. I can only rely on Your atonement for my sins. I can only throw myself on Your mercy." Even then I knew that some people only flee to the Cross to escape hell, not out of a real turning to God. I could not be sure about my own heart and motivation. Then I remembered John 6:68. Jesus had been giving out hard teaching, and many of His former followers had left Him. When He asked Peter if he was also going to leave, Peter said, "Where else can I go? Only You have the words of eternal life." In other words, Peter was also uncomfortable, but he realized that being uncomfortable with Jesus was better than any other option!

According to this way of thinking, certainty is not an option. The very best option available is "being uncomfortable with Jesus."
__________________

[Pentecost]

Are we talking about the same Simon Magus that was later accused by the early church fathers of founding the Gnostic cult called Simonianism, and whose disciples may have included Marcion?

Don't forget he invents simony... And maybe flew and was a powerful sorcerer; little less detail on that.

[One Bad Pig]

That was the irenic version! The polemic would have been unpostable, by the new standards I've set myself:

2 Timothy 2:24The Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, 25with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth

Good for you!

Does faith automatically result in good works? What if works do not ensue?

Source: John 14:15 NKJV

If you love Me, keep My commandments.

© Copyright Original Source

It will automatically result in at least an attempt to do good works. If works do not ensue, that's a good sign we don't have faith.

What if good works are not the result of true faith, but an effort by a false professor, to imitate the fruit of true faith?

Works do not save anyone. If one's works are done in an attempt to please God, then odds are quite good one has true faith.

Is worrying about false fruit an indication that one's faith is true?

I think that worrying about false fruit is unnecessary. People generally know when they do something what their motives are. False fruit is an attempt to please men rather than God.

How do I explain the continued presence of sin in my life?

IMO Romans 7:23-25 adequately explains that.

<on the lack of certainty of salvation>

IMO, someone who distinguishes between certainty and assurance is playing word games; they're essentially synonymous. I think that this is something that Calvinists in particular will struggle with, because they believe they can do nothing about it. Though, ironically, Calvin himself believed one could be sure of one's salvation. IMO Romans 8:16 shows that we can be assured of our salvation:

Source: Rom 8:16 NKJV

The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God

© Copyright Original Source

[One Bad Pig]

Don't forget he invents simony...

I would somewhat disagree with this. IMO the term 'simony' was coined in an attempt to shame by association those who bought offices in the church.

[footwasher]

Does faith automatically result in good works? What if works do not ensue?

Source: John 14:15 NKJV
If you love Me, keep My commandments.

So we keep His commandments because we love Him. Does that mean that we know we are saved because we appreciate what Jesus did for the world?

It will automatically result in at least an attempt to do good works. If works do not ensue, that's a good sign we don't have faith.

But I do believe Jesus died for my sins and was resurrected. That's faith by your definition. However, sin still plagues my life. So why is this happening?

S
Works do not save anyone. If one's works are done in an attempt to please God, then odds are quite good one has true faith.

Sproul is uncertain about his condition. He desires to do good works because he felt the lack. He expected good works to be a natural outflow from his mental assent that Christ died and was raised. Since it didn't happen, he did good works anyway, supposing that this type of good works would suffice. Now he is in a quandary. Suppose his faith was artificial, was not from belief, but from fear of going to hell. Really, Sproul has no way to discover or confirm what his motives are. What a predicament!

The text says that if we live according to the desires of the flesh we will die and if we are putting to death the deeds of the body, we will live.

So works do save us:

Romans 8:12So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— 13for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

Is worrying about false fruit an indication that one's faith is true?

I think that worrying about false fruit is unnecessary. People generally know when they do something what their motives are. False fruit is an attempt to please men rather than God.

You said an attempt at good works was a good sign. What made you change your mind? Remember, authentic fruit is a result of mental assent of Christ's death and resurrection. False fruit is good works done out of fear.

How do I explain the continued presence of sin in my life?

IMO Romans 7:23-25 adequately explains that.

Romans 7:23but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. 24Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

Why is Paul thanking God?

<on the lack of certainty of salvation>

IMO, someone who distinguishes between certainty and assurance is playing word games; they're essentially synonymous. I think that this is something that Calvinists in particular will struggle with, because they believe they can do nothing about it. Though, ironically, Calvin himself believed one could be sure of one's salvation. IMO Romans 8:16 shows that we can be assured of our salvation:

Source: Rom 8:16 NKJV
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God.

How?

[One Bad Pig]

Does faith automatically result in good works? What if works do not ensue?

Then one does not have faith.

So we keep His commandments because we love Him. Does that mean that we know we are saved because we appreciate what Jesus did for the world?

If we appreciate that in word and deed, then I'd say that's a decent indication.

But I do believe Jesus died for my sins and was resurrected. That's faith by your definition. However, sin still plagues my life. So why is this happening?

Because you're still living in your corrupt body of flesh.

Sproul is uncertain about his condition. He desires to do good works because he felt the lack. He expected good works to be a natural outflow from his mental assent that Christ died and was raised. Since it didn't happen, he did good works anyway, supposing that this type of good works would suffice. Now he is in a quandary. Suppose his faith was artificial, was not from belief, but from fear of going to hell. Really, Sproul has no way to discover or confirm what his motives are. What a predicament!

As a Calvinist, Sproul has no control over his motives anyway. And what does God say about worrying (Mat 6:25-34)?

The text says that if we live according to the desires of the flesh we will die and if we are putting to death the deeds of the body, we will live.

So works do save us:

Romans 8:12So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— 13for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

Without faith, works will not save us. And please note the tense of the verb 'putting.' We are not promised that we will become perfect on this side of death; it is, however, a goal to strive for (Mat 5:48).

Is worrying about false fruit an indication that one's faith is true?

It is worrying, which goes against Christ's commandments. Keep doing the works; there are occasions when one starts by doing something for the wrong motive, but by dint of persistence one's heart is changed so that one eventually does it for the right motive.

You said an attempt at good works was a good sign. What made you change your mind? Remember, authentic fruit is a result of mental assent of Christ's death and resurrection. False fruit is good works done out of fear.

I didn't change my mind. I would say that authentic fruit is a result of fear of and love for God due to Christ's death and resurrection. Fear is an essential component of this (Eccl 12:13 - see also ch. 5,8; 2 Cor 7:1).

How do I explain the continued presence of sin in my life?

Sin is a continued presence in your life because you're still living in a corrupt body of flesh.

Why is Paul thanking God?

Because, despite Paul's weakness and failure to always do what he wants to do, God is saving him anyway.

How [can we be assured of our salvation]?

That, I cannot answer. Only by listening for and to the Spirit can one find that out.

[footwasher]

Then one does not have faith.

Sproul says there are people who believe they are saved, but those around them seriously doubt it.

These are people who have been baptised:

Romans 10:9If 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.

They have faith but have no fruit so you can't say that situation cannot exist.

If we appreciate that in word and deed, then I'd say that's a decent indication.

Again there are people like I have described, who have faith and believe a strange doctrine that they will eventually and inevitably produce fruit.

Because you're still living in your corrupt body of flesh.

So will my faith inevitably produce fruit?

As a Calvinist, Sproul has no control over his motives anyway. And what does God say about worrying (Mat 6:25-34)?

It says this:
"For this reason I say to you, do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?

What does worrying about provision for sustaining the physical body, an exercise condemned by Scripture, have to do with examining myself, which is approved by Scripture?

Without faith, works will not save us. And please note the tense of the verb 'putting.' We are not promised that we will become perfect on this side of death; it is, however, a goal to strive for (Mat 5:48).

Not true. This passage shows that if a person in the deepest jungle, does not have faith in Christ, through no fault of his own but because he has not heard of Christ, because he has not been preached to, but who does good works, will be found law abiding on the Day of Judgment:

Romans 2:14For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

And Jesus could not have offered an unblemished sacrifice. He put to death ALL the desires of the body BEFORE he offered it on the Cross. We are taught to be like Him, as we cannot share in what remains of His afflictions if we cannot do the same.

It is worrying, which goes against Christ's commandments. Keep doing the works; there are occasions when one starts by doing something for the wrong motive, but by dint of persistence one's heart is changed so that one eventually does it for the right motive.

Rather its an indication about the incoherence of Calvinism. It requires a check to be made for bad fruit, when scripture says there are NO checks against ANY fruit:

Galatians 5:22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

I didn't change my mind. I would say that authentic fruit is a result of fear of and love for God due to Christ's death and resurrection. Fear is an essential component of this (Eccl 12:13 - see also ch. 5,8; 2 Cor 7:1).

I think I have clarified the view. There is no such thing as false fruit.

Sin is a continued presence in your life because you're still living in a corrupt body of flesh.

However, we have the gift of the Spirit.

Because, despite Paul's weakness and failure to always do what he wants to do, God is saving him anyway.

Not so. God does not save unless we put to death the desires of the body through the gift of the Spirit. That is why Paul thanks God. Because of the gift.

That, I cannot answer. Only by listening for and to the Spirit can one find that out.

Has the Spirit confirmed it to you through words yet? Rather is it not those who are LED by God to put to death the desires of the flesh who are confirmed to be sons of God?

Romans 8:12So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— 13for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, “Abba! Father!” 16The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, 17and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him.

Encapsulated
Those who believe that Christ has removed the curse of the law are saved

Those who are free are saved

Those who know they can choose to serve sin and die, or choose to serve Christ and live are saved

Those who choose to serve Christ are saved