Ask an Evangelical III

[Arakhor]

I agree that he didn't write a science textbook, but the work is still "God-breathed" that is, it is as if God breathed out the words himself. If they cannot be trusted on scientific and historical matters, 2 Timothy 3:16 is false.

Why would you expect Scripture to teach history and science? This is pure Evangelical tradition and hardly Biblical.

If the writing is "God-breathed" that ultimately makes God the author. As such, God cannot lie and so everything in the text must be true.

Where are we ever told that God cannot lie? This just seems to be yet more Evangelical tradition, you know, the stuff you criticise the Catholic church for using instead of the Bible alone.

 

[Truronian]

Yes, only the original Hebrew and Greek text was infallible. Granted, the word for word translations (ESV and NASB are two I know of) are pretty darn close, but yes, translation errors are possible.

And how do you know what the original Greek and Hebrew texts read?

Where are we ever told that God cannot lie?

Indeed, seems like something that people do every day would perfectly doable for an omnipotent being.

 

[Zack]

Having faith in Christ means trusting in him and being obedient to his will is a part of that.

But it's not necessary for salvation, and is therefore irrelevant and unnecessary.

 

[Core Imposter]

Very nice thread.

Why can't an Evangelical believe that marrying within one's race is the best practice without being labeled a racist?

 

[History_Buff]

Why can't an Evangelical believe that marrying within one's race is the best practice without being labeled a racist?

I'd wager its because when you phrase it like that, it sounds like it's been done for racist reasons?

 

[Flying Pig]

Why can't an Evangelical believe that marrying within one's race is the best practice without being labeled a racist?

Because to do so makes distinctions between people on the grounds of race, which is the very definition of racism.

 

[Core Imposter]

Because to do so makes distinctions between people on the grounds of race, which is the very definition of racism.

So then you agree with me that having racial classifications on the census and in fact, any government document, is racist and would also agree with me that we need to pass a contitutional amendment to bar the use of racial, ethnic, and religious labels?

Eh, sorry for being drawn off topic.

 

[GhostWriter16]

But it's not necessary for salvation, and is therefore irrelevant and unnecessary.

This is both true and untrue at the same time. Look at James 2, then look at John 15:5. If a man remains in him, he will bear much fruit, and obeying Jesus is necessary for that. However, the abiding part happens first.

The Bible doesn't really say that works play no role in Salvation at all, but that they do not SAVE. They are critical for sanctification, for gaining reward in Heaven (Yes, there are different levels of reward, much like there are different levels of punishment), for getting other people into Heaven (We don't actually do this, but we "Make disciples" as per Matthew 28:19-20.) The reality is that a saved person will ultimately grow to a point where they are characterized by obedience.

There's a bit of deeper theological stuff here, but look up the "Lordship Controversy" if you're interested. I'm definitely on the "Lordship" side of things, although I do think that can be taken too far by some.

Very nice thread.

Why can't an Evangelical believe that marrying within one's race is the best practice without being labeled a racist?

Because the vast majority of people aren't Evangelicals and so the Bible wouldn't control how they label things?

Technically "Racist" means meaning some race is superior or inferior to another race. (Note, I'm using "White" and "Black" here to make a simple point, but it would apply to any race.) So if you believed that interracial marriage is wrong, but that a black marriage is just as valid as a white marriage and that the white person is sinning just as much the black person in an interracial marriage, and no more, than it wouldn't be "Racist" per say. It would still be wrong and unbiblical though. There's just no good reason to say that interracial marriage is wrong, Biblically speaking. The closest thing you'll get is the Old Testament, but that only tells Israelites not to marry non-Israelites, and even then, there was no indication that Boaz sinned when he married Ruth, the Moabite, since she was a believer in God. So what it comes down to, both in the Old Testament and the New, it is a common faith that you are supposed to have with your spouse, not a race (And obviously, you're NOT supposed to have a common gender) I see simply no good reason WHATSOEVER either Biblically or logically that a marriage between a white person and a black person is against God's Will.

Ignoring the racist part of it, as an Evangelical I'd challenge you to find me ONE TEXT that says otherwise, outside of the context of "Israelities" (Who worshipped God) and "Other nations" who don't. I don't think you'll find it.

 

[Flying Pig]

So then you agree with me that having racial classifications on the census and in fact, any government document, is racist and would also agree with me that we need to pass a contitutional amendment to bar the use of racial, ethnic, and religious labels?

Eh, sorry for being drawn off topic.

What? No. That's clearly not the same thing, and arguing along those lines is just one-upmanship.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Because to do so makes distinctions between people on the grounds of race, which is the very definition of racism.

Technically I don't think that definition is accurate. I think "Racism" is to think one race is superior or inferior to another, or that some races are superior/inferior to others.
On making distinctions, is it racist to say that black people tend to jump better than white people?

Technically I think MisterCooper is right that being against interracial marriage can be done without being racist. I just think its ridiculous since there's no Biblical or logical reason to hold that view. And I'd agree that most people in America that hold that view are prejudiced against the black population. But one doesn't HAVE to lead to another.

So then you agree with me that having racial classifications on the census and in fact, any government document, is racist and would also agree with me that we need to pass a contitutional amendment to bar the use of racial, ethnic, and religious labels?

Eh, sorry for being drawn off topic.

OK, we can't go here in this thread. I'm cool with the theological implications of the topic (Such as "Why can't Evangelicals believe...") or whatever but once it gets into political policy, it needs to go to another thread.

I remember in Ask an Evangelical I I specifically asked for politics to be kept out. Not sure if I did this time. In any case, no rabbit trails

 

[JollyRoger]

Why do some Evangelical churches refuse to marry interracial couples or even non-white, but same-race couples?

 

[Heerlo]

I believe that Jesus died on the Cross to pay the sin debt for mankind and, thus, to save us all from Hell, and that He was resurrected from the dead.And I also believe that doing good things and living a good life will not get you salvation.Right about the moment that Jesus died, He said, "It is finished,' thereby saying that His work to redeem mankind was finished.I don't believe that we have to add any good works to earn salvation after we are saved.
BUT WAIT.Don't get me all wrong.I don't believe you can go and sin all the time after you get saved and still make it into Heaven.God wants us to do good works, yes, but that is not what saves us, even after we are saved.And I believe that after we are saved, we are saved, without having to do good deeds to earn it.

Now once again, do not get me wrong here.I believe we are supposed to live right after we get saved.But I believe if we accept what Jesus has done for us in giving His life, and keep our Faith properly in His sacrifice there, that the good works will follow, although we are not saved by them still.Although we must live good lives, that in no way plays a roll in our salvation.

Like Paul says in Romans chapter 4, For what saith the scripture?Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness."Abraham had simple Faith in God, and he obtained righteousness by that, and not by any good works on his part.Paul continues in verse 4, "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt."What I think this verse may mean, is that if someone tries to earn salvation by works i.e. "him that worketh", that they may think that they can earn their way to Heaven, and think that God owes them something because they do certain things.But I know that God owes us nothing.Verse 5 continues, "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his Faith is counted for righteousness."I think this may be talking about a person who knows that their good works can never get them to Heaven, and do not try to earn salvation, but just trusts in God's mercy for salvation.But like I said, we are still supposed to live good lives and not commit sin.Continuing to verse 6, "Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness WITHOUT works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.Blessed is the man to whom The Lord will not impute sin."So, six verse says, in my own words, that the person is blessed who has righteousness without works, which I believe is the only true righteousness, and certainly the only one which will get us to Heaven.

So I likewise believe, that what Jesus did in dying for us was enough, and that we are ever supposed to keep our Faith in His Sacrifice, because that is what God did to redeem us.Like Abraham, we trust completely in God for salvation, and not in our own good works.And what did God do to give us salvation?The death of His Precious Son on Calvary's Cross.

So, like you were talking about James being interpreted to be contrary to Paul's teaching, I don't believe that James was saying that works are neccasary for salvation, or neccasary to stay saved.But I think it may be that what James is saying, is that if you see a person that does not have the works to back up their profession, then clearly they do not have Righteousness by Faith, which, I think, my cause you to live a good life, and do good works anyway, even though they do not have a roll in saving you, or keeping you saved.

Now let me say again, that you cannot live a sinful life and still go to Heaven.You might think that, since we are under Grace, that we can sin all we want.It is true that we are under Grace.God had Grace on us by saving us, which we didn't deserve.But that still doesn't give us permission to continue in sin.We are saved by Grace, and going back into sin, or trying to earn salvation by works, causes you to give up the Grace that saved you in the first place.

I hope that if everything I said is right and in agreement with the Word Of God, that everyone will agree with me.And I try not to say anything that I don't have a scripture to back it up with.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I remember in Ask an Evangelical I I specifically asked for politics to be kept out.

Yeah, I know the feeling.

Golden rule and all, so Mister Cooper, please do elaborate.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Why do some Evangelical churches refuse to marry interracial couples or even non-white, but same-race couples?

Because they are wrong?

I believe that Jesus died on the Cross to pay the sin debt for mankind and, thus, to save us all from Hell, and that He was resurrected from the dead.And I also believe that doing good things and living a good life will not get you salvation.Right about the moment that Jesus died, He said, "It is finished,' thereby saying that His work to redeem mankind was finished.I don't believe that we have to add any good works to earn salvation after we are saved.
BUT WAIT.Don't get me all wrong.I don't believe you can go and sin all the time after you get saved and still make it into Heaven.God wants us to do good works, yes, but that is not what saves us, even after we are saved.And I believe that after we are saved, we are saved, without having to do good deeds to earn it.

Now once again, do not get me wrong here.I believe we are supposed to live right after we get saved.But I believe if we accept what Jesus has done for us in giving His life, and keep our Faith properly in His sacrifice there, that the good works will follow, although we are not saved by them still.Although we must live good lives, that in no way plays a roll in our salvation.

Like Paul says in Romans chapter 4, For what saith the scripture?Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness."Abraham had simple Faith in God, and he obtained righteousness by that, and not by any good works on his part.Paul continues in verse 4, "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt."What I think this verse may mean, is that if someone tries to earn salvation by works i.e. "him that worketh", that they may think that they can earn their way to Heaven, and think that God owes them something because they do certain things.But I know that God owes us nothing.Verse 5 continues, "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his Faith is counted for righteousness."I think this may be talking about a person who knows that their good works can never get them to Heaven, and do not try to earn salvation, but just trusts in God's mercy for salvation.But like I said, we are still supposed to live good lives and not commit sin.Continuing to verse 6, "Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness WITHOUT works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.Blessed is the man to whom The Lord will not impute sin."So, six verse says, in my own words, that the person is blessed who has righteousness without works, which I believe is the only true righteousness, and certainly the only one which will get us to Heaven.

So I likewise believe, that what Jesus did in dying for us was enough, and that we are ever supposed to keep our Faith in His Sacrifice, because that is what God did to redeem us.Like Abraham, we trust completely in God for salvation, and not in our own good works.And what did God do to give us salvation?The death of His Precious Son on Calvary's Cross.

So, like you were talking about James being interpreted to be contrary to Paul's teaching, I don't believe that James was saying that works are neccasary for salvation, or neccasary to stay saved.But I think it may be that what James is saying, is that if you see a person that does not have the works to back up their profession, then clearly they do not have Righteousness by Faith, which, I think, my cause you to live a good life, and do good works anyway, even though they do not have a roll in saving you, or keeping you saved.

Now let me say again, that you cannot live a sinful life and still go to Heaven.You might think that, since we are under Grace, that we can sin all we want.It is true that we are under Grace.God had Grace on us by saving us, which we didn't deserve.But that still doesn't give us permission to continue in sin.We are saved by Grace, and going back into sin, or trying to earn salvation by works, causes you to give up the Grace that saved you in the first place.

I hope that if everything I said is right and in agreement with the Word Of God, that everyone will agree with me.And I try not to say anything that I don't have a scripture to back it up with.

Right after James says "And Abraham believes and it was counted to him as righteousness." He then says "You believe God is one? Good! Even the demons believe that, and shudder."

Part of what James is saying is simple, that works do have a role to play, but what exactly they play is more complex.

Paul, on the other hand, is a complete theologian. He carefully explains that we have been saved by grace through faith, and not by works of the law. He says in 1 Corinthians "The slanderers, the sexually immoral.... will not go to Heaven and such were some of you, but you were washed."

Be careful not to take Paul out of context and interpret everything else to fit Paul. They all teach the same gospel:

1. To become saved requires nothing but faith

2. Once you are saved, you will, and must, do good works.

As for the very complex question of "What happens if #1 happens if #2 happens." There are two answers, 1 that this is impossible, and someone who has faith will be faithful by default, or 2, that person will lose their Salvation, I lean towards the first interpretation, but not every Evangelical agrees with me. In any case, don't play games with your faith

 

[JollyRoger]

If someone who thinks they are saved finds out that God's threshold for what constitutes homophobia is so low that the said Evangelical lived life as an unrepentant homophobe deserving of hell, will he be saved from hell because he didn't know of God's views?

 

[Heerlo]

Right after James says "And Abraham believes and it was counted to him as righteousness." He then says "You believe God is one? Good! Even the demons believe that, and shudder."

Part of what James is saying is simple, that works do have a role to play, but what exactly they play is more complex.

Paul, on the other hand, is a complete theologian. He carefully explains that we have been saved by grace through faith, and not by works of the law. He says in 1 Corinthians "The slanderers, the sexually immoral.... will not go to Heaven and such were some of you, but you were washed."

Be careful not to take Paul out of context and interpret everything else to fit Paul. They all teach the same gospel:

1. To become saved requires nothing but faith

2. Once you are saved, you will, and must, do good works.

As for the very complex question of "What happens if #1 happens if #2 happens." There are two answers, 1 that this is impossible, and someone who has faith will be faithful by default, or 2, that person will lose their Salvation, I lean towards the first interpretation, but not every Evangelical agrees with me. In any case, don't play games with your faith

I believe that none of the Bible contradicts it any where else.But I also believe that works really have no part in salvation.Now, once again, don't get me wrong;I believe that you must live good after being saved, but that this in no way has anything to do without salvation.

Like I said in my above post, Romans chapter four says, in my own words, that David describes the blessedness of the man to whom the Lord imputes Righteousness WITHOUT WORKS.

Now concerning the seeming contradiction by James, I believe what James meant was not that works have a part in salvation, but that if you see someone who claims to be a Christian, but they do not have the works to back it up, then clearly they have not received the Righteousness that comes without works, which, I believe, is gained by trusting in what Jesus did by dying on the Cross, as the way of salvation.

And once again, I am in no way stating that you can be saved and live in sin at the same time, but if are truly in right standing with God, then I think it may be that the good works will come.

James chapter 2 verse 14 says, "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works?can faith save him?"

I believe that this means something like that if someone claims to be a Christian, i.e. "saying they have faith", but don't have the works to back it up, then certainly that person has not received the Righteousness Without Works, that David spoke of in the 32nd Psalm, as I have already mentioned.And the Righteousness was made available by Jesus' death on the Cross, which paid the sin debt for all mankind.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I think we basically believe the same thing then. You don't need works to be saved, but you will have works if you are saved. Would you agree with that statement?

 

[JollyRoger]

So if you think you are saved, but you don't have works means you are not saved?

 

[GhostWriter16]

So if you think you are saved, but you don't have works means you are not saved?

In essence, yes.

 

[JollyRoger]

That seems to me then to mean that you do need works.