Search results

The angle I'm approaching it by is outlined in the OP where I shared many passages I had difficulty reconciling.

I am not sure what your view is.

It seems like you are denying "faith alone", and saying that, when John speaks about "faith", he, definitionally, includes, in that, also, walking in a way in keeping with that faith, and he never meant to be understood as teaching "faith alone" for eternal life?

You just agreed with my "take" on James 2, but now you're disagreeing?

Isn't it the case that James KNEW his audience had faith (ie, he accuses them of "adultery", meaning he knew they were "married" to God), and he was calling them to not only have faith, but to add works to their faith, so that the faith would be "complete", not "incomplete", so as to resurrect...

In that same chapter, Paul warns the Jewish believers they are "storing up wrath" for themselves (meaning they wouldn't be "repaid eternal life"), even though they had believed. No, many of the leaders believed, but they didn't confess their faith in Christ because they loved sin. Therefore...

When God "promised" Abraham he would have a son, Isaac, "at this time next year", did that mean Abraham didn't have to have sex with his wife?

Right, I did mention this verse, and I also mentioned the counterverses to it that I was asking how to reconcile with it :

As was mentioned in the OP, I was looking how you all reconciled the passages listed in the OP.

I'm thankful that you want to help, but I (the person you're wanting to help) also have to say that, I'm sorry, but this does nothing to reconcile the passages I asked about.

At least you're trying to help people--that is appreciated.

The answer to the OP is going to be how you reconcile the passages which do not teach eternal life is by faith alone with the passages that seem to teach eternal life is by faith alone. From our interactions, I gathered that my inference wasn't enough, but that I had to clarify that what I was...

I guess the inference that I was looking for how you all reconciled the passages I was having difficulty reconciling wasn't enough, so I amended the OP to explicitly ask how you all reconcile the passages. Thank you for helping me make the discussion a smoother discussion.

I was asking how you all reconcile the verses shared.

Here, you assert that my "opinion" that you have not answered the OP was an erroneous opinion; but, later, you admitted that I was right that you didn't answer the OP, because you weren't even trying to answer it. It seems like your practice is to try to put people down without thinking about...

OK I'm going to go ahead and block you, because I've seen your posts elsewhere, and you only chime in in order to offend people and be abrasive.

The thread has an OP, and the understanding is that we are going to be on topic. If you came in with a different understanding--that you would be off-topic--I guess I can't help that. I had an expectation, and maybe you had a different expectation. I have a topic I'm discussing, and I don't...

@marks In the context of John 12, this would be important, because the text says many of the leaders believed, but ("but" being a seeming negation of the conclusion that their "faith alone" would result in eternal life for them), because they loved sin, they would not confess their belief--ie...

When you supply me with your way of reconciling the passages I asked about reconciling, I will recognize you have answered (or, at least, have attempted to answer) the OP; until then, how can I "opine" you have answered? Maybe that is true, because God always shows me "the Cross", or Jesus...

Yeah, I think, in context, James's point in referencing the demons' "belief" is to point out that they have no plans (and perhaps cannot have plans) of actually changing the way they behave--James says "behave in a way that is in keeping with your faith", seemingly, the same as Romans 14:5, 23...