• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Works or Grace

What must one do to be "saved"?

  • Baptism

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • Faith in Jesus is sufficient

    Votes: 4 30.8%
  • Faith plus Works

    Votes: 1 7.7%
  • Must join a Church or Organization

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Must be "better" than before

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Must be a "good person"

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Evangelism

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • other

    Votes: 9 69.2%

  • Total voters
    13

Acer21

New Member
Are works necessary for salvation (as the JW's claim) or can we be saved by belief alone in Jesus Christ's sacrificial death?

What must one do to be saved?
 
Last edited:

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Are works necessary for salvation (as the JW's claim) or can we be saved by belief alone in Jesus Christ's sacrificial death?

What must we do to be saved?

Faith is the foundation
Once you have faith, god's righteous works work through you
When you let god work through you via faith, you produce righteous works
Since it is coming from god, works are from god

Without god's works through you that you accept in grace and live in faith, you are not in his favor. You would be doing unrighteous works of man without god and faith. So, you need both.

Baptism means accepting jesus as lord in order to repent and accept redemption. In order to be saved, you need to have faith in god, ask for repentance, and accept his grace. Whether by water or not is not near the point in the baptism itself.

So you need baptism (repenting and accepting jesus as lord and savior)
You need faith (foundation of salvation)
You need works (letting god work through you because you have faith)

If you arent baptized, faith means nothing
If you dont let god work through you, your works are unrighteous and that of man
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neb

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
God's unmerited favor is given by letting him work through you. Those works are from god because you accepted his favor and you let him work for through you for others in return. So, its not grace vs works. Its grace and works.

Works only becomes unscriptural when you dont let god work through you in order to produce good works. When you let him, it goes together. You dont earn your salvation by works. You live your salvation through works. Works meaning of god not of man.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neb

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Problem is, people think works means you earn salvation. In scripture works are separated into two categories: righteous and unrighteous. The righteous works lets god work through you so you dont earn your salvation, you live it. The latter means the works are from man. In the law, some people feel they need to work for salvation and others feel belief in god is not based on faith but from what man does.

That antiworks christian gets the context mixed up. But as a debate, its been repeated often. Some dont like works others do. Depends on how they define their relationship with christ. Is it one-sided or two-sided. Depends.
 

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
Are works necessary for salvation (as the JW's claim) or can we be saved by belief alone in Jesus Christ's sacrificial death?

What must we do to be saved?

I dislike the use of the word 'we' in such context because I am not you and you are not me, at least from a temporal standpoint.

That said, the only thing in my opinion one must do to be saved is to discover one's true nature.
 

Acer21

New Member
Problem is, people think works means you earn salvation. In scripture works are separated into two categories: righteous and unrighteous. The righteous works lets god work through you so you dont earn your salvation, you live it. The latter means the works are from man. In the law, some people feel they need to work for salvation and others feel belief in god is not based on faith but from what man does.

That antiworks christian gets the context mixed up. But as a debate, its been repeated often. Some dont like works others do. Depends on how they define their relationship with christ. Is it one-sided or two-sided. Depends.

Your understanding is almost so complete (and I am so much in agreement) that there is little room for commentary from me.

However, since "salvation" is the issue here in relation to "works", I will focus hard on that issue.
So... does one 'do good works' to BE saved, or because they ARE saved? In other words, the repentant Thief on the cross was saved solely because of belief, correct, apart from anything he could do to save himself?
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
One is not 'saved' by a false messiah. One is 'saved' by one's good deeds, adherence to Noahide Law if one is not Jewish, and closeness to G-d.

IMO, of course ;)
 

Acer21

New Member
I would like to scrutinize whether Jesus may have fulfilled the role and obligations of the (then) long-awaited messiah.
That may sound blasphemous, except if it is true.
 

Acer21

New Member
With a verbal repentance. You also forget that grain offerings would be acceptable. Blood is not necessarily a requirement.

“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.” (Lev. 17:11)
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life.” (Lev. 17:11)

Leviticius 5:11
“But if he cannot afford two turtledoves or two pigeons, then he shall bring as his offering for the sin that he has committed a tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering. He shall put no oil on it and shall put no frankincense on it, for it is a sin offering.

This is to atone for a sin and it requires no blood.

Do you also remember what David wrote? He wrote this in psalm 40:

In sacrifice and offering you have not delighted,
but you have given me an open ear.
Burnt offering and sin offering
you have not required.
Then I said, “Behold, I have come;
in the scroll of the book it is written of me:
I delight to do your will, O my God;
your law is within my heart.”

Lastly, Jesus would not work for any kind of sacrifice at all. The first and most obvious reason is because he was a human. The following reasons are:

1. He was blemished. The Romans had smacked him, beaten him and cut him bloody. This makes him unacceptable. Even if this hadn't happened...

2. He was circumcised. This is also a blemish as far as a sacrifice is concerned.

3. He apparently came back to life, thus nullifying the entire thing.

None of the rules for sacrifices were upheld during the crucifixion. Not a single one. From it being a non-kosher animal, to it being blemished, to it not being done on an altar and to there being no priests, no ceremony.

It is completely possible for one to give a verbal repentance. G-d would not leave people who are unable to make sacrifices, blood or no, with no means of repentance. For the entirety of Israel's exile there has been no Temple, thus no sacrifices, and are we to believe that G-d, The Mater of All, The Most High, gives them no way to repent? Surely such is not worth worshipping. But He does give one a way to repent. Baruch HaShem!

 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Your understanding is almost so complete (and I am so much in agreement) that there is little room for commentary from me.

However, since "salvation" is the issue here in relation to "works", I will focus hard on that issue.
So... does one 'do good works' to BE saved, or because they ARE saved? In other words, the repentant Thief on the cross was saved solely because of belief, correct, apart from anything he could do to save himself?

If the thief let god work through him, then yes he is saved. Salvation isn't what man does for god but what god does through man. It's something you are awakened to. Like some christians say god had already called them they just had to listen.

So, I'd assume based on that thief's life, if he had let christ work through him via salvation, he isn't defined by his action but by his faith in God. So, god wouldn't ideally judge is salvation on him stealing but his faith. The thing is, if he didn't let god work through him, by what means does that person have salvation?

I mean, if your parents give you a gift to use for your benefit, what is the gift worth if it's not put to use as well. But, I assume the thief is pardoned if he repents.

Remember. Works isn't earned, it's lived. if you don't live salvation by letting god work through you, what exactly does your salvation mean from gods point of view?
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
slightly different choice.

Faith alone saves, but not faith that is alone.

Paul told the Colossians their fruitfulness goes back to the day they understood the grace of God in truth (around Col 1:5,6)

Saving faith results in fruit showing it is a living faith. You are not saved by your fruit but the work is a fruit of saving faith as is the love of God and repentance.

Works are a vindication of a living faith and evidence of it.

Faith is the root. Works are the fruit.

FAITH + WORKS = SALVATION (not quite and works based salvation)
still trying to pull oneself up by your bootstraps

FAITH = SALVATION - WORKS (dead faith fruitless showing no life or change)
no appetite for God or love of God and man

FAITH = SAVATION + WORKS (living saving faith fruitful showing life)
faith working in love

However not all types of faith save. The kind is
glorifying God, leaning on the work of Jesus on the cross, trusting for eternal life
Faith in faith is not saving faith
Faith in anything is not saving faith
 
Last edited:

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
How does one atone for sins without blood sacrifice?

Why blood?

I can see bread and wine. Maybe animals to an extent. But never a human being. That's like the American army sacrificing one person's life to save millions. I understand the justification, but it doesn't met our military off the hook for such an immoral action as Blood sacrifice. Sounds creepy and barbaric to tell you honest.

Why not keep the sacrifices in the OT?

I mean, since jesus was jewish I'd assume he didn't agree with using his blood as a literal atonement for sins. Sacrifice isn't about literal blood but the giving away ones life for the well-being of another. This can be done by anything of value. Blood is one way but not all see blood as the highest sacrifice.
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
Why blood?

I can see bread and wine. Maybe animals to an extent. But never a human being. That's like the American army sacrificing one person's life to save millions. I understand the justification, but it doesn't met our military off the hook for such an immoral action as Blood sacrifice. Sounds creepy and barbaric to tell you honest.

Why not keep the sacrifices in the OT?

I mean, since jesus was jewish I'd assume he didn't agree with using his blood as a literal atonement for sins. Sacrifice isn't about literal blood but the giving away ones life for the well-being of another. This can be done by anything of value. Blood is one way but not all see blood as the highest sacrifice.


The OT says 'the life of the flesh is in the blood, I have given it to you to make atonement on the alter'
the blood sacrifices of the Old testament point to the ultimate sacrifice once for all in Jesus

In the Passover there was a substitution, The life of a lamb without blemish (a blood sacrifice) substituted for the first born.
In Jesus all believers go from being alienated sinners to becoming a first born of God
 

Acer21

New Member
Leviticius 5:11
“But if he cannot afford two turtledoves or two pigeons, then he shall bring as his offering for the sin that he has committed a tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a sin offering. He shall put no oil on it and shall put no frankincense on it, for it is a sin offering.

This is to atone for a sin and it requires no blood.

Do you also remember what David wrote? He wrote this in psalm 40:

In sacrifice and offering you have not delighted,
but you have given me an open ear.
Burnt offering and sin offering
you have not required.
Then I said, “Behold, I have come;
in the scroll of the book it is written of me:
I delight to do your will, O my God;
your law is within my heart.”

Lastly, Jesus would not work for any kind of sacrifice at all. The first and most obvious reason is because he was a human. The following reasons are:

1. He was blemished. The Romans had smacked him, beaten him and cut him bloody. This makes him unacceptable. Even if this hadn't happened...

2. He was circumcised. This is also a blemish as far as a sacrifice is concerned.

3. He apparently came back to life, thus nullifying the entire thing.

None of the rules for sacrifices were upheld during the crucifixion. Not a single one, from it being a non-kosher animal, to it being blemished, to it not being done on an altar and to there being no priests, no ceremony.

It is completely possible for one to give a verbal repentance. G-d would not leave people who are unable to make sacrifices, blood or no, with no means of repentance. For the entirety of Israel's exile there has been no Temple, thus no sacrifices, and are we to believe that G-d, The Mater of All, The Most High, gives them no way to repent? Surely such is not worth worshipping. But He does give one a way to repent. Baruch HaShem!

1. Is it possible and Biblically appropriate to suggest that Jesus may have acted as a scapegoat?

2. Jesus circumcision would not be considered a blemish to God (God is not God's name), but a fulfillment of a covenant.
Genesis 17:9-14 9Then God said to Abraham, "As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come. 10This is my covenant with you and your descendants after you, the covenant you are to keep: Every male among you shall be circumcised. 11You are to undergo circumcision, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and you. 12For the generations to come every male among you who is eight days old must be circumcised, including those born in your household or bought with money from a foreigner-those who are not your offspring. 13Whether born in your household or bought with your money, they must be circumcised. My covenant in your flesh is to be an everlasting covenant. 14Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant."

3. Resurrection proves Jesus's Divinity.

"For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol,or let your holy one see corruption." Ps.16:10

"O Death, where are your plagues?
O Sheol, where is your sting?" Hosea 13:14
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
The OT says 'the life of the flesh is in the blood, I have given it to you to make atonement on the alter'
the blood sacrifices of the Old testament point to the ultimate sacrifice once for all in Jesus

In the Passover there was a substitution, The life of a lamb without blemish (a blood sacrifice) substituted for the first born.
In Jesus all believers go from being alienated sinners to becoming a first born of God

I'd have to ask a Jew on this about the child sacrifice. As for the others, it's always been animal. The child first born was slit not for the well-being of others but as a consequence for the Pharaoh's actions. It wasn't a good thing. It was a consequence.
 

Acer21

New Member
I'd have to ask a Jew on this about the child sacrifice. As for the others, it's always been animal. The child first born was slit not for the well-being of others but as a consequence for the Pharaoh's actions. It wasn't a good thing. It was a consequence.

@Unveiled Artist,
...but how do you not understand that Jesus's death on the cross was a blood sacrifice for the our sins as a final fulfillment of OT Sacrificial Atonement?
 
Last edited:
Top