Jesus
A Credible Image from the Fayum Mummy Portraits. See Note below. (Fair Use)
Armstrongism in Contention with Christianity:
Concerning Salvation by Faith
The Armstrongist model for salvation departs from Christianity. Anyone who looks forward to a life in Paradise should consider this issue carefully.
The Armstrongism Says About Salvation
The following two published statements expose the essential model for Armstrongist soteriology. After you sift through the many sound bites in archival material, you find these principles at the center of Armstrongism.
Jesus tells us that our OBEDIENCE to the Ten Commandments is an absolute PREREQUISITE to receiving God's gift of eternal life (Mat. 19:16-17). (Ambassador College Bible Correspondence Course, Lesson 17, 1966.)
Rod Meredith writing of the “Civil Law” in the Law of Moses:
These statutes and judgments, based on the ten commandments, are “righteous” (Palm 119:7, 8). It is SIN to break them! (Roderick C. Meredith, “Is OBEDIENCE to god Required for Salvation?”, Ambassador College, 1956.)
In summary, one must have a record of effective law-keeping in order to one day receive salvation. This means that Armstrongists do not have salvation now. Their salvation is in suspense as they await judgment in their personal Eschaton. For them, the keeping of the Decalogue, the statutes and judgments are a pre-condition to salvation – an input into the salvific process. While this is “salvation by works”, even though Armstrongism denies that salvation by works is a part of its soteriology, Armstrongists do not neglect faith in Christ. So, they have a hybrid model that includes both law-keeping (the Law of Moses) and faith both as sources of salvation.
What Jesus Said about Salvation
Jesus made the following clear statement about salvation:
Very truly, I tell you, anyone who hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and does not come under judgment but has passed from death to life.” (NRSV, John 5:24)
Here Jesus makes faith or belief the source of salvation. And the result is that the person who believes has (notice past tense) eternal life and has passed (note past perfect tense) from death to life. Salvation has already happened for those who have received the gift of faith. The earlier statement that I quoted from the Ambassador College Correspondence Course begins with the phrase “Jesus tells us…” This contradicts what Jesus really tells us in John 5:24.
Jesus echoes this in his response to the wealthy young man in Matthew 19:16-26. The young man comes to him and says, “Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life.” The answer, of course, there is nothing you can do to earn eternal life. Jesus takes him down a logical path where he quickly finds the level of “doing” that will cause the young man to reject salvation. Perfection and the resultant salvation are unattainable by doing. But with God all things are possible and he provides the imputed righteousness of Christ for the perfection of the Believer.
Summary Argument
Paul says we are saved by grace through faith and not of works. Armstrongism asserts that we are saved by grace through faith plus works. HWA maintains that only those who are keeping the commandments are recipients of grace, making grace contingent on law-keeping:
And those who, through repentance, obedience and FAITH have turned from disobedience and are, through faith, KEEPING the Law, are the only ones who are UNDER GRACE! (HWA, “What is Faith”, WCG, 1979)
In this odd, non-Biblical interpretation, grace comes after law-keeping in contravention to Paul (Ephesians 2:8-9) who states that salvation is not of works at all. It is worthwhile to educate yourself about the model of salvation in Armstrongism and how it compares to Christianity, if you seek salvation.
Note: An image of Jesus in the Catacombs of Priscilla shows him with short hair and clean shaven. I have used this very early image as a guide in choosing a likely portrait. The date for the Catacombs image is circa 225 CE.
by Scout
You seem unable to grasp the concept of obeying God's law out of love for Him. Christians don't do it for salvation. They do it out of love. Jesus did say that if we love Him we would keep the commandments.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely! In addition, what possible benefit is gained by breaking any of the commandments? Do we benefit by murdering, lying, stealing, committing adultery etc?
DeleteThe "Fundamental Beliefs" of COGWA and UCG mention salvation several times. But "Salvation" itself is not a fundamental belief. Curious, that.
ReplyDeleteYes, salvation is through repentance and faith, not law keeping.
ReplyDeleteIn future soteriology discussions try to include the following:
ReplyDeleteRev 12:10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
Acts 5:32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him
Hebrews 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Phil 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
for Anon 1:49:58 PM:
Deletehttps://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/35438/in-2-thessalonians-18-what-does-paul-mean-by-obey-the-gospel
Scout is absolutely correct about the Christian doctrine of salvation in/through Christ. Paul wrote to the saints at Rome that even though the Jews had Torah, they simply did not understand the way of salvation. He said: "Dear brothers and sisters, the longing of my heart and my prayer to God is for the people of Israel to be saved. I know what enthusiasm they have for God, but it is misdirected zeal. For they don’t understand God’s way of making people right with himself. Refusing to accept God’s way, they cling to their own way of getting right with God by trying to keep the law. For Christ has already accomplished the purpose for which the law was given. As a result, all who believe in him are made right with God." (Romans 10:1-4, NLT) A little later, in the same chapter in our Bibles, he wrote: "If you openly declare that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by openly declaring your faith that you are saved." (Romans 10:9-10, NLT)
ReplyDeleteLikewise, he was even more explicit in his epistle to the saints of Galatia. He wrote: "Yet we know that a person is made right with God by faith in Jesus Christ, not by obeying the law. And we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we might be made right with God because of our faith in Christ, not because we have obeyed the law. For no one will ever be made right with God by obeying the law." (Galatians 2:16, NLT) In the same epistle, he also wrote: "those who depend on the law to make them right with God are under his curse, for the Scriptures say, 'Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the commands that are written in God’s Book of the Law.' So it is clear that no one can be made right with God by trying to keep the law. For the Scriptures say, 'It is through faith that a righteous person has life.' This way of faith is very different from the way of law, which says, 'It is through obeying the law that a person has life.' But Christ has rescued us from the curse pronounced by the law. When he was hung on the cross, he took upon himself the curse for our wrongdoing." (Galatians 3:10-13, NLT)
Now, it is certainly true that one who has placed their faith in Christ and received the Holy Spirit will be exhibiting the fruits or evidence of having been saved. In other words, they will be loving God with their whole being and loving each other as him/herself.
Finally, Christ said: "If you love me, obey MY commandments." (John 14:15, NLT) A little later, he said: "Those who accept MY commandments and obey them are the ones who love me. And because they love me, my Father will love them. And I will love them and reveal myself to each of them." (John 14:21, NLT) Later still, he went on to say: " When you obey MY commandments, you remain in my love, just as I obey my Father’s commandments and remain in his love. I have told you these things so that you will be filled with my joy. Yes, your joy will overflow! THIS IS MY COMMANDMENT: Love each other in the same way I have loved you. There is no greater love than to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. You are my friends if you do what I command." (John 15:10-14, NLT) Indeed, he had already said that this was the very thing that would identify someone as a Christian! (John 13:35, NLT)
Anonymous 11:18 wrote, "You seem unable to grasp the concept of obeying God's law out of love for Him."
ReplyDeleteThe Good News is that Jesus came to bring us salvation. Your attitude may seem noble and self-sacrificial but it is not compatible with the working of Jesus in our lives. Jesus wants us to want salvation - that is what he gave his life for.
If we love him we will keep the Law of Christ, but that does not get salvation for us. Armstrongists believe that they can get salvation by keeping the law. Whereas, Christians recognize that keeping the law is an evidence that you are saved already. Moral behavior is correlated with salvation and not a cause of salvation.
I heard HWA in front of a lecturn in the Field House in Big Sandy accuse the lay members several times that they were trying to "get" salvation instead of supporting the work. While he was theologically incorrect, he must have sensed an attitude.
Scout
"Armstrongists believe that they can get salvation by keeping the law."
DeleteThat is not true and has never been taught by The Church.
5:33 Okay, but check this out. Say a splinter church like LCG says/teaches they are the only true church and there is no other. Why because they keep the commandments and the holy days and other things? Well essentially are saying they are the only ones to receive salvation. Or any Armstrongist that puts their church (no other christians on earth except their church) in the 6th and 7th church era, believe that only they are saved for the first resurrection. What's the difference?
DeleteI wholeheartedly agree with Anonymous 5:33. It'll be ramped up because Holy Day season is approaching. They also make sure believers are marked and bullied during this season. Only Jesus himself knows how bad it's been.
DeleteAnonymous 5:33 wrote, "That is not true and has never been taught by The Church."
DeleteIt has been a central tenet of Armstrongism. While they deny salvation by works they support an under-the-table doctrine of Qualifying for the Kingdom.
When your ministry talks about the Sabbath, Holy Days and tithing being required for salvation, what do you think they are talking about? Even better, go to your nearest Armstrongist minister and tell him that you are going to quit tithing and see what he says. He will fast-track you to Gehenna.
Have a look at:
https://armstrongismlibrary.blogspot.com/2023/01/bootstrapping-salvation-disturbing.html
He that says "I know Him" and keeps not the commandments is a liar and has no truth in him. This is something the anti- crowd simply cannot comprehend.
DeleteI believe Gerald Flurry, of all people, did an excellent job summing up the WCG teaching:
Delete"Of course, salvation can't be earned by works. BUT YOU DON'T EVEN BECOME A CANDIDATE WITHOUT WORKS!... But without proper Sabbath-keeping, you'll never be saved!"
So, first he says you can't be saved by the law... yet you must keep it to even have a chance at salvation.
Maybe that doesn't sound circular to you...
If you love God and love your neighbor, which of the commandments will you willfully ignore?
DeleteI don’t know about worldwide because I came into one of the splinter groups. But I do know that Christ not only asked for us to keep the commandments, but also the new commandment to love one another (John 13). Obviously the love wasn’t there in the end. Anytime you split and there ends up being hundreds of other groups that spawn off from Worldwide Church of God, there is division and contention. And all that commandment keeping will not only not save you, but it won’t save your organization, as you need something else, the intent.
ReplyDeleteYears ago, I did enjoy the HWA booklet on What is Faith and the example of Daniel. Daniel was greatly beloved and had several examples of faith while in captivity along with his friends.
Yes Scout, we are saved by grace and that through faith.
ReplyDeleteRomans 9:16 So it depends not upon man’s will or exertion but upon Gods mercy.
His grace and mercy are unfathomable and nothing will change that.
Christ was preordained before the foundation of the earth to come and save.
The law was simply a tutor to bring us to Him. And now that we have Him we have no need for the law. And the law is magnified because it leads us to Jesus. Countless numbers have died never hearing of Jesus and the salvation granted through Him. In the resurrection they will be offered this salvation, without preconditions. Will they have to prove their faith by works of law then, after being offered this grace? Then it is no longer grace. Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness, while uncircumcised and before Sinai. The concept of obeying the Law out of love for Him leaves us wondering which Law, parts or the whole, including stonings, and the sacrifices which were an integral part of the Torah. But this blog has covered this many times over. Nice post thanks.
Sometimes I am prompted to sign in to my Google account, and sometimes I am not (and my comment is published anonymously). Not trying to dissimulate - I'm responsible for the comment today at 2:19:28.
ReplyDeleteYou're breaking the 2nd commandment.
ReplyDeleteJesus also said if you love me, keep my commandments. In His own words He is equating more to salvation than just mere belief. If it was mere belief in Him, then how would one prove it? By fruits manifested from an effort in keeping His commandments. The alternative would have to be to say we don't love him. Seems to me character building through following a list of principles implies believe, thereby attaining a reward.
ReplyDeleteYes, the love of God is that we keep His commandments. He that says "I love Him" and keeps not the commandments is a liar and there is no truth in him.
DeleteAnyone that teaches that the commandments are of no value and we don't have to obey them is a liar, and certainly are not part of God's Church.
Yes, belief alone is not sufficient. The devils believe, and tremble. Satan believes. Catholics and Protestants believe. It will not save any of them.
DeleteWe can all use scriptures to prove our points such as this concerning faith with salvation:
DeleteRomans 1:16-17 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “The just shall live by faith.”
But it's both, keeping the commandments and having the faith of Jesus (Revelation 14:12).
Anytime you split and there ends up being hundreds of other groups that spawn off from Worldwide Church of God, there is division and contention. And all that commandment keeping will not only not save you, but it won’t save your organization,..."
ReplyDeleteThat's always been the WWCG line that member's heard umpteen times from the pulpit. The reality is that 'division and contention' always exists within
every church whether it splinters or not. The solution is for Christians to be following Christ. The solution is NOT fo everyone to fake reality by suppressing the emotions of contention and resentment. This is bully morality, which is the true culture of the HWA splinters. And claiming that joining a splinter is automatically a eternal death sentence is terror religion on the part of the ministry. They need to repent of abusing their members rather than deceiving their victims to stay no matter how toxic the church environment. Christ cursed the unproductive tree, affirming that He hates loss. If church attendance works against a member, they need to consider staying at home or finding another church.
"If church attendance works against a member, they need to consider staying at home or finding another church"
DeleteExactly, there's no reason to face the verbal abuse each weekend after a hard week of work each time. We are suppose to speak with the seasoned "salt" but after a while the environment becomes toxic. Keeping the commandments is wonderful, but it doesn't address the attitude of lording over others. There is the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy and faith.
No that is wrong. You clearly have an ulterior motive in what you write. Bullying and toxic environments in church are to be exposed against all odds.
DeleteThe believer learns from the law how to be righteous as Jesus is.
ReplyDeleteJudging from the day by day comments, it is apparent that what sells the best here at BANNED are the controversial subjects of law and salvation. This current post does not disappoint.
ReplyDeleteScout raises 2 questions that most do not agree on: salvation NOW and salvation HOW? He offers a clear statement made by Jesus (which statement is true), but his one dimensional approach demonstrates this cause of division I speak of.
As a fait accompli, Scout quotes John 5:24, then acts as if this is the only thing Jesus ever said on the subject. It's not.
In John 3:36, Jesus talks about belief, but then adds that "he that OBEYS not the Son shall not see life". Other scriptures on the subject contain conditions and exceptions that, if not done, can keep one from entering the Kingdom (see John 3:3,5, Matthew 7:21-23, John 6:53, etc.).
Where I think we go off the rails is when we view and focus on salvation from one dimension, and not the 3 stages that it is. Salvation is past, present, and future---have been saved, are being saved, shall be saved---justification, sanctification, and glorification. Emphasizing one stage at the expense of the other 2 leads to questions and confusion. Everybody does this to some extent.
On this topic, Scout says, " Armstrongism is in contention with Christianity ". The fact is, Christianity is in contention with Christianity! Christian churches are divided over sola fide, predestination, once saved, always saved, root/fruit issues such as the role of good works, law, covenants, sacraments, mortal sin, etc.ect.etc. Both Catholics and Armstrongism believe salvation can be lost, which means there are obviously conditions of some kind that must be met.
Scout has said in the past that " there is a diversity of viewpoint in the Christian community " which demonstrates this is not merely an ARMSTRONG problem! The truth is, there is no soteriology or concise Christian model we all agree on. Scout may have it all figured out but in the real world, most do not!
BP8 wrote, “In John 3:36, Jesus talks about belief, but then adds that "he that OBEYS not the Son shall not see life"
DeleteLet me quote the entire scripture:
“Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.”
It is uncertain if Jesus is saying this or John the Baptist. Let us assume Jesus stated this. The first clause must give Armstrongists heartburn – the kind where you clutch your chest and keel over. Armstrongists do not believe this simple statement although they claim to. Instead, they believe that something must be added to belief for you to qualify to receive salvation (represented synonymously by “eternal life”). You must add to belief the keeping of all the Law of Moses including the Decalogue, statutes and judgments. (I am assuming that nobody has officially rescinded the teachings of Herman Hoeh and Rod Meredith.)
The first clause is compatible with Christian orthodoxy. So is the second clause. If one is baptized but then shows no evidence of a desire to observe the Law of Christ, then we must conclude that such a person was never really a Christian. The contrapositive of “whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life” is “whoever obeys the Son shall see life”. That makes it a little clearer. As you can see the content of this statement is a long ways off from saying that salvation is earned by works which I think you are suggesting.
Scout
This topic generates the most response because the scriptures related to it are the easiest to twist and pervert to support the Catholic/Protestant view.
DeleteAnonymous 1:49 wrote, “In future soteriology discussions try to include the following…”
ReplyDeleteI will look at this verse that you cite because it is an oft-used prooftext for Armstrongists, “Phil 2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.”
Armstrongists believe that the phrase “work out your own salvation” supports their view that they do not yet have salvation and must produce a lifetime of works (observing the Law of Moses) to possibly receive it at the judgment. This is not the case and the meaning of this phrase can be exegeted from context in Philippians 1:27-28:
“I will know that you are standing firm in one spirit, striving side by side with one mind for the faith of the gospel and in no way frightened by those opposing you. For them, this is evidence of their destruction but of your salvation.” (NRSV)
Here Paul speaks of works of the Philippians, “striving side by side with one mind”, and states that this is “evidence” of their salvation. The idea that faith produces works comports with James 2:18. This is a simple principle that we can easily apprehend because we know that if someone believes something it will guide their actions. But the point is that these Philippians were Christians and already had salvation and it was being evidenced by their works – the works engendered by salvation. So why would Paul say “work out your own salvation” in the Armstrongist sense – that they did not have salvation and were working to one day obtain it?
The Greek word for “work out” means something like “work down to the end-point” or be persistent in application until the end. One Bible translation uses the phrase “work on your salvation” which is clarifying when considered along with Ephesians 2:8 (by grace through faith and not of works). Clearly, Paul is not going to reverse himself after such an explicit statement as Ephesians 2:8. If Philippians 2:12 had the Armstrongist meaning, it would contradict Ephesians 2:8. And this discrepant meaning would not support Armstrongism at all. It would demonstrate that the Bible was internally inconsistent and has no credibility. And both Armstrongism and Christianity would be undermined.
“Work out your own salvation”, then, means that we should be persistent in doing good as God works with us. Philippians 2:13 states, “For it is God who works in you, both to will and work for his pleasure.” Or as Paul says in Galatians 6:9, “And let us not be weary in well doing.” It is not about earning salvation by works. The Philippians already had salvation. But they needed to be active participants in their progressive sanctification.
Scout
Note: I have read Armstrongist literature where works were correctly recognized as coming from God working in us. But then they used this principle to say that this meant that they could not be accused of salvation by works because none of the works they referred to were human works. This is an artful dodge. Paul says by grace through faith not of works. So works of any form from any source are not the causation of salvation. They are a product of salvation.
Scout, I do not know where you got your NRSV; is it Phil 2:12? I think I will obey Titus 3:9 and no longer read your and Miller's strivings about the law. Below is your version of NRSV and THE NRSV:
DeleteNew Revised Standard Version
Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed me, not only in my presence, but much more now in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling;
“I will know that you are standing firm in one spirit, striving side by side with one mind for the faith of the gospel and in no way frightened by those opposing you. For them, this is evidence of their destruction but of your salvation.” (NRSV)
Anonymous 10:11
DeleteI am not sure what you are referring to. I cut and pasted the verses I used from the online NRSV which is titled "New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition." My guess is that it may differ from the third edition which is my hard copy version.
In Titus 3:9, Paul was anticipating such odd ideas as British Israelism and sects that would believe that the Law of Moses should be observed and yet want to be called Christian. I would imagine he encoutered this sort of thing in his lifetime. We know for sure he butted heads with The Circumcision Party, which seems to be an early form of Armstrongism.
Scout
Miller:
ReplyDeleteThanks for the augmenting comment. You addressed effectively the issue of antinomianism which I did not. In this debate between faith and works, someone on the Armstrongist side will always use the dodge that faith as the cause of salvation means that you don't have to observe any laws. And the laws are consistently The Law of Moses because that underpins their Sabbath and Holy Day practice. It is good that you headed off the stampede.
Scout
"Armstrong-'splaining" is not truth or Christianity. It's just the ramblings of one man whose followers dote on his every word, as if he were some great restorer or apostle. He's really no different from any other human teacher.
ReplyDeleteWe were taught to single source our biblical information to him and his church, believing only him and eschewing all others. The only one worthy of that type of loyalty and dedication was Jesus himself. Single-sourcing is a form of idolatry.
Why do you ignore the existence and influence of Loma repeatedly?
DeleteAnd even Christ doesn't insist on only single sourcing Him. A 'problem' with the bible is that it only has so many pages, so detail is often absent. Which is why reading self help books is worthwhile. They are hated by many ministers and members since they often expose the partially towards evil that's rampant in Armstrongism.
DeleteAnd your works won't save you anonymous at Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 9:14:00 AM PDT!
ReplyDeleteI know, he wants to pick on Catholics and Protestants , and essentially said they won't be saved. That's the wrong attitude. I know , because I used to be like that. It's the wrong approach and judgement.
DeleteIn the 1999 movie, The Bachelor, a man has to marry before his 30th birthday in order to inherit his deceased father's 100 million dollars. Otherwise he gets nothing. It's like that with salvation. Eternal life is the free inheritance, but the condition is works. No works means no inheritance.
DeleteYes 9:21, there is a covenant, a New Covenant with the laws. (Jer. 31:33-34)
DeleteJames 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
DeleteHere ya go Lonnie. The Church has never taught that salvation is by works. But faith without works is dead, it will not lead to salvation.
RSK...I am disgusted by the likes of Flurry.......Yet I do believe that "you cannot become an American by works.....Yet if you do not at least respect the flag or speak English with maybe a Spanish Accent.......you do not even become a candidate........"
ReplyDeletenck
Scout 356
ReplyDeleteI don't want to disappoint but NO I'm not suggesting salvation can be earned by works.
The point of my comment was that salvation is a complicated subject that can't be explained by a single prooftext. Christianity is divided on this issue which questions the very idea of "Christian orthodoxy". If you insist on crowning a champion, why not give the award to the group with the largest body of Christian believers? The problem there is, they don't believe " sola fide"!!
Also, the conclusion you draw about people never really being Christian because they reject the religion of Scout? Is there a difference between a person losing their salvation and never having been saved in the first place? It seems both suffer the same fate. There are many debates and division on this very question as well.
No Christian orthodoxy here!
This issue of faith or works or both is more complicated that it first appears. Paul clearly identifies salvation coming by grace through faith without works. But, in the Christian view, works are correlated with faith. Correlation not causation. This is because people enact what they believe.
ReplyDeleteI think many Armstrongists take the rugged individualist approach, perhaps as a matter of self-pride or good ol’ American self-dependency, towards salvation. But where do you draw the line between what a believer must do and what God does? Not an easy issue. Both mainstream Christianity and Armstrongism believe in the doctrine of the Vicarious Humanity of Christ. Both theologies, in general, assert that faith is a gift, that it is the gift given to us and is the the faith of Jesus Christ himself. It is the faith OF Christ not faith IN Christ. Both mainstream Christianity and Armstrongism assert that we receive through faith, not our own but Christ’s, the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ. And, when it comes to works, Paul states in Philippians that God “works in us, both to will and work for his good pleasure”. If we have Christ’s faith and Christ’s righteousness and the works that we have are generated by God working in us, what is left for the rugged individualist?
Then there is the thief on the cross who received salvation without works of any category. Then Paul says in 1 Corinthians that there are Christians whose works are not acceptable and “If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire”. No works, nevertheless the Christian receives salvation. And Paul says in Romans 5:10, that we are saved by the life of Christ being lived within us. To me this means the full package: grace, faith, works, everything all subsumed in the life Jesus in us - and we would not really be able to separate out the individual causes of salvation.
Paul separated out works as a non-cause of salvation. Armstrongism includes works as a cause for salvation through the doctrine of Qualifying for the Kingdom. I believe works are a part of theosis – our becoming like God to some extent and participating in the divine nature. Works are a product of faith and cannot stand by themselves. Works are saving only when generated by God within the context of grace and faith. I am trying my best to observe the Law of Christ. But I am not going to grab Jesus by the sleeve in the next life and tell him he could not give the thief on the cross salvation because the thief had no works. Armstrongists who believe they are going to be God-as-God-is-God might think they will have the chutzpah and the right to do that. Let me know how that turns out.
Scout
Tuesday, September 24, 2024 at 5:13:22 AM PDT said:
ReplyDelete"Yes, the love of God is that we keep His commandments. He that says "I love Him" and keeps not the commandments is a liar and there is no truth in him."
The second time you said "the commandments". That is not what Christ said.
Christ said "MY commandments". He also uses the word "entole" for commandments which signifies a more generic "command".
John always uses "nomos" when he means "the Law". He does not use it hear. Christ hear means His Law, the Law of Christ.
Not Sinai Law.
Hear! Here!
DeleteWe go through so many scriptures and we discuss greek words whe really it is put to rest in Galatians.
ReplyDeleteGal. 3:24-25 "24 Therefore the law was our [a]tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
Gal. 5 refers to the Sinai Law as the handmaid and that we must put away the handmaid or we will not receive the promise of Sarah/the New Covenant/Jerusalem Above.
You can't have both, just as Abraham had to put away Hagar the handmaid.
I know people try to explain this away, but why? The New Covenant has better promises and terms.
Gal.4 not 5 is what I meant to reference.
DeleteThe tutor can no longer punish us. That in no way negates what the tutor taught us. We still obey the law, but it is out of love for God, not fear of punishment.
DeleteAnonymous 4:07 wrote, "This topic generates the most response because the scriptures related to it are the easiest to twist and pervert to support the Catholic/Protestant view."
ReplyDeleteI believe the quoted words of Jesus are very clear in the essay I wrote. No twisting required. All indications are that one day soon Armstrongists will accuse Jesus of twisting Herbert's words. You are almost there now.
Scout
The hallmark of deception is sincerity. A fellow once told me : "I've read the bible cover to cover three times". My first thought was: "yes, but how much of it did you understand?".
DeleteArmstrongites, in the distant future, as they listen to a sermon given by none other than Jesus Christ:
ReplyDelete"No way, you got that wrong! That's not at all what
Mr. Armstrong said!!!"
Scout 657
ReplyDeleteYour comment is very well stated. Like it or not, I'm going to take it as a partial agreement to what I was driving at.
I still believe a lot of confusion can be eliminated when salvation is examined through its 3 individual stages and not lumping everything together under the one term "salvation". Works play no role in justification, but do find a place in sanctification. Separation is important!
I don't get too upset about the thief on the cross. All we know about his situation is what is written in those 2 verses in Luke, and that is open to interpretation. No more than we know, I would no more alter God's plan and sequence of salvation because of him than I would for the people of Sodom, who are also promised a certain level of tolerance in the judgement (Matthew 10:15, 11:24).
BP8 4:31 wrote, “I don't want to disappoint but NO I'm not suggesting salvation can be earned by works.”
ReplyDeleteBut do you believe in HWA’s Doctrine of Qualifying for the Kingdom which is structured to be equivalent to salvation by works? Armstrongists will tell you that they do not believe in salvation by works but they have Qualifying for the Kingdom hidden in their back pockets.
In spite of all the perceived complexity in denominational soteriology, Paul makes an explicit statement about salvation. It is by grace through faith and not of works. Everyone has to deal with that in their theology. The orthodox deal with it elegantly, and others, especially the non-mainstream groups, do not. As the issue is typically framed, the big divide is between Catholics and Protestants. I have not read much about the Catholic side of things, so I do not know where Armstrongists would fit in this spectrum or if they fit at all. I believe there are marginal groups that are so heterodox that they lie outside the usual Catholic-Protestant pale. Perhaps, Armstrongism falls into that cartegory.
The ”religion of Scout” is mainstream Christianity. What I write can be found in most evangelical systematic theologies. On the topics I have examined, I would include Catholic theology as well. I have some beliefs that are not popular in the modern church but were held by many Patristics, particularly Gregory of Nyssa. My exposure to Catholicism is limited but where their theology seems to be off-rail to me, it resembles Armstrongism – particularly in hierarchical governance and high church ritualism.
On the other hand, I do not know what you believe – whether you are a Christian or an Armstrongist or neither like Lee T. Walker. Bring it. Let’s have a look at it.
Scout
Anonymous Thursday, September 26, 2024 at 5:37:37 AM PDT,
ReplyDeleteIf we truly love God and each other, we won't be willfully ignoring God's Law! We will be fulfilling it. Moreover, by observing the Law of Christ, we will surpass all ten of the Ten Commandments written on stone.
Anonymous Thursday, September 26, 2024 at 5:42:37 AM PDT,
Our faith is demonstrated by our love of God and each other. It is evidence that we have been saved by Grace through faith in Jesus Christ. Salvation is NOT a transaction (If you do this, I'll do this) in the same way that the Old Covenant was between God and Israel. The New Covenant is a faith-based covenant. We have to believe in and accept Jesus as the Messiah and our Savior. Once again, the way that we live our lives going forward is the evidence of that faith, and that God has shared with us the Holy Spirit. Our behavior is NOT causative in this instance, it is the product of that faith!
Scout 721
ReplyDeleteI've commented on this site for a few years now and have said over and over again that I consider myself part of the spiritual body of Christ and that I don't believe in earning salvation by any means.
I'm not an Armsstrongite although I am sympathetic to some of the central core doctrines, tweeked to my own satisfaction of course.
Many of those doctrines have been abused from the pulpit and so muddied with controversial language that they are almost unrecognizable and not worth repeating or defending, so I have my own spiel.
In the COG movement, I always liked Ron Dart and material by David Antion, for both seemed to be very knowledgeable, skilled, sound and biblical in their presentation. I also have few issues with Vance Stinson and Bill Watson.
If you want to dig into Catholicism from a safe distance, look up Trent Horn, Council of Trent, on YouTube. I have found that when you strip away the mystery Babylon, false church stuff, the Catholics and the Armstrongs have a few things in common. It's interesting stuff!
Earl 434
ReplyDeleteYou can make Galatians 4 all about the law, but I think there is a higher truth to be considered here, that being the differences in the 2 covenants. How do the 2 covenants differ? Different laws? No, a different approach to law.
The OC between God and Israel was an agreement contingent on human effort and compliance (Ex.19:5-8), which meant it was destined for failure from the start (Romans 8:7). God knew this, the Israelites had to learn it. The human path of self effort is pure bondage and slavery because it's a dead end, it doesn't work or accomplish anything.
The NC is successful because it's based on the promise of God. God Himself is the active agent. His promise is, "I will write MY LAW on their hearts", which makes the recipients " the children of promise" (Gal.4:28) because they believe what He says.
Galatians 4:24 plainly identifies itself and the sounding verses as "an allegory for the 2 covenants". The OC was contingent on human effort, even as Hagar's son was the product of Abraham and Sara's scheme to work out God's plan themselves instead of trusting Him. The son born was " born after the flesh", or human planning. Isaac on the other hand was God's promised one (born after the spirit), the result of God's planning and action. God's plan succeeded where Abraham's human effort failed.
The same is true today. Any human devised method (law of Moses, law of CHRIST, prayer, fasting, tithing, sabbath keeping) that is used to make one right with God thus bypassing Jesus Christ is wrong and will fail!
Galatians 5:4 says, "Christ is become of no effect unto you whosoever of you are JUSTIFIED by the law (any law), you are fallen from grace"
Scripture declares that the fault with the OC was not the law, but THEM (Heb.8:8), carnal , self oriented man and his approach to the righteousness of God. God is correcting that flaw by placing His spirit in us.
The law is good when used lawfully (1 Tim.1:8). Relying on it for justification does not and will not work, as shown by many NT scriptures (Acts 15:1, Romans 3:20-22, Galatians 2:16, 21, 3:11).
The lesson of the book of Galatians and the 2 covenants? Human effort does not and cannot accomplish the righteousness of God!
Bp8,
ReplyDeleteFrankly, you are bringing your eisegesis into gal. 4. Gal. 3 speaks of Abraham being justified by faith 430 years before the law. Abraham did not know the law such as sabbaths (E.g. Passover, leaving in haste, etc were reference points Abraham did not have). It wasn’t yet given; it clearly says so. Further, the law was not of faith; gal.3 explicitly states this. The term used is the law (nomos). It is the Law that is at issue. And while the law is good and yes the israelites could not keep it, they are not the only problem for the law could not bring salvation. Faith yielded salvation. Faith yielded salvation for Abraham without the Law. Abraham preceded the law (nomos), but he had an agreement with God that did not include “the Law”.
We as Christians are encouraged to follow the example of Abraham and faith, leapfrogging over any mention of imitating Moses (the Sinai Law deliverer).
Faith is all that is needed. For with faith the Comforter, the Holy Spirit is given and thus the Fruit of the Spirit. And, against such there is no law. It is not needed!
That is the beauty of faith and the N.C.
The terms and promises are better: faith with the Fruit of the Spirit and thus salvation!
Why are we even talking about the law, the handmaid?
Earl.
DeleteDid you even bother reading my comment? Your initial reference was Galatians 4, but all I said also applies to chapter 3. Galatians 3 says:
Verse 2---"receive the spirit by works of law, self effort, or by believing God"?
(I think I answered that).
Vs.8---"Abraham received justification by faith".
(How is one justified? Galatians 5:4, I covered that).
Vs.11---"no one is justified by the law". My conclusion exactly!
Vs.18---"God gave the inheritance to Abraham by promise", not because of Abraham's works and effort.
(Promise verses effort?? I explained that).
Vs.21---"can the law (any law or human method) give life and the righteousness of God "?
(No, my point was, the role of the law is not for justification or to give life).
Now, your comments on Galatians 3: You say
1). " the law was not of faith"?
(You are correct. My comments on Gal.4 contrasts DOING, self effort vs. BELIEVING).
2). "The law is the issue"?
(It's not. It is the example used to prove the point that justification is not by self effort. Any human method could have been used. The issue is the misuse of the law!)
3). " the law could not bring salvation "? (I never said it could. That's not the role of the law).
4) " follow the example of Abraham and faith, not Moses"?
(Abraham-Moses is a meaningless comparison. One thing is for sure, we don't want to follow Abraham's example in his failed scheme with Hagar, which produced him that was "born after the flesh", by human planning!
5) " Faith, not law, is all that is needed"?
(For justification yes, I said that).
6) "the law, the handmaid"?
(The handmaid example clearly belongs to the 2 covenants , Gal 4, where the Israelites attempt at keeping the law by their own effort is compared to Abraham and his plan with Hagar to work out God's plan. Both failed!
7) the terms and promises of the NC are better"?
(Yes, I said that too. Earl, do you even know what is contained in these NC promises? Look up and read, Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 11:19-20, 36:26-27, Hebrews 10:16. This is what God does, not us!
In the NT, the law is a standard, never a method. It is not for justification. Salvation is the gift and promise of God, not of works and self effort. I can't put it any plainer than that, which is the point of the book of Galatians.
The Elephant in the Room
ReplyDeleteIt is unfortunate that we do not have any clear, cogent counterpoints on this issue from Armstrongists. If you notice, when Armstrongists show up on this blog, they typically write one or two sentences that are really sound-bites they have heard from their ministers and then they vanish. There is seldom a lengthy or detailed treatment of any topic. This, I believe, is symptomatic of brain-washing. They only thing they come to the debate with is a collection of sound-bites and nothing further.
But I also believe that those Armstrongist that show up are people with reservations about Armstrongism. The really hardcore Armstrongists don't look at challenging material like what is found on this blog at all. They have no intention of being challenged. Like the kids who cover their ears and yell so that they cannot hear what is being said.
My guess is that if Armstrongists evaluated the example of Jesus that I cited in my essay, they would say that it represents only a part of the picture. The other part is in Matthew 5:17. This aligns nicely with their view that both faith and works are pre-conditions for salvation. Their hermeneutic is "here a little, there a little." But the integration of several scriptures requires interpretation. The meaning is not incontrovertible under the principle that if all the scattered scriptures are brought together then we will arrive at the inevitable truth. The fact is that Armstrongism is an interpretation of scripture. But it is not seen as an interpretation because they believe that HWA speaks ex cathedra - another area where Armstrongism resembles medieval Catholicism.
Scout
What I found interesting after leaving a splinter group some time ago, is the many scriptures that Armstrongism and their ministers refuse to cover and explain on a certain topic. They act like the protestants that they pick on concerning certain doctrines that don't fit their narrative. The hypocrisy that exist is a not good.
DeleteHardening of the heart and plugging of the ears leads one farther and farther into disbelief. For those of us who have left, we’ve had to go back to the question Jesus asked his disciples, “who do you say that I am?”
ReplyDeleteA lesser God? A man who had strong faith? Simply a prophet? A God who ceased to be God and then became God again? Who is Jesus?
Thomas said it, my Lord and my God. And Jesus did not correct him.
Looks more like Jesus Martinez than Jesus Christ
ReplyDeleteJesus Christ and Jesus Martinez look similar. What Jesus Christ did not look like is a British hippie.
DeleteScout