@fmf saidThink outside the box. Think of the term "religion" as a verb and not a noun.
No, you have it wrong. "Religion" is when a group of people have faith in the same God figure based on the teachings in their scriptures.
Religion is what people do based on whatever makes them think it's what God wants them to do in order to have a right standing with him.
It's called "works". They(works)don't save, and they're not based on faith in what God does, but instead on what they do.
@josephw saidUnfortunately for you, and for whatever point you are hoping to make, the word religion IS NOT a verb and IT IS a noun. Meanwhile, the word religious is an adjective. If "thinking outside the box", for you, is contorting the meaning of the vocabulary we are using and trying to crowbar it into your weak rhetoric, then that is a matter for you - not me.
Think outside the box. Think of the term "religion" as a verb and not a noun.
@josephw saidIf your point is that your religion is different from other religions, fair enough. But if your point is that Christianity is not a religion because religions are different from Christianity, then that is an industrial grade no true Scotsman logical fallacy.
Religion is what people do based on whatever makes them think it's what God wants them to do in order to have a right standing with him.It's called "works". They(works)don't save, and they're not based on faith in what God does, but instead on what they do.
@josephw saidBeing born again is a divine act of God, not something we can do to make God like or love us. That doesn't stop people who want to be considered "right" with or without God from ordering their lives in ways they deem appropriate, they do so without God's grace that is transforming. The simplicity of God escapes the natural man, who is always finding fault with God and ignoring their own.
No.
The "spiritual" transformation "caused" faith in me as a result of trusting in/relying on and believing in the one that gave his life for me.
@kellyjay saidArguing that the ideology surrounding your particular God figure is morally incoherent and the ancient mythology is not credible does not mean someone is "ignoring" their own faults.
The simplicity of God escapes the natural man, who is always finding fault with God and ignoring their own.
@josephw saidIf faith were a teapot, then works are the tea that pours out of it.
It's called "works". They(works)don't save, and they're not based on faith in what God does, but instead on what they do.
I think it is an error to separate the two. Works are an expression of faith and the change that has occurred in a believer because of it.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidExcellent 👍
If faith were a teapot, then works are the tea that pours out of it.
I think it is an error to separate the two. Works are an expression of faith and the change that has occurred in a believer because of it.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidMy point is that many, many Christians ~ many on this forum over the years, too - assert that good works are not necessary for "salvation" ~ only faith [the teapot]. sonship ~ in a decade and a half ~ scarcely ever posted a word about good works. He somehow almost never posted about the tea or the pouring of the tea. He just fixated on the teapot. It is a brand of theology rife among Protestants et al. I find it interesting.
A teapot that doesn't pour tea is not functioning as the creator of the teapot intended.
@fmf saidMy point, is that works (the tea) 'evidence' that the faith of an individual (the teapot) has been correctly fashioned.
My point is that many, many Christians ~ many on this forum over the years, too - assert that good works are not necessary for "salvation" ~ only faith [the teapot]. sonship ~ in a decade and a half ~ scarcely ever posted a word about good works. He somehow almost never posted about the tea or the pouring of the tea. He just fixated on the teapot. It is a brand of theology rife among Protestants et al. I find it interesting.
Faith alone saves, but this life changing faith 'automatically' produces good works in an individual, so if such good works are not forthcoming or evident, then clearly the faith underpinning it is suspect.
Sonship is not the only person to fixate on the 'teapot' and miss the point that faith without good works is a dead faith, instead getting defensive to the mere inference that good works contribute in some way to salvation.
Faith alone saves. Good works evidence that this faith is genuine. (And hence are intertwined).
1 edit
@ghost-of-a-duke saidMore than a few people feel like what the book of James was saying and what Paul wrote about were at odds with one another, but you correctly identified how they do not. One was talking about salvation the other was speaking to results we would see in one's life after being saved. God changes us from the inside out and that transition is manifest in how we walk in the world.
My point, is that works (the tea) 'evidence' that the faith of an individual (the teapot) has been correctly fashioned.
Faith alone saves, but this life changing faith 'automatically' produces good works in an individual, so if such good works are not forthcoming or evident, then clearly the faith underpinning it is suspect.
Sonship is not the only person to fi ...[text shortened]... .
Faith alone saves. Good works evidence that this faith is genuine. (And hence are intertwined).