From Wednesday:

I am uncomfortable with this, to say the least. If salvation was based solely on God's promises, then all would be saved. God wants everyone to be saved, and He has enough power to save everyone. So if salvation is dependent only on Him, then none would be lost. But we know that is not the case.

Salvation is by faith. How do we know that Abraham had faith?


In both cases, Abraham's faith came with obedience. It was, in other words, faithfulness.

Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him as righteousness. But that belief, as it always is with the belief that results in receiving God's righteousness, led to him trusting and obeying God's word.

In contrast, unbelief and disobedience go hand in hand.


And there we see the difference between belief and unbelief. True belief - true faith - gives one access to God's grace, which teaches us to live godly lives in this present age. Anything short of this is unbelief, which only leads to disobedience and death.

From Tuesday:

I have a problem with this as well. Justification comes through faith. Obedience is the fruit of faith. They do not cause each other.

The only possible exception is if one is using "justified" in the sense of "making just." If so, obedience is not the result of justification, it is the definition.

Arnold, I agree with what you said.
Abraham's part was to accept God's promises, but God's promises are conditioned to obedience.
However, isn't obedience different from promise? Can we promise to obey?

You are right. However, don't we often say we obey not in order to be saved, but because we were saved? I don't see a problem with this statement, because the fact that you were saved implies you had the true faith. Wouldn't this be a case of metonymy (substitution of cause for effect, proper name for one of its qualities, etc.) or synecdoche (substitution of a part for whole, species for genus, etc.)?

In the case where Abraham believed God would provide him an heir and it was counted as righteous - the question is, Did such belief involve obedience?

Here's a promise:
Maybe our obedience is simply accepting this promise from God. Obedience is, after all, a gift from God. It is something we receive from God. And when the true Christian offers his obedience, it must be cleansed by Christ's obedience.

If we do promise God to obey Him, it is like promising to give someone filthy rags. Not exactly enticing. That's exactly what the Israelites did at Sinai, thereby establishing the Old Covenant.

Maybe we should stop saying that. I think the causality we imply, or even teach, causes problems.

Let's consider "we obey because we are saved." Why would salvation cause you to obey? Does it "force" you such that you are unable to disobey. If so, that would make us slaves for eternity. Unpalatable.

Is it because of gratitude, perhaps? There are such things as Thank Offerings, such as Cain's offering. However, they are always preceded by a Sin Offering, such as Abel's offering. Without the blood of the Substitute, our offerings are unacceptable. So, in a very real sense, it's really Christ's obedience that we are offering to God, which we get from God in the first place.

There's nothing wrong with this concept, as long as we know that our obedience is also received from God.


Yes, true faith always comes with both obedience, justification, and salvation. But I don't like the causal link.


Perhaps. But if we will communicate in this way, it would be just as valid to say that obedience is a means of justification, since true obedience only comes by true faith. And that's exactly what some of our more "conservative" brethren like to say.

Yes. Keep in mind that Isaac was not a virgin birth. Abraham and Sarah had some work to do.

More importantly, when Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac, his belief that his descendants would come through Isaac allowed him to obey the command.

Abraham was counted righteous before he and Sarah got to work.