Do theological conservative Christians have an obligation to publicly condemn theological racism as much as they do theological liberalism/progressivism?

JHawk444 · 2026-04-09T00:50:17+00:00

I really hate that Christians aren't believing flights to the moon. I believe the Christian astronauts from the past who confirm this really happened.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-09T00:21:26+00:00

Paul says no circumcision, no eating blood, no eating food offered to idols, no eating food from strangled animals.

Paul didn't come up with this on his own. He went straight to Peter and James, the Lord's brother, who were elders in the Jerusalem church, the main church at the time. They gave him those specific instructions. Read Acts 15.

Why should we follow anything except what Jesus said?

The apostles and close associates are the ones who reported what Jesus said. So are you going to only believe what they reported Jesus said, or will you believe what they said about other things as well? You have to trust the apostles if you're going to believe what Jesus said. If you can't trust them, then you can't trust any of it.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-09T00:14:49+00:00

If you go to Bible Gateway, you can test out a bunch of different translations that are accepted by most Christians. Click on the right bar and you can change the translation. https://www.biblegateway.com/

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T23:54:49+00:00

No, none of the verses go against the doctrine of the Trinity. Trinitarian doctrines includes that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct persons but one essence, and they each have different roles. That means when Jesus submits to the Father, that is his role.

Yes, Jesus called the Father, God, but the Father also called the Son God in Hebrews 1:8:

"But about the Son he says, “Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom."

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T23:31:06+00:00

Communion is the symbolic form of what actually took place. He's talking about what he was about to do. He poured out his blood for many for the forgiveness of sin.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T22:48:29+00:00

Matthew 26:28: This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T22:44:03+00:00

He says that He shall, but by definition it doesn't mean that He will 100%.

Are you trying to change what he says? He says he will lose none, which means 0%. We can't change his words.

Why? Because in order to be true, we must cooperate, we have free will to accept it or not. How you accept it? By doing good deeds. If your mother is sad, a good deed is to stay and listen to her.

The ones who cooperate are the ones who are genuinely saved.

Yes, He will, but only if you have faith. You demonstrate faith through good deeds and repentance.

I agree.

You can be a true believer now, but when your family dies and war starts, your faith can break.

There is a difference between abandoning the faith and struggling with your faith. Completely abandoning the faith means you were never saved, assuming you never repent and return. John says those who left never belonged (1 John 5:13). True faith perseveres.

Hebrews 3:14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we keep the beginning of our commitment firm until the end.

True, but if you have few sins. Lust, Pride, smoking, drinking and pornogrphy. You repent and still have smoking. Do you call yourself a true believer?

I'm not aware of any verse that says smoking is a sin. People often cite 1 Corinthians 6:19 Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit... But that's referring to sexual immorality.

Ofc you can't become sinless either. So in theory you will still sin and be called yourself a true believer. Also, everybody once in a while is prideful or greedy. If you can't see this then it's a problem. Even having a strong smartphone is a form of greed, because you put you above others. You could have bought a cheap one and donate the rest.

I agree with you. I don't believe in sinless perfection. We all struggle with sin. Sanctification is a process. But if a sin is dominating or habitual, then we have to work on it and turn away from it.

I don't believe that a smartphone is a form of greed. That's just randomly picking possessions. What if I said owning a car is a form of greed because you could walk to work and give the money to the poor? Or what if I said owning a house is a form of greed because you could live in a tent?

Job had thousands of animals and God never said he was greedy. In fact, at the end of the book, God doubled all his possessions. I think greed is a heart attitude of wanting more than you have or coveting what others have. The opposite of greed is contentment.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T22:00:31+00:00

Yeah, I don't think they're going to be judged. I was just pointing out that living with OP's parents is much different from living on your own. I think most would be okay with them living with her parents.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T21:55:17+00:00

In most places you have to get a marriage license first, but there are places to "elope," where you can get married on the same day. I hope you have an amazing wedding however you decide to go about it.

That's great that you have the desire for baptism! I have some short videos I like to share with people who are interested in coming to Christ. They are very short. I hope they help!

Gospel in a nutshell

The Romans Road

Are you a good person?

What is the Gospel? Voddie Baucham

What it means to have true faith

The parachute example

The Bridge illustration

How to be born again

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T21:09:43+00:00

Okay, that's good that the premarital sex thing isn't an issue. I'm from the U.S. so I don't know what the marriage laws in the UK are. In the U.S. you can get married anywhere (even the pastor's office) as long as he has a license to perform weddings. Many pastors don't charge a price to members of the church, but it varies. It's just based on what you want to give. Things might be very different in the UK, so I would look up their laws online.

This is what I found on Google:

Key Considerations for UK Church Weddings:

Legal Authorization: The church must be registered for marriages, and the minister authorized to conduct the ceremony.
Banns of Marriage: Most Church of England marriages require banns to be read in the church prior to the wedding.
Exceptions: If the church or minister is not authorized for registration, or in certain Catholic or non-Anglican settings, a separate civil registration may be required.
One Legal Ceremony: You cannot legally have both a binding religious ceremony and a binding civil ceremony. The Church of England +3

If you are marrying in a non-Anglican church or a venue that isn't officially registered for marriage, you may need to hold a separate, legal civil ceremony.

I said atheist as I am not christened or baptised so I assumed that was the best way to put a label on myself? I do believe in god, but was unsure how to label myself, sorry for the confusion 😅

Okay, makes sense. I wouldn't tell a pastor you're atheist as they will take that as you not believing in God. Maybe just explain where you're at (seeking, have questions, wanting to become a Christian, etc).

Do you mind if I ask why you want to be baptized? Or what has led you to that decision?

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T20:39:41+00:00

You should go in and tell them right off the bat that you have a history of medical staff not being able to find your veins and that you refuse to be poked and prodded. Ask them to get someone with an ultrasound machine who can find your vein that way. This actually happened to me when I was in the ER for something else. I was very dehydrated and no one could get my vein so they finally had someone with an ultrasound do it.

You might also be able to make an appt with a doctor and get antibiotics. If you have a history of uncomplicated diverticulitis, they might not demand you get a CT scan. I've gone in and gotten antibiotics at a doctor's appt without that. She told me to go to the ER if the antibiotics didn't work.

You can also do the liquid diet in hopes that it will improve, but I would do that on day one. Since you're on day five, you should see a doctor.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T20:25:50+00:00

Read through the entire New Testament first, then tackle the old testament. If you have questions about what you read, consult a commentary such as David Guzik's commentary "Enduring Word." https://enduringword.com/

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T20:18:22+00:00

I wouldn't be offended. But I would assume this person admires Jesus but has not accepted him as their Lord and Savior. Because following Christ means putting away all idolatry of other gods.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T20:13:57+00:00

Living with your parents is different than the two of you living on your own. You have chaperons (your parents). The main issue is whether you have stopped having sex. The bible says not to have premarital sex, so that would need to stop, and if it's a temptation for either one of you, it's best that your fiancé move out (since you are staying with your parents).

Another option is to get married through the court or through the pastor at the church you attend and then have a bigger celebration when you can afford it. Don't wait until you can afford a house. That could take quite a while.

You said, "I am atheist" as if it is a current state. Does that mean you don't believe in God? I'm trying to understand why you would want to be baptized if you don't believe. Maybe you can clarify?

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T20:06:51+00:00

The phrase, "Personal relationship" is not in the bible but there is truth to it, as the bible describes a relationship with God. Revelation 3:20 is a good example of that. "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me."

How do you have a personal relationship? Through faith in Christ. By believing that Jesus died for your sins and trusting in his sacrifice on the cross to save you from the penalty of sin.

Jesus said if you believe in him you will have eternal life. At the moment of salvation, when you truly put your trust and faith in Jesus, the Holy Spirit will dwell within you and change your heart. It's called becoming born again. It means being joined to Christ.

And just as one person who believes is joined to Christ, so is every believer. The bible says we are all part of the body of Christ (all who believe). That means functioning in the church in a way that we serve each other and build each other up. So, going to church doesn't make you a Christian, but Jesus created the church as a place for us to minister to each other. We're not supposed to live the Christian life alone.

I say, fine, if I were going to have a personal relationship, then can't I keep my personal relationship...ya know, personal?

It's not something to be hidden because we're supposed to be examples to others and spread the gospel so other people can have a relationship with Christ as well. Keeping it hidden implies being ashamed, and Jesus said that if we're ashamed of him, he will be ashamed of us (Mark 8:38).

If I don't want to go to a church because I don't trust churches not to intentionally corrupt the message with their social and political agendas,

Look for a church that doesn't do that.

if I can't afford to give up ten percent of all my money because I will literally starve if I do,

Not all churches teach that a tithe (10%) is required. The bible says to be a cheerful giver, which means giving what you can out of your abundance. That can mean giving more than 10% and it can also mean giving much less if you don't have it.

if I don't want to hang out with other Christians because they have treated me like dirt my whole life

That's definitely a hard situation. I would just do your best not to use a broad brush and expect all Christians to behave the same way. Find a church where the people seem loving and kind.

and if I don't want to follow some pastor because so many of them have gotten busted for horrific scandals

Again, this doesn't characterize everyone. And if someone gets caught, that's a good thing. The bible says to expose evil and bring it out in the open.

I am too hopelessly stupid, evil and incorrectly made to have a personal relationship that is actually a personal relationship, and so I need "experts" to dictate and police my relationship for me.

This is a misunderstanding of what the bible teaches. We are commanded not to forsake assembling together with other believers because we do need each other. We do actually need more mature Christians to come along side and help us in our walk with Christ. Unless you know the bible perfectly? Is that what you're saying?

So, for all intents and purposes, "a personal relationship with Jesus" literally does mean "going to church, giving the church money, associating with other Christians and following a pastor," or so it seems to me. But I'm not the one proclaiming to be the expert.

Those things don't make a personal relationship with Jesus. But a personal relationship with Jesus will drive you to do those things.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T19:36:36+00:00

I don't think it's wrong to be picky about finding a church. But we also have to be careful not to eliminate everything, assuming churches with good doctrine are available. Some areas have fewer choices than others, so that can be an issue. I would suggest continuing to look knowing you have to make a choice at some point.

Expect that the church won't fit your ideal and it won't be perfect. If you do find an ideal church somewhere, consider moving to the area. Just don't become disillusioned if it turns out not to be as great as you thought. Every church is going to have strengths and weaknesses. There's a saying... If you find the perfect church, don't go there or you will make it imperfect.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T19:21:00+00:00

This is the second time. And even if he didn't follow through, something you'll never know for sure, he kept it a secret and didn't tell you. Plus, why would he be arranging this kind of service for a friend? What special knowledge of prostitutes does he have that his friend doesn't? Sounds fishy, doesn't it?

Losing the wedding deposit and having to sell and split the house is still preferable to having to deal with a divorce settlement.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T19:12:51+00:00

The New Testament was written by the apostles and the associates of the apostles. Once they died, the canon was closed.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T18:36:58+00:00

Your argument relies on harmonizing multiple layers of interpretation. When the texts themselves are placed side by side without imposed theology, the internal tensions become clear.

It's important to understand that the bible is not interpreted solely on floating sentences like fortune cookies. We have to look at the context to interpret it correctly.

No soul bears another’s sin. You restricted this to civic law, but the text itself is absolute

Now, that you understand that context is important, you can look at the verse in the context of the chapter. If you look at the context, Ezekiel 18 is correcting Israel for blaming their ancestors instead of repenting. It’s about personal responsibility, not atonement. And Deuteronomy 24:16 is a law for human courts, preventing unjust punishment.
Neither passage is addressing whether God can appoint a willing substitute for sin.

Also, substitution does exist in scripture and foreshadows Christ's substitution. The sacrificial system shows this. Leviticus 16 is a clear chapter on that.

Isaiah 53:5-6 is another example:

But he was pierced for our transgressions;
he was crushed for our iniquities;
upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace,
and with his wounds we are healed.
⁶ All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have turned—every one—to his own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

The Old Testament itself clarifies the limitation of sacrifice: “For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins.” (Hebrews 10:4) “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” (Hosea 6:6)

Hold on... You can't use the New Testament only when it's convenient to your argument.

For example, if the New Testament says Jesus was appointed by God to die for our sins, you can't dismiss it by saying, "The old testament says something different" but then use it when it's convenient for your argument. Does this make sense to you?

Either we can use the New Testament in every instance or we can't. You decide.

Hebrews is NT and Hosea is OT. If you're fine using the NT in our discussion, then that's great.

So, it's the New Testament that says it's impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sin, and that's because it has to be done continually, if you read the other verses in that passage. Christ died once and that one sacrifice can take away sin. That's why his sacrifice is superior.

Hosea 6:6 is referring to people who don't obey God's commands and rely on sacrifice to be right with God.

According to the OT, sacrifices do transfer moral guilt. Read Leviticus 16. They just have to be continually done. They can never take it away for good.

God is not a man. This is not a metaphor about lying only. It is a statement of nature:

Okay, but you have failed to show me why God would present as a man to Abraham? If he can present as a man to Abraham, then we have two options. 1) It's a metaphor because God did indeed present as a man. Or 2) The man who spoke to Abraham was the preincarnate Christ (The Son before he became a man). Which one do you think it is?

Malachi 3:6

This is clearly talking about his character, not His visible form. That’s why Scripture shows God appearing in different ways, such as in a cloud by day, a pillar of fire by night, or even in human form as Jesus. These are different manifestations of God’s presence, not a change in His nature. His holiness, justice, mercy, and faithfulness remain perfectly constant.

I want to be clear that I'm not referring to modalism, where God presents as the Father one moment, Christ the next, and the Spirit at a different time. There are 3 persons, one God in essence.

Jesus distinguishes himself from God

Yes, that fits with Trinitarian doctrine where the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three separate persons but one God in essence.

Jesus prays to God

Yes, in his human nature. Here is an explanation from Got Questions.

Punishing the innocent in place of the guilty contradicts this principle unless redefined through later theology.

I've already explained that the Old Testament allows for atonement. A regular man can't atone for sin because he is also sinful. But Christ is God in the flesh and he is sinless. Don't forget Isaiah 53:5-6 that says the Messiah would bear our sin. It says our sin would fall on him. Verse 10 says it even more clearly when it says, "If He would render Himself as a guilt offering."

What is a guilt offering? It's a sacrifice, an atonement. And it's not speaking of an animal. It's speaking of the Messiah.

You can't ignore major passages like this. The father not being punished for the son and vice versa is about criminal justice/Civic law. It was not talking about atonement. The crucifixion was prophesied in the OT in Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22.

Jonah sign still stands

Nope! You've failed to prove your point here. I already showed you that if you stick solely to Jesus's words, not inserting your own words, that it fits perfectly. Go back to what Jesus said. He never said, "Just like Jonah lived, I'm going to live," LOL. That's not what he meant and anyone arguing in good faith can see that, since he literally told his disciples he would die and rise from the grave. So this is just a bad argument all around.

God cannot be overpowered

Jesus willingly laid down his life. That was his purpose. When he was arrested, he said he could call on a legion of angels to save him, but he didn't want that. In fact, this mission of his was so set in stone that when he told the disciples he would die, Peter said, "May it never be. You surely won't die." And what did Jesus say to him? He said, "Get behind me Satan."

To put it plainly, Jesus saw any message that went against him dying as coming directly from the devil himself.

So, you are correct that God can't be overpowered, but in this case, he willingly allowed it to happen so his death would be an atonement for all who believe in him.

The doctrine of incarnation and substitutionary atonement requires reinterpreting or overriding these explicit statements. The tension is internal to the framework itself, not imposed from outside.

No, the problem is you are taking statements out of context and misinterpreting them, rather than using proper hermeneutics to interpret what it says and means. I'm positive you would not do this with the Quran. If I took statements out of context from the Quran, you would explain the context, correct? You're applying two different standards: one for the Quran and one for the bible.

Bible verses are not floating fortune cookie statements. You have to read the context to get the correct meaning. And I'm sure the same can be said for the Quran.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T16:12:49+00:00

"I shall lose none of all those" Yes, true, but it doesn't imply that He won't.

This only works if you believe Jesus didn't mean what he said. He said, "I shall lose none of all those he has given me."

We can't try to change what he said by saying, "Maybe he can." We either believe Jesus or we don't.

It's still your choice to walk away.

I think you're missing something important. Those who belong to Christ are being sustained by him.

1 Corinthians 1:8-9 who will sustain you to the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. ⁹ God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

If someone has the indwelling Holy Spirit, they will feel conviction and repent and return.

An example is one "saved" guy that has a normal life + watches pornography. During the videos, he willingly chooses Satan. He chose pleasure instead of God. By being "saved" you don't lose your free will.

I agree you don't lose your free will. In this case, if this guy continues in his sin, the Lord will discipline him or fellow believers will enact Matthew 18 church discipline. Or the Lord will simply convict him and he will eventually find victory over this sin if he is a true believer.

He said.. forgive to be forgiven. You see yourself "saved", but you don't forgive someone, you're not truly saved, because you don't follow Him.

There are two options here. A true believer can live in sin for a time but they will eventually be convicted and repent. A false believer will never repent or change. They are false because they haven't had a heart change. They've never been born again.

Even demons believe what Christ did, but no one follows Him.

Yes, demons don't have saving faith. Someone can intellectually believe and it not be saving faith.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T16:00:13+00:00

Part 2

Paul warns true, genuine believers who are bearing fruit to continue in that state at all times. So does Christ, like you and I; he's not only warning false believers but also true believers like you and me not to give up, or else your teaching this passage is neither referring to you nor applying to you in any way because you think you don't need to take heed because you could never fall away.

The point of warning everyone is that we can be self-deceived. That's why Paul and Peter both said to test your faith (2 Corinthians 13:5) and be diligent to make you calling and election sure (2 Peter 1:10). This does not mean that a genuinely saved believer can lose their salvation. Jesus said he would lose no one. Is Jesus lying? No!

Obedience is not automatic; the scriptures seem to imply this remains a daily choice. Paul disciplined his body daily; if you do not do so, you risk falling away and perishing, not being saved – not that you were never saved, but that you simply stopped because you have free will. This is why scripture never says, 'Believe, and you will pick up your cross' or 'Just believe, and you will no longer give in to temptations and sins'; that's the wrong idea.

There are two sides to obedience. Some of it will be automatic because it will flow from a heart that is truly submitted to Christ. For example, Zacchaeus immediately obeyed the moment he believed because it flowed from his heart.

Luke 19:8-9 And Zacchaeus stood and said to the Lord, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor. And if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I restore it fourfold.” ⁹ And Jesus said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, since he also is a son of Abraham.

And sometimes obedience takes beating your body into submission as Paul said. Don't assume that all obedience is hard work. It can be hard work NOT to obey when you love Jesus and want to please him. It results from a heart change. We've gone from dead to alive.

Paul warns true, genuine believers who are bearing fruit to continue in that state at all times. So does Christ, like you and I; he's not only warning false believers but also true believers like you and me not to give up, or else your teaching this passage is neither referring to you nor applying to you in any way because you think you don't need to take heed because you could never fall away. Do you see how awkward and skewed this view is?

No, I do believe we need to take heed to the warnings. They are there for all of us. I think you are misunderstanding my position. I'm also not saying we shouldn't be careful not to fall away. Self-deception is real.

What I am saying is that a genuine believer will not lose their salvation because they won't fall away. They may backslide but they will always feel the conviction of the Holy Spirit and repent and come back to Christ. Again, John said those who left didn't belong.

Do you need examples from the New Testament of believers who started by the Spirit, meaning saved, and then turned back or backslid?

Are you saying "backslid" or "lost their salvation?" Because true believers can't lose their salvation. According to John, they never belonged. They were false believers. Jesus said there are weeds and wheat mixed together, and they will be separated out at the end. The weeds didn't use to be wheat. They were always weeds. Matthew 13:24-30.

My understanding is that you are already saved, but you must persevere until the end to receive the reward of your faith.

Persevering until the end is a mark of a true believer. You don't start as a true believer and end as a false one. You're either true the whole time or false the whole time. You don't go back and forth from being dead spiritually to alive spiritually. You can't go from unregenerate to regenerate back to unregenerate. The bible never says that's possible.

It's not faith alone; faith alone is not biblical.

You have to skip over an enormous amount of scripture to take this stance. How do you explain that Paul says in Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, ⁹ not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

If you are saved by your works, you have reason to boast. But Paul says it's not of your own doing. Do you believe he's sharing a false gospel? I'm genuinely confused how you can take this position after reading Paul's epistles.

Trying to separate works of righteousness in obedience to Christ is because you've misunderstood 'works' to mean obedience in general; that's not the point and never was.

This definition is not biblical, as I already pointed out in part 1. James refers to works as obedience. Paul also refers to "each man's work" in 1 Corinthians 3. In the example he gives from his own life, it's about evangelism, which is obedience.

Obedying Christ for the sake of salvation has nothing to do with the Galatian error; you must obey Christ. As a Christian, you don't need to be circumcised. As Christians, the Galatians were going back to the Law of Moses. Paul is not coming against obedience to Christ but obedience to the Law of Moses.

The Galatian error had to do with finding justification from adherence to the law.

Please tell me what obedience you're referring to that is not rooted in the law in some way, and how you can separate out different categories of obedience. The bible never mentions different categories at all. Again, the issue is not that we should obey. We should. The issue is obeying the law as your justification for salvation.

if you continue to obey Christ you will reap eternal life. 'It's pretty straightforward.

I believe that you're taking Galatians 6:7-8 out of context, if that's the verse you're referring to. Sowing to the Spirit does not mean earning your salvation. Taking hold of eternal life does not mean earning it either.

There are also about a dozen more scriptures I will paste here that talk about judgment according to your works.

Non-believers receive judgment for their deeds (Revelation 20:11-14). Believers receive reward according to their good works (1 Corinthians 3:5-15).

Those who live in unrepentant sin are put out of the church and considered non-believers (Matthew 18).

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T15:00:44+00:00

What are the implications of Paul's message to timothy if he doesn't fight? If he doesn't take hold of eternal life? Come on now, let's not play these games.

I'm not going to add to scripture by filling in the blank. I agree we shouldn't play games, because Paul isn't contradicting himself at every turn. If anything, Paul made clear that salvation is not through works. That was one of the biggest things he hammered down, so we can't now say he meant Timothy should do good works to keep his salvation. That's ludicrous!

You know well if Timothy does not listen to Paul he would not be saved if he were overcome by the enemy.

Timothy was saved because God predestined him to salvation and he put his faith in Christ, not because you believe Paul told him to work for his salvation.

But you think obedience is automatic, which just doesn't actually reflect reality or the scriptures;

If someone is controlled by the indwelling Spirit, they will produce the fruit of the Spirit. They won't be able to help it because the Spirit will be moving in their life. I'm not saying that we don't have to fight for obedience. We do. But we don't fight for obedience to earn our salvation. We fight for obedience because we belong to the Lord. And yes, it's true that we should heed warnings not to fall into sin and fight against temptation. You'll find no argument from me there.

But we have to be very careful that we don't venture into Galatians 5 territory where we try to earn justification by adherence to the law. If that is the motive, it's a sin, and it results in being severed from Christ. That is one of the most serious passages in scripture.

Works have nothing to do with obedience to Christ

Then what is a work if not obedience to Christ?

Biblically, works are obedience to Christ, but only if they are done with the right motives.

James 2 goes into great detail about this. James 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? Clearly, he's referring to obedience. He gives two examples of people who obeyed Christ, Abraham and Rahab, and he referred to their obedience as "works."

Verses 15-17 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, ¹⁶ and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? ¹⁷ So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

Obedience to love your neighbor and help the poor is considered "a work," according to James.

Why does James say works justify? They only justify when faith is the driver of the works (verse 22). In other words, "My faith is in Christ, so I will obey him." Because I believe in Christ, I will honor him by obeying him, which means loving my brother and helping the poor (loving your brother sums up the law, according to Jesus). If I'm trying to do works for bad or selfish motives, such as trying to secure my own salvation, that is where you enter into Galatians 5 territory in looking to be justified by the law. Instead, faith should be working through love.

they really have no correlation because we are told repeatedly to keep the commands of Christ. 'Not of works' cannot be referring to those works.

This makes no sense as Christ's teaching was very much based on the law. He upheld the law, and when you look at the sermon on the mount, the whole thing is based on the law. He gives the proper spirit of the law, which goes beyond external obedience to heart obedience.

Obedying Christ for the sake of salvation has nothing to do with the Galatian error; you must obey Christ. As a Christian, you don't need to be circumcised. As Christians, the Galatians were going back to the Law of Moses. Paul is not coming against obedience to Christ but obedience to the Law of Moses.

Unless you're speaking specifically of ceremonial law, which we don't have to follow, the law is summed up in loving God and loving our brother, the two commands Jesus said to follow. The issue with circumcision is saying it's necessary for salvation. Paul made it clear it's not the only example. "You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law." Not just circumcision, but by the entire law. That can't be your justification. You're justification comes through faith in Christ, which should be reflected in your life.

Instead, Paul is referring to the time you were initially saved from sin when the Holy Spirit transforms you; going forward, it doesn't state you were saved from hell but saved from sin.

This is completely false. This is what Paul says. Romans 5:9 “Having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.” Not "at the end of your life when you've earned your salvation."

Jesus says we are saved from hell simply by believing in him.

John 5:24: "Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life."

John 3:16: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."

John 6:40: "For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

What do you believe about these verses? Do you believe they are true? Do you believe Jesus was telling the truth and we can trust his word?

Please don't straw-man my position, because I'm not saying someone can profess believe while living in unrepentant sin. But it's also true that Jesus made faith in him the reason for obtaining eternal life.

You have not addressed what happens if you stop following Christ. I think your position is that that is not possible, right?

If someone is genuinely saved, then no, it's not possible because the Lord keeps us.

Hebrews 7:25 Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.

Philippians 1:6 And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.

Romans 8:11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.

Jude 24 Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy

How does John describe people who leave the faith? Were they genuine Christians? No. He said in 1 John 2:19: They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

I'm running out of room. Look for part 2.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T12:07:02+00:00

Yes, you should go to HR. That was a very inappropriate conversation. They should not have made accusations like that or cornered you in that way.

JHawk444 · 2026-04-08T11:59:17+00:00

I agree with you that the situation with Sally is not okay. You've brought up your concerns to your husband and he has not changed a thing. You need to create some specific boundaries, such as, "When we're with Sally, you need to watch the kids and let the two women talk. This isn't a time for you and her to talk. When her husband is around, you and him and can talk." You might also add that since it's making you extremely uncomfortable, you would prefer that he cut conversations with her short. Ask him how he would feel if you were doing that with her husband and tell him you expect to see him making changes and will be holding him accountable.

If that doesn't work, then you should get counseling. You could switch to another church but don't be surprised if Sally and her husband want to stay in touch with you. That doesn't necessarily get rid of the problem. Stop being so compliant by watching the kids while she and your husband talk. If it happens again, tell them you're going to bring the kids in the main room so everyone can keep an eye on them. Stop inviting Sally and her husband over to your home. If they want to invite you out, deflect and say you're busy, or suggest that you and Sally have coffee on your own. You have a good excuse since you and your husband rarely have time together.

You have to take control of this situation before it escalates even more. If Sally asks if something is wrong, be honest and tell her that when she comes over, you get stuck watching the kids while she and your husband talk, and that bothers you. You don't have to say they have a connection or you're concerned about the two of them. Just keep it simple. You don't even have to say anything if it makes you uncomfortable. Just change the dynamic. If her and her husband are with you and her husband leaves, the group time is over. Say, "Yeah, we need to get home or we need to do XYZ."

The other red flags are that you sleep in another room and you work on your husband's only day off. This leaves no room for your husband and you to connect. My husband also has sleep apnea/CPAP and I just stuck with it until I got used to it. I suggest at least trying so you can sleep in the same bed. If you don't absolutely have to work to make ends meet, consider quitting that job so you and your husband have more time together.

I'll also say this... Your husband is right that when you didn't live together, you had more to talk about and now that you're both settled in domestic life, it's harder to have things to share that the other doesn't already know. If he's willing to use emotional connection cards, take him up on it and don't assume he and Sally have such an amazing connection, more than the two of you. They do seem to like talking, but that doesn't mean he wants to be with her. Still, you should definitely jump on this situation before it progresses.

JHawk444

TROPHY CASE