Ridiculous. Where is the word "alone" in Romans 3:28? What language useage requires it to even be implied? This is based on YOU reading into Scriptures what is not there. You have already admitted that we must love to be saved, correct? Thus, how can faith be alone and be saving? Please.
You are the one who consistently inserts exceptions into scripture to make it match Tradition.
Tradition is useful to explain passages of Scripture. Whether it is Protestant or Catholic tradition, we both rely on it, no matter how much you dislike the idea.
Here is an excerpt from the article The Joy of Heavenly Rewards by Matt Perman:
Interesting, but avoids the obvious...That Christ doesn't specifically mention a higher or lower place in heaven. ALL His parables that talk about the Kingdom of God discuss entrance TO the Kingdom, not varying degrees of the Kingdom! Sure, we can ascertain what Mr. Perman says regarding HOW MUCH we love. We Catholics look at it this way: All who enter heaven will be completely filled with God. But some will have larger containers to be filled! However, this has nothing to do with judgment into the Kingdom, when Christ discusses the matter.
Christ's parables don't speak of different levels of glory in heaven, but whether a person even gains ENTRANCE to heaven. Look at Matthew 13, I believe. You'll find several "Kingdom" parables. Not one discusses your idea.
Of course God doesn't "owe" us anything, but this is another example of salvation depending on the decisions of man, his actions.
You just got done posting me a section on how our actions get us different levels of glory in heaven, now this...What is going on? God judges us based on our decision to suffer willingly in His name. I still don't understand this "detachment" you seem to desire between God and man. When I am faced with a moral decision, I don't sense an invisible hand forcing me to do one thing or the other... God has aided me by forming my will, by placing in me the desire to do His will. But it is still I who uses these gifts, freely. OR I can freely reject them. The simple fact that the Scriptures OVER AND OVER command men to do something pretty clearly tells us that WE are to decide.
At some point you are going to have to admit that man is, by himself and independent of God, partially responsible for his own salvation, in your view.
The choice is set before us - death or life, as my tagline states. WE make the decision, based on the tools God has given us. Let's look at an example. Let's say we have two seniors in high school. Both are average students. With one, we give him no incentive, no aid, no counseling to pursue a higher education. We make no relationship between making more money and college degrees. We leave it up to the student. Most would party and not choose to sacrifice to get through college. Now take the other person. We raise him to understand the benefits of college. He has parents that are examples (by their jobs and desire to learn), he is pushed by them, by guidance counselors, and so forth. His intellect and will are formed so that going to college seems a "no-brainer". AND YET, HE IS THE ONE MAKING THE CHOICE, ISN'T HE? God instructs us, guides us, enables us to choose the good and see how it will benefit us. Yet, we are responsible for choosing God or not. In a manner of speaking, we MUST choose God to be saved. How can we repent otherwise? Does God toss you on your knees? And is that you repenting, then? I find this conversation a bit silly. I don't feel an overwhelming will forcing me to do anything. I do things because God has outfitted me to more often choose the good.
If the motivation is to get something of value in return, it is a "work". If a thing is done out of love for God, then it is not a "work". Is this what you are saying? If so, since I claim that perseverance is necessary, I would have to agree with you.
Well, we are on the same page, then, at least here.
Regards
How do you think Paul's audience accepted this statement? What were the other possibilities to salvation? Imagine you were a Roman of God reading Paul's letter. I am sure you would have immediately said, "Oh yeah, what Paul really means is that you need faith to be saved, PLUS you have to be Baptized, PLUS you have to confess your sins to a priest, PLUS all the many other requirements of the Catholic Church for salvation." Again, you are the one who is building things in.
I have said many times that my view is that faith includes love.
[On the Perman article discussing "reward" in heaven] Christ's parables don't speak of different levels of glory in heaven, but whether a person even gains ENTRANCE to heaven. Look at Matthew 13, I believe. You'll find several "Kingdom" parables. Not one discusses your idea.
Why does it have to be mentioned in parables for the idea to be true? Perman only mentioned one parable (Minas-Luke 19) to make his point. Why is he wrong because he used other scripture in support? Maybe Jesus was focusing in His parables on the much greater issue, just getting in and never mind about any rewards. I don't think that means both can't be true.
You just got done posting me a section on how our actions get us different levels of glory in heaven, now this...What is going on?
I just think that salvation itself and rewards in heaven are completely different subjects. Salvation is eternally more important.
When I am faced with a moral decision, I don't sense an invisible hand forcing me to do one thing or the other...
Without the sense of a physical touch, haven't you ever felt "led" by God to do something? That's the hand. You have already conformed yourself to the image of Christ to "x" degree. When you act based on this, that's the hand. Sure, we think we experience free will, but it is really God acting through us.