Posted on 11/03/2007 5:03:12 PM PDT by annalex
You know, if someone had a tree that could bear fruit, and asked me for gardeining advice, I would not be telling him what to do with the fruit. I would instead tell him to soften the soil, water the tree, chase off vermin, — things like that. I would not exhort him to constantly check if he has fruit.
If good works were a fruit of already obtained salvation it would not make sense for St.Paul to spend the second half of every letter of his on “fruits”.
In the same passage we always quote:
Eph 2:8-10 : 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith — and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.
In the same thought, Paul says we are NOT saved by works, but that we were created to do good works. Presumably, we were not created to do works for pay, but rather works of love, which are NOT a causal part of salvation. Paul is only speaking to Christians here. The "we" and "us" relate back to the earlier "you".
I disagree that this is how "charity" is used. It is used in the sense of "love" in the MACRO sense. The problem we have is in reconciling this verse so that it does not mean that love "trumps" faith. If it did, then the only result would be a works-based salvation. Instead, we can say that love here refers to all love that is good. It includes God's love for us and ours for Him. Faith and hope only refer to individuals. In this verse, love (charity) is greater because it encompasses more.
You're assuming a conclusion, i.e., that the tree could produce fruit. The better analogy would be that the person only knew he had a tree and did not know if it was a fruit-producer or not. Paul says to check this. If it is a bad tree, then you can do anything to the soil you want, but it still won't produce fruit. The only way to turn a bad tree into a good one is faith.
If good works were a fruit of already obtained salvation it would not make sense for St.Paul to spend the second half of every letter of his on “fruits”.
It makes perfect sense. Paul knew that the worst position possible to be in is that of a false believer (honest non-believers are in a much better position). He ministers heavily to false believers because they are in the greatest need.
"You have been saved" in Eph 2:8 is incorrect. Your own King James version says "are ye saved" and Young's literal make the progressive case very clear: "ye are having been saved". Secondly, St. Paul is not saying there that we are not saved by works in general, -- he qualifies these works twice, as works "form yourself" and intended to "boast". This is consistent with the Catholic teaching, with James 2, and St. Paul himself in Romans 2, and right here in Ephesians where he tells us that we are created to do good works. He also concludes his thought thus:
13 Wherefore I pray you not to faint at my tribulations for you, which is your glory. 14 For this cause I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 Of whom all paternity in heaven and earth is named, 16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened by his Spirit with might unto the inward man, 17 That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts; that being rooted and founded in charity, 18 You may be able to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth, and length, and height, and depth: 19 To know also the charity of Christ, which surpasseth all knowledge, that you may be filled unto all the fulness of God. 20 Now to him who is able to do all things more abundantly than we desire or understand, according to the power that worketh in us; 21 To him be glory in the church, and in Christ Jesus unto all generations, world without end. Amen.(Eph 3)
Works and faith are not separated at all here: they are a single way of life that as a whole -- both faith and works -- has been in us as a result of Divine grace. Works strengthen faith and faith strengthens works, just like St. James teaches most conclusively.
This is an amazing spin on a very clear passage, and your only reason for it is "the only result would be a works-based salvation". This logical fallacy is called "begging the question".
Still doesn’t make sense. If a tree cannot produce a fruit at all, there is no point in giving any gardening advice. If a tree under some conditions can produce a fruit, then again the concentration would be on these conditions and not on what the fruit is like.
The natural conclusion form this observation is what the Church teaches, that works done in the spirit of love (or charity) cooperate with grace and produce salvation. Since works is something man is at liberty to do or not do, it becomes important to Paul to urge them. Works is the gardening act, that cooperates with grace,— sun and soil. Fruit is salvation. Simple and biblical, no exegetical contortions needed.
I'm with annalex. I have no idea where you get this exegesis from. The word translated charity here is simply agapon, the usual Greek word for selfless love.
The problem we have is in reconciling this verse so that it does not mean that love "trumps" faith. If it did, then the only result would be a works-based salvation.
Instead of starting out with a theological position and reading it back into Scripture, why don't you form your theological ideas from Scripture -- all of it -- in the first place?
That way, you don't need "reconcile" a verse by making it meaningless.
BTW, Paul's point here is simply that agape continues into heaven, and is therefore greater than faith or hope, which aren't needed in heaven. It goes without saying that he thinks all three are necessary here on earth.
All you need to do is add to that the Tridentine observation that good works strengthen grace in the justified man, and you have the Catholic position in a nutshell.
Strong's calls it the present indicative tense. That can be taken either as a past action or as an on going process, depending on the context. The full context of Paul's writings was that he believed himself to be already saved. For example:
1 Tim 1:15-16 : 15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. 16 Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting. KJV
However, you can simply ascribe every assertion of certainty to only being true AT THAT MOMENT. From there we would just have differing views of common sense. For example, John 3:16. Shall everyone who truly believes in Him have everlasting life? You would have to say "No".
Secondly, St. Paul is not saying there that we are not saved by works in general, -- he qualifies these works twice, as works "form yourself" and intended to "boast". This is consistent with the Catholic teaching, with James 2, and St. Paul himself in Romans 2, and right here in Ephesians where he tells us that we are created to do good works.
What? Here is the passage:
Eph 2:8-9 : 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast. KJV
The "not of yourselves" clearly refers to where the grace and faith came from. It has zero to do with the works. "That" which is not of yourselves IS the gift of God. THEREFORE, works have nothing to do with it, SO THAT no one can boast. If we COULD be saved by works, to any extent, then we could boast. God doesn't want that. He wants us to know that our salvation is solely His gift. At least, that is what Paul says.
Works and faith are not separated at all here: they are a single way of life that as a whole -- both faith and works -- has been in us as a result of Divine grace. Works strengthen faith and faith strengthens works, just like St. James teaches most conclusively.
He is talking about both the time of perseverance and the act of salvation. What's the big deal? During perseverance, of course faith and works go hand in hand. Nobody disputes that. He does the same thing in Eph. 2:8-10. As I said, in the Eph. 2 passage, Paul more concretely separates the two. "Not by works" means just what it says, we are not saved by works. Salvation is not of ourselves, it is THE gift of God.
OK, then for you, charity is more important than faith. Just do enough charity, maybe have a little faith, and you will be saved. That's a works-BASED salvation, with a little faith thrown in. Your side emphasizes works over faith, and mine emphasizes faith only for salvation. That is what I have always thought and you are kindly confirming it for me. :)
At this point I may be getting a little lost in the analogy and what refers to what. :) I was just saying that Paul was saying to check the tree first to see if it is a fruit producer. If it is, then it will be profitable to work the soil to strengthen the tree and it will produce more and better fruit. If it is a bad tree, then everything stops until there is faith. No amount of work on a bad tree will turn it into a good tree.
Works is the gardening act, that cooperates with grace,— sun and soil. Fruit is salvation.
But not all trees are capable of producing fruit, no matter how hard you work them. Your contention appears to be that ALL trees are capable of bearing fruit if your work them hard enough. That just doesn't match what we know in nature. Some fruit trees are just bad trees and will never produce fruit. Works are only of any benefit to good trees.
I'm with annalex. I have no idea where you get this exegesis from. The word translated charity here is simply agapon, the usual Greek word for selfless love.
The important part is that under this interpretation, as I understand it, charity (or love) TRUMPS faith on earth. Works trump faith in salvation. I have often criticized Catholics for holding this view, and now it seems that it is being agreed to. :)
Instead of starting out with a theological position and reading it back into Scripture, why don't you form your theological ideas from Scripture -- all of it -- in the first place?
That's exactly what Reformers do; take our ideas from the totality of scripture. In this case a works-based faith clearly does match the totality of scripture. That totality teaches a faith-based salvation. Therefore, since this verse appears to contradict the much greater weight of evidence, it should be interpreted to match that. If, however, the greater weight of evidence was that if we all just do enough good works we will be saved, then this verse could stand alone in agreement.
That way, you don't need "reconcile" a verse by making it meaningless.
Well, there are clearly many verses in the Bible that appear to conflict on their faces. Since I refuse to declare any verses to be "wrong", I don't see any other option than to reconcile them. I have seen tons of examples of Bible verses being reconciled to match the theology the Church has developed.
I would submit that Catholicism reconciles FAR more verses than Reformers do since it is the Church's theology that must be matched. We just say that everything must match the greatest weight of other scripture. So, if the Bible is a fundamentally sound and consistent Book, then we do not need to veer away from plain meaning very often. It does happen, but less for us because we don't have to match Mariology, or praying to saints, or papal infallibility, or some sacraments, etc., etc. All of those must be back matched to the scriptures. The result is the reconciling that you are talking about that, in my opinion, renders many passages meaningless, as you say.
The standard response I get to this is that the belief was first and the writing came second. If true, then the Bible is necessarily the MOST enigmatic volume ever written in the history of literature in terms of what we need. It would necessarily mean that the Bible was NOT intended to be a direct revelation to God's people. I can't accept that, but I know the Church probably has other ideas.
BTW, Paul's point here is simply that agape continues into heaven, and is therefore greater than faith or hope, which aren't needed in heaven. It goes without saying that he thinks all three are necessary here on earth.
I would think that would match the substance of my original point; that love is called greater here because it encompasses more, i.e. God's love for us in Heaven in this case. We didn't say exactly the same thing, but I would take this as a basic agreement. :) I said love in the macro sense. That includes both love on earth and Heavenly love, just as you said. By Alex's post, I thought the Catholic view was that the love spoken of in this verse only applied to the love by people showed in their selfless acts, "charity".
All you need to do is add to that the Tridentine observation that good works strengthen grace in the justified man, and you have the Catholic position in a nutshell.
Yes, and this may get into the very tricky "what is grace?" debate. :) Since we see salvation in this context as being an event, we couldn't say that works add to salvational grace. However, IF it is ever proper to consider "grace" to be the same as "blessing", then I could be in agreement.
So, "have been saved" is patently incorrect. "You are saved" as in "you are taught" or "you are fed".
The "not of yourselves" clearly refers to where the grace and faith came from. It has zero to do with the works.
Right; so if one works for boast and under his own power, that is not salvific. We agree here. Grace is source of both saving faith and saving work of love.
During perseverance, of course faith and works go hand in hand. Nobody disputes that
Ah, good, So, this is all Ephesians 2-3 is saying. No "work is fruit" theory there.
Cuz the Bible tells me so :)
Yes. God wishes all to be saved;; all are capable of responding to the call, but of course, not all do so. Works of love is a necessary part of that response, and as St. Paul teaches, even the chief part.
But not salvation by faith alone, as the scripture clearly tells us. It is not a matter of reconciling verses that could be read in a variety of ways: the salvation by faith alone is expressly contradicted by scripture, in a passage that is solely devoted to that question, and in language that couldn't be plainer.
I am very unlearned as to tenses, but what I found was the present indicative tense as compared to other languages. It said, in essence, that "You are saved" could mean either "You were saved" OR "You are being saved now", depending on the context. I just took the context of all of Paul's writings, which demonstrate to me that he believed he was already saved, i.e. that assurance is possible.
FK: "During perseverance, of course faith and works go hand in hand. Nobody disputes that."
Ah, good, So, this is all Ephesians 2-3 is saying. No "work is fruit" theory there.
Not really. In Eph. 2-3 perseverance works are covered, but so is the separate idea that faith, executed through saving grace, is what saves alone. Lifelong perseverance is what goes with lifelong works, not the ordained and graced "moment" of salvation. Both of the passages we quoted cover both of these ideas.
But we have been talking about Eph. 2 which PLAINLY discredits any idea that works play a significant part of salvation. Works are necessary but GUARANTEED by God for the elect. Sola Fide incorporates works BECAUSE they are guaranteed. It's all one package. No one who has true faith fails in works. EVER! That is God's promise in a passage that also "couldn't be plainer". :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.