Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: annalex; metmom; 1000 silverlings; Alex Murphy; Belteshazzar; bkaycee; blue-duncan; boatbums
Preface:

Below and the following 3 are the latest responses to an exchange that has its beginning a month or more ago, and as far as i know i am finally up to date in up in my responses (which takes me days to do). I do not seek to add or subtract for God words, and hope i do not, but to respond in the fear of God, and while this examination is a centuries old controversy, which is often subject to over simplification, hopefully we have cleared up some misunderstanding. Yet I am the only one who is allowed to examine things objectively and come to a different understanding, and while this has been has been edifying and has made things clearer, i am not sure if much further extensive exchange with you is worth engaging in.

It is certain that souls in Acts did not know much fine points of theology, but they were convicted of their damnable and destitute state as sinners before a holy and just almighty God, unable to escape their just damnation or gain glory except by looking to God for His mercy in the Christ foretold by the prophets in Scripture. And that the moment they placed their repentant faith in Him to save them by His blood and righteousness, they would be forgiven and receive the Holy Spirit, God “purifying their hearts by faith.” (Ats 15:8,9)

This is what evangelical faith overall has historically preached, with its transformative conversions, and that this faith results in works of faith by the Holy Spirit, which the church edifying souls to do. But it is this often immediate conversion and simplicity in Christ with its evident regeneration that Rome militates against, at times literally by the sword of men, turning the grace of God into a vast autocratic bureaucratic system, with more of a form of the new birth rather than the Biblical relativity. Certainly evangelical churches come short of the prima New Testament church, and i certainly do, but within such are those who mainly represent the remnant that are evidentially saved, and their unity is of the Spirit, not by implicit trust in men which cults require, and they preach Christ, not their particular church.

If Rome preached the kind of gospel that convicted men if their desperate need to be saved by Jesus blood in the light of their sins and unworthiness and inability to morally merit eternal life, rather than presupposing them to be Christians (mainly) by paedobaptism, and then fostering confidence in the power of the church and their own merit for salvation, then we could have some fellowship in the Spirit. And i thank God there are a few who look past the trappings of religious form and find Christ. But as faith without works is dead, obedience to Christ will require dissent from Rome, resulting from her presupposed supremacist position over the Scriptures and declaration to be so. May all know "the grace of God in truth." (Col. 1:16) Thank you for your patience.


you are ignoring that this justification by faith out of a poor and contrite heart is contrary to one meriting eternal life

It is not contrary. One does work pleasing God out of love of God and this merits eternal life because God promised it will. You insert the meaning of "merit" as in "demanding by rights". But the merit of good works rests on the sovereign grace of God,-- at least that is what the Church teaches.

It is you who keep asserting the same, inserting works-merit into texts in order to fit your doctrine, so that the one does works of faith which justify, but the unGodly cannot do such works until they are justified.

"{2} For if Abraham were justified by works [except works of faith and love], he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. {3} For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God [and did works of faith and love], and it [they — works of faith and love], was [were] counted unto him for righteousness. {4} Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt [owed, to be recompensed]. {5} But to him that worketh not [excepting works of faith and love], but believeth on him that justifieth the [Godly] unGodly, his faith [and works of love], is [are] counted for righteousness." (Romans 4:2-5)

"For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves: it [they — your works of faith and love], is [are] the gift of God: {9} Not of works [except works of faith and love], lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9)

The mention of works in v. 10 which are the result of faith does not negate the distinction as to what saves. Souls are saved by grace to do good works; they do not do good works to be saved, though their works testify that are saved and will be rewarded.

a saving faith is not of a character that is alone, but is or will be accompanied by works

I know you wrote a long syllogism designed to obscure this plain biblical teaching, but that short statement alone is sufficient to say that in order to save anyone, faith must be accompanied by good works, and so we are not saved by faith alone. It is not complicated.

Unlike your superficial consideration of texts. It is not complicated; the faith that saves is of a nature that works, else you must discard baptism by desire.

Without the precise distinction men will presume their works merit justification, essentially like men presumed works of their law did.

Why should they not presume that their good works merit justificaton if the Bible tells them they do (Matthew 25:31-46),

That does not say that, their good works merit justification, but describes Jesus blessing them who lived out their faith. Just as Jesus blessed faith (Lk. 8:13) and said “thy faith hath saved thee, go in peace” (Lk. 7:50; cf. 18:42) so He can just as easily bless faith manifested in works. Such souls were justified by faith, and by faith they overcome, and it is through faith and patience one inherits the promises. (Heb. 6:12)

and the Bible tells them the works done out of a legal obligation do not (Romans 3:28)? All they need to do is to read the scripture once in a while and listen to Protestant sophistry less, and they will know what God wants of them in order to place them to be with Him in heaven.

Again you are reading what you need to into the text, as Rm 3 places all under the law, directly or indirectly, by letter or intent, showing no one could merit justification, but that “Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin,” so that “all the world may become guilty before God” (Rm. 3:9,19) and in need of justification through faith. And Abraham's works were excluded even though they were done before the law. God justifies the unGodly faith, (Rm. 4:5) not Godly who do works of faith and love.

You miss what “therefore” [in Romans 12:1] establishes, a justification by faith not merit

No it doesn't. The previous discourse is about sovereign grace, not any kind of "faith alone": The same pattern as in Ephesians 2:4-10: God in His Mercy and Grace chooses to save us, therefore "walk in the good works that He had prepared for you". This passage, cited above, unlike Ephesians, does not mention faith even in passing.

You continually assume no distinction is being made between faith and works when they plainly do as regards the means through which one is saved, that being a faith which works by love, not works gaining salvation. Rm. 9-11 is about sovereign grace, defining grace in election as excluding works or human merit based upon penance or holiness or merit. The texts you posted (Rm. 11:32-36) only describe the conclusion of a long dissertation in which faith/believe is mentioned 11 times, As posted before,

“For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. (Rm. 9:11,15,16)
“What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.” (Rm. 9:30)
"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. {6} And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. {7} What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded " (Romans 11:5-7)
As concerns salvation, “the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise..The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. 12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Rm. 10:6,8-13)

That said, the relationship between grace and human freedom, which is behind this issue, is an age old one which is not fully resolved in Roman Catholicism itself, as seen in “Congregatio de Auxiliis.”

here again it is faith, with cps 11-15 exhorting living out that faith, as faith that justifies is of a character that will follow Jesus

But nowhere does St. Paul offer that that faith is unaccompanied by works.

Of a kind of faith, this is true. But again, “To him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the unGodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (Rm. 4:5) refers to works of the law and those apart from it, such as uncircumcised Abraham did, but Abrahamic faith is of a quality that responds to the will of its Object in obedience.

The idea that works "live out our faith" is not in itself heretical. It is even common sense: one cannot do works of self-denying love unless one had faith. But you continually make the assumption that because good works require faith as a necessary component, works do not "merit justification" as you favorite expression is. Works and faith form a single package and together they merit justification -- not as a debt to us but as a sovereign will of merciful God.

Justifying faith is not without works in that it will express them, but that does not mean faith absolutely must first manifest works before it justifies one, though such expression may be the event in which one is saved. Again, it is by faith in the mercy of God in Jesus Christ the righteous, that He will save the unGodly by His blood, that one procures justification by. This kind of faith may be realized in an act of obedience, but can precede such, which is why baptism by desire is allowed. And neither faith or works merit justification.

Chrysostom (349-407): “For a person who had no works, to be justified by faith, was nothing unlikely. But for a person richly adorned with good deeds, not to be made just from hence, but from faith, this is the thing to cause wonder, and to set the power of faith in a strong light.” NPNF1: Vol. XI, Homilies on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, Homily 8, Rom. 4:1, 2.

But what is the “law of faith?” It is, being saved by grace. Here he shows God’s power, in that He has not only saved, but has even justified, and led them to boasting, and this too without needing works, but looking for faith only. NPNF1: Vol. XI, Homilies on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, Homily 7, vs. 27.

As for what merit can refer to,

“..we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation, and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.” — Trent, justification, CHAPTER VIII.

7,069 posted on 01/16/2011 1:39:01 PM PST by daniel1212 ( "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out," Acts 3:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7008 | View Replies ]


To: daniel1212
It is a constant amazement to me how some Roman Catholics who claim complete acceptance of Scripture can then turn around and cast it to the side in favor of their "Tradition". It is also ironic that when you go back and read the writings of some of the early church "fathers", they are remarkably clear on the faith/works question. I don't understand how those today cannot see it. I do not place "tradition" or an "infallible" magesterium on the same level of authority of God's holy word, and to hear some talk, they claim they do not teach anything contrary to Scripture. Yet when some of their dogma is shown to be in direct opposition to clear Biblical doctrine, it is the dogma that is proclaimed as the victor.

It is telling how most refuse to even acknowledge this.

7,073 posted on 01/16/2011 3:18:53 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7069 | View Replies ]

To: daniel1212
I am the only one who is allowed to examine things objectively and come to a different understanding

You most certainly must do that. Salvation of yourself and others depends greatly upon your overcoming the Protestant heresies big and small. There is no greater threat to the Western civilization today than Protestantism in any of its forms.

they placed their repentant faith in Him to save them by His blood and righteousness, they would be forgiven and receive the Holy Spirit, God “purifying their hearts by faith.” (Ats 15:8,9) This is what evangelical faith overall has historically preached

Good, That is Catholic teaching.

If Rome preached the kind of gospel that convicted men if their desperate need to be saved by Jesus blood in the light of their sins and unworthiness and inability to morally merit eternal life, rather than presupposing them to be Christians (mainly) by paedobaptism, and then fostering confidence in the power of the church and their own merit for salvation, then we could have some fellowship in the Spirit

The sacraments of the Church are what internally configures souls onto their eventual salvation. The Evangelical thinks that once he convinced someone in the “desperate” (why is it desperate, by the way? Despair is a mortal sin) need to be saved, he then is done, when the reality is that this is when that converted soul needs to turn to the Church and be healed, -- the job of the Church begins when you guys quit.

[Cites Romans 4:2-5 with supposedly Catholic insertions]

Apparently you don’t understand. Justification is a lifelong process. The justification Abraham received in Gen. 15:6 is indeed one that involved no works (the sacrifice was a demonstration of grace already conferred). No rewriting of the scripture is necessary to hold the only scriptural position which is Catholic, and in this case the scripture does describe justification by faith. But this is not the single time Abraham was justified. He was also justified before that when he crossed the desert (Gen 12, compare Hebrews 11:8); he was also justified after, as he offered Isaac up for sacrifice (Gen 22, compare James 2:21-23). I believe we discussed this before. In general, therefore, justification is by faith and works, even though exceptionally justification is possible by faith alone – as well as, we might conclude from Matthew 25, by works alone.

Regarding Eph. 2:10: The mention of works in v. 10 which are the result of faith does not negate the distinction as to what saves. Souls are saved by grace to do good works; they do not do good works to be saved, though their works testify that are saved and will be rewarded.

False. If the intent of St. Paul was how you say it, he had worded it very poorly: he did not say that works are the result of faith and his topic is salvation rather than any rewards that might accompany salvation. Further, verse 10 says the opposite of what you try to make it say: the good works are “what God had prepared so that we should walk in them” rather than something we “do not do to be saved”. The Scripture says “white”; you read “black”. See how ruinous Protestantism is to human condition?

the faith that saves is of a nature that works, else you must discard baptism by desire.

First, baptism is not works of any kind. Baptism by water is not works either, as the only person Who works in it is God. Declarations of faith in the Evangelical setting are not baptism by desire because usually the one who makes the profession is baptized already and if he is not, there is a true Church just a few blocks down where he can be properly baptized into the Catholic faith. Since he does not go there, yet he can, not being nailed to anything, all these chest-beatings during an “altar call” are delusional. However, the faith that saves is indeed in the nature that works, this is why Faith Alone is a false slogan.

Regarding Matthew 25:31-46: That does not say that, their good works merit justification, but describes Jesus blessing them who lived out their faith. Just as Jesus blessed faith (Lk. 8:13) and said “thy faith hath saved thee, go in peace” (Lk. 7:50; cf. 18:42) so He can just as easily bless faith manifested in works. Such souls were justified by faith, and by faith they overcome, and it is through faith and patience one inherits the promises. (Heb. 6:12)

No it doesn’t merely “describe Jesus blessing them who lived out their faith”, - have you read it? There are indeed passages in the Gospel where Jesus blesses people and praises their faith, but Matthew 25:31-46 does much more than that: it establishes the basis of judgement and it is by the good works and not by faith alone. Which should not surprise anyone interested in the scripture, since the scripture plainly says that we are not saved by faith alone in James 2:24.

Rm 3 places all under the law, directly or indirectly, by letter or intent, showing no one could merit justification,

No one could merit justification by law. It never said that no one could merit justification at all, since St. Paul as a Catholic Christian was not teaching any kind of Protestant despair. Justification is available to some as he says both in Romans 2:7 and then again Romans 3:27.

in need of justification through faith

Yes, that is the Catholic teaching. The faith that works and not faith alone, as we’ve seen.

Abraham's works were excluded even though they were done before the law

His circumcision was “excluded” (Rm. 4:9-11). Other works justified him (Heb 11:8-9, Heb 11:17, James 2:21.

You continually assume no distinction is being made between faith and works when they plainly do as regards the means through which one is saved, that being a faith which works by love, not works gaining salvation

I see many places in the scripture where the distinction is made between grace and works, and many where distinction s made between faith and law, and not once is says that faith is opposed to works. Specifically, the notion that works are not “gaining salvation” when done in faith is nowhere in the scripture.

The texts you posted (Rm. 11:32-36) only describe the conclusion of a long dissertation in which faith/believe is mentioned 11 times

The conclusion is actually Romans 12:1, “I BESEECH you therefore, brethren, by the mercy of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing unto God, your reasonable service.”, and yes that is the conclusion: the service of self-denial is necessary for salvation and not faith alone.

the relationship between grace and human freedom, which is behind this issue, is an age old one which is not fully resolved in Roman Catholicism itself

That is because the Fathers of the Church never taught one way or another regarding the issue of how the free will interacts with predestination of the elect; they just taught that both the free will and the predestination are part of the divine plan. Several opinions were voiced about it overtime and those the article mentions are all compatible with Catholic Christianity. The Church is comfortable not defining things that the Apostolic Church left undefined. The case of the doctrine of Faith Alone is different as it is clearly heretical contradicting both the patristic consensus and the plain word of the scripture.

But again, “To him that worketh not but believeth on him that justifieth the unGodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (Rm. 4:5) refers to works of the law and those apart from it

The reference in that passage is circumcision and not any works in general.

This kind of faith may be realized in an act of obedience, but can precede such,

Yes it can, exceptionally. As St. Augustine asked, what of one who has not works? But that observation is not the same as the doctrine of Faith Alone, which incorrectly states that faith is alone providing initial justification in every case. It is not.

none of those things which precede justification-whether faith or works-merit the grace itself of justification

Yes. Neither works or faith merit salvation which is by grace alone. However, as the scripture (Mt 25:31-46, Eph 2:5-10) teaches, one who has works of love will be saved not because Christ owes it to him, but because His sovereign will is to save him.

7,164 posted on 02/07/2011 6:36:53 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7069 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson