Posted on 02/27/2011 8:08:19 PM PST by Natural Law
Faith Without Works? Do Calvinists Actually Read the Christian Bible? Is anyone as mystified as I am at this contradictory and unbiblical Calvinist “Sola Fide” idea that faith without works is sufficient for salvation? How can Calvinists reject James Chapter 2 which states that; “What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?” (James 2:14) and "Faith without works is dead" (James 2:26). To do so is antithetical to Scripture.
The Calvinist rejection of James is at best substitutional, permitting Calvinists to conclude that works naturally follow from and are only a result of true faith thus requiring no conscious commitment or consideration. The result is a negation of the call to Beatitude and a rejection of the obligations of the Second Greatest Commandment issued by Jesus Himself.
Borrowing from Hinduism many fringe Calvinists actually practice a form of the Brahiminst caste system in which they profess that their own Salvation was secure from the beginning of time and no obligation exists toward the less fortunate and needy because God rejected their election from the beginning of time.
The substitution of actual, contextual Scripture for the more flattering personal interpretations is a return to the Gnostic heresies that the Church successfully rejected more than a thousand years earlier. They attempt to seek truth through Scripture on their own despite the admonition of Peter who stated; “But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20).
Faith alone is insufficient. Adam and Eve had faith yet fell. They spoke directly with God yet succumbed to sin. What about Paul, whom many Calvinists give greater credence than Jesus, when he says; "And if I should have prophesy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could move mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing." (1 Corinthians 13: 2).
Perhaps the citations some will more closely identify with; the demons whom Jesus expelled.
"And behold they [the demons] cried out saying: What have we to do with thee, Jesus Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" (Matt 8: 29).
The demons had faith certainly equal to that of the Calvinists. Not only do they profess that Jesus is the Son of God, but they also have a profound knowledge of Scripture and profess belief in the final judgment. Peter didn’t profess that Christ is the Son of God in Matthew 16:16-- eight chapters later. Why didn’t Jesus didn't make the demons the rock on which He built His Church? He required Works to build His Church.
Karma, Brahminism and Maya arose from the Reformation? Who knew?
Cordially,
Before the Reformation, nobody thought to apply them to Christianity. You may thank Luther, Zwingli and Calvin for the mindset that led to that. And to the mindset that led to Latter Day Saints, Jehovah's Witnesses, Pentecostals, Branch Davidians, Unitarians, Quakers, Shakers, and all the rest of the fakers.
Maybe Theater of the Absurd would be a more apt metaphor:
A form of drama that emphasizes the absurdity of human existence by employing disjointed, repetitious, and meaningless dialogue, purposeless and confusing situations, and plots that lack realistic or logical development.Compare:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_(illusion)Maya
to
Human Depravity by R.C. Sproul
As far as I can tell, legitimate Roman Catholic scholarship and/or official sources do not stoop to making such outlandish, absurd, idiotic and quite frankly, slanderous misrepresentations as you have made. Maybe you can disillusion me. <rim shot>
Cordially,
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.