Replies

While RCAs repeat the canard that Luther was alone in excluding the apocrypha, and that he did so for purely doctrinal reasons, he want not alone in his exclusions, and had scholarly reasons for doing so, besides some doctrinal ones. Controversy as to what constituted the canon went on for centuries and right into Trent. See http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Ancients_on_Scripture.html#2

In addition, 2 Maccabees 12: 43-45 supports praying for souls who died because they were idolaters*, which is a mortal sin according to Roman Catholicism, for which there is no purgatory or deliverance, not a confessed sin or unconfessed venial sin which Purgatory is supposed to deal with.

It could thus be used to support praying for the dead i Hell, while nowhere in Scripture do we see such, nor praying to anyone in Heaven but the Lord.

*”Now under the coats of every one that was slain they found things consecrated to the idols of the Jamnites, which is forbidden the Jews by the law. Then every man saw that this was the cause wherefore they were slain.” (2Mac. 12;40)

“...Besides, that noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forsomuch as they saw before their eyes the things that came to pass for the sins of those that were slain. (2Mac. 12;40) More: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Contentions_Purgatory.html#Contents

“Martin Luther made it too easy and that is why he had such a following - “Faith Alone” is much easier than faith plus works and being judged on those works. Phil 2:12; Mt 7:21; Jam 2:14 -24.”

Once again you evidence a lack of knowledge in this issue, as sola fide mean faith alone appropriates justification, , versus morally deserving justification, but the Abrahamic type faith that is counted for righteousness is one that effects obedience toward its Object. Thus the Reformers formula is, “We are justified by faith alone but not by a faith that is alone.” [“Essential Truths of the Christian Faith,” Google books]

And s concerns this issue in the light of historical Protestantism, which is often charged with promoting faith without works, Martin Luther is recorded as stating, “Works are necessary for salvation but they do not cause salvation; for faith alone gives life.”[Ewald M. Plass, “What Luther says,” page 1509]

In his Introduction to Romans, Luther stated that saving faith is,

a living, creative, active and powerful thing, this faith. Faith cannot help doing good works constantly. It doesn’t stop to ask if good works ought to be done, but before anyone asks, it already has done them and continues to do them without ceasing. Anyone who does not do good works in this manner is an unbeliever...Thus, it is just as impossible to separate faith and works as it is to separate heat and light from fire! [http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/luther-faith.txt]

Scottish theologian John Murray of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, asserted, “Faith alone justifies but a justified person with faith alone would be a monstrosity which never exists in the kingdom of grace. Faith works itself out through love (Gal. 5:6). And Faith without works is dead (James 2:17-20).” “It is living faith that justifies and living faith unites to Christ both in the virtue of his death and in the power of his resurrection. No one has entrusted himself to Christ for deliverance from the guilt of sin who has not also entrusted himself to him for deliverance from the power of sin.”[Redemption Accomplished and Applied] [http://defendingcontending.com/2011/05/18/the-monstrosity-of-a-faith-that-is-alone]

Contemporary evangelical theologian R. C. Sproul writes,

The relationship of faith and good works is one that may be distinguished but never separated...if good works do not follow from our profession of faith, it is a clear indication that we do not possess justifying faith. The Reformed formula is, “We are justified by faith alone but not by a faith that is alone.” [“Essential Truths of the Christian Faith,” Google books]

Dr. Michael Horton (theologian) concurs by saying,

This debate, therefore, is not over the question of whether God renews us and initiates a process of gradual growth in holiness throughout the course of our lives. ‘We are justified by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone,’ Luther stated, and this recurring affirmation of the new birth and sanctification as necessarily linked to justification leads one to wonder how the caricatures continue to be perpetuated without foundation. [Are we justified by faith alone?” http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/articles/are_we_justified_by_faith_alone.shtml]

In addition, upon hearing that he was being charged with rejection of the Old Testament moral law, Luther responded,

And truly, I wonder exceedingly, how it came to be imputed to me, that I should reject the Law or ten Commandments, there being extant so many of my own expositions (and those of several sorts) upon the Commandments, which also are daily expounded, and used in our Churches, to say nothing of the Confession and Apology, and other books of ours. [Martin Luther, [”A Treatise against Antinomians, written in an Epistolary way”] More by Luther on works of faith.

The Westminster Confession of Faith states:

Faith, thus receiving and resting on Christ and His righteousness, is the alone instrument of justification; yet it is not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but works by love. [Westminster Confession of Faith, CHAPTER XI. Of Justification. http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/wcf.htm]

The classic Methodist commentator Adam Clarke held,

The Gospel proclaims liberty from the ceremonial law: but binds you still faster under the moral law. To be freed from the ceremonial law is the Gospel liberty; to pretend freedom from the moral law is Antinomianism. [Adam Clarke Commentary, Gal. 5:13]

Likewise on on Titus 1:16 (”They profess that they know God; but in works they deny, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.” KJV):

Full of a pretended faith, while utterly destitute of those works by which a genuine faith is accredited and proved. [Adam Clarke Commentary, Titus 1]

To which the famous Presbyterian commentator Mathew Henry concurs: “There are many who in word and tongue profess to know God, and yet in their lives and conversations deny and reject him; their practice is a contradiction to their profession.” [Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible, Titus 1]

Also, the Puritan preachers were charged with making Christianity to narrow, perhaps in reaction against the Antinomian controversy.

They had, like most preachers of the Gospel, a certain difficulty in determining what we might call the ‘conversion level’, the level of difficulty above which the preacher may be said to be erecting barriers to the Gospel and below which he may be said to be encouraging men to enter too easily into a mere delusion of salvation. Contemporary critics, however, agree that the New England pastors set the level high. Nathaniel Ward, who was step-son to Richard Rogers and a distinguished Puritan preacher himself, is recorded as responding to Thomas Hooker’s sermons on preparation for receiving Christ in conversion with, ‘Mr. Hooker, you make as good Christians before men are in Christ as ever they are after’, and wishing, ‘Would I were but as good a Christian now as you make men while they are preparing for Christ.’” (http://www.the-highway.com/Early_American_Bauckham.html)

Finally, while RCs boast about how they have works along with faith, versus Prots, the evidence shows that evangelical faith manifests greater general commitment and conformity in core truths and moral views. http://www.peacebyjesus.com/RC-Stats_vs._Evang.html