Rather than being much redundant, i will address the main points which could benefit from clarification and or expansion, with some organization.
Grace and works are separate altogether. Faith and works are either separate or one and the same, depending on the nature of the works.
Grace and works are not separate as grace enables works, but in reality grace works through faith producing works.
Grace and works are of different origin. God sends grace; we do works. They are often contrasted in the scripture: [Rm. 11:5-7; 2 Tim. 1:9; Eph. 2:8,9] No similar contrast is drawn in the scripture between faith and works, because they both are something originating in the heart of man: [Ja. 2:2; Heb. 11:8,9; Gal. 5:9]
I have affirmed the separate place each have, but in context, you fail to grasp the manner in which they go together, in relation to how faith and works go together. Nor is it that good works eventually produce faith and that faith originates in the heart of man, as faith is a supernatural gift from God, enabling one to effectually believe revealed truth beyond the ability of man.
God, in His grace, gives faith, which results in works.
You also appeal to Rm. 2:7-10 as teaching salvation by works, but which describe what saved persons do, which is works of faith, "For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified." (Romans 2:13) and which i fully affirm. One is justified “by faith alone” in that God-given supernatural faith is what is counted for righteousness, though it is expressed in works. Man comes to God, being drawn to Him but destitute and damned, and out of a poor and contrite heart believes in Him who justifies the unGodly, not the Godly, and their faith is counted for righteousness, an dare given the gift of eternal life. Those who continue in the faith, trusting in the Lord Christ to save them, not their works or goodness or that if their church, do works of faith, led by the Spirit, which only believers can do, and will finally fully realize “eternal life” and recompense for their suffering and works, in the mercy and grace of God.
Let me examine your treatment of Romans 3-4.
A point by point rebuttal of your rendering of this is not necessary as it is a continuance of your insistence on reading into the text what you want to see.
While Rm. 3 excludes both Jews and Gentiles from having any moral fitness whereby they could merit acceptance with God, and instead renders them are all under sin and need of justification by grace, and even though Rm. 4 plainly teaches that if Abraham had done works that merited justification then he could boast, (Romans 4:1-3) you state that he did do justifying works he could boast of, that “Yes, -- we could boast. But it doesn’t mean we always do.” And rather than what Paul is teaching, that if works could merit justification than man could boast, you attempt to make the exclusion of works to be that of boasting of such works, or ones done for temporal gain, while sanctioning doing works to gain eternal life. Supposing that the Catholic system only supports doing works of love for not other reason than love for God is a fantasy, while one must be justified to do works of such love.
The works of the law also provided spiritual benefits, but which system is excluded because it is based upon moral merit by obedience (Gal. 2:20) rather than faith in the mercy of God in Christ, which again, Paul has been laboring to show both Jew and Gentiles they are in need of, being unable to be morally worthy by works.
And when Rm. 4 contrasts Abraham being justified by works before he was circumcised or under the law, you insist this only means works of the law being disallowed, such as circumcision and works done for social recognition, when again, in reality it is part of his contrast between works morally meriting justification, as under the law, versus faith procuring it, in which he clearly states the latter is counted for righteousness. Thus it is of faith, that it might be by grace, by which faith is given, resulting in works led by the Spirit. (Rm. 8:14)
And as man cannot do anything that would make him actually worthy in God's sight, Rm. 4 concludes with justification being something which man cannot gain except by faith. For Abraham was unable to gain the promise, but his faith was counted for righteousness, and which resulted in actions which produced a nation. “And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;" (Romans 4:21-24)
In contrast, if you have man doing works meriting justification which he could boast of but does not, and if your criteria (as stated in other responses) for such salvific works are works of love by one who imitates Christ, then you have souls doing Christian works of love in imitation of Christ before they are justified, in order to be justified!
In this and other examples you confuse what faith does with the actual means by which justification is appropriated, though faith and work go together. Thus when you see Titus 3:5 and Eph. 2:8,9 which contrast faith and works in an unqualified manner, you invoke verses which speak of what faith effects in order to assert they are causative of justification.
Moving on, your continuing commitment to either argue against a straw man or failure to read or comprehend this oft stated definition and its distinction results in your supposing that Rm. 12:1,2 is contrary to sola fide. If any faith has historically taught or fostered works of faith it is those who hold to sola fide.
As regards Rm. 11:11-16, you again misconstrue how grace works in order to force it to conform to salvation by grace through merit, when an unbiased reading of the text would allow you to see that it is teaching that the elect are chosen as such before they did works, and thus it is purely by grace, under which repentance and faith is given, resulting in works which confirm the saved state of the soul.
When you come to the patristic quotes, after giving the necessary qualifier,” that no Church father is himself infallible,” you misconstrue Clement's words to mean that their election was “surely not of faith but of grace (“but through the operation of His will”), just as Rome teaches,” meaning that they were saved by grace through works of merit! That Clement exhorts them to works, just as those who hold to sola fide do, cannot be used to make his words, “we not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men” to mean justification is by works out of merit. Again, sola fide teaches that the faith that the faith that saves is a faith that follows, but it is the God-given faith aspect which procures justification by imputed righteousness.
For Ambrosiaster, you assert that “faith” in “They are justified freely because they have not done anything nor given anything in return, but by faith alone they have been made holy by the gift of God” is supposed to be “grace” in order to support justification by grace through works which merit it.
Faced with Augustine, “when someone believes in him who justifies the impious, that faith is reckoned as justice to the believer, as David too declares that person blessed whom God has accepted and endowed with righteousness, independently of any righteous actions (Rom 4:5-6). What righteousness is this? The righteousness of faith, preceded by no good works, but with good works as its consequence” you allow that “one CAN be justified by faith alone and following repentance. We can certainly see that in people unable to work due to some disability or circumstance. However, the general principle is not following here: it is true that exceptionally one can be justified without good works, but it is still not true that anyone as a general proposition is thus justified.”
I am glad you allow this in a qualified manner, except that inn this context repentance is part of the act of faith, and if one can be justified by faith alone in the case wherein a soul has no ability, then it affirms sola fide, the difference being that in the sola fide i describe, no man has the ability to do works which would morally merit justification, but that God gives faith which procures it, with obedience following.
For me, it is not the sequence that is critical, but the recognition that no man can morally merit justification, being morally destitute, and that instead he is damned due to his works, and must be granted repentance and given faith, albeit a faith that will produce obedience towards its Object, insomuch as the possessor of said faith is able (and which includes repentance when convicted of not doing so), and which faith is counted for righteousness. But yet while eternal life is given as a free gift, one must continue in faith, and works are the gauge by which faith is evidenced, and thus the doers of the law are those who are justified, and works of faith are recompensed beyond the gift of eternal life.
Yes, and it also described what a condemned person doesn’t do, just like Matthew 25:31-46. In other words, we are saved or condemned by what we do. Your grasp of this issue is actually close to Catholic, or possible entirely Catholic, but your reading of the Scripture is infected by typical Protestant exegesis, necessary to cram the silly slogan of “faith alone” into your sound belief.
when Rm. 4 contrasts Abraham being justified by works before he was circumcised or under the law, you insist this only means works of the law being disallowed, such as circumcision and works done for social recognition, when again, in reality it is part of his contrast between works morally meriting justification, as under the law, versus faith procuring it, in which he clearly states the latter is counted for righteousness.
When you say “works morally meriting justification” is it necessary to point out which works. But the context shows only works of circumcision, a ritualistic work bringing no one any good. So it is I who reads Romans 4 in its proper context.
if you have man doing works meriting justification which he could boast of but does not, and if your criteria (as stated in other responses) for such salvific works are works of love by one who imitates Christ, then you have souls doing Christian works of love in imitation of Christ before they are justified, in order to be justified!
Justification is a process, not a single event. If a Pagan does works in imitation of Christ without a formal faith in Christ then that is the salvific work of Christ done in him, -- his justification has begun.
That Clement exhorts them to works, just as those who hold to sola fide do
Yes, the Protestant communities of faith do exhort their flock to good works. The difference is that authentic churches do so without telling them at the same time that they are not saved by them.
no man has the ability to do works which would morally merit justification
Of course one can. Matthews 25:31-46 say so. The rub is that the meriting is according to the sovereign will of Christ Who gave us the grace to be saved by out works.