A new and devastating quickie against Faith Alone?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Dude
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That’s a bit strange. Many Protestants believe, as a matter of their church"s teachings or of their own interpretation of scripture, that salvation cannot be lost, while the RCC officially teaches that it can be. And its quite illogical to say that we can have assurance of salvation just because we know that some are predestined to heaven. We have the knowledge that predestination is true, while only God knows with absolute certainty exactly who those predestined are.
God bless Fhansen,

I didn’t say everyone can have assurance of salvation.

In my # 37 post I said: God’s children/elect have Eternal Assurance of salvation.

The Scripture is a Catholic Book and the teachings of the Scripture is the teachings of the Catholic Church.

ACCORDING TO THE TRENT

We cannot know with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY we are among the elect.

ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURE

John 5:24; 1 John 5:13; 1 Cor.11:27-29; 2 Cor.13:5-6; we CAN KNOW we are saved we have eternal life, only the elect has eternal life.

If I DON’T KNOW / DON’T BELIEVE I have eternal life/elect and I still partake in the Eucharist, I **disobey God’s command **given to us in 2 Cor.13:5-6, (reinforced this command in 1 Cor.11:27-29) then I partake in the Eucharist without faith in unworthy manner and I’m guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. – I eat and drink judgment to myself.

**For the sake of the Eucharist ** we can know (John 5:24; 1 John 5:13) we have eternal life and according to God’s COMMAND in 2 Cor.13:5-6; 1 Cor.11:27-29; we MUS KNOW we have everlasting life/elect or we failed the test and we are not free to partake in the Eucharist.

**Summary: **Before we partake in the Eucharist, (not with absolute certainty) we MUST KNOW, we are among the elect and we should act accordingly.

So, If I say; I’m saved (I have eternal life) I’m among the elect, I neither violate the teaching of the Trent nor the Scripture.

If I don’t know/don’t believe I’m saved/elect and I still partake in the Eucharist, I DISOBEY GOD’S COMMAND, VIOLATE THE EUCHARIST and I’m GUILTY of the body and the blood of the Lord.

This is above a** VERY SERIOUS **matter.

The Eucharist is only for the saved/elect.

God bless.

LatinRight
 
I think I’ve come across a new and devastating simple argument against the Protestant doctrine of faith alone: We know that Paul says we are saved by “faith working through love” (Gal 5:6) and that James says faith without love (works) is dead (James 2:24-26). Protestants answer these passages by saying that we aren’t saved without love because love always accompanies true faith. But can this be?

If love always accompanies true faith, this means that prior to justification, a person with true faith also has love for God. But a person who is unsaved by definition cannot have love for God, and thus the Protestant claim is false. This means that justification is what bestows love upon the believer, and that prior to justification the person only has dead faith. This means what saves us is ultimately the love we have, which can also be lost by mortal sin, and that faith alone isn’t enough. And thus the Protestant doctrine of Faith Alone is turned on its head, because they want “justified by faith” to mean “eternally saved by faith alone,” yet all Paul really means by this is “faith receives love,” and from there we must persevere in love to the end (Rom 13:8-14). 😃
God bless Catholic Dude,

HOW TO READ THE NEW TESTAMENT By Etienne Charpentier

Nihil obsta
te: Father Anton Cowan

Imprimatur: Monsignor John Crowley, VG Westminster, 28 May 1985

Quote: “There is ONE CENTRAL QUESTION here: how can we become RIGHTEOUS and be SAVED?

We NOT justified by what we do (works, observing law) but by FAITH IN CHRIST.

Salvation is NOT a matter of achieving but RECEIVING IT FREELY from God hands, in faith.”

End quote. Emphasize mine.

**JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION

by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church **

3/17 Justification is SOLELY due to the forgiving and renewing mercy that God imparts

as a gift and we RECEIVE IN FAITH, and NEVER CAN MERIT IT ANY WAY.

4/25 We confess together that sinners are justified by faith in the saving action of God in

Christ. WHATEVER in the JUSTIFIED PRECEDES or FOLLOWS the free gift of faith is

NEITHER THE BASIS of justification NOR MERITS it.

4/27.The Catholic understanding also sees faith as fundamental in justification. For

without faith, no justification can take place. Thus justifying grace never becomes a

human possession. While Catholic teaching emphasizes the renewal of life by justifying

grace, this RENEVAL in FAITH, HOPE, LOVE is always dependent on God’s

unfathomable grace and contributes NOTHING to JUSTIFICATION. End quote.

God bless.

LatinRight
 
God bless Fhansen,

I didn’t say everyone can have assurance of salvation.

In my # 37 post I said: God’s children/elect have Eternal Assurance of salvation.
Yes, and how does that square with, “We have the knowledge that predestination is true, while only God knows with absolute certainty exactly who those predestined are”?
The Scripture is a Catholic Book and the teachings of the Scripture is the teachings of the Catholic Church.

ACCORDING TO THE TRENT

We cannot know with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY we are among the elect.

ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURE

John 5:24; 1 John 5:13; 1 Cor.11:27-29; 2 Cor.13:5-6; we CAN KNOW we are saved we have eternal life, only the elect has eternal life.

If I DON’T KNOW / DON’T BELIEVE I have eternal life/elect and I still partake in the Eucharist, I **disobey God’s command **given to us in 2 Cor.13:5-6, (reinforced this command in 1 Cor.11:27-29) then I partake in the Eucharist without faith in unworthy manner and I’m guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. – I eat and drink judgment to myself.

**For the sake of the Eucharist ** we can know (John 5:24; 1 John 5:13) we have eternal life and according to God’s COMMAND in 2 Cor.13:5-6; 1 Cor.11:27-29; we MUS KNOW we have everlasting life/elect or we failed the test and we are not free to partake in the Eucharist.

**Summary: **Before we partake in the Eucharist, (not with absolute certainty) we MUST KNOW, we are among the elect and we should act accordingly.

So, If I say; I’m saved (I have eternal life) I’m among the elect, I neither violate the teaching of the Trent nor the Scripture.

If I don’t know/don’t believe I’m saved/elect and I still partake in the Eucharist, I DISOBEY GOD’S COMMAND, VIOLATE THE EUCHARIST and I’m GUILTY of the body and the blood of the Lord.

This is above a** VERY SERIOUS **matter.

The Eucharist is only for the saved/elect.

God bless.

LatinRight
It’s very simple, really. Quit relying primarily on your own personal opinions about the meaning of Scripture. You can’t possibly know the full meaning of a 2000 year old NT written in very different times by different authors for different reasons or purposes. As far as responsible, erudite, scholars are concerned Scripture appears to even contradict itself on details such as times and places now and then.

But you want to pontificate anyway, viewing yourself as God’s chosen spokesperson and all. Don’t worry, though, many of us have been there, a major PIA at times. You just cannot know what literary devices John was using. Was he speaking generally? Was he employing hyperbole? Did he have a specific audience in mind? And are all who believe themselves to be numbered among the elect necessarily numbered among the elect? Step down a bit; leave such foolishness. You will eventually anyway.
 
Yes, and how does that square with, “We have the knowledge that predestination is true, while only God knows with absolute certainty exactly who those predestined are”?

It’s very simple, really. Quit relying primarily on your own personal opinions about the meaning of Scripture. You can’t possibly know the full meaning of a 2000 year old NT written in very different times by different authors for different reasons or purposes. As far as responsible, erudite, scholars are concerned Scripture appears to even contradict itself on details such as times and places now and then.

But you want to pontificate anyway, viewing yourself as God’s chosen spokesperson and all. Don’t worry, though, many of us have been there, a major PIA at times. You just cannot know what literary devices John was using. Was he speaking generally? Was he employing hyperbole? Did he have a specific audience in mind? And are all who believe themselves to be numbered among the elect necessarily numbered among the elect? Step down a bit; leave such foolishness. You will eventually anyway.
God bless Fhansen,

My faith is in the teachings of the Catholic Church and the teachings of the Holy Spirit.

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE by Fr. John Harden SJ.

Quote: “The Scriptures are holy because their main author is the all-holy God. But they

are also holy because they are able to sanctify those who READ the Bible as NO OTHER

LITERATURE in the world is capable of doing.

St. Thomas does not hesitate to speak of the Scriptures as a KIND OF SACRAMENT.

SIMULAR to what happens when we receive BAPTISM or the EUCHARIST.

**The same Holy Spirit who first inspired the Bible CONTINUES TO ENLIGHTEN those who

now READ the Bible** .” End quote.

[CCC 108]; Still, the Christian faith is not a “religion of the book.”

Christianity is a religion of the “Word” of God, “not a written and mute word, but incarnate and living.”

If the Scriptures are not remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God,

must, through the Holy Spirit, “open [our] minds to understand the Scriptures.” End quote.

God bless.

LatinRight
 
God bless Fhansen,

My faith is in the teachings of the Catholic Church and the teachings of the Holy Spirit.

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIBLE by Fr. John Harden SJ.

Quote: “The Scriptures are holy because their main author is the all-holy God. But they

are also holy because they are able to sanctify those who READ the Bible as NO OTHER

LITERATURE in the world is capable of doing.

St. Thomas does not hesitate to speak of the Scriptures as a KIND OF SACRAMENT.

SIMULAR to what happens when we receive BAPTISM or the EUCHARIST.

**The same Holy Spirit who first inspired the Bible CONTINUES TO ENLIGHTEN those who

now READ the Bible** .” End quote.

[CCC 108]; Still, the Christian faith is not a “religion of the book.”

Christianity is a religion of the “Word” of God, “not a written and mute word, but incarnate and living.”

If the Scriptures are not remain a dead letter, Christ, the eternal Word of the living God,

must, through the Holy Spirit, “open [our] minds to understand the Scriptures.” End quote.

God bless.

LatinRight
Yes, you just forget this part, which has been posted before, seeing how you pick and choose which Catholic teachings to actually follow:

113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"81).

You’ve already stated that that your understanding of the faith and Scripture is often at odds with and superior to that of the Church’s even though her understanding dates back to the beginnings of Christianity whereas yours is whatever you happen to decide is true after supposedly being opened by Christ to understand Scripture even though others claiming the same inspiration as often as not disagree with you anyway! You might as well toss a coin. Ridiculous
 
Yes, you just forget this part, which has been posted before, seeing how you pick and choose which Catholic teachings to actually follow:

113 2. Read the Scripture within “the living Tradition of the whole Church”. According to a saying of the Fathers, Sacred Scripture is written principally in the Church’s heart rather than in documents and records, for the Church carries in her Tradition the living memorial of God’s Word, and it is the Holy Spirit who gives her the spiritual interpretation of the Scripture (". . . according to the spiritual meaning which the Spirit grants to the Church"81).

You’ve already stated that that your understanding of the faith and Scripture is often at odds with and superior to that of the Church’s even though her understanding dates back to the beginnings of Christianity whereas yours is whatever you happen to decide is true after supposedly being opened by Christ to understand Scripture even though others claiming the same inspiration as often as not disagree with you anyway! You might as well toss a coin. Ridiculous
God bless Fhansen,

Thank you for your post. Yes that is important point too.

I would like ask a favor.

Several days ago I have read two articles on Atonement.

One from Richard Rohr who is a Franciscan Catholic Priest: Incarnation instead of Atonement and the other: The Meaning of the Atonement by Mark M. Mattison.

When I read both articles, I realized what I believed as an Evangelical that the ransom paid to God the Father I was wrong.

Now I don’t know what is the truth in this area.

If you could Fhansen please put me in the right direction to study the Atonement. In particularly to whom was the ransom paid?

Thank you in advance.

God bless

LatinRight
 
If you could Fhansen please put me in the right direction to study the Atonement. In particularly to whom was the ransom paid?
Scripture does not say to whom the ransom is paid. Ransoms are paid to captors and God did not hold us captive. I’ve seen some say that you would be straining the metaphor to identify a payee and others say that the ransom was paid to the Devil. Choose which one helps you to understand the atonement better but for Catholics a ransom paid to God is incorrect.
 
I’m not sure I entirely follow the argument there. My first Anglican church was very evangelical and believed in salvation through faith alone. We were always taught that love is the expression or evidence of faith. So a person wouldn’t have love for God before they have true faith. I’m not sure love and faith can be that clearly separated (which I think is what James is saying).
That’s interesting. I thought Anglicans believed in rebirth (sanctifying grace) through Baptism. I guess each Anglican church is different (which is also something I have heard).
 
The thief on the cross case closed!
The thief on the cross made an act of assent of the will. He also witnessed publicly to the other thief prior to Jesus’ declaration that “you shall be with me in paradise”. These are both “works”. A “work” doesn’t mean only going door to door. In point of fact, the Billy Graham/Bill Bright “sinner’s prayer” formula is a “work” in itself which is completely unnecessary in the Christian (Catholic/Orthodox) economy of salvation. E.g. Infant baptism effects salvation with the absolute absence of any work on the part of the infant. Not so the “sinner’s prayer”.
 
The thief on the cross made an act of assent of the will. He also witnessed publicly to the other thief prior to Jesus’ declaration that “you shall be with me in paradise”. These are both “works”. A “work” doesn’t mean only going door to door. In point of fact, the Billy Graham/Bill Bright “sinner’s prayer” formula is a “work” in itself which is completely unnecessary in the Christian (Catholic/Orthodox) economy of salvation. E.g. Infant baptism effects salvation with the absolute absence of any work on the part of the infant. Not so the “sinner’s prayer”.
Yes, more would’ve been demanded, as per Luke 12;48, of the thief on the cross had he somehow survived longer. He did the best he could with what he was given at the time.
 
OP wondering here in this quiet place WHY you or anyone would even think of this? Make peace my friend,make peace and create bonds not war… Life and faith are precious and there is work to do. Blessings and peace this day and night, this dark and light,
Because this is an apologetics forum?
 
Scripture does not say to whom the ransom is paid. Ransoms are paid to captors and God did not hold us captive. I’ve seen some say that you would be straining the metaphor to identify a payee and others say that the ransom was paid to the Devil. Choose which one helps you to understand the atonement better but for Catholics a ransom paid to God is incorrect.
God bless Chesster,

Thank you for your post it was helpful.

God bless. LatinRight
 
God bless Fhansen,

Thank you for your post. Yes that is important point too.

I would like ask a favor.

Several days ago I have read two articles on Atonement.

One from Richard Rohr who is a Franciscan Catholic Priest: Incarnation instead of Atonement and the other: The Meaning of the Atonement by Mark M. Mattison.

When I read both articles, I realized what I believed as an Evangelical that the ransom paid to God the Father I was wrong.

Now I don’t know what is the truth in this area.

If you could Fhansen please put me in the right direction to study the Atonement. In particularly to whom was the ransom paid?

Thank you in advance.

God bless

LatinRight
Sure, no problem, right after I give a full, clear, explanation of the Trinity :). The atonement is considered to be a mystery, with various theories surrounding it. Terms like “ransom” are used figuratively, to emphasize the fact that man’s fallen state is an anomalous injustice in creation, one that must be dealt with once and for all in order for this injustice to be rectified.

Anyway, what makes the atonement so awesome is that by it, God was reconciling His own creation with Himself. Through Christ man makes amends to the God he offended, but simultaneously it’s God, Himself, who’s paying the price! He makes the amends for us. Only God can save man, His beloved wayward creation; that’s the central message. And He was willing to suffer an excruciatingly humiliating and painful passion and death to both demonstrate and accomplish that, so great is His love. What more do we really need to know?

What God wants from man is that same kind of love. He wants us to forego our sinful ways, our pride, our self-righteousness, our selfishness, our uncalled for anger and violence, our greed that causes so much harm to neighbor, our sin that almost cavalierly crucified Him, the most perfect Being in existence, so that we’ll finally look upon the One we’ve pierced and be convicted and so turn and follow Him in rejecting the world’s ungodly ways, turning fully towards righteousness, fully towards love first above all else. Satan, BTW, is owed absolutely nothing, a bit player relatively speaking.
 
dreath.

Welcome to CAF.

I see your first post was . . . .
The thief on the cross case closed!
Since other people have appealed to me to try to prove justification by faith ALONE in the past (many times), I will assume you mean the same thing (please correct me if you mean something else).

But the passages concerning “The Good Thief” do not even hint at justification by faith ALONE. Those passages never say anything about faith ALONE either.

First of all we know from John 4:1-2 Jesus’ disciples began to “Baptize” disciples.

As far as we know, the Good Thief MAY have been Baptized, fallen away, and was, with the GRACE of Christ, coming back.

Maybe the Good Thief wasn’t Baptized either. We just don’t know.

Whatever it was, the Good Thief – by the GRACE of Christ – had a perfect “deathbed contrition”. (By “perfect” I mean he had this contrition for the correct reasons.)

The Good Thief on his proverbial deathbed DID display faith to be sure.

But is that the ONLY virtue the Good Thief displayed? No!

Let’s go deeper into these passages.

(Some of the following will be from a prior post of mine . . . . )

As we look into “The Good Thief”, we will see on display the Graces of . . . .
  • Good Work or “Charity” (“admonishing our fellow sinners” is the third spiritual WORK of mercy, as in “rebuke” the other thief)
  • Repentance (our “due reward” for our sins)
  • Faith (“Your Kingdom”)
  • Hope (“Remember me”, I hope to go to Heaven)
  • Humbling oneself (This sentence against us is, “just” or “indeed justly”)
Let’s look at the episode of the good thief closer to see if it teaches us sola fide.

We will even see the good thief initially attack and deride Jesus!

But Jesus still gifts the man with “a death-bed contrition”. Jesus provides the GRACE for the good thief’s conversion.

Initially the good thief was attacking Jesus right along with many others.

MATTHEW 27:35-40, 44 35 And when they had crucified him, they divided his garments among them by casting lots; 36 then they sat down and kept watch over him there. 37 And over his head they put the charge against him, which read, “This is Jesus the King of the Jews.” 38 Then two robbers were crucified with him, one on the right and one on the left. 39 And those who passed by derided him, wagging their heads 40 and saying, “You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross.” . . . . 44 And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way.

MARK 15:27-32 27 And with him they crucified two robbers, one on his right and one on his left. 29 And those who passed by derided him, wagging their heads, and saying, “Aha! You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, 30 save yourself, and come down from the cross!” 31 So also the chief priests mocked him to one another with the scribes, saying, “He saved others; he cannot save himself. 32 Let the Christ, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross, that we may see and believe.” **Those who were crucified with him also reviled him. **

Some of the sola fide people will say it is St. Luke’s Gospel account of the good thief that will show us sola fide being taught.

We’ll get to St. Luke’s account shortly and see that far from teaching us sola fide, St. Luke’s Gospel suggests otherwise.

St. Luke’s Gospel certainly shows “faith” within the good thief – “Jesus remember me when you come into your kingdom.” This thief correctly believes Jesus can deliver him. He correctly believes Jesus has a “kingdom”. This is all true. It certainly teaches justification by faith.

But is this ALL it teach us?

Does the St Luke’s passage of the good thief teach justification by faith, ALONE?

No!

Incidentally. The “one on his right and one on his left” point from Matthew 27:38 above, SHOULD ALSO hearken us back to Matthew 25 when Jesus in His KINGDOM tells us about people on his right and left too.

MATTHEW 25:34-46 34 Then the King will say to those at his right hand, 'Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; 35 for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? 38 And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? 39 And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?’ 40 And the King will answer them, **‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.’ **41 Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; 42 for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?’ 45 Then he will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.’ 46 And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life."
 
Let’s go deeper:

LUKE 23:32-38 32 Two others also, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him. 33 And when they came to the place which is called The Skull, there they crucified him, and the criminals, one on the right and one on the left. 34 And Jesus said, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.” And they cast lots to divide his garments. 35 And the people stood by, watching; but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, “He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!” 36 The soldiers also mocked him, coming up and offering him vinegar, 37 and saying, “If you are the King of the Jews, save yourself!” 38 There was also an inscription over him, “This is the King of the Jews.” . . . (verses 39-46 will be presented below)

So as we lead up to the verses concerning the “Good Thief” we again ask, does Luke’s account of the Good Thief teach us justification by faith ALONE?

It displays faith to be sure!

**But the Good Thief passages ALSO show . . . . **

But it also shows the good thief hopes to go to Heaven – “Jesus remember me”.

The verses show the hope of the good thief here. He hopes to get to Heaven by the power of Jesus’ remembrance. “Remember me” – I hope to go to Heaven.

ROMANS 8:24a
24 For in this hope we were saved. . . .

But it even shows more. It shows works!

The good thief now admonishes or rebukes the other thief for his reviling Jesus, even though before this, he himself was reviling Jesus too!

Admonishing our fellow sinners in love is a spiritual work of mercy, but a “work” it is.

How many times have you heard someone use bad language and have not had the fortitude to admonish our fellow sinner? Or how often was someone else committing some other sinful act that you saw and you (or I) neglected to rebuke or correct them?

Yet this good thief, with all of his suffering, finds the grace (given to him) to rebuke a fellow sinner!

And yes there is even more.

The good thief “humbles himself” (as Jesus in Luke 18:14 taught us earlier with the repentant publican - “every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted”).

The good thief says in verse 41 concerning their sinful DEEDS: “And we indeed justly; for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds”.

This suggests a repentance in the good thief as well (*which is itself COOPERATING with GRACE – see 2nd Timothy 2:25-26 to see “repentance” as cooperating with grace).

LUKE 23:39-46 39 One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!” 40 But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly; for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” 42 And he said, “Jesus, **remember me **when you come into your kingdom.” 43 And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” 44 It was now about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour, 45 while the sun’s light failed; and the curtain of the temple was torn in two. 46 Then Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!” And having said this he breathed his last.

So we’ve seen faith, hope, and a charitable work DEMONSTRATED from the good thief.

We’ve seen this man humbling himself and recalled Jesus’ words “every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted”.

We’ve seen a warning about sin and the recompense for sin, - “we are receiving the due reward of our deeds” (there is no evidence the “bad” thief ever repented).

We’ve also seen at least the suggestion of repentance in the good thief.

Far from teaching sola fide, this set of verses, if anything, refutes sola fide.

**The Good Thief DISPLAYS . . . **
  • Good Work or Charity? Check.
  • Repentance? Check.
  • Faith? Check.
  • Hope? Check.
  • Humbling oneself? Check.
Someone might object and say: “Well this is all because of the guy’s faith.”

But notice they have to assert something that is NOT stated in Scripture.

Before it was: “This MUST be an illustration of sola fide as this guy didn’t have time for any good works”, BUT NOW it often gets turned into . . . “Well the good works came from his faith”.

The faith ALONE proponent must ignore the Biblical aspects here of repentance, hope, and humbling himself (none of which fit into justification by faith ALONE) or try to assert these are mere “incidentals to the passages”.

The “Faith ALONE” teaching we may have gotten as kids, sometimes skews our reading of Scripture so bad that we can’t even see the “hope”, “charitable WORKS”, etc. DISPLAYED here by the Good Thief.

And the Good Thief even demonstrates his work BEFORE he demonstrates his faith (I am NOT asserting he can save himself from “his work”. I AM asserting “his work” is itself “a grace”, just like his “faith” is a “grace” too - Yet he COOPERATES with these GRACES).

NO SOLA FIDE HERE!

The synoptic passages concerning the Good Thief do not teach or suggest sola fide (nor is sola fide taught anywhere in Scripture. It is specifically taught against).

Thus the Good Thief passages do not illustrate justification by faith ALONE unless you read-into these verses things that are not there and read-out of the passages things that ARE there.
 
Sure, no problem, right after I give a full, clear, explanation of the Trinity :). The atonement is considered to be a mystery, with various theories surrounding it. Terms like “ransom” are used figuratively, to emphasize the fact that man’s fallen state is an anomalous injustice in creation, one that must be dealt with once and for all in order for this injustice to be rectified.

Anyway, what makes the atonement so awesome is that by it, God was reconciling His own creation with Himself. Through Christ man makes amends to the God he offended, but simultaneously it’s God, Himself, who’s paying the price! He makes the amends for us. Only God can save man, His beloved wayward creation; that’s the central message. And He was willing to suffer an excruciatingly humiliating and painful passion and death to both demonstrate and accomplish that, so great is His love. What more do we really need to know?

What God wants from man is that same kind of love. He wants us to forego our sinful ways, our pride, our self-righteousness, our selfishness, our uncalled for anger and violence, our greed that causes so much harm to neighbor, our sin that almost cavalierly crucified Him, the most perfect Being in existence, so that we’ll finally look upon the One we’ve pierced and be convicted and so turn and follow Him in rejecting the world’s ungodly ways, turning fully towards righteousness, fully towards love first above all else. Satan, BTW, is owed absolutely nothing, a bit player relatively speaking.
God bless Fhansen,

Thanks you for your post.

The last couple of days I read a lot of teachings on the Atonement, I like the subject.

In my view, your post is a good summary what I have learned.

God bless. LatinRight
 
The thief on the cross case closed!
That doesn’t work since Christ had not died on the cross yet and therefore he is an exception since at that point he was still under the law. Your bad theology based upon gross misinterpretation of the Word of God.

Moreover your doctrine flies in the face of the context of the rest of Word of God . Look here at Hebrews 11 which lists a host of individuals who were not at all saved by any such “faith alone” If anything this whole chapter teaches that salvation is by faith and works.

James tells us all very plainly that faith without works is dead. Look here at the context.
***James 2:[17] So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.
[18] But some one will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.
[19] You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe – and shudder.
[20] Do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren?
[21] Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?
[22] You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works,
[23] and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God.
[24] You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
[25] And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
[26] For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead. ***
Of course here you also ignore the whole context of Our Lord’s very words in ***Matthew 25:[31] “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne.
[32] Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats,
[33] and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left.
[34] Then the King will say to those at his right hand, Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; [35] for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, [36] I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' [37] Then the righteous will answer him, Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink?
[38] And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee?
[39] And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?’
[40] And the King will answer them, Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.' [41] Then he will say to those at his left hand, Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;
[42] for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
[43] I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’
[44] Then they also will answer, Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?' [45] Then he will answer them, Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.’
[46] And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

***No…your beliefs are not based upon what the Bible actually says.
 
You see, I just don’t accept that most / all Protestants are intending to claim that “faith” can be strong and can hold one in good stead regardless of behaving abominably (ie. absent love). Evidently, such behaviour reveals a lack of commitment to faith. Sinning is a turning away from God, an abandonment of faith, even if only temporarily.
You are correct.
 
Let’s stay on-point…

And yet the above statement (bolded) seems to be the interpretation that some ascribe to the statement “salvation is assured by faith alone” [or at least the ‘upshot’ of that statement].
Justification is by grace alone through faith alone. The short hand sola fide is a statement regarding the fact that justification is a work of God in us, that we are therefore only justified by faith, and not by works. Justification is a gift, not earned or merited by anything we do.

That is all it means. It isn’t an exclusion of good works.

Jon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top