A Question for Sola Fide "Faith Alone" Protestants

[Legal_Eagle]

Here’s a retread of a question I posed on another thread. I never really got a good answer to it so here goes again.

There are several threads that have touched on the question of justification by faith alone vs. works playing a part in our justification. After reading through the threads it seems to me that what we are really arguing over (Calvinists aside) comes down to semantics. It seems as though we are actually saying the same things but using different language to describe what we mean.

Passages from Romans and James seem to illustrate my point.

Romans
Chapter 4

1 What then can we say that Abraham found, our ancestor according to the flesh?
2 Indeed, if Abraham was justified on the basis of his works, he has reason to boast; but this was not so in the sight of God.
3 For what does the scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

James
Chapter 2

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 the works.
23 Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called “the friend of God.”
24 See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

I don’t believe, and I don’t think anyone else here believes, that St. Paul and St. James are contradicting each other. I believe that they were doing what we seem to be doing, using different language to describe the same thing. Semantics, in other words.

What do you Sola Fide folks think about this? If you disagree, how then do you explain the passage from James in light of the passage from Romans and vice versa?

 

[Atemi]

Hello,

I’ll give you a response…

Here’s a retread of a question I posed on another thread. I never really got a good answer to it so here goes again.

There are several threads that have touched on the question of justification by faith alone vs. works playing a part in our justification. After reading through the threads it seems to me that what we are really arguing over (Calvinists aside) comes down to semantics. It seems as though we are actually saying the same things but using different language to describe what we mean.

It would admittedly be great, but that is not the case.

Passages from Romans and James seem to illustrate my point.

I don’t believe, and I don’t think anyone else here believes, that St. Paul and St. James are contradicting each other.

Agreed.

I believe that they were doing what we seem to be doing, using different language to describe the same thing. Semantics, in other words.

What do you Sola Fide folks think about this?

As I said, this is not a language issue, but a doctrinal one.

If you disagree, how then do you explain the passage from James in light of the passage from Romans and vice versa?

They are not speaking of the same justification. We must be careful not to take one meaning for “justification” and transfer that to every usage.

It is like the word “save” or “saved” (sozo). It does not mean the same thing every time it is used. This goes for our language as well. Context is key.

Romans is specifically addressing salvation.
James is specifically addressing false claims of faith.

One is addressing justification before God, the other before man.

Please note that Abraham was justified before God by faith way before He ever offered Issac as mentioned in James.

 

[DallasCatholic]

Hello,

I’ll give you a response…

It would admittedly be great, but that is not the case.

Agreed.

As I said, this is not a language issue, but a doctrinal one.

They are not speaking of the same justification. We must be careful not to take one meaning for “justification” and transfer that to every usage.

It is like the word “save” or “saved” (sozo). It does not mean the same thing every time it is used. This goes for our language as well. Context is key.

Romans is specifically addressing salvation.
James is specifically addressing false claims of faith.

One is addressing justification before God, the other before man.

Please note that Abraham was justified before God by faith way before He ever offered Issac as mentioned in James.

So, are you purposfully ignoring the last part of verse 14 “Can his faith save him?” Clearly James is addressing far more than “false claims of faith”. Also, are you claiming that James was wrong in verse 21?

 

[joshua_b]

Hello,

Romans is specifically addressing salvation.
James is specifically addressing false claims of faith.

One is addressing justification before God, the other before man.

Please note that Abraham was justified before God by faith way before He ever offered Issac as mentioned in James.

I am definitely NOT a biblical scholar, but I have a very common sense litmus test for any proposition of what the Bible “actually means…in context”. I simply substitute the proposed meaning in place of the original wording of the passage being discussed.

Go to James and substitute “false claims of faith” for the word (or words) you suggest refer to this and see exactly how it reads.

 

[jam070406]

St. Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies (Post 202 A.D.):

“When we hear, ‘Your faith has saved you,’ we do not understand (The Lord) to say simply that they will be saved who have believed in whatever manner, even if works have not followed. To begin with, it was to the Jews alone that He spoke this phrase, who had lived in accord with the law and blamelessly, and who had lacked only faith in the Lord.”

 

[Atemi]

So, are you purposfully ignoring the last part of verse 14 “Can his faith save him?”

No. Not at all.

I was only pointing out the specific purposes for which they were writing…what they were primarily discussing.

As to verse 14:

“Can that faith save him?”

What kind of “faith” is James addressing? He said what kind of “faith” in the same verse right before:

“What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works?”

Anyone who has been a follower of Christ for any period of time surely has known people who SAY they are Christians and that they believe in Jesus Christ…but how do they act?

No.

James is right.

Lip service will not save anyone.

Saving faith ACTS. It moves.

Also, are you claiming that James was wrong in verse 21?

This has already been explained. I make no such foolish claim.

LOL.

 

[Atemi]

I am definitely NOT a biblical scholar, but I have a very common sense litmus test for any proposition of what the Bible “actually means…in context”. I simply substitute the proposed meaning in place of the original wording of the passage being discussed.

Go to James and substitute “false claims of faith” for the word (or words) you suggest refer to this and see exactly how it reads.

So you went and substituded “false claims of faith” everywhere “justification” or “justified” is used in that text?

LOL.

I think you missed my point. That exercise will not yield you anything.

 

[guanophore]

James Chapter 2

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 the works.
23 Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called “the friend of God.”
24 See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

James is specifically addressing false claims of faith.

One is addressing justification before God, the other before man.

Please note that Abraham was justified before God by faith way before He ever offered Issac as mentioned in James.

Ok, I am going to try to understand this. What does that mean, a “false claim of faith”.

 

[DallasCatholic]

No. Not at all.

I was only pointing out the specific purposes for which they were writing…what they were primarily discussing.

As to verse 14:

“Can that faith save him?”

What kind of “faith” is James addressing? He said what kind of “faith” in the same verse right before:

“What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works?”

Anyone who has been a follower of Christ for any period of time surely has known people who SAY they are Christians and that they believe in Jesus Christ…but how do they act?

No.

James is right.

Lip service will not save anyone.

Saving faith ACTS. It moves.

This has already been explained. I make no such foolish claim.

LOL.

LOL, what a smokescreen you concoct. I don’t know what translation of the Bible that you are using, probably the NIV I suspect. Your original contention was that:

Romans is specifically addressing salvation.
James is specifically addressing false claims of faith.

One is addressing justification before God, the other before man.

Why would James be concerned about justification before man? He wouldn’t, clearly he is addressing salvation as you admit in your own words.

Lip service will not save anyone.

Saving faith ACTS. It moves.

So, now that you agree with Catholic teaching I guess this discussion is over. lol.

 

[Pax]

Hello,

I’ll give you a response…

It would admittedly be great, but that is not the case.

Agreed.

As I said, this is not a language issue, but a doctrinal one.

They are not speaking of the same justification. We must be careful not to take one meaning for “justification” and transfer that to every usage.

It is like the word “save” or “saved” (sozo). It does not mean the same thing every time it is used. This goes for our language as well. Context is key.

Romans is specifically addressing salvation.
James is specifically addressing false claims of faith.

One is addressing justification before God, the other before man.

Please note that Abraham was justified before God by faith way before He ever offered Issac as mentioned in James.

You are way off. The apostle James uses the words “justify” and “salvation.” What you are suggesting requires that James did not know the meaning of the terms or how to use them.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

So, now that you agree with Catholic teaching I guess this discussion is over. lol.

I think there’s something to the semantic issue, however. I think what Atemi is saying is that he who really believes will act – that works are natural to a believer.

The Catholic POV is that faith alone is not enough; one must also do good works. That position does not contradict the notion that a believer is one who, by definition and extension, WILL act.

Are we not, after all, on the same page?

Peace,
Dante

 

[Atemi]

Ok, I am going to try to understand this. What does that mean, a “false claim of faith”.

James is addressing those who say one thing, but do another.

vs 14 “What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?”

James forwards a rhetorical question that every reasonable person can understand. The answer is emphatically no, as it is not true faith.

This problem is timeless in our faith, and is especially dangerous to those who witness it and practice it.

Across the board, our churches are plagued with folks who SAY they have faith, but it doesn’t show on the outside.

 

[Atemi]

You are way off. The apostle James uses the words “justify” and “salvation.” What you are suggesting requires that James did not know the meaning of the terms or how to use them.

No.

The terms do not mean the exact same thing every time they are used. This is basic.

Do a search in the NT for the word for “justify” or “justified” and then take one meaning and context and apply it across the board.

All that will result is a mess.

Do the same for “saved” or “save.” A total mess if you apply one meaning and context to every usage.

It is no different in English.

 

[Atemi]

LOL, what a smokescreen you concoct. I don’t know what translation of the Bible that you are using, probably the NIV I suspect.

Thank you for the gratuitous insult, but I was using the Catholic NAB in this case:

nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/james/james2.htm

I guess officially approved Catholic translations are worthy of mockery now?

Maybe if non-Catholics quote and use them.

I understand.

Your original contention was that:

**Romans is specifically addressing salvation.
James is specifically addressing false claims of faith.

One is addressing justification before God, the other before man**.

Yes. A fair read of James 2 is all about actions among and for our fellow man and the emptiness of lip service.

Why would James be concerned about justification before man?

Because it is before men that our faith is witnessed and proven.

It is not proven before God because God already knows if we are among the elect or not. Actually, He knew from eternity past if our faith would be true or dead.

It is before men that we prove our claims to faith. It is there that is the arena.

“Demonstrate your faith to me…”
“I will demonstrate my faith to you…”

Not to God…but to man…

He wouldn’t, clearly he is addressing salvation as you admit in your own words.

Yes. Just because the bulk of the text is dealing with false claims of faith doe snot mean the writer cannot mention salvation.

But how to be saved is not the primary topic of the chapter. It is not a treatise on how we are saved.

**Lip service will not save anyone.

Saving faith ACTS. It moves.**

So, now that you agree with Catholic teaching I guess this discussion is over. lol.

No.

The difference is that I reject the idea that works merit grace and eternal life from a Holy God (CCC 2010).

Faith = salvation + works

not…

Works (+ faith?) = salvation

 

[guanophore]

James is addressing those who say one thing, but do another.

vs 14 “What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?”

James forwards a rhetorical question that every reasonable person can understand. The answer is emphatically no, as it is not true faith.

This problem is timeless in our faith, and is especially dangerous to those who witness it and practice it.

Across the board, our churches are plagued with folks who SAY they have faith, but it doesn’t show on the outside.

But, Atemi! If I confess with my mouth that Jesus is Lord, and in my heart I have faith, then I am saved! God’s word says that. How can you say otherwise? Who are you to judge whether my salvation is “just talk”?

 

[guanophore]

No.

The terms do not mean the exact same thing every time they are used. This is basic.

Do a search in the NT for the word for “justify” or “justified” and then take one meaning and context and apply it across the board.

All that will result is a mess.

Do the same for “saved” or “save.” A total mess if you apply one meaning and context to every usage.

It is no different in English.

But, when it comes to salvation, Atemi, it is the same. People are only saved once. When one believes in the heart, and professes with the lips. That is salvation, plain and simple, across the board.

 

[Atemi]

But, Atemi! If I confess with my mouth that Jesus is Lord, and in my heart I have faith, then I am saved! God’s word says that. How can you say otherwise? Who are you to judge whether my salvation is “just talk”?

I am sorry.

Can you please link to where I judged anything about your salvation.

I lost that post…

 

[Atemi]

But, when it comes to salvation, Atemi, it is the same. People are only saved once. When one believes in the heart, and professes with the lips. That is salvation, plain and simple, across the board.

You are preaching to the choir.

You need to take a step back and take a breath.

 

[DallasCatholic]

Thank you for the gratuitous insult, but I was using the Catholic NAB in this case:

nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/james/james2.htm

I guess officially approved Catholic translations are worthy of mockery now?

Maybe if non-Catholics quote and use them.

I understand.

Yes. A fair read of James 2 is all about actions among and for our fellow man and the emptiness of lip service.

Because it is before men that our faith is witnessed and proven.

It is not proven before God because God already knows if we are among the elect or not. Actually, He knew from eternity past if our faith would be true or dead.

It is before men that we prove our claims to faith. It is there that is the arena.

“Demonstrate your faith to me…”
“I will demonstrate my faith to you…”

Not to God…but to man…

He wouldn’t, clearly he is addressing salvation as you admit in your own words.

Yes. Just because the bulk of the text is dealing with false claims of faith doe snot mean the writer cannot mention salvation.

But how to be saved is not the primary topic of the chapter. It is not a treatise on how we are saved.

No.

The difference is that I reject the idea that works merit grace and eternal life from a Holy God (CCC 2010).

Faith = salvation + works

not…

Works (+ faith?) = salvation

So, as with Scripture you attempt to pull something out of context within the Catechism. Here you go:
2010 Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life. Even temporal goods like health and friendship can be merited in accordance with God’s wisdom. These graces and goods are the object of Christian prayer. Prayer attends to the grace we need for meritorious actions.

2011 The charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently their merit before God and before men. the saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.

It seems that, in your cherry picking of the Catechism, you read all but the last sentance of 2010 and ignored 2011 since it didn’t fit your line of reasoning. Despite your erroneous opinion, the Church does not teach that we can earn our way into Heaven.

 

[DanteAlighieri]

With all due respect, gang, I think the negativity and contentiousness in this thread is getting in the way of the debate.

Peace,
Dante