A simple argument refuting Faith Alone

[Catholic_Dude]

In the course of talking with a Protestant, I came up with an argument I think refutes Faith Alone by failing to understand what kind of works Paul was condemning. Here is the argument:

1. My first question to the Protestant is: In places like Acts 15:1 we see the Judaizers teach, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Does this mean circumcision a ‘good work’?
2. If circumcision is not a ‘good work’, then why would it make sense to say Paul was condemning all good works in general when he said “faith not works of the law”? (Keep in mind Paul condemned getting circumcised in places like Gal 5:3-4.)
3. If circumcision is a ‘good work’, then why don’t Christians get circumcised and obey other laws (e.g. dietary laws) in the Law of Moses?

At this point, the Protestant is in a bind, for if they say circumcision is a good work, then they have no reason why Christians are avoiding doing such ‘good works’. If they say no, it is not a good work, then they cannot argue Paul was arguing “faith alone” when he said ‘no’ to ‘works of the law’.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I think it’s sound. What would you say to the Protestant who asks you if circumcision is a good work?

 

[JonNC]

In the course of talking with a Protestant, I came up with an argument I think refutes Faith Alone by failing to understand what kind of works Paul was condemning. Here is the argument:

1. My first question to the Protestant is: In places like Acts 15:1 we see the Judaizers teach, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Does this mean circumcision a ‘good work’?
2. If circumcision is not a ‘good work’, then why would it make sense to say Paul was condemning all good works in general when he said “faith not works of the law”? (Keep in mind Paul condemned getting circumcised in places like Gal 5:3-4.)
3. If circumcision is a ‘good work’, then why don’t Christians get circumcised and obey other laws (e.g. dietary laws) in the Law of Moses?

At this point, the Protestant is in a bind, for if they say circumcision is a good work, then they have no reason why Christians are avoiding doing such ‘good works’. If they say no, it is not a good work, then they cannot argue Paul was arguing “faith alone” when he said ‘no’ to ‘works of the law’.

Are you under the impression that sola fide excludes the necessity of good works?

Jon

 

[ClamDigger]

And let’s not forget:
“Then he shall say to them also that shall be on his left hand: Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat: I was thirsty, and you gave me not to drink. I was a stranger, and you took me not in: naked, and you covered me not: sick and in prison, and you did not visit me. Then they also shall answer him, saying: 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? Then he shall answer them, saying: Amen I say to you, as long as you did it not to one of these least, neither did you do it to me. And these shall go into everlasting punishment: but the just, into life everlasting.”
Obviously these people recognized Jesus as the Lord, but they did not show their faith through their love for mankind, seeing as how we “are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them” (Ephesians 2.10) and our “end shall be according to [our] works.” (2 Corinthians 11.15)

In the course of talking with a Protestant, I came up with an argument I think refutes Faith Alone by failing to understand what kind of works Paul was condemning. Here is the argument:

1. My first question to the Protestant is: In places like Acts 15:1 we see the Judaizers teach, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” Does this mean circumcision a ‘good work’?
2. If circumcision is not a ‘good work’, then why would it make sense to say Paul was condemning all good works in general when he said “faith not works of the law”? (Keep in mind Paul condemned getting circumcised in places like Gal 5:3-4.)
3. If circumcision is a ‘good work’, then why don’t Christians get circumcised and obey other laws (e.g. dietary laws) in the Law of Moses?

At this point, the Protestant is in a bind, for if they say circumcision is a good work, then they have no reason why Christians are avoiding doing such ‘good works’. If they say no, it is not a good work, then they cannot argue Paul was arguing “faith alone” when he said ‘no’ to ‘works of the law’.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Are you under the impression that sola fide excludes the necessity of good works?

Jon

Are you under the impression that these threads are merely means of stirring up trouble where none exists?

 

[JonNC]

Are you under the impression that these threads are merely means of stirring up trouble where none exists?

Oh, no. Not at all. That would mean that I am trying to read the OP heart. If that was the impression I left, I hereby apologize to you and the OP.

I just know that there is an impression with some - in part part because some protestants wrongly make the claim - that sola fide denies the importance of good works. Not all of us take that unscriptural stand.

Jon

 

[MarcoPolo]

Not all of us take that unscriptural stand.

That is true, not all. The OP’s angle should only be asked of those who do.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Are you under the impression that sola fide excludes the necessity of good works?

Jon

Not at all! Just the opposite!

Your question fits right into my argument, let me turn it around on you: Does sola-fide exclude the necessity of circumcision?

If you say circumcision is a “good work,” then you’re apparently suggesting circumcision is something all good sola-fide Christians should do.

If you say circumcision is not a “good work,” then you cannot read Paul as saying “saved faith apart from good works” since Paul used circumcision as his prime example.

See the problem now?

 

[JonNC]

Not at all! Just the opposite!

Your question fits right into my argument, let me turn it around on you: Does sola-fide exclude the necessity of circumcision?

If you say circumcision is a “good work,” then you’re apparently suggesting circumcision is something all good sola-fide Christians should do.

If you say circumcision is not a “good work,” then you cannot read Paul as saying “saved faith apart from good works” since Paul used circumcision as his prime example.

See the problem now?

No. Circumcision may or may not be a good work. I don’t know if Jews even view it as a work. For Christians, it is not a necessary work/event, good or not.

Jon

 

[Catholic_Dude]

No. Circumcision may or may not be a good work. I don’t know if Jews even view it as a work. For Christians, it is not a necessary work/event, good or not.

Jon

Interesting response.

Do you think circumcision is a “work of the Law,” as Paul used the phrase?

 

[shocktrooper]

JonNC

Do you believe that a person can be save by faith alone? Do you believe that God’s grace and our response to it has nothing to do with our salvation. If you believe that we have to participate in our own salvation by responding to God’s grace with faith and works, then you hold a Catholic teaching on this subject. Am I correct or am I missing something?

From what it sounds like, you do not subscribe to what Martin Luther taught, which was that works had nothing to do with our salvation, hence the mantra “faith alone”. This excludes all other things.

God bless.

 

[JonNC]

Interesting response.

Do you think circumcision is a “work of the Law,” as Paul used the phrase?

Again, you’re asking me about a Jewish religious act. I really don’t know, except to say that it was part of Jewish law, I suspect. So, again, suspecting, that this would be the way Paul would have spoken of it.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

JonNC

Do you believe that a person can be save by faith alone? Do you believe that God’s grace and our response to it has nothing to do with our salvation. If you believe that we have to participate in our own salvation by responding to God’s grace with faith and works, then you hold a Catholic teaching on this subject. Am I correct or am I missing something?

The full thought is, We are justified by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone. All salvation comes by grace. Faith comes as the result of grace. And of course, we have the free will to reject grace. We respond to faith by following the savior’s commands, to partake in hearing the word, and receiving the sacraments (means of grace), and to do those good works He has prepared for us to do.
And as Galatians says, *For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision: but faith that worketh by charity. * So, while it is by grace through faith we are saved, that faith must be an active, charitable faith, or it is a dead faith. Dead faith does not save.

From what it sounds like, you do not subscribe to what Martin Luther taught, which was that works had nothing to do with our salvation, hence the mantra “faith alone”. This excludes all other things.

As a matter of fact, I do subscribe to sola fide in the way Lutherans and Luther describe it:
Luther’s preface to Galatians 5:6
*Faith must of course be sincere. It must be a faith that performs good works through love. If faith lacks love it is not true faith. Thus the Apostle bars the way of hypocrites to the kingdom of Christ on all sides. He declares on the one hand, “In Christ Jesus circumcision availeth nothing,” i.e., works avail nothing, but faith alone, and that without any merit whatever, avails before God. On the other hand, the Apostle declares that without fruits faith serves no purpose. To think, “If faith justifies without works, let us work nothing,” is to despise the grace of God. Idle faith is not justifying faith. In this terse manner Paul presents the whole life of a Christian. Inwardly it consists in faith towards God, outwardly in love towards our fellow-men. *

In regards that I hold to the Catholic teaching, I respond, if you say “faith working through charity”, I agree. If you say “faith and works”, not so much.

God bless.

His blessing also with you.

Jon

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Again, you’re asking me about a Jewish religious act. I really don’t know, except to say that it was part of Jewish law, I suspect. So, again, suspecting, that this would be the way Paul would have spoken of it.

Jon

Back to my original point: if those acts of Jewish law are not to be done by Christians, then when Paul says man is “justified by faith apart from works of the Law” (and this includes circumcision), these cannot be “good works” Christians are called to do. Thus, Paul is never saying ‘faith alone’.

 

[JonNC]

Back to my original point: if those acts of Jewish law are not to be done by Christians, then when Paul says man is “justified by faith apart from works of the Law” (and this includes circumcision), these cannot be “good works” Christians are called to do. Thus, Paul is never saying ‘faith alone’.

This seems to be contradictory. If he says we are justified by faith apart from works of the law, how is he not saying by faith alone? He is saying it is not by works we are justified, but by faith, understanding that the faith we are talking about is an active faith, one that obeys the commands of Christ to care for the least of his children.

Jon

 

[StrawberryJam]

This seems to be contradictory. If he says we are justified by faith apart from works of the law, how is he not saying by faith alone? He is saying it is not by works we are justified, but by faith, understanding that the faith we are talking about is an active faith, one that obeys the commands of Christ to care for the least of his children.

Jon

Dumb question. Does Jesus ever stop anyone from doing works?
Does he himself accept works by a sinner who loves him?
Does he ever say that one ought not to do any works?
Does he even hint that doing for another is not a part of who he was? He did want us to share with him as he shared with us- correct?

 

[shocktrooper]

The full thought is, We are justified by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone. All salvation comes by grace. Faith comes as the result of grace. And of course, we have the free will to reject grace. We respond to faith by following the savior’s commands, to partake in hearing the word, and receiving the sacraments (means of grace), and to do those good works He has prepared for us to do.
And as Galatians says, *For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision: but faith that worketh by charity. * So, while it is by grace through faith we are saved, that faith must be an active, charitable faith, or it is a dead faith. Dead faith does not save.

You really like to use the word “alone”. The one instance here I will agree with you on is “Christ alone”. I am not sure how many “alones” you can use when referring to the same subject though. Two “alones” are no longer alone. “Grace Alone” excludes our participation (works) and faith. “Faith Alone” excludes grace and our participation (works). Grace alone puts all the work on God and disallows our response. By taking this view, you get into Calvinism which claims that God saves who He wills.

In regards that I hold to the Catholic teaching, I respond, if you say “faith working through charity”, I agree. If you say “faith and works”, not so much.

I do say “faith working through grace” with good works being the fruit of the faith, or the proof in the pudding. No work alone can merit you salvation but our works do keep us in God’s grace. As St. James told us, even the devils have faith.

St. James 2:14-26
*14 What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not works? Shall faith be able to save him? 15 And if a brother or sister be naked, and want daily food: 16 And one of you say to them: Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; yet give them not those things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit? 17 So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself.

18 But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works; and I will shew thee, by works, my faith. 19 Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well: the devils also believe and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. 24 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only? 25 And in like manner also Rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them out another way? 26 For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead.*

It is clear that St. James is admonishing those that claim to have faith but no works that are in accord with God’s will. Here St. James is saying that claiming you have faith in one God (verse 19) is not good enough. It also seems pretty ironic to me that verse 24 is the only place in Scripture that has “faith alone”, and it is not in a context that you would like. Claiming you believe in one God does not make you a Christian. Christians are known by the fruits of their work and their adherence to the Gospel, to Jesus Christ and his commandments. This sets them apart from all the others.

I just don’t understand how you can defend a doctrine that says we are saved by “faith alone” by saying that it really means authentic faith that is proven by works. Verse 22 seems to suggest that works do affect faith, just as faith affects works. I would think you would agree that they co-operate with each other.

I am not sure we disagree on anything discussed here other than what the odd and misleading term “faith alone” suggests. According to you, it does not mean what it says. Why not just say we are saved by grace through faith and works? It seems like you can’t let go of “faith alone” because it would cause too much of a chink in your armor, so you have to say “faith alone” but mean saved by grace alone, through faith alone, and work to maintain that grace through our actions, i.e. works and participation in the Sacraments.

 

[JonNC]

=StrawberryJam;7618420]Dumb question.

How is asking my brother/sister in Christ an explanation, in charitable way, a dumb question?

Does Jesus ever stop anyone from doing works?

Of course not. He commands it.

Does he himself accept works by a sinner who loves him?

Of course He does.

Does he ever say that one ought not to do any works?

I think my comment, to which you responded, indicates quite the opposite.

Does he even hint that doing for another is not a part of who he was?

It is exactly who He is, and He expects us to do the same.

He did want us to share with him as he shared with us- correct?

Yep.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

=shocktrooper;7618692]You really like to use the word “alone”. The one instance here I will agree with you on is “Christ alone”. I am not sure how many “alones” you can use when referring to the same subject though.

They are not in reference to the same subject, however.

Two “alones” are no longer alone. “Grace Alone” excludes our participation (works) and faith.

Grace alone excludes everything in terms of how we come to Him. Without grace, there is no salvation.

“Faith Alone” excludes grace and our participation (works).

It does not, in either case. What faith alone does is state what brings us to justification - grace through faith, and not by works.

Grace alone puts all the work on God and disallows our response.

No, it puts to rest the false pelagian notion that we can come to faith by our own will and actions, without grace. Faith itself is a gift of grace. We then have free will to reject grace.

By taking this view, you get into Calvinism which claims that God saves who He wills.

Calvinism is expressly rejected by Lutheranism. I would be Catholic loooong before I would be Calvinist or Reformed.

I do say “faith working through grace” with good works being the fruit of the faith, or the proof in the pudding. No work alone can merit you salvation but our works do keep us in God’s grace. As St. James told us, even the devils have faith.

Precisely. And this is why I said that, when talking about a saving faith, we are talking about a faith that is active, a faith that works.

St. James 2:14-26
*14 What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not works? Shall faith be able to save him? 15 And if a brother or sister be naked, and want daily food: 16 And one of you say to them: Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; yet give them not those things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit? 17 So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself.

18 But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works; and I will shew thee, by works, my faith. 19 Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well: the devils also believe and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect?* 23 And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. 24 Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only? 25 And in like manner also Rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them out another way? 26 For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead.

It is clear that St. James is admonishing those that claim to have faith but no works that are in accord with God’s will. Here St. James is saying that claiming you have faith in one God (verse 19) is not good enough. It also seems pretty ironic to me that verse 24 is the only place in Scripture that has “faith alone”, and it is not in a context that you would like. Claiming you believe in one God does not make you a Christian. Christians are known by the fruits of their work and their adherence to the Gospel, to Jesus Christ and his commandments. This sets them apart from all the others.

And I believe Luther expresses this well in the quote earlier in the thread.

There are a number of times when Paul expresses that we are justified by faith, and not by works, lest we should boast. And James here rightly acknowledges that a true faith, a saving faith, is one that is obedient to Christ’s commands that we do the good works the Spirit has prepared for us to do. Failure to do what Christ has commanded is sin, and repeated and unrepented sin leads to a loss of faith, and is evidence of a dead faith.

I just don’t understand how you can defend a doctrine that says we are saved by “faith alone” by saying that it really means authentic faith that is proven by works. Verse 22 seems to suggest that works do affect faith, just as faith affects works. I would think you would agree that they co-operate with each other.

I do, but it not the works that justify.

I am not sure we disagree on anything discussed here other than what the odd and misleading term “faith alone” suggests. According to you, it does not mean what it says. Why not just say we are saved by grace through faith and works?

I most certainly can say that we are saved by grace through faith, working in love.

It seems like you can’t let go of “faith alone” because it would cause too much of a chink in your armor, so you have to say “faith alone” but mean saved by grace alone, through faith alone, and work to maintain that grace through our actions, i.e. works and participation in the Sacraments.

A chink in my armor? Again, I can say that I am saved by grace alone, by faith in Christ, working through love. In addition, with the help of the Holy Spirit, I depend very much on the means of grace - the sacraments - to help me work out my salvation in fear and trembling, recognizing that it is the Spirit working through me, helping me to responsibly respond to His grace.

Jon

 

[Heliotropium]

What I do not understand is why no one seems to understand what the works of the law are and why Paul says you are not justified by them. The works of the law are the rituals the Jews did to be either part of the convenant (cricumcison) or to purify ones-self from sin (sacrifices, washing hands, fasting, not eating with gentiles, etc.)

The reason for why Paul is saying you are not justified by these works is because for one they are no longer needed. Christ has fullfiled the Old Testament laws and they are now abrogated. Secondly Paul is stating that your not jusitifed by the works of the law but by faith is because back in those days the people (and the people in present times) thought of themselves as being justified as long as they did these rituals even if they didnt really believe in them. They didnt really care about having faith because they thought as long as I wash my hands and not eat with certian people then regardless of if I beleive in God or not I will be saved since I did the works of the law. Basically they were like agnostics saying hey God could be true and God might not be true but as long as I do the works of the law I will be justified regardless and therefore ok if God does exist. Furthermore some of them also thought that they were the cause of their own jusitfication and not by Gods grace. This made them self rightous and they held themselves high up above others and it is because they were so spiritually prideful they couldnt even see Christ when he came to them in humility.

This is what Paul is warining us about! He is telling us that it is becaue Christ abrogated these laws of purification that they are no longer good or bad and that they no longer take sin away or purify the person doing them. They are NOTHING. The only thing that matters now is that all your works (actions through the day) are DONE WITH CHARITY AND FAITH IN CHRIST AND FOR CHRIST! There are no more works of the Law there is just your FAITH and the WORKS you do as a result of your FAITH and CHARITY because “FAITH without WORKS is dead”–James 2:26

The same message Paul is saying back then rings true today. Christians everywhere feel that they can live sinful lives just because they beleive in Christ or because they profess him as their personal Lord and Saviour while at the same time not lifting a fingure to follow Gods will but instead just doing their own. They are not justified by this faith becaue that faith is dead. Heck even the devil has that much faith. Satan believes in Christ and knows Him to be the Lord and Saviour of the world but does that justify Satan? Could that justify Satan? No! Absolutely not and it wont justify us!