OK you have a good point there. Now we can move forward.
A very good point indeed! You have no objective standard all you have is your own opinion and you cant say its any better than ours.
Also notice you cannot quote one ECF who claims as you do that Rome has no authority because she doesn’t “look” the same.
What you don’t seem to get is that the Church’s life develops organically. She grows in depth and knowledge under the superintendance of the Holy Spirit. Her practices follow suit over time. Even a Protestant has to see that the Church in the book of Acts is only an embryonic form of what was to come. No Protestant group looks exactly like them either. What she doesn’t lose my friend is her authority.*
So then when St. Paul teaches that the old testament law and prophets bore witness to the gift if righteousness of God (Romans 3:21; 1:17) that this is referring to ‘‘works’’ (non-meritorious) of the old testament saints which were done out of the confidence and conviction of God’s promises?
Precisely. This is why St. Paul uses Genesis 15:6 to show the Jews that Abraham was justified before any law - ceremonial or moral - had been introduced. Abraham’s justification came before keeping any law. It came by works of faith. That is why the confrontation he presents is really between law vs. faith and not works of faith vs. “saving” faith. When St. Paul condemns “works” in Romans 4, it is under the context of the Law:
*
“For if those who live by law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless…” (Romans 4:14)
*
Notice how St. Paul naturally goes from speaking about “works” and “circumcision” to the “law” in verse 14? It’s because he is trying to draw a sharp line between what comes from the law and what comes from faith.
*
“What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works.” (Romans 9:30-32)
*
Notice again, St. Paul’s clear association with the law and works:
*
Gentiles pursued righteousness by faith.
*
Israel pursued a law of righteousness by works.
*
Clearly Paul distinguishes the kind of righteousness which both groups sought: the Gentiles pursued “gracious” righteousness through faith while Israel pursued a “legal righteousness” through works. The former does not seek to obligate God; the latter most certainly does. But how can you pursue righteousness by faith? “Pursue” is a verb. “Righteousness” involves “goodness and truth”. To pursue goodness and truth, you inevitably must act. And action means works of faith. This is why St. Paul says in Galatians:
*
“The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.” (Galatians 5:6 NIV)
*
It’s not just “faith” that counts; it’s “faith expressing itself through love.” Again, faith must work through love. It is a marriage of sorts. This is the reason why James says:
*
“Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.” (James 2:17)
*
Notice that faith by itself cannot be alive. It needs the other the lung to breathe.
St. Paul uses Habukkuk like he used Abraham: to show us how justification is wrought through faith TO faith; from one test to another. Both of these men were repeatedly tested by God their whole lives, and they LIVED (i.e. through actions) their faith from one moment of existence to another. There are trials that come up that must be faced and conquered. If Habakkuk or Abraham failed in the works leading from one faith test to another faith test, one could not say that they lived from faith to faith. They would have started out with “faith”, but a trial might have come upon one of them to make them lose the second moment of “faith”. If Abraham had refused to sacrifice Isaac, could St. Paul say that he lived from “faith to faith”? Quite evidently not since Abraham would not have trusted in God concerning his only son’s fate. You see, it’s quite simple, actually. You cannot really “believe in something” or have “faith in something” unless you are willing to put your body and soul on the line for it, and unless you are willing to sacrifice something for that belief. If you are not willing to do it, then you cannot be said to really believe in it. You see, works are required to bring faith to life. This is the reason St. James compares the faith without works to a body without a soul: “As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.” (James 2:26). If you still maintain that you do have “faith” but insist on divorcing works from it (insofar as your justification is concerned) and therefore stopping its realization and actualization, then you have a dead faith, and a dead faith does not save.
Therefore in Abraham’s life was a constant continual and progressive reckoning of Abraham’s faith as true and God pleasing righteousness?
"You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is j-u-s-t-i-f-i-e-d by what he
does and not by faith alone. (James 2:20-24)
