Bridging the "Faith Alone" Divide

[Contarini]

Catholics and Protestants disagree mightily on the doctrine of justification. However, a closer look at the concepts involved reveals that the two sides are much closer in understanding than the fireworks suggest.

. . . .

Therefore, if Catholics and Protestants come to a mutual understanding of one another’s terminology and the definitions of these terms, they can also agree on what does and does not constitute the faith needed for justification. Justification by Faith Alone (or sola fide) does not need to be a bitterly divisive issue separating Catholics and Protestants.

*Adapted from “*Justification: By “Faith Alone”?” by James Akin.

Randy,

I agree with this. However, I think that there is still an important question to ask: can faith (as Catholics define it) exist as a supernatural virtue given by God, without hope and charity? Traditional Protestants (as opposed to antinomian heretics of recent years) would say that it can’t (and yes, that includes Luther–Luther taught that God justifies us based on our faith alone, so that no sin in itself separates us from God, but he also taught that faith never came unaccompanied by love and good works). So while Protestants traditionally believe in sola fide, Catholics are the ones who believe in sola fides. Protestants believe (by and large, though we Wesleyans are a bit different from the Lutheran/Calvinist/Baptist views) that we are saved by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone. Catholics believe the opposite–there is a faith that is alone, but it doesn’t save. And yet, in your view, it is a gift of God. Protestants would generally say that the faith that does not save is just another human opinion.

Why is this important? Because of preaching (and personal witness, of course). A Protestant preacher gets up in front of a congregation containing people who believe all the right doctrines but don’t live them, and says: “Repent, and believe in Jesus.” And people do–it’s sound theologically and it works practically. A Catholic preacher gets up in front of the same group of people and says: “you already believe, but now you need to do good works.” And it doesn’t do much, because they don’t have the basis for doing truly good works in the first place, which is living faith.

This in my opinion is why so many ex-Catholics say that they never “heard the Gospel” as Catholics. Obviously they heard the Gospel in an objective sense. But they never heard a call to faith, because by the Catholic definition they already had faith.

I do not think that this disagreement needs to be church-dividing. But any reunion between Protestants and Catholics will have to allow Protestants to keep preaching the Gospel this way, because it is clearly superior both theologically and practically to the Catholic way (even though the Catholic way adds up to the same thing in the end).

Edwin

 

[jimmy]

You must understand that justified in James 2 is different from “justified” in Romans…I have shown this in several postings now…

1344 δικαιόω [dikaioo /dik·ah·yo·o/] v. From 1342; TDNT 2:211; TDNTA 168; GK 1467; 40 occurrences; AV translates as “justify” 37 times, “be freed” once, “be righteous” once, and “justifier” once. 1 to render righteous or such he ought to be. **2 to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered. **

THAT DEFINITION IS THE PROPER RENDERING OF JUSTIFIED IN JAMES 2…BUT IN ROMANS, WHERE WE SEE JUSTIFIED AND CONDEMNED USED IN THE SAME CONTEXT, WE HAVE TO SAY THAT THIS DEFINITION IS THE ONE BEING USED THERE…

That is your eisegesis. You are reading into the text your own distinctions. What the word actually means in Greek is to be made righteous. It is to give to each his due, to put in a right relationship. So to justify would be to destroy evil and to increase the good. This can be seen by reading Plato or the other Greek philosophers(Paul actually uses them quite a bit in his epistles). It can also be seen by reading a good Greek dictionary.

By making the distinction you have made between James2 and Romans3 you have simply read into it your own theology rather than read what they have written.

 

[crisco]

James’ question:
“What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if you say you have faith but do not have works? Can faith save you?” (2:14)
His answer:
“You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” (2:24)

He begins the section by asking whether faith by itself is sufficient to save (justify a person). He ends after offering some examples (Abraham / Rahab), with his answer - works/faith.

Doesn’t sound like he’s wanting only to see evidence of justification, he’s asking about what justifies (works/faith).

Akin provides an analysis of how ‘justified’ is used in the passage;

The Meaning of “Justified” cin.org/users/james/files/james2.htm

"The normal thing one will hear in Evangelical expositions of James 2 is that the justification being discussed is something called “justification before men” rather than “justification before God.” Justification before men is said to be the knowability by men that one is justified by God. In other words, if one is justified before men then men know that one is the recipient of God’s justification.

Unfortunately, this interpretation is completely impossible. The only point of evidence offered for it is James 2:18b, where James says: “Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.” James’s declaration “show me,” is taken to be an assertion that it is this “justification before God before men” that is under discussion. However, this proves nothing since the exact same statement bears an alternative interpretation. James’s point is that faith without works is impotent (“dead,” “barren,” without “profit”), and as an illustration of this he points out that faith cannot even be demonstrated to exist without works – that is how impotent it is!

Because 2:18b can bear different interpretations, it cannot be cited as evidence in favor of any one interpretation. However, the “justification before God before men” view can be positively ruled out as completely impossible based on ten points in the text.

First, in 2:14, James asks: “What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can faith save him?” Here James shows us that the kind of profit he is interested in is salvation. The kind of faith plus works James is talking about profits toward salvation, which pertains to justification before God, not men. His question, “Can faith save him?” sets the tone for the whole discussion (as it should since it is in the first verse of it). The subject at hand is one’s relationship with God, not one’s reputation among men."

 

[Randy_Carson]

You must understand that justified in James 2 is different from “justified” in Romans…I have shown this in several postings now…

You have asserted this several times now, but is your assertion correct?

Consider the following passage from Romans 6:1-7:

(1) What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? (2) Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? (3) Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? (4) Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (5) For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be {in the likeness} of {His} resurrection, (6) knowing this, that our old man was crucified with {Him}, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. (7) For he who has died has been freed from sin. (Rom. 6:1-7)

Notice the last verse in that passage (v 7). Paul states that he who has died has been freed from sin, and the context is obviously sanctificational. Paul is discussing why we must not “continue in sin” (v 1), how we have “died to sin” and must not “live any longer in it” (v 2), how our “old man was crucified with him” so that “the body of sin” might be destroyed so we would no longer “be slaves of sin” (v 6). It is in this sense that Paul says, “he who has died as been freed from sin.”

We died with Christ, and so now we have been freed from the power of sin, which is why we must no longer live in sin. We have been freed from its power, now we must leave it and put it behind us. The context here is obviously sanctificational. So obviously that modern every translation of the Bible renders verse 7 such that he who has died has been “freed” from sin.

But that is not what the passage says in Greek. Instead of the word “freed,” when we look at the Greek text we find the word “justified” (dikaioo). What Paul actually wrote was, “He who has died has been justified from sin.” Yet, as we said, the context is so obviously sanctificational that every modern translation renders this “has been freed from sin.” We therefore see that in Paul’s thought being justified from sin includes being freed from sin—not just forensically, but sanctificationally. As a result, in Paul’s thought and in Paul’s terminology there simply is not the rigid division between justification and sanctification that Protestant language suggests.

This is something that is admitted by the more sensitive Protestant scholars2. In fact, E. Sanders points out that the phrase “that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been justified from sin.” (Romans 6:6-7) is paralleled by, “though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart . . . [a]nd having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.” (Romans 6:17-18) As a result, “has been justified” is paralleled with “having been set free,” indicating again that justification in Paul’s thought includes the idea of being freed from sin.3

from “Justification in Catholic Teaching” by James Akin

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

 

[Randy_Carson]

Randy,

I agree with this. However, I think that there is still an important question to ask: can faith (as Catholics define it) exist as a supernatural virtue given by God, without hope and charity? Traditional Protestants (as opposed to antinomian heretics of recent years) would say that it can’t (and yes, that includes Luther–Luther taught that God justifies us based on our faith alone, so that no sin in itself separates us from God, but he also taught that faith never came unaccompanied by love and good works). So while Protestants traditionally believe in sola fide, Catholics are the ones who believe in sola fides. Protestants believe (by and large, though we Wesleyans are a bit different from the Lutheran/Calvinist/Baptist views) that we are saved by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone. Catholics believe the opposite–there is a faith that is alone, but it doesn’t save.

Here I think you are agreeing that neither of us holds that we are saved by faith alone - you because you hold “not by a faith that is alone”, and me for the same reason! How about that? :clapping:

And yet, in your view, it is a gift of God. Protestants would generally say that the faith that does not save is just another human opinion.

Hence the importance of the other two virtues: hope and charity?

Why is this important? Because of preaching (and personal witness, of course). A Protestant preacher gets up in front of a congregation containing people who believe all the right doctrines but don’t live them, and says: “Repent, and believe in Jesus.” And people do–it’s sound theologically and it works practically.

I’m guessing that might be why Peter preached roughly the same message on Pentecost. However, you know there are those who repent and “believe” but do nothing to live more godly lives, so there are weaknesses in this scenario, too. The shallowness of revival tent or “Billy Graham Crusade” conversions is obvious enough.

A Catholic preacher gets up in front of the same group of people and says: “you already believe, but now you need to do good works.” And it doesn’t do much, because they don’t have the basis for doing truly good works in the first place, which is living faith.

That could happen, but it is not the only possible outcome of his preaching. Therefore, it does not follow that his preaching was flawed theologically.

This in my opinion is why so many ex-Catholics say that they never “heard the Gospel” as Catholics. Obviously they heard the Gospel in an objective sense. But they never heard a call to faith, because by the Catholic definition they already had faith.

I might suggest that they had proper faith but lacked hope and charity.

I do not think that this disagreement needs to be church-dividing. But any reunion between Protestants and Catholics will have to allow Protestants to keep preaching the Gospel this way, because it is clearly superior both theologically and practically to the Catholic way (even though the Catholic way adds up to the same thing in the end).

Edwin

I’m not convinced that continuing to preach the gospel in a (Protestant) way that contains the inherent problems I listed in a post above is the best approach. Why don’t we agree that Catholic or Protestant preaching needs to contain the full message of faith (believing God), hope (trusting God), and charity (loving God and neighbor)?

 

[Atemi]

Randy_Carson:
Consequently, Catholics will not in common practice use the term “Faith Alone” though we can agree with it when properly undestood.

It is incumbent upon those Protestants who cling to that slogan so dearly to recognize the problems described above and to abandon their attempts to teach a biblical concept in language that is itself unbiblical.

Hope this helps. :tiphat:

So Catholic attacks upon Sola Fide rest only in the semantical use of the term?

No. Not at all.

Like I said, only Jimmy really believes Jimmy here. Catholics have their own problems with Sola Fide and it is not just the words chosen.

…

 

[OneForTruth]

That is your eisegesis. You are reading into the text your own distinctions. What the word actually means in Greek is to be made righteous. It is to give to each his due, to put in a right relationship. So to justify would be to destroy evil and to increase the good. This can be seen by reading Plato or the other Greek philosophers(Paul actually uses them quite a bit in his epistles). It can also be seen by reading a good Greek dictionary.

By making the distinction you have made between James2 and Romans3 you have simply read into it your own theology rather than read what they have written.

Let’s look at the context…

James 2:14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest 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, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

We are justified by faith alone but not by faith that is alone…When one comes and is destitute and you tell them to go kite-flying, what does that say about you? What does it SHOW? Justification, again, is shown to be in the past and is by faith…we are saved, dead to the law, born again, children of God, elect, heirs with Christ…etc. We are speaking here of the outworking of faith…faith comes first along with the transformation thereof…

John6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

God chnages us - no longer spritually dead but alive, no longer spirtually blind but now see, no longer spiritually deaf but now hear…A new creature…

2Co 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

A new tree…

Mt 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

There is a major change in the life of that person…they are of the elect and whom he justifies he also glorifies…

Romans 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

In James 2, we are looking at true living faith, which, as we know if the gift of God. We are concerned with the fruit of the tree…the SHOWING of fruit - the evidences of true faith…

Justification occurred the day that I realized that there was no way for me to merit salvation, I repented from sin and turned to Christ as Lord and Savior all by the grace of God and I was given a new heart and was forever changed. It is a past event.

(cont’d)

 

[OneForTruth]

(cont’d)

Have you been born again?? Well, we take a look at 1 John…

Practicing of righteousness…
1 John 2:29…29 If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone also who practices righteousness is born of Him.

Therefore, whatsoever is born of God practices righteousness.

Loves the brethren…
1 John 3:14…14 We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death.

Hates sin and does not practice it…
1 John 3:9…9 No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Loves…
1 John 4:7…7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God.

Confesses…
1 John 4:15…15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

Believes on Christ…
1 John 5:1…1 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.

Perseveres…
1 John 5:4…4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world–our faith.

Keeps commandments…
1 John 2:3…3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.

By the way, after John says all of the things he writes…

1 John 5:13…13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

Not lustful…
Galatians 5:24 NAS95 24 Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

Walks in the Spirit…
Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Perform works…
John 14:12…12 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father.

I would be very careful adding man’s wisdom into the interpretation of scripture…

1Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

Have a great day!

 

[crisco]

**We are justified by faith alone **but not by faith that is alone…

James 2:24: You see that a person is justified by works and **not **by faith alone.

This is James’ answer to his question in 2:14. Can faith (on its own) save (justify) someone?

 

[Angainor]

Well, I don’t think it is a waste of time, in that Jimmy Akin makes the point that all Christians believe that faith, hope and charity [love] in Christ are necessary components to receive eternal life,

“Waste of time” may be a bit harsh, but that was my reaction. I was nearly finished reading an article called “Justification by Faith Alone” when I came across the disappointing line “Without going into the subject of what kind of justification is being discussed here…” The kind of justification seemed important to the topic.

If one accepts “faith” as a verb, which includes hope and charity then faith alone isn’t a problem.

I don’t. Faith is more of a direct object… “have faith”.

 

[Linkowski]

James 2:24: You see that a person is justified by works and **not **by faith alone.

This is James’ answer to his question in 2:14. Can faith (on its own) save (justify) someone?

It is the faith that is being characterized here…faith that is by itself…

James 2:17 NAS95 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

It is not that salvation requires faith plus works, but that works are the consequent outgrowth and completion of genuine faith. It is the faith of the person being vindicated (justified) - not the person.

 

[jimmy]

Let’s look at the context…

…
John6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

God chnages us - no longer spritually dead but alive, no longer spirtually blind but now see, no longer spiritually deaf but now hear…A new creature…

2Co 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

A new tree…

Mt 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

There is a major change in the life of that person…they are of the elect and whom he justifies he also glorifies…

Romans 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

In James 2, we are looking at true living faith, which, as we know if the gift of God. We are concerned with the fruit of the tree…the SHOWING of fruit - the evidences of true faith…

Justification occurred the day that I realized that there was no way for me to merit salvation, I repented from sin and turned to Christ as Lord and Savior all by the grace of God and I was given a new heart and was forever changed. It is a past event.

(cont’d)

Yes, it is a past event. But it is also a present event and a future event. Abraham was justified in Gen.12, in Gen15, in Gen17 and in Gen21. It is not a one time event. Justification is to make just, not simply to declare just as any good Greek dictionary will tell you.

James does not simply say you show your faith by your works. You do, but those works are actually justifying you. They actually make you just. It says clearly a man is not justified by faith alone but by works. Your association of justification in James 2 with your second definition above is simply a pharisaical definition of justification. As Christ says, you speak from the abundance of your heart[Matt.12]. Justification is a change of the heart which occurs over time. It does not occur in a single moment. If that were the case no Christian would ever sin. Paul would not have had to rebuke Peter as he retells in Galatians. Paul would not have had to rebuke the Christians of Rome in Romans. There would be no need for it because they would already be completely justified. You are not justified completely, sanctified completely, freed completely and etc. until you are disassociated completely from sin. As Christ says, he who sins is a slave to sin[John8].

It is simply sophistry to make the distinction between faith and ‘living faith’. You are twisting the words of scripture to say that it is by faith alone but not really by faith alone. Simply agree with James when he says that a man is not justified by faith alone but by his works. That is the only place in scripture where the term ‘faith alone’ ever appears and it is in the negative. It is simply sophistry which protestants engage in to try to justify their doctrine of faith alone.

 

[jimmy]

It is the faith that is being characterized here…faith that is by itself…

James 2:17 NAS95 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

It is not that salvation requires faith plus works, but that works are the consequent outgrowth and completion of genuine faith. It is the faith of the person being vindicated (justified) - not the person.

Your quote of James2;17 simply affirms what has been said. Both faith and works are necessary for justification. Faith by itself is meaningless and will only condemn you to hell. But faith with the work of love will make you a son of God[Matt.5].

 

[teachccd]

I would be very careful when discounting the inspiration of the Church in acknowledging Scripture. And those who ackowledged Scripture under the guidance of the same Spirit also interpret Scripture under the guidance of the same Spirit. To do otherwise results in private interpretation and the resulting chaos is very evident… God Bless…teachccd

 

[teachccd]

It is the faith that is being characterized here…faith that is by itself…

James 2:17 NAS95 17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.

It is not that salvation requires faith plus works, but that works are the consequent outgrowth and completion of genuine faith. It is the faith of the person being vindicated (justified) - not the person.

You bold-faced correctly. Faith without works is dead and a dead faith cannot save, therefore faith and works save. Pretty straight forward… God Bless …teachccd

 

[Linkowski]

Your quote of James2;17 simply affirms what has been said. Both faith and works are necessary for justification. Faith by itself is meaningless and will only condemn you to hell. But faith with the work of love will make you a son of God[Matt.5].

What does “dikaioo” mean in the book of Romans??

Romans 8:33-34 NAS95 33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who** justifies**; 34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.

This is a legal declaration! This is the context of Romans.

 

[teachccd]

What does “dikaioo” mean in the book of Romans??

Romans 8:33-34 NAS95 33 Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who** justifies**; 34 who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.

This is a legal declaration! This is the context of Romans.

What is the context of Matthew 25:31-46?? Aren’t we divided by what we do as we see Jesus in all???

 

[Linkowski]

What is the context of Matthew 25:31-46?? Aren’t we divided by what we do as we see Jesus in all???

What we do has everything to do with what we are. Don’t separate the two. A lot of unsaved people do good things too…but…

Isaiah 64:6 NAS95 6 For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away.

 

[guanophore]

If any Catholics here believe the conclusion of this piece, they would forever cease to rail against Sola Fide and non-Catholic Christains for holding it.

If it is basically the same as the RCC teaches, then where do Catholics get off in attacking others for clinging to Church teaching?

Will Catholics here on CA and offline now stop attacking Sola Fide?

Nope. Just look at a few of the resent threads.

No Catholics really believe Jimmy, it seems to me.

.

Where have you been attacked, Atemi? Can you please put the link here? Or is it that you feel personally attacked if somone disagrees with your private interpretation of scripture?

You sound very defensive here, so this must be a very sensitive issue for you. I agree that the threads you have posted in are accurately described as resent (ful).

 

[guanophore]

So Catholic attacks upon Sola Fide rest only in the semantical use of the term?

No. Not at all.

Like I said, only Jimmy really believes Jimmy here. Catholics have their own problems with Sola Fide and it is not just the words chosen.

…

Indeed! Most of the problem is in the attitudes of the person using it!