Calvin silenced by James2:24

[Catholic_Dude]

I was looking on a calvinist page of Calvin’s commentaries and his work Institutes, and looked up where they referenced James2:24. I was shocked at how much twisting and turning he did with that verse!

For those who need a refresher, here is James2:24
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

For his Commentary on the book of James, I looked up Ch2, v24, but guess what, that verse wasnt even recognized as a verse! The commentary is set up in one-verse-at-a-time commentary, but v24 is missing! Look here, I know you could argue a mistype on the part of the web page makers, but on their page they say this work was proof read. Not to mention what are the odds that 2:24 is missing and not some other random verse?

Now from his Institutes its amazing he dances around the verse, refuses to accept what it says and even changes definitions to fit his agenda:
11. But they say that we have a still more serious business with James, who in express terms opposes us. For he asks, “Was not Abraham our father justified by works?” and adds “You see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only,” (James 2:21, 24). What then? Will they engage Paul in a quarrel with James? If they hold James to be a servant of Christ, his sentiments must be understood as not dissenting from Christ speaking by the mouth of Paul. By the mouth of Paul the Spirit declares that Abraham obtained justification by faith, not by works; we also teach that all are justified by faith without the works of the law. By James the same Spirit declares that both Abraham’s justification and ours consists of works, and not of faith only. It is certain that the Spirit cannot be at variance with himself. Where, then, will be the agreement? It is enough for our opponents, provided they can tear up that justification by faith which we regard as fixed by the deepest roots: to restore peace to the conscience is to them a matter of no great concern. Hence you may see, that though they indeed carp at the doctrine of justification by faith, they meanwhile point out no goal of righteousness at which the conscience may rest. Let them triumph then as they will, so long as the only victory they can boast of is, that they have deprived righteousness of all its certainty. This miserable victory they will indeed obtain when the light of truth is extinguished, and the Lord permits them to darken it with their lies. But wherever the truth of God stands they cannot prevail. I deny, then, that the passage of James which they are constantly holding up before us as if it were the shield of Achilles, gives them the slightest countenance. To make this plain, let us first attend to the scope of the Apostle, and then show wherein their hallucination consists. As at that time (and the evil has existed in the Church ever since) there were many who, while they gave manifest proof of their infidelity, by neglecting and omitting all the works peculiar to believers, ceased not falsely to glory in the name of faith, James here dissipates their vain confidence. His intention therefore is, not to derogate in any degree from the power of true faith, but to show how absurdly these triflers laid claim only to the empty name, and resting satisfied with it, felt secure in unrestrained indulgence in vice. This state of matters being understood, it will be easy to see where the error of our opponents lies. They fall into a double paralogism, the one in the term faith, the other in the term justifying. The Apostle, in giving the name of faith to an empty opinion altogether differing from true faith, makes a concession which derogates in no respect from his case. This he demonstrates at the outset by the words, “What does it profit, my brethren, though a man say he has faith, and have not works?” (James 2:14). He says not, “If a man have faith without works,” but “if he say that he has.” This becomes still clearer when a little after he derides this faith as worse than that of devils, and at last when he calls it “dead.” You may easily ascertain his meaning by the explanation, “Thou believest that there is one God.” Surely if all which is contained in that faith is a belief in the existence of God, there is no wonder that it does not justify. The denial of such a power to it cannot be supposed to derogate in any degree from Christian faith, which is of a very different description. …
(cont)

 

[Catholic_Dude]

1. We have not made good our point until we dispose of the other paralogism: since James places a part of justification in works. If you would make James consistent with the other Scriptures and with himself, you must give the word justify, as used by him, a different meaning from what it has with Paul. In the sense of Paul we are said to be justified when the remembrance of our unrighteousness is obliterated and we are counted righteous. Had James had the same meaning it would have been absurd for him to quote the words of Moses, “Abraham believed God,” &c. The context runs thus: “Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness.” [James2:21] If it is absurd to say that the effect was prior to its cause, either Moses falsely declares in that passage that Abraham’s faith was imputed for righteousness or Abraham, by his obedience in offering up Isaac, did not merit righteousness. Before the existence of Ishmael, who was a grown youth at the birth of Isaac, Abraham was justified by his faith. How thee can we say that he obtained justification by an obedience which followed long after? Wherefore, either James erroneously inverts the proper order (this it were impious to suppose), or he meant not to say that he was justified, as if he deserved to be deemed just. What then? It appears certain that he is speaking of the manifestation, not of the imputation of righteousness, as if he had said, Those who are justified by true faith prove their justification by obedience and good works, not by a bare and imaginary semblance of faith. In one word, he is not discussing the mode of justification, but requiring that the justification of believers shall be operative. And as Paul contends that men are justified without the aid of works, so James will not allow any to be regarded as justified who are destitute of good works. Due attention to the scope will thus disentangle every doubt; for the error of our opponents lies chiefly in this, that they think James is defining the mode of justification, whereas his only object is to destroy the depraved security of those who vainly pretended faith as an excuse for their contempt of good works. Therefore, let them twist the words of James as they may, they will never extract out of them more than the two propositions: That an empty phantom of faith does not justify, and that the believer, not contented with such an imagination, manifests his justification by good works.
2. They gain nothing by quoting from Paul to the same effect, that “not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified,” (Rom. 2:13). I am unwilling to evade the difficulty by the solution of Ambrose, that Paul spoke thus because faith in Christ is the fulfillment of the law. This I regard as a mere subterfuge, and one too for which there is no occasion, as the explanation is perfectly obvious. The Apostle’s object is to suppress the absurd confidence of the Jews who gave out that they alone had a knowledge of the law, though at the very time they where its greatest despisers. That they might not plume themselves so much on a bare acquaintance with the law, he reminds them that when justification is sought by the law, the thing required is not the knowledge but the observance of it. We certainly mean not to dispute that the righteousness of the law consists in works, and not only so, but that justification consists in the dignity and merits of works. But this proves not that we are justified by works unless they can produce some one who has fulfilled the law. That Paul had no other meaning is abundantly obvious from the context. …

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Amazing how Calvin ignores verse24 the entire time and dances around the issue (eg tries to make Paul and James at odds), and even redefining terms like justification, even when Paul and James are talking about the same passage in Genesis with Abraham!

 

[Tom]

Their problem is a complete misunderstanding of Pauls writing, as Peter of course warned.
Paul is the Apostle to the gentiles. The argument between the Apostles was if one had to first be a Jew prior to becoming a Christian. To be a Jew you had to follow the “works” of the Law. These are the “works” Paul is writing of, circumcision, cleansing, offerings,… all of the “works” of the Law, NOT “works” of Christian charity!!! Any time you read Paul about “works” he’s arguing that one did not need to do the “works” of the Law, in other words he didn’t need to follow Jewish Law to become a Christian.

 

[Elzee]

If it takes that much text and effort to explain the meaning of 14 simple words I think 'thou protests too much’, not to mention what it does to the whole concept of ‘everyone can interpret Scripture for themselves’…

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Tom:

Their problem is a complete misunderstanding of Pauls writing, as Peter of course warned.
Paul is the Apostle to the gentiles. The argument between the Apostles was if one had to first be a Jew prior to becoming a Christian. To be a Jew you had to follow the “works” of the Law. These are the “works” Paul is writing of, circumcision, cleansing, offerings,… all of the “works” of the Law, NOT “works” of Christian charity!!! Any time you read Paul about “works” he’s arguing that one did not need to do the “works” of the Law, in other words he didn’t need to follow Jewish Law to become a Christian.

I have been noticing the same thing from both luther and calvin in what i have read, a total misunderstanding of works.

 

[Tom]

Catholic Dude:

I have been noticing the same thing from both luther and calvin in what i have read, a total misunderstanding of works.

What really troubles me is these were very educated, intelligent people. Could they possibly have missed such basic understanding or did they intentionally mislead and twist Scripture to meet their personal agendas? It’s very troubling, Luther was so well versed in the writings and life of Paul, is it really plausible to think he didn’t understand the context Paul was writing in? Paul in ALL of his writings refers to works of the Law, which was his main battle cry with the other Apostles. Peter warned us about taking his writings out of context, yet Luther comes along and does exactly what Peter warned us about. Paul wrote about “works” of the Law, read his writings he even refers to circumcision and laws about eating, he’s NOT referring to “works” of Christian charity, in James on the other hand we’re seeing writings about “works” of Christian charity, two completely different matters. Luther must have understood this. Why did he deceive and distort Scripture? Could it be he was so consumed with hatred of the Church for not recognizing his superiority and brilliance? Sounds like it from his writings, but again, here I am attacking the man not his teachings, please forgive me.

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Tom,

I often wonder the same thing about Luther. I really don’t have very much historical knowledge of the man or the time (I mean, not compared to some people), so I am, like you, just speculating.

I have a suspicion, from what I know about Luther’s life, that he struggled so much with “feeling” forgiven and “earning” forgivness that he decided to chuck the whole thing and decide that 1) We are forgiven no matter what and can’t lose that justification and 2) nothing we can do in the least way contributes to or takes away from our state.

That way he could avoid all the pangs of doubt and scruples.

Does anyone know of a good and serious psychological study of Luther out there? I’d be interested in reading it.

As far as Calvin goes I have even less knowledge about him than I do about Luther if sucha thing were possible. Thanks Catholic for those excellent quotes!

Do you guys think that maybe Calvin also was trying to “work” his way into Heaven, realized it was too hard and then threw out the baby with bathwater?

P.S. Tom – I don’t think we need to worry about attacking Luther when we discuss him. You didn’t say anything over the top. And from what I gather, most people (Catholics and non-Catholics alike) do not mind if Luther is criticized. However, its probably a good idea for us to remember to be as respectful as possible.

What do you think?
VC

 

[Chris_LaRock]

Ephesians 2:8-9 paints an entirely different picture about faith vs. works.

 

[mercygate]

Chris LaRock:

Ephesians 2:8-9 paints an entirely different picture about faith vs. works.

There is no “versus.”

 

[Tom]

Chris LaRock:

Ephesians 2:8-9 paints an entirely different picture about faith vs. works.

Paul is referring to “works” of the Law, those things required of the Jewish faith. He specifically mentions this in Chap 2, 10 -15. When you read Paul referring to “works” it is always “works” of the Law NOT “works” of Christian charity. That is the context he was writing. Luther knew this.

Ephesians 2
All our good comes through Christ. He is our peace.
1 And you, when you were dead in your offences, and sins, 2 Wherein in time past you walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of this air, of the spirit that now worketh on the children of unbelief: 3 In which also we all conversed in time past, in the desires of our flesh, fulfilling the will of the flesh and of our thoughts, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest: 4 But God, (who is rich in mercy,) for his exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, 5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together in Christ, (by whose grace you are saved,)
6 And hath raised us up together, and hath made us sit together in the heavenly places, through Christ Jesus. 7 That he might shew in the ages to come the abundant riches of his grace, in his bounty towards us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; 9 Not of works, that no man may glory. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them.
11 For which cause be mindful that you, being heretofore Gentiles in the flesh, who are called uncircumcision by that which is called circumcision in the flesh, made by hands; 12 That you were at that time without Christ, being aliens from the conversation of Israel, and strangers to the testament, having no hope of the promise, and without God in this world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus, you, who some time were afar off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and breaking down the middle wall of partition, the enmities in his flesh: 15 Making void the law of commandments contained in decrees; that he might make the two in himself into one new man, making peace;

Paul begins explaining that Jew are not saved by following “works” of their law (1-3). He continues on to explain that God is giving us a gift in His son (4-8). Verse 9 is referring to “works” of the Law, please see verses 11- 15, he’s referring to works of the Law, NOT “works” of Christian charity. Yes by grace we are saved through faith, and not that of ourselves (works of the Law), for it is a gift of God. That is exactly what the Catholic Church teaches.

 

[Tom]

Ephesians 2
1 And you, when you were dead in your offences, and sins, 2 Wherein in time past you walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of this air, of the spirit that now worketh on the children of unbelief:

Remember who his audience is, it’s gentiles. They were not counted among the chosen.

3 In which also we all conversed in time past, in the desires of our flesh, fulfilling the will of the flesh and of our thoughts, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest: 4 But God, (who is rich in mercy,) for his exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, 5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together in Christ, (by whose grace you are saved,)

Here he includes himself and his fellow Jewish Christians, even though they performed “works” of the Law.

6 And hath raised us up together, and hath made us sit together in the heavenly places, through Christ Jesus. 7 That he might shew in the ages to come the abundant riches of his grace, in his bounty towards us in Christ Jesus.

Now gentile and Jew alike are granted the chance for salvation.

8 For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, for it is the gift of God; 9 Not of works, that no man may glory. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus in good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them.

Absolutely correct, following the works of the law will not save you. The Rabbis who reject Jesus, even though they follow the Law are rejecting the savior.

11 For which cause be mindful that you, being heretofore Gentiles in the flesh, who are called uncircumcision by that which is called circumcision in the flesh, made by hands;

Here he specifically mentions a “work” of the Law! Circumcision is a work of the Law!

12 That you were at that time without Christ, being aliens from the conversation of Israel, and strangers to the testament, having no hope of the promise, and without God in this world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus, you, who some time were afar off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ. 14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and breaking down the middle wall of partition, the enmities in his flesh:

15 Making void the law of commandments contained in decrees; that he might make the two in himself into one new man, making peace;

Any question here that he is talking about “works” of the Law?
There can be no “errors” in Scripture can there? To interpertate Paul as meaning “works” of Christian charity is in direct contradiction to James. Can either be wrong? No! Your understanding of Paul is wrong, he is NOT referring to “works” of Christian charity, he’s referring to “works” of the Law. Now if we understand Paul as referring to works of the Law, and James as referring to “works” of Christian charity, are they both correct? Absolutely! They are talking about two different things! Jesus calls us to do “works” of Christian charity. Is Paul then wrong? No, because he isn’t referring to “works” of Christian charity, he’s referring to “works” of the Law. It can, and is, both, not one or the other.

 

[Tom]

BTW, the Catholic Church does NOT teach that you must “earn” your way into heaven by doing works. Doing these works is how we accept the grace freely offered by God. It’s our acceptance, not our wage. Don’t do those works, you’re simply not accepting the gift of grace God freely offers. Jesus offers us grace when He tells us to take up our cross, can we refuse? Sure, we can say no to His offer of grace.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

bump

 

[SyCarl]

Paul is referring to “works” of the Law, those things required of the Jewish faith. He specifically mentions this in Chap 2, 10 -15. When you read Paul referring to “works” it is always “works” of the Law NOT “works” of Christian charity. That is the context he was writing. Luther knew this.

Paul begins explaining that Jew are not saved by following “works” of their law (1-3). He continues on to explain that God is giving us a gift in His son (4-8). Verse 9 is referring to “works” of the Law, please see verses 11- 15, he’s referring to works of the Law, NOT “works” of Christian charity. Yes by grace we are saved through faith, and not that of ourselves (works of the Law), for it is a gift of God. That is exactly what the Catholic Church teaches.

I have just read an interesting article by Robert Sungenis where he equates works of the law and works. I don’t agree with his result but I think he makes sense in his analysis on this point.

After all Jesus said:

One of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And He said to him, " ‘YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.’ "This is the great and foremost commandment. "The second is like it, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’ “On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 22:35-40 NASB)

Jesus’ words would not leave much room for something different from works of the law.

 

[Afterburned6387]

BTW, the Catholic Church does NOT teach that you must “earn” your way into heaven by doing works. Doing these works is how we accept the grace freely offered by God. It’s our acceptance, not our wage. Don’t do those works, you’re simply not accepting the gift of grace God freely offers. Jesus offers us grace when He tells us to take up our cross, can we refuse? Sure, we can say no to His offer of grace.

The Mormon church also consents to Salvation by Grace, but they note how gracious god is for letting us earn our salvation…sounds awfully similar.

I would also point out one key verse. Ephesians 2:8-9

“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.”

Two things jump out at the keen observer about this verse. In greek, the word order of a sentence doesn’t matter, the role a word plays in a sentence is determined by its case ending (similar to Latin). The way one would emphasize a point is by moving the word to be emphasized to the beginning of the sentence. In the structure of this sentence, the main points to be emphasized are “Grace” (first clause), and “Not of yourselves” (second clause). The implication here is that it is God’s doing, and you have no say in the matter. This isn’t a gift we are free to accept or reject, the sentence structure indicates that it is something God does all on his own, without our involvement.

Second, the word used there for works is “ergon,” which means “work, deed, or action,” in no way would it indicate a “work of the law,” it just means more generally, any verb a person can do

In addition, we have Romans 4:1

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

Here we find both the ideas of “imputed” righteousness, consistent with Protestant Teaching on Once-For-All Justification, and a clear antithesis of James 2:24.

Calvin’s mental meanderings are somewhat to be expected, as salvation by faith over and over again is preached in the bible, yet it is only this one verse that seems to say otherwise, hence we see why Luther was tempted to label it “Apocryphal”

My view has always been a twofold faith

In Faith are we Justified Once-For-All
From here we proceed in Love “to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.” (Eph. 2:10)

If we do not proceed in love, then we have not been justified, and show by our fruits that we are not children of God.

“No one who professes faith falls into sin, nor does one who has learned to love, hate. “The tree is known by its fruit.” Similarly, those who profess to be Christ’s will be recognized by their actions. For what matters is not a momentary act of professing, but being persistently motivated by faith”

St. Ignatius of Antioch

 

[Pixie_Dust]

The Mormon church also consents to Salvation by Grace, but they note how gracious god is for letting us earn our salvation…sounds awfully similar.

I would also point out one key verse. Ephesians 2:8-9

“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.”

Two things jump out at the keen observer about this verse. In greek, the word order of a sentence doesn’t matter, the role a word plays in a sentence is determined by its case ending (similar to Latin). The way one would emphasize a point is by moving the word to be emphasized to the beginning of the sentence. In the structure of this sentence, the main points to be emphasized are “Grace” (first clause), and “Not of yourselves” (second clause). The implication here is that it is God’s doing, and you have no say in the matter. This isn’t a gift we are free to accept or reject, the sentence structure indicates that it is something God does all on his own, without our involvement.

So we don’t have anything to do with whether or not we go to Heaven? We don’t have to make a decision to accept Jesus into our heart as Lord and Saviour? You left out verse 10. Why do non-Catholics always leave out verse 10? For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them.

Second, the word used there for works is “ergon,” which means “work, deed, or action,” in no way would it indicate a “work of the law,” it just means more generally, any verb a person can do

In addition, we have Romans 4:1

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

Yep, Abraham believed God, and ACTED on that belief by obeying what God told him to do. What if he’d just stayed in Haran after God told him to leave?

Christians do not do works of charity to boast about them, particularly before God. It is only because of God’s grace working in us that we have “faith working through love.” (Gal. 5:6)

Here we find both the ideas of “imputed” righteousness, consistent with Protestant Teaching on Once-For-All Justification, and a clear antithesis of James 2:24.

Calvin’s mental meanderings are somewhat to be expected, as salvation by faith over and over again is preached in the bible, yet it is only this one verse that seems to say otherwise, hence we see why Luther was tempted to label it “Apocryphal”

Well, I disagree with your interpretation of Scripture - are you surprised? Over and over again in the Bible I read:

Neh. 13:14, Psalm 11:7,28:4, Isa. 3:10, 59:18, Jer. 25:14, 50:29, Ezek. 9:10, 11:21, 36:19, Hos. 4:9, 9:15, 12:2, Sir. 16:12,14 - The 2,000 year-old Catholic position on salvation is that we are saved by Jesus Christ and Him alone (cf. Acts 15:11; Eph. 2:5). But by the grace of Christ, we achieve the salvation God desires for us through perseverance in both faith and works.

continued…

 

[Pixie_Dust]

part deux…

My view has always been a twofold faith

In Faith are we Justified Once-For-All
From here we proceed in Love “to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.” (Eph. 2:10)

If we do not proceed in love, then we have not been justified, and show by our fruits that we are not children of God.

“No one who professes faith falls into sin, nor does one who has learned to love, hate. “The tree is known by its fruit.” Similarly, those who profess to be Christ’s will be recognized by their actions. For what matters is not a momentary act of professing, but being persistently motivated by faith”

St. Ignatius of Antioch

You keep quoting that Catholic Bishop. Interesting. Note he says “persistently” - d’you suppose he believed Once Saved, Always Saved which is NOT in Scripture, or did he believe “he who endures to the end will be saved” which IS in Scripture, more than once?

Sir. 35:19; Luke 23:41; John 3:19-21, Rom. 8:13, 2 Tim 4:14, Titus 3:8,14, Rev. 22:12 - these verses teach us that we all will be judged by God according to our deeds. There is no distinction between the “saved” and the “unsaved.”

1 Cor. 3:15 - if works are unnecessary for salvation, then why is a man saved (not just rewarded) through fire by a judgment of his works?

Matt. 7:1-3 - we are not judged just by faith, but actually how we judge others, and we get what we have given. Hence, we are judged according to how we responded to God’s grace during our lives.

Matt. 10:22, 24:13; Mark 13:13 - Jesus taught that we must endure to the very end to be saved. If salvation occurred at a specific point in time when we accepted Jesus as personal Lord and Savior, there would be no need to endure to the end. We would already be saved.

Matt. 16:27 – Jesus says He will repay every man for what he has done (works).

Matt. 25:31-46 - Jesus’ teaching on the separation of the sheep from the goats is based on the works that were done during their lives, not just on their acceptance of Christ as Savior. In fact, this teaching even demonstrates that those who are ultimately saved do not necessarily have to know Christ. **Also, we don’t accept Christ; He accepts us. God first makes the decision to accept us before we could ever accept Him.
**
Matt. 25:40,45 - Jesus says “Whatever you did to the least of my brothers, you did it to Me.” We are judged and our eternal destiny is determined in accordance with our works.

Mark 10:21 - Jesus says sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. This means that our salvation depends upon our works.

Luke 12:43-48 - these verses teach us that we must act according to the Lord’s will. We are judged based upon what we know and then do, not just upon what we know.

Luke 14:14 – Jesus says we are repaid for the works we have done at the resurrection of the just. Our works lead to salvation.

Luke 23:41 - the good thief did in fact do a good work, which was rebuking the bad thief when he and others were reviling Jesus. This was a “work” which justified the good thief before Jesus and gained His favor. Moreover, we don’t know if the good thief asked God for forgiveness, did works of penance and charity and was reconciled to God before he was crucified.

Rom. 2:6-10, 13 - God will judge every man according to his works. Our salvation depends on how we cooperate with God’s grace.

2 Cor. 5:10 - at the judgment Seat of Christ, we are judged according to what we have done in the body, not how much faith we had.

2 Cor. 9:6 – Paul says that he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully, in connection with God’s judgment.

 

[Afterburned6387]

So we don’t have anything to do with whether or not we go to Heaven? We don’t have to make a decision to accept Jesus into our heart as Lord and Saviour? You left out verse 10. Why do non-Catholics always leave out verse 10? For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath prepared that we should walk in them.

I did not exclude that verse, I included it in my explanation of the twofold faith (a term I coined myself, don’t expect to find it elsewhere), I do not intend to leave out any part of the bible

Yep, Abraham believed God, and ACTED on that belief by obeying what God told him to do. What if he’d just stayed in Haran after God told him to leave?

But his actions were done as a result of faith, not as a cause of them. Remember, if one can boast about something, it can’t be a means of salvation. That is clearly laid out both in Rom. 4:1 and Eph. 2:8-9

Christians do not do works of charity to boast about them, particularly before God. It is only because of God’s grace working in us that we have “faith working through love.” (Gal. 5:6)

The distinction isn’t whether or not we DO boast, but whether or not we are ABLE to boast. A Christian does not do something to save himself, and give himself the ability to boast (though a good one shouldn’t), he is saved by something in which he CANNOT boast.

Well, I disagree with your interpretation of Scripture - are you surprised? Over and over again in the Bible I read:

Neh. 13:14, Psalm 11:7,28:4, Isa. 3:10, 59:18, Jer. 25:14, 50:29, Ezek. 9:10, 11:21, 36:19, Hos. 4:9, 9:15, 12:2, Sir. 16:12,14 - The 2,000 year-old Catholic position on salvation is that we are saved by Jesus Christ and Him alone (cf. Acts 15:11; Eph. 2:5). But by the grace of Christ, we achieve the salvation God desires for us through perseverance in both faith and works.

continued…

Every one of those quotes is from the Old Testament, where salvation could only (seemingly) come from works, as it was pre-Christ. Remember Romans 3:21?

“But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify.”

Before Christ, the only righteousness to be obtained was through the law, now we have a righteousness apart from it.

I look forward to the continued…

 

[Afterburned6387]

Pretty much the only thing I have to say in rebuttal, as the only valid point made in the above:

Salvation by Grace apart from ANY works does not preclude rewards for good deeds

No Protestant would deny that we are truly rewarded for our good deeds, but in the 1 Cor. quote, notice:

“If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.”

So one can be devoid of “good works” (what we assume the building represents), but still be saved…how does this mesh with your understanding?

One can be “merely saved” (Eph. 2:8-9), or one can be “completely saved” (Phil 2:12)

I wrote a letter to a Catholic friend of mine explaining this idea, I will post it shortly after this.