Earning our salvation

[fbl9]

Hi gurneyhalleck1…you gave the example of one confessing their sin walking out the door and committing the same sin again.Is the commssion of this sin a work?
Is confessing this sin a work also?
Staying in grace requires one to live by the spirit not by the flesh.
What gives faith energy? sitting there twiddling one’s thumbs?

It is by doing the things God has commanded us to do that we feed the grace given to us.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I don’t think comments like “but enjoy” are necessary. And it’s not true that no accountability exists in the eyes of Protestants. Obviously faith will be accounted for by God just as it was evident with the Good Thief at Calvary.

I know so many Protestants who are just the holiest people and who have stricter accountability than many Catholics I know. Some of my best, most honest, and clean-cut, moral friends I had in high school were Baptists and Lutherans and yet my three Catholic friends were drunks, drug-users, and had many sexual encounters despite the “accountability” system they were taught. So assuming that people who are of the sola fide mindset will inverably wind up libertine or of no accountability makes little sense. Most Calvinist and Lutheran theologians I read have high standards of accountability not because they’ll earn points but because they believe it’s what God wants of us–to behave with thanksgiving and joy as saved Christians

Sola fide leads only to the place of no accountability. I don’t like that place, for me or anyone else. You want to live there, its your choice. I don’t want to be where you don’t need to do something. Sounds insufficient to me. But enjoy. Its like saying, you need to have cake to have a birthday party, but if you add ice cream to the cake, its no longer a birthday party. Understandable, but wrong.

 

[ignatius777]

I don’t think comments like “but enjoy” are necessary. And it’s not true that no accountability exists in the eyes of Protestants. Obviously faith will be accounted for by God just as it was evident with the Good Thief at Calvary.

I know so many Protestants who are just the holiest people and who have stricter accountability than many Catholics I know. Some of my best, most honest, and clean-cut, moral friends I had in high school were Baptists and Lutherans and yet my three Catholic friends were drunks, drug-users, and had many sexual encounters despite the “accountability” system they were taught. So assuming that people who are of the sola fide mindset will inverably wind up libertine or of no accountability makes little sense. Most Calvinist and Lutheran theologians I read have high standards of accountability not because they’ll earn points but because they believe it’s what God wants of us–to behave with thanksgiving and joy as saved Christians

And the reverse is also true

 

[ignatius777]

I don’t think comments like “but enjoy” are necessary. And it’s not true that no accountability exists in the eyes of Protestants. Obviously faith will be accounted for by God just as it was evident with the Good Thief at Calvary.

I know so many Protestants who are just the holiest people and who have stricter accountability than many Catholics I know. Some of my best, most honest, and clean-cut, moral friends I had in high school were Baptists and Lutherans and yet my three Catholic friends were drunks, drug-users, and had many sexual encounters despite the “accountability” system they were taught. So assuming that people who are of the sola fide mindset will inverably wind up libertine or of no accountability makes little sense. Most Calvinist and Lutheran theologians I read have high standards of accountability not because they’ll earn points but because they believe it’s what God wants of us–to behave with thanksgiving and joy as saved Christians

No catholic would suggest that the “accountability” which we profess guarentees people will lead a virtuous life. The difference is that in the rationale of sola fide all of those behaviors which you observed in your catholic friends would be inconsequential to someones salvation. There is no escaping that line of thinking for protestants. Whether or not catholics behave that way is irrelevant to their ultimately having to account for those choices.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

What role do they play? How many good works plus faith earns your way to heaven? Paul tells us that to break the least of the Law is to break all of it. To live by a merit system is to revert to the Law and incur the wrath of God. So I’m trying to make sense of a system in which Paul tells us we are justified through faith. He tells us in Philippians 3 that he jumped through all the works-based earn your way to heaven ascetic law-abiding works-driven quest for salvation and he tells us that it’s “rubbish.” He tells us we are saved by faith and calls the Galatians “stupid” and pig-headed for wanting to revert to the old ways of pharisaic law-driven works-hunting. The Pauline language is easy to follow with faith. How does God measure our works if we’re no longer under the Law but under grace and faith? How many works do you have to do? How will He judge you based on this merit system? I hear constantly people make reference to James and works but Catholics in here do not make as good an argument for a works-driven system as Protestant make their case clearly with faith alone. The Protestant system is coherent and logical and the Catholic position is murky from the way I read it in here. It’s a steady back and forth system of receiving grace in confession, committing mortal sin makes the justification disappear in which you have to return to confession to get it back and sanctification must take place to give you final justification. If you’re not “there” yet you go to purgatory and steadily purge away your vestiges of sin and imperfection until you finally get justified and glorified in a theosis with God. Where do we see this in Scripture? Paul’s imputation-style language seems more in line with the NT and the New Covenant.

The works that play a role in our salvation are not works of the old Mosaic law, but works spoken of by Paul and James in the Scriptures. They are the works we do with faith - works in love - that gain us merit. And by merit I’m not in any way saying that by performing a work we are “owed” anything. Rather, we are obligated by accepting the gift of salvation to respond to that gift by working in love.

The “works” language does cause a disconnect - because I think non-Catholics read too much into the term, and ignore other scriptures that clearly spell out that our obligation as followers of Christ includes keeping His commandments and good works. One has to acknowledge the different interpretations and offer that the Catholic position is well reasoned and rests upon the entirety of scripture - taken in context and understood within the same Sacred Tradition that comes from the Apostles. But force and argument will not change hearts. There is room for disagreement where one rejects Sacred Tradition and interprets the passages of scripture in a different way. One can only offer the Catholic position, and pray that the Holy Spirit leads us all into the fullness of Truth. As Catholics, we should have no problem praying for knowledge of the truth.

Peace,
Robert

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Of course!

And the reverse is also true

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Not necessarily; saying that this bad behavior is inconsequential to Protestants isn’t necessarily the case as it may mean that the person has lost faith. We can’t read the person’s heart to know their faith status with God. If they’re willing to commit a ton of sins and live hypocritically it might really be that their religion is smoke and mirrors or just for looks, or more cultural and routine than genuine faith. We can’t judge by exteriors but it might very well be a sign that they’re lacking in faith?

No catholic would suggest that the “accountability” which we profess guarentees people will lead a virtuous life. The difference is that in the rationale of sola fide all of those behaviors which you observed in your catholic friends would be inconsequential to someones salvation. There is no escaping that line of thinking for protestants. Whether or not catholics behave that way is irrelevant to their ultimately having to account for those choices.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Thanks for this post, Robert. Great points.

The works that play a role in our salvation are not works of the old Mosaic law, but works spoken of by Paul and James in the Scriptures. They are the works we do with faith - works in love - that gain us merit. And by merit I’m not in any way saying that by performing a work we are “owed” anything. Rather, we are obligated by accepting the gift of salvation to respond to that gift by working in love.

The “works” language does cause a disconnect - because I think non-Catholics read too much into the term, and ignore other scriptures that clearly spell out that our obligation as followers of Christ includes keeping His commandments and good works. One has to acknowledge the different interpretations and offer that the Catholic position is well reasoned and rests upon the entirety of scripture - taken in context and understood within the same Sacred Tradition that comes from the Apostles. But force and argument will not change hearts. There is room for disagreement where one rejects Sacred Tradition and interprets the passages of scripture in a different way. One can only offer the Catholic position, and pray that the Holy Spirit leads us all into the fullness of Truth. As Catholics, we should have no problem praying for knowledge of the truth.

Peace,
Robert

 

[Pug]

But if we are dependent on sanctification for final justification,

We are dependent upon having the Holy Spirit in our hearts at the time that we die for final justification. That is what matters. For the purposes of if we go to heaven or if we go to hell, it won’t matter other than if he is there then.

how many people do you meet in your life, Catholic or Protestant, who seem sanctified and holy, pure, and truly showing the fullness of the grace God has given them?

It won’t matter how holy you seem to the eyes of others. Either you have the Spirit or you don’t at that moment of death. The hapless Christian who seems to not quite have it together and the smooth operator who seems joyful, loving, and extra spirit-filled both get to go to heaven if they are “in a state of grace” then.

Protestants are not of the mindset that God doesn’t expect them to behave, cooperate in grace, and live the moral life. I think we all know that; but where they differ is the belief that the eternal consequences of sin, the salvation we get from God is not through our own works but through faith and grace alone.

The eternal consequences of sin are indeed removed from us by grace. God gives you the grace to repent (return to God), you cooperate and repent, and you are free of the eternal consequences of the sins that went before. For Catholics, the two main points of interest for this are baptism and confession, both of which are times when the eternal consequences of the previous sins are wiped out. They are times when the person goes from not having sanctifying grace to having sanctifying grace.

Sanctification follows and the real Christian naturally cooperates and lives a moral life to the best of his ability, but not to earn his way to heaven lest anyone should boast

I agree, no boasting. Our merits are due to God, because our meritorious actions proceed in Christ (we cooperate and do them while we are in Christ), with the promptings, dispositions, and assistance of the HS, our helper. What Catholics call “merits” are God’s gifts, that he has freely chosen to give.

but rather because it’s a mature and loving relationship. Take marriage for example. I don’t do nice things for my wife just because if I don’t she’ll get angry with me; I do it because I love her. I do nice things for my boss out of respect and thanks and duty not because I’ll earn points with her. So I don’t think Protestants feel they can live the moral-free life.

I agree, most Protestants I know feel they ought to live a moral life.

If salvation is dependent on our works, since NO ONE is pleasing to God Paul tells us in Romans

Catholics agree that there is no strict right to merit before God by man.

and all are sinners and the wages of sin is death, we will all die based on our works and “cooperation” with God. If I walk out of the confessional after confessing I looked at pornography, then I look at a woman lustfully on the street I am already in sin. Jesus says to dream of adultery in the heart or lust in the mind is the same as doing it. So I’m right back. The minute I leave the confessional I’m still a sinner and fall short of God’s glory.

Our natures remain haunted by the effects of original sin. This is not personal sin. It is though, if you do not resist temptation and instead give in. Having the woman cross your path and having your mind perk up and suggest to you that you ought to keep thinking about her now that you have noticed that you are noticing her is a temptation. Once we realize what is up, though, we are given grace to stop with that and turn our eyes away (I know, easier said than done). If we don’t cooperate, it can be a mortal sin, true. But if it is venial, it does not constitute rejection of friendship with God, though we are weakened. Christians will do venial sins. It is a fact of life. We continue in grace, though, even when we don’t cooperate with every grace that we receive. We are not under some kind of system that depends on our perfection this instant.

I just don’t see evidence of infusion of grace in the Catholics I know or the Orthodox for that matter. Nobody is pleasing to God enough to merit anything.

I agree that many Christians don’t do a great job of cooperating with the graces they receive. Not that I am saying that we can truly know by looking at someone if they are in a state of grace, and such. Only God sees into our hearts like that. But God can makes us into sons and daughters, freely of his own accord. He is then pleased on those instances when we do walk in a manner worthy of that. He has chosen to be pleased in that case. For example, he doesn’t just give everything to us at once, bypassing our whole life. For his own reasons he works in processes that go as follows: he prompts us with grace to pray for more faith, we cooperate and pray for more faith, he is pleased, and then he gives us more faith. He chooses to be pleased with this state of affairs, with these things that have come through his grace. The works that we do (when we are cooperating with his grace) are pleasing to him. Hebrews 13:16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Great post. Thank you, Pug.

We are dependent upon having the Holy Spirit in our hearts at the time that we die for final justification. That is what matters. For the purposes of if we go to heaven or if we go to hell, it won’t matter other than if he is there then.

It won’t matter how holy you seem to the eyes of others. Either you have the Spirit or you don’t at that moment of death. The hapless Christian who seems to not quite have it together and the smooth operator who seems joyful, loving, and extra spirit-filled both get to go to heaven if they are “in a state of grace” then.
The eternal consequences of sin are indeed removed from us by grace. God gives you the grace to repent (return to God), you cooperate and repent, and you are free of the eternal consequences of the sins that went before. For Catholics, the two main points of interest for this are baptism and confession, both of which are times when the eternal consequences of the previous sins are wiped out. They are times when the person goes from not having sanctifying grace to having sanctifying grace.

I agree, no boasting. Our merits are due to God, because our meritorious actions proceed in Christ (we cooperate and do them while we are in Christ), with the promptings, dispositions, and assistance of the HS, our helper. What Catholics call “merits” are God’s gifts, that he has freely chosen to give.

I agree, most Protestants I know feel they ought to live a moral life.

Catholics agree that there is no strict right to merit before God by man.

Our natures remain haunted by the effects of original sin. This is not personal sin. It is though, if you do not resist temptation and instead give in. Having the woman cross your path and having your mind perk up and suggest to you that you ought to keep thinking about her now that you have noticed that you are noticing her is a temptation. Once we realize what is up, though, we are given grace to stop with that and turn our eyes away (I know, easier said than done). If we don’t cooperate, it can be a mortal sin, true. But if it is venial, it does not constitute rejection of friendship with God, though we are weakened. Christians will do venial sins. It is a fact of life. We continue in grace, though, even when we don’t cooperate with every grace that we receive. We are not under some kind of system that depends on our perfection this instant.
I agree that many Christians don’t do a great job of cooperating with the graces they receive. Not that I am saying that we can truly know by looking at someone if they are in a state of grace, and such. Only God sees into our hearts like that. But God can makes us into sons and daughters, freely of his own accord. He is then pleased on those instances when we do walk in a manner worthy of that. He has chosen to be pleased in that case. For example, he doesn’t just give everything to us at once, bypassing our whole life. For his own reasons he works in processes that go as follows: he prompts us with grace to pray for more faith, we cooperate and pray for more faith, he is pleased, and then he gives us more faith. He chooses to be pleased with this state of affairs, with these things that have come through his grace. The works that we do (when we are cooperating with his grace) are pleasing to him. Hebrews 13:16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.

 

[fhansen]

But if we are dependent on sanctification for final justification, how many people do you meet in your life, Catholic or Protestant, who seem sanctified and holy, pure, and truly showing the fullness of the grace God has given them? Precious few. Paul and James tell us to break the least of the Law is to break all of it.

Well, we also need to deal with verses such as the following. The first two are from the Sermon on the Mount. Other verses from that sermon tell us that not only our actions but even our hearts first of all must be in the right place-the New Covenant standard is even higher than the Old.

**“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. Matt 5:17

Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. Matt 5:48

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ 46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” Matt 25:44-46
For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live,… Rom 8:13

Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? 1Cor 6:9

Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8 Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9 Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Gal 6:7-9
As obedient children, do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance. 15 But just as he who called you is holy, so be holy in all you do; 16 for it is written: “Be holy, because I am holy.” 1Pet 1:14

Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord. Heb 12:14**

And, maybe most importantly, these:
**“With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matt 19:26

“I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. John 15:5**

Continued next post

 

[fhansen]

Continued

I think we can easily limit God-failing to appreciate* His* vision for us. Many Protestants believe, as Catholics do, that we’ll eventually be fully sanctified; they’re just less certain as to how/when this will happen- or maybe even somewhat vague as to if it can or needs to happen at all. But whatever side of heaven sanctification might take place on it will be a complicated endeavor, one only God could pull off.

The main problem with the doctrine of imputed righteousness as being sufficient in and of itself to justify us, is that, by it, Gods’ will is simply not done, even in heaven possibly. But sin and heaven are mutually exclusive, simply because sin can’t help but obscure the vision of God; sin is our attachment to things other than Him first and foremost after all. So it’s not so much that He won’t let us in; it’s that we’re incapable of or unequipped for even experiencing heaven-of experiencing God-to the extent we’re still attracted to other, created, things more than Him.

Again, most Protestants view man’s sanctification as Gods plan in the end-and they generally live under the onus, at least to some degree, that they should consciously strive for obedience, whether or not that striving fits so well with their theology -they just don’t view sanctification as necessary for salvation. But remember that love fulfills the Law. I think we can make the concept of holiness a bit too complicated-and too unreachable. Holiness/sanctification is nothing more or less than Gods will for us- to be the beings he created us to be, although this means a much higher level of being to be sure. In any case that’s what our justice consists of. And while we can’t possibly achieve this justice on our own, we’re nonetheless created to possess it and that’s the point; we don’t have it only because we were never meant to possess it on our own -we cannot do so in fact - while apart from or separated from God. And this is the basis of the New Covenant-that each man, individually, needs God’s Spirit operating within in order to be capable of fulfilling Gods will for him.

To consider that perfection is possibly not attainable at all is to doubt God’s will, IMO, since He created us to be a certain way, and later even gave us laws, after the fall, spelling out some important basic rules of obedience if we we’re to be holy, the way He intended. But just because the Law can’t justify and give life, as the Spirit can, this does not imply that the Law is wrong-because the Law, itself, is spiritual according to scripture. The problem, also according to Scripture, is that we are not spiritual. And so obedience to the letter of the law kills while the Spirit gives life. As we come to abide in the Spirit, being perfected in God’s love, the Law is fulfilled ipso facto.

The gospel of man’s salvation is not just about forgiveness of sin. It’s about God’s plan for the restoration of man to the heights from which he fell-maybe a little higher yet.

If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children. St Basil

If St Augustine could sum up Catholic thought pretty well by saying, “Love, and do what you like”, I believe Protestant thought might be summed up by saying, “Believe, and do what you like”, with, perhaps, a qualification or two.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Superb post, fhansen! Thanks so much
gurney

Continued

I think we can easily limit God-failing to appreciate* His* vision for us. Many Protestants believe, as Catholics do, that we’ll eventually be fully sanctified; they’re just less certain as to how/when this will happen- or maybe even somewhat vague as to if it can or needs to happen at all. But whatever side of heaven sanctification might take place on it will be a complicated endeavor, one only God could pull off.

The main problem with the doctrine of imputed righteousness as being sufficient in and of itself to justify us, is that, by it, Gods’ will is simply not done, even in heaven possibly. But sin and heaven are mutually exclusive, simply because sin can’t help but obscure the vision of God; sin is our attachment to things other than Him first and foremost after all. So it’s not so much that He won’t let us in; it’s that we’re incapable of or unequipped for even experiencing heaven-of experiencing God-to the extent we’re still attracted to other, created, things more than Him.

Again, most Protestants view man’s sanctification as Gods plan in the end-and they generally live under the onus, at least to some degree, that they should consciously strive for obedience, whether or not that striving fits so well with their theology -they just don’t view sanctification as necessary for salvation. But remember that love fulfills the Law. I think we can make the concept of holiness a bit too complicated-and too unreachable. Holiness/sanctification is nothing more or less than Gods will for us- to be the beings he created us to be, although this means a much higher level of being to be sure. In any case that’s what our justice consists of. And while we can’t possibly achieve this justice on our own, we’re nonetheless created to possess it and that’s the point; we don’t have it only because we were never meant to possess it on our own -we cannot do so in fact - while apart from or separated from God. And this is the basis of the New Covenant-that each man, individually, needs God’s Spirit operating within in order to be capable of fulfilling Gods will for him.

To consider that perfection is possibly not attainable at all is to doubt God’s will, IMO, since He created us to be a certain way, and later even gave us laws, after the fall, spelling out some important basic rules of obedience if we we’re to be holy, the way He intended. But just because the Law can’t justify and give life, as the Spirit can, this does not imply that the Law is wrong-because the Law, itself, is spiritual according to scripture. The problem, also according to Scripture, is that we are not spiritual. And so obedience to the letter of the law kills while the Spirit gives life. As we come to abide in the Spirit, being perfected in God’s love, the Law is fulfilled ipso facto.

The gospel of man’s salvation is not just about forgiveness of sin. It’s about God’s plan for the restoration of man to the heights from which he fell-maybe a little higher yet.

If we turn away from evil out of fear of punishment, we are in the position of slaves. If we pursue the enticement of wages, . . . we resemble mercenaries. Finally if we obey for the sake of the good itself and out of love for him who commands . . . we are in the position of children. St Basil

If St Augustine could sum up Catholic thought pretty well by saying, “Love, and do what you like”, I believe Protestant thought might be summed up by saying, “Believe, and do what you like”, with, perhaps, a qualification or two.

 

[JonNC]

=fhansen;7284295]Continued

Again, most Protestants view man’s sanctification as Gods plan in the end-and they generally live under the onus, at least to some degree, that they should consciously strive for obedience, whether or not that striving fits so well with their theology -they just don’t view sanctification as necessary for salvation.

I’m thankful you said most protestants. Lutherans certainly view sanctification as the necessary extension of justification. Luther said, quite well, that “There is no justification without sanctification, no forgiveness without renewal of life, no real faith from which the fruits of new obedience do not grow.”

Jon

 

[Matorin]

Just read this. Thoughts? How similiar is this to Catholic thought?

fundamentallyreformed.com/2006/02/11/once-saved-always-saved/

 

[fhansen]

Just read this. Thoughts? How similiar is this to Catholic thought?

fundamentallyreformed.com/2006/02/11/once-saved-always-saved/

It’s not quite Catholicism because, in the writer’s theology, good works are merely a fruit or sign of one’s salvation whereas in Catholicism salvation is simply not a one-time certainty to begin with-no OSAS unless we could read the mind of God- having the foreknowledge only He has.

In Catholicism, good works are an expression of one’s becoming justified-they are gifts of grace-one can accept the gift, performing the work and building his justice on it further, or he can always refuse the gift. These works of love are an outworking of one’s salvation-part and parcel of it-because, as they test and stretch one’s faith, we become more just-which is to say we grow in our love for God and neighbor.

Read the parable of the Talents where the servants were all given something to invest but one refused to invest it-resulting in his being kicked out- while the others increased their investment.

OTOH, the theology expressed in the article is closer to Catholicism than the “easy believism” of Charles Stanley et al, which the article also describes, and which can all too easily blossom from the “faith alone” doctrine-a dangerous outgrowth to be sure.