Faith Alone

[Vincent]

Romans 6:1-7 (RSV)
What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For he who has died is ***freed ***from sin.
This passage clearly expresses sanctification.

At the same time . . .

What many versions translate as “**freed from sin” (Rom. 6:7), which emphasizes the dimension of sanctification, is in fact **"δεδικαίωται ἀπὸ τη̂ς ἁμαρτίας".

But ***δεδικαίωται ***is the perfect passive indicative of. . . **

δικαιόω**, that is:**

“to justify”**

Surprise!

 

[sandusky]

Romans 6:1-7 (RSV)
What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For he who has died is ***freed ***from sin.
This passage clearly expresses sanctification.

At the same time . . .

What many versions translate as “***freed ***from sin” (Rom. 6:7), which emphasizes the dimension of sanctification, is in fact ***“δεδικαίωται ***ἀπὸ τη̂ς ἁμαρτίας”.

But ***δεδικαίωται ***is the perfect passive indicative of. . . **

δικαιόω**, that is:**

“to justify”**

Surprise!

The context calls for “freedom,” or “set free from,” (which is the thought of the chapter, notice the close of the thought in v14); IOW, the believer is now free to obey, and to do acts of righteousness.

That’s much clearer than “justified from sin.”

 

[sandusky]

Pax:

Okay, I’ll quote them again and I will highlight the areas that I am referring to.

James Buchanan states that “justification by faith is a legal or forensic term used in scripture to denote the acceptance of anyone as righteous in the sight of God.” Nowhere does Buchanan say anything about regeneration. He believes that justification is merely an imputation…a legal or forensic term.

The Westminster statement on justification says:
“Justification is altogether a legal declarative act on God’s part as the supreme judge. We deny that justification is any sense a moral transformation or inner renewal. In justification, God legally declares the sinner who in himself is still guilty and polluted to be righteous in Christ. Justification involves only the legal imputation or legal account of the perfect righteousness of Christ to the sinner. We deny that justification is by a grace at conversion that enables sinners to do the law unto their justification.”

What I have highlighted is exactly what I said and what I am talking about. This view of justification denies regeneration in that it is merely an imputed righteousness.

I think you’re quibbling, Pax; the culmination of God’s effectual, or irresistible call results in the instantaneous events of salvation.

God is able to declare the believer righteous for two reasons. 1) He gave the righteousness (Rom 3:22; Php 3:9). It was imputed to us (Rom 4:1-4, 20-24), that is, the righteousness was credited to the believer in place of his sins. And, 2) God has made the believer righteous in Christ (2 Cor 5:21, cf Rom 5:19; 1 Cor 1:30). So then, that essential righteousness becomes a quality of the believer’s renewed personhood and inner nature (Eph 4:24; cf 1 Pet 1:22; Acts 15:9).

That righteousness consists of Christ’s perfect righteousness even unto death (Rom 5:19; Php 2:8; Jn 8:29).

Therefore, justification is not only God’s declaration that the gospel believer is righteous (and not guilty concerning sins, and the law), but also God’s imputation of that righteousness, which makes them to be righteous.

 

[Pax]

You’ve not answered my question, Pax.

The point you want to make is that justification and sanctification are not divided, and yet, none of the verses you post mention justification; why is that?

My point is in fact that there is no clear division between the two. It is for that very reason that I quoted all of the verses I did on sanctification. My questions concerning each verse were not addressed by you or moondweller. Instead, you posed your own question. Try reading the post again and you will see that my choice of passages deliberately excluded any passage that used the word justification. I did this to show that if you inserted the word justification in place of the word sanctification you would not violate scriptural truth. In the passages the words can be used interchangeably. This helps to demonstrate the things they have in common and that the line between them is blurred rather than distinct.

 

[Pax]

The context calls for “freedom,” or “set free from,” (which is the thought of the chapter, notice the close of the thought in v14); IOW, the believer is now free to obey, and to do acts of righteousness.

That’s much clearer than “justified from sin.”

So do you think that this verse has nothing to do with justification? If so then you are mistaken because Paul uses the word “justified.” I brought this up in my question to moondweller which went unanswered. Vincent took the cue and explained it. You seem to be disputing the relationship to justification. My point in bring it up is to show that there is no clear distinction or dividing line between justification and sanctification. Romans 6:7 removes all doubt.

 

[Pax]

I think you’re quibbling, Pax; the culmination of God’s effectual, or irresistible call results in the instantaneous events of salvation.

God is able to declare the believer righteous for two reasons. 1) He gave the righteousness (Rom 3:22; Php 3:9). It was imputed to us (Rom 4:1-4, 20-24), that is, the righteousness was credited to the believer in place of his sins. And, 2) God has made the believer righteous in Christ (2 Cor 5:21, cf Rom 5:19; 1 Cor 1:30). So then, that essential righteousness becomes a quality of the believer’s renewed personhood and inner nature (Eph 4:24; cf 1 Pet 1:22; Acts 15:9).

That righteousness consists of Christ’s perfect righteousness even unto death (Rom 5:19; Php 2:8; Jn 8:29).

Therefore, justification is not only God’s declaration that the gospel believer is righteous (and not guilty concerning sins, and the law), but also God’s imputation of that righteousness, which makes them to be righteous.

This is simply untrue. We have shown numerous times on this thread, by way of scripture, that Christians can fall from grace, can fall away, and can lose their salvation. It is not instantaneous once for all if we choose to leave the faith.

 

[Pax]

Therefore, justification is not only God’s declaration that the gospel believer is righteous (and not guilty concerning sins, and the law), but also God’s imputation of that righteousness, which makes them to be righteous.

An imputed righteousness does not make a person truly righteous. Imputed righteousness means that the person remains polluted and that there is no inner renewal per the Westminster statement on justification.

Only the Catholic understanding of infused righteousness is consistent with the truth of God making us righteous.

 

[Holly3278]

One of my favorite verses in the Bible refuting the idea of salvation by faith alone is:

Jas 2:24 RSV You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Emphasis mine.

 

[guanophore]

One of my favorite verses in the Bible refuting the idea of salvation by faith alone is:

Jas 2:24 RSV You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Emphasis mine.

I also find it fascinating that this is the ONLY place where the words “faith alone” appear together.

I think it is significant that Paul writes about three things that abide, faith, hope, and love. Why would not the greatest be faith?

 

[Randy_Carson]

I also find it fascinating that this is the ONLY place where the words “faith alone” appear together.

I think it is significant that Paul writes about three things that abide, faith, hope, and love. Why would not the greatest be faith?

Isn’t it curious that the Apostle Paul used the word “faith” and related terms more than 200 times in the New Testament, yet he never once used the phrase “faith alone”?

This seems strange considering how concerned Paul was with passing on the faith accurately and the means to justification would be among the most important truths he would preach. In fact, throughout all of his works, he goes to great lengths to choose his words with precision, so it seems odd that “faith alone” does not appear once in all of his writings.

This is even more surprising given the fact that Paul also used the words “alone” and “only” more than any other New Testament author. Clearly, Paul was well-accustomed to using these powerful qualifiers.

Could it be that the Holy Spirit prevented Paul from ever writing “faith alone” to describe the process of justification? And that same check prevented any of the gospel writers from ascribing “faith alone” to Jesus, either.

In fact, the only time that the Holy Spirit allowed any author to use that infamous phrase, is when He inspired James to write, “You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.” (James 2:24)

Therefore, for those who propose that Paul taught justification by faith alone, a very haunting question remains: Why didn’t Paul use the specific phrase “faith alone” anywhere in his New Testament writings?

 

[Gamera]

Isn’t it curious that the Apostle Paul used the word “faith” and related terms more than 200 times in the New Testament, yet he never once used the phrase “faith alone”?

This seems strange considering how concerned Paul was with passing on the faith accurately and the means to justification would be among the most important truths he would preach. In fact, throughout all of his works, he goes to great lengths to choose his words with precision, so it seems odd that “faith alone” does not appear once in all of his writings.

This is even more surprising given the fact that Paul also used the words “alone” and “only” more than any other New Testament author. Clearly, Paul was well-accustomed to using these powerful qualifiers.

Could it be that the Holy Spirit prevented Paul from ever writing “faith alone” to describe the process of justification? And that same check prevented any of the gospel writers from ascribing “faith alone” to Jesus, either.

In fact, the only time that the Holy Spirit allowed any author to use that infamous phrase, is when He inspired James to write, “You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.” (James 2:24)

Therefore, for those who propose that Paul taught justification by faith alone, a very haunting question remains: Why didn’t Paul use the specific phrase “faith alone” anywhere in his New Testament writings?

If I understand our fundamentalist friends correctly, they believe that any “spirit-filled” believer will understand that Scripture “really means” salvation by faith alone, even though Scripture never actually says it. You know – just like a spirit filled believer will know that James 2:24, which says we are NOT saved by faith alone, doesn’t really mean that. Apparently the Bible is in a code that only fundamentalists can decipher. So much for perspicacity.

 

[Holly3278]

I also find it fascinating that this is the ONLY place where the words “faith alone” appear together.

I think it is significant that Paul writes about three things that abide, faith, hope, and love. Why would not the greatest be faith?

Yes, of course a Protestant explanation of that verse would be that we are justified in front of men by our works.

 

[Chaldean_Rite]

“For in hope we were saved. Now hope that sees for itself is not hope. For who hopes for what one sees? ”[Romans 8:24].

Now that we have established that we are saved by hope, which is not faith [clearly, if he meant faith he would have said faith]; does that mean you even need faith? Just in case you don’t see what I’m trying to do*, I’m trying to make the case, based upon St. Pauls testimony, from that particular passage, in that particular book, all we need is HOPE ALONE. If you don’t know how to respond to this [perhaps because all this time you got it wrong, you thought it was FAITH ALONE!!], I suggest talking to a Catholic priest that is faithful to Church teaching or seeking counsel [try http://www.catholic.com”]www.catholic.com* ].

I am, of course, being facetious and humorous here just to get a point across: it is not just faith or just hope that saves us, even thou [pointing at the bible] “it says it here”. At any rate, this verse is crystal clear: if you SEE heaven [ie: if you have an absolute assurance of salvation because you are “saved”] your hope is seen and therefore according to St. Paul, is not hope at all and cannot bring about salvation.

Futher, this type of logic I did above is what I usually notice protestants doing when they study scripture, usually ignoring the most important parts, like John 20:22-23, for example. A shame.

 

[moondweller]

You are passing judgements over another human beings belief here. Do you have that power in your faith, only God has that power. The rest of christianity sees your response as a violation of the first commandment?

You seem to want to ascribe to me a faith created in your own mind that bears no resemblance to Catholicism with Christ at the head of the Church.

“You” was used in a general sense. I wasn’t addressing anyone in particular. However, the shoe comes in many sizes. I was merely answering your question regarding an intellectual ascent vs. true faith. You’re the one who asked the question.

God didn’t justify just persons in the O.T.

Which of the animal kingdom did He justify? With the new movie out, you’re not getting confused with Narnia, are you?

Coming to Faith requires you to do something, doesn’t it.

No, it requires you to believe something.

No one knowledgable about the Jewish faith will ever agree with you that they are a faith alone faith.

Agreed. But a remnant of Jews “according to God gracious choice” do understand that “if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace” (sic Rom. 11:5-6)

If faith alone was all that was important in the old testament, then why burnt offerings, why passover?

Are you suggesting that Law observance justified men before God? Suggested reading: Heb. 10:1-14.

 

[moondweller]

Another fact?

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar?

No. This verse must be understood in the context James intended it. He was not advocating justification by works at all, but by example he was pointing out Abraham’s faith. Jump down to verse 22:“You see that FAITH was working with his works, and as a result of works, FAITH was perfected” (not his justification).His willingness to offer up Issac demonstrated how his faith had matured. The same faith by which God justified him some 20 years earlier (Gen. 15:6). In context James wasn’t presenting a didactic teaching on justification, but by example of Abraham’s maturity of faith in what God had promised, he appealed to his Jewish brethren in Christ to demonstrate, in action, that same faith by which God had also previously justified them: “Show me your faith…”

I have found it ironic indeed, even paradoxical, that the Roman CC invariably appeals to the Book of James rather than the Book of ROMANS for its dogmatic stance on justification. Paul made his teachings on that doctrine abundantly clear to the church at Rome - yet the Roman CC now looks, instead, to James.

 

[moondweller]

Galatians 5:24 says,

“And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.”

Scripture says elsewhere that “…our old self was crucified with him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin.”

This sounds pretty much like the passage from Galatians 5:24. So my question to you is as follows:

Does crucifying the flesh and thereby dying to sin which thus frees us from sin, pertain to sanctification, justification, or both?

In regeneration the true believer receives a new life and a new nature; in justification he receives a new standing before God - righteous. He is made right in His sight. This is a fundamental truth presented by Paul to the church at Rome:Rom 4:5 "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,"This fundamental truth Paul links all the way back to Abraham - the father of all who believe.Rom 4:16 "For this reason {it is} by faith, in order that {it may be} in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all,“Gal. 5:24 has nothing to do with justification but all to do with positional sanctification. Paul does not say in that verse that those who belong to Christ are crucifying the flesh,” but “have crucified” the flesh. It pertains the cross principle he wrote about in previously in 2:20:Gal 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the {life} which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me."Note: He doesn’t say, I am being crucified with Christ, but “I have been crucified with Christ.” He is consistent in his letter to the church at Colossae when he writes:Col 3:3 "For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God."He doesn’t say that they are dying so that their lives will in the future be hidden with Christ in God. Nor does he say, “Crucify yourselves in hopes to be hidden with Christ in God.” But “YOU HAVE DIED and you life IS HIDDEN WITH CHRIST in God.” This is positional sanctification. It’s the believer’s new identity in Christ = “sanctified in Christ Jesus” (see 1 Cor. 1:2; cf. Heb. 10, 14), which as eternal (everlasting) as Christ Himself. This cannot be reversed because he writes to them in the following verse:Col 3:4 "When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory."Now it is most important for the true believer to fully understand his positional sanctification because such glorious knowledge is the catalyst that motivates his experiential, or, practical sanctification here on earth:Col 3:5 "Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry."You see Pax, the gospel is not just that Christ died for our sins and they’re forgiven, glorious as that is, but that we who have truly believed and are Christ’s have (it is revealed) also died with Christ and are hidden with Him in the heavenly:Eph 2:4-6 "But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly {places} in Christ Jesus,"My prayer for you, and all on this thread, is that of Paul’s to the believers at Ephesians just before he wrote to them regarding their position in Christ:Eph 1:18-23 {I pray that} the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you will know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. {These are} in accordance with the working of the strength of His might which He brought about in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly {places,} far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.He goes on then to reveal to them (and all who are Christ’s) their sanctified position in Christ. No longer in Adam, but now, and forever, "in Christ, the “Last Adam.”

 

[moondweller]

I am afraid you have been misinformed about your family history, moondweller. The Catholic Faith was taught by the Apostles, it did not “develop an take hold in the West in the Middle Ages”, either. On the contrary, the Eastern Catholic Churches formed first, before Catholicism spread to Rome, and to Europe. However, this faith, referred to in the book of Acts as “The Way”, was taught all over the Roman Empire before the canon of your scripture was closed by that Church in the fourth century.

Paul at first was a persecutor of “the Way” (Acts 22:4). But after his radical conversion he became its greatest teacher. “The Way” (which is Christ) is doctrinally Pauline. That is, most of its doctrines, such as, justification, redemption, reconciliation, sanctification, identification, and the believer’s glorification are revealed to the church by Paul. So much so that Paul employs the term “my gospel” by which God will judge the secrets of men (Rom. 1:17), establish believers (Rom. 16:25), and through which the truths concerning Christ are to be remembered (2 Tim. 2:8). These things he preached, they received and we now stand (1 Cor. 15:1; cf. Gal. 1:11; 1 Tim. 1:11).

“The Way” is Pauline. It’s justification by grace through faith alone. There’s no indication that Paul ever taught the Marian dogmas, prayers to canonized saints, the sacrificial nature of the “Eucharist,” or Purgatory. All dogmas that developed later in post-Apostolic Catholicism. Nor is there any indication that Peter ever taught his own supremacy, or that of some “successor” of his; or that John who cared for Mary ever taught the motherhood of Mary for all Christians.

The N.T. Scriptures provide us with the doctrines taught and held by “the Way.”

I agree with you about justification by faith, however, this justification has always expressed itself in the holy acts of the redeemed.

Agreed. And so does James. That his whole point in chapter two.

It appears that you have not understood the difference between sacred works, and works of the flesh

It appears you still refuse to believe Paul and the ancient teachings of "the Way:"Rom 4:1-8 "What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven, and whose sins have been covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account."Works may follow, but it’s through faith in what God has said that He credits righteousness. Paul precludes works of any kind. “The Way” was and always is by FAITH.

 

[ryanoneil]

There are works of the law (law of Moses) and good works (law of Christ).
Works of the law is a system of wages and good works is a system of grace.
Works of the law don’t save and good works do. It is that simple

The difference is clear in Ephesians 2. Paul refers to works of the law in v 8-9. He refers to good works in v 10.

8
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God;
9
it is not from works, so no one may boast.
10
For we are his handiwork, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that God has prepared in advance, that we should live in them.

The difference is also clear in

For the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has freed you from the law of sin and death. (Rom 8:2)

To those outside the law I became like one outside the law–though I am not outside God’s law but within the law of Christ–to win over those outside the law. (1 Cor 9:21)

For the whole law is fulfilled in one statement, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” (Gal 5:14)

Bear one another’s burdens, and so you will fulfill the law of Christ. (Gal 6:2)

 

[guanophore]

Therefore, for those who propose that Paul taught justification by faith alone, a very haunting question remains: Why didn’t Paul use the specific phrase “faith alone” anywhere in his New Testament writings?

I think, for Paul, as with the other Apostles, faith included obedience:

“…through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith…” Rom 1:5

“…according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith…” Rom 16:26

For Paul, faith meant obedience to all that Jesus taught and commanded.

Interesting these phrases are found in the very book that is used to promote that obedience is extraneous.

 

[ryanoneil]

Dont forget about this obedience.

For I will not dare to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to lead the Gentiles to obedience by word and deed, (Rom 15:18)

Do you not know that if you present yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? (Rom 6:16)