HELP! Does Romans 4 preach sola fide?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mom2three
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LittleDeb said:
On the contrary. I have been reading many long posts in this thread since nearly day 1. While other Catholic apologists posts have been very good, yours have been exceptional.

Your clarity with the explanation of works outside of faith being a debt issue was very helpful to me. You have clearly explained how works are not a result of faith, like the Protestant argument. While at the same time, you have shown how an atheist or someone else without faith can do things that appear to be works, i.e. feed the poor, visit the sick, etc. and still not go to heaven because their works lacked initial justification through faith. The secular argument is ‘works alone.’ The Protestant argument is ‘faith alone.’

That has been a hard one for me to explain. ‘Debt’ clarifies that so well. The Catholic Truth has always been Faith plus Works. You have given me a much better way to explain that. Thank you!
Click to expand...
I agree strongly with LittleDeb. 👍

Don’t let the fire go out Antonius Lupus. Layout a strong Catholic defense and spread it out like napalm. Our God is indeed a consuming flame!
 
myfavoritmartin said:
This too is an old argument, the Trinity was an accepted definition way way before Nicea…

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
If it had been universally accepted, then the council would have been unnecessary. A nodding acquaintance with the history of the period would give you a picture of the actual situation in the Church. Because Scripture is not clear on the subject, heresies had erupted that threatened to undermine the orthodox teaching that Jesus is true God and true man. The very point here is that the council adopted a defining term not found in Scripture: homoousion. The Church, coming together in council, promulgated a refinement of the trinitarian doctrine that became de fide thereafter.

Actually, this needs to be carried over to another thread: this thread is about sola fide, not about sola Scriptura.
 
mikeledes said:
All this talk about “if” and “repaying according to works,” does not fit a Soteriology that claims that works play absolutely no role in our glorification. First of all, the works that the justified do are done “in Christ” and cannot be done apart from Christ in a manner pleasing to God (“For without me you can do nothing.”). So even the good works we do in Christ are ultimately derived from the work of Christ on the Cross, so we cannot glory in them.

Secondly, if works have nothing to do with inheriting Eternal Life, then why even bother to bring then up (Romans 2:6-10, 1 Timothy 6:18-19, Matthew 25;33-46 [Please read these verses carefully], John 15:2,6). Why does the Bible say we are judged according to our works and not simply according to our faith.

Thirdly, if salvation does not have past, present, and future dimensions, why do we find verses like:

1 Timothy 4:16

“Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this in you will save yourself and those who hear.”

I thought Timothy was already saved? Why does it say he “will save(Future tense) yourself?” Moreover, why is Paul connecting salvation with actually doing something, if nothing we do besides faith affects our salvation? Finally, why urge Timothy to continue?
Won’t that happen automatically with justification, since it is an eternal state?

Why does the Bible say that those “who endure to the end will be saved?” Why be saved at the end if they are already and forever saved? Why urge to endure if our efforts after being justified have nothing to do with our salvation?

Why does Romans 13:11 say:

“… for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed.”

if we already have salvation in its fullest sense?

Why does Jesus several times states that in order to inherit eternal life you need to keep the commandments (Matthew 19:17, Luke 10:25-28)? I thought that was done by faith alone?

Why does he tell us to keep the commandments in order to remain in Him (John 15:10, 1 John 3:24)? I thought once we were justified by faith alone, we would always remain in Christ and nothing we do - even keeping the commandments - can affect that?

Why does John 15 contradict everything you are saying but fits perfectly with the above verses?

When you read Romans 4 in context of the entire New Testament, both the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles, you see a very different Gospel from the one you are preaching.

God Bless,
Michael
Click to expand...
I’m still waiting for a direct response to these verses.

God Bless,
Michael
 
I would also like to emphasize that truly righteous acts before God can only flow out of a regenerated heart (i.e. the justified). However, if we block this flow by willfully being unfruitful or not persevering in keeping the commandments, then we will be held accountable and thrown into the fire. The works of the justified are the manifestation of the Cross of Christ in their lives. If we lack righteous acts, we frustrate God’s plan for our lives. Our justification must be followed by a life of obedience to God. Otherwise we will be disqualified.

God Bless,
Michael
 
mikeledes said:
I would also like to emphasize that truly righteous acts before God can only flow out of a regenerated heart (i.e. the justified). However, if we block this flow by willfully being unfruitful or not persevering in keeping the commandments, then we will be held accountable and thrown into the fire. The works of the justified are the manifestation of the Cross of Christ in their lives. If we lack righteous acts, we frustrate God’s plan for our lives. Our justification must be followed by a life of obedience to God. Otherwise we will be disqualified.

God Bless,
Michael
Click to expand...
This may be the most succint and biblical exaplanation that I’ve heard yet!

The Lord be with you, brother Michael!!! 👍

James 2:22-----“You see that faith was **active **along with his works, and faith was completed by works,”
 
The Cross of Christ was not merely a substitutionary sacrifice. He did not just simply die in order to pay the price of our sins, which is eternal damnation. Nor did he die so that we did not have to do anything. Christ died on the cross to pay the price of our sins and to liberate us from enslavement to sin so that we could have the freedom to serve our God in righteousness:

Romans 6:13-14, 17-19

"And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourself to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law but under grace. … But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. … For just as you presented your members as slaves of unclenannes, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present (i.e. word of action) your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness. "

Romans 7:4

“Therefore, my brethren, you have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another - to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God.”

Galatians 5:13

"For you brethren have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through LOVE serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even this: ’ YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF’.

The Cross gave us the freedom to serve God by loving Him and by loving our neighbor as ourselves. How does the Bible define “love”?

2 John 6

“This is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the commandment, that as you have heard from the beginning, **you should walk in **it.”

Love also means doing works of charity (1 John 3;17-18) What avails is faith working through love! Avails in what? Avails in our salvation (Matthew 19:7, Luke 10:25-38, Matthew 16:27, 25:33-46).

Christ died on the Cross not only to make us righteous before God, but to give us the freedom and the power to fulfill the call to live in righteousness that comes with justification. Not using this freedom to serve God by persevering in righteousness is a rejection of what Christ did for us. That is why the fruitless branches in Christ will be cut off, wither, and thrown into the fire.

God Bless,
Michael
 
Also, Apophasis, verse 63 of John 6 is not an explanation of what Jesus says. Jesus is merely affirming the origin and objective of His words. What he said comes from God (i.e. “spirit”) and it is life giving (i.e. "life’). Note that after this “explanation”, many disciples abandon Him. Why? Because that was not really an explanation. Please compare this with John 7:36 -39, 8:26-30, 12:32-33, 13:10-11, 16:16-30, 21:18-19 and all the previous verses I gave. Those explanations are very clear, unlike the vague explanation Jesus supposedly gives in verse 63. This just does not fit with the pattern of how Jesus or the Evangelists explain things and thus verse 63 cannot be an explanation.

God Bless,
Michael
 
LittleDeb said:
On the contrary. I have been reading many long posts in this thread since nearly day 1. While other Catholic apologists posts have been very good, yours have been exceptional.

Your clarity with the explanation of works outside of faith being a debt issue was very helpful to me. You have clearly explained how works are not a result of faith, like the Protestant argument. While at the same time, you have shown how an atheist or someone else without faith can do things that appear to be works, i.e. feed the poor, visit the sick, etc. and still not go to heaven because their works lacked initial justification through faith. The secular argument is ‘works alone.’ The Protestant argument is ‘faith alone.’

That has been a hard one for me to explain. ‘Debt’ clarifies that so well. The Catholic Truth has always been Faith plus Works. You have given me a much better way to explain that. Thank you!
Click to expand...
Antonius Lupus is amazing!!! Especially when you consider that all of this is coming from a 17 year old.🙂

God Bless,
Michael
 
mikeledes said:
Antonius Lupus is amazing!!! Especially when you consider that all of this is coming from a 17 year old.🙂

God Bless,
Michael
Click to expand...
Please my bretheren give God **ALL **of the glory you give me.

For I must become less so he can be Greater (John 3:30).

I am nothing.
 
apophasis said:
No, Paul’s is not emphasizing works AT ALL. But he specifically states that “his FAITH” is reckoned to him as righteousness, “apart from works.”
Click to expand...
Yes, but *what *works is St. Paul talking about???

The works of the Law, or any other works devoid of a faith in Christ.

Romans 3:28-----“For we hold that a man is justified by *faith apart from *works of law.”

Romans 4:13----The promise to Abraham and his descendants, that they should inherit the world, did not come through the **law **but through the righteousness of faith.

Also Look at Galatians 3:21-22–

21: Is the **law **then against the promises of God? Certainly not; for if a **law **had been given which could make alive, then righteousness would indeed be by the law.
22: But the scripture consigned all things to sin, that what was promised to **faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. **
 
mikeledes said:
Antonius Lupus is amazing!!! Especially when you consider that all of this is coming from a 17 year old.🙂

God Bless,
Michael
Click to expand...
Right, Mike! And since you are an ancient and wizened geezer yourself at age 28, your expertise is much LESS amazing! NOT!

Both of you are outstanding.👍 👍
 
apophasis said:
He did clarify Himself in vs. 63. And why not allow those who refused to believe in Him to go?Actually, no. In context I believe eating His flesh and drinking His blood is figurative for internalizing, by faith, what He accomplishes for them on the cross (vs. 51, cf vss. 35-50). And by that faith His resurrected LIFE is received, transferred to, the believer (this is “union,” not “communion”). I believe it has no reference at all to His future institution of the sacrament of “Communion.”
Click to expand...
Moreover, if John 6 is a reference to “union” with Christ through faith, then why does Jesus use the word “abides” in verse 56? A word you argue refers to our “communion” with Christ, not our “union” with Him. Jesus is the Passover Lamb. Notice that all of this is taking place close to Passover. The Passover Lamb in Exodus was killed and its blood was used to mark the doors of the Israelites, saving them from the angel of death. What happened after the paschal lamb was killed and its blood was used? It was EATEN! Similarly, Christ died on the Cross and His Blood was shed for our salvation. Now we must consume the Passover Lamb and that is done in the Eucharist. The only time in the Bible that you have a reference to eating the body and blood of Christ, besides John 6, is when the Bible talks about the Lord’s Supper. It is never used as a reference to faith. This is all I will say on this matter because it is really tangential to the discussion in this thread.

God Bless,
Michael
 
I would just like to quickly add that anyone who wanted to partake of the passover lamb had to be circumcised first. Similarly, we have to receive the “circumcision of Christ” (Colossians 2:11) before we can partake of His Body and Blood. So it was appropriate that He would talk about belief in Him first in the earlier part of John 6 before He talked about what one had to do subsequent to believing in Him.

God Bless,
Michael
 
Boy, it’s gotten awfully quiet. Does this mean I’ll be seeing some new faces on “The Journey Home.” 😃

God Bless,
Michael
 
mikeledes said:
Boy, it’s gotten awfully quiet. Does this mean I’ll be seeing some new faces on “The Journey Home.” 😃

God Bless,
Michael
Click to expand...
Hi,
I thought I would respond just in case no one else does. All the protestants probably saw the thread going in circles and decided to leave because all was said that needed to be said. I personally lose interest when threads go nowhere. It could also be that they are busy with their lives away from the computer.😃
Anyway, just my:twocents: And now I am going going gone BYE;)
 
ALLFORHIM said:
Hi,
I thought I would respond just in case no one else does. All the protestants probably saw the thread going in circles and decided to leave because all was said that needed to be said. I personally lose interest when threads go nowhere. It could also be that they are busy with their lives away from the computer.😃
Anyway, just my:twocents: And now I am going going gone BYE;)
Click to expand...
I like my “glass is half full” intepretation better. 😃

God Bless,
Michael
 
I would really like to add something to the discussion but you are all doing a wonderful job and I have nothing to add. It is a great blessing to read the excellent contributions made by young Catholics that are clearly on fire for the faith.

Keep up the good work and God bless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top