Honest Protestant seeking answers on Sola Fide (Galatians)

[reccanboy]

I am hoping for a Catholic response which can offer an exegesis of the epistle to the Galatians ch. 5:2-4, which I find to support justification by faith alone.

The Galatians being addressed in this letter are said to accept the atonement of Christ, and thus they believe in grace.

Now, I repeat yet again, the audience of Paul’s epistle were part of the Church community, and thus recognized the necessity of the atonement of Christ, but they didn’t recognize the sufficiency of the atonement for justification, which is why they wanted to be circumcised. Thus one cannot say that Paul was arguing against individuals who believed that one is justified solely upon the basis of the Law, apart from grace.

Galatians 5:2-4 “Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.”

I am crystal clear on the fact that Paul recognizes the “works of the law” as being the ceremonial elements of the Law, so I don’t expect posts correcting me on this matter.

This is the heart of the issue:

Paul said that: “it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for The righteous shall live by faith.” (Gal. 3:11)

Paul quotes from the book of Habakkuk, which is from the Old Testament. This means that even in the OT, you were not justified by the law of circumcision, even in light of the coming sacrifice of the messiah.

If any Catholic can help me understand a better interpretation of Galatians, then I would greatly appreciate it.

 

[kristanl]

This is like the test Abraham had to face. Abraham had to beleive that God would keep his promises, even though there was no evidence of it. The test was whether Abraham would give up on the Lord or not. Abraham had to edure the test of being told by God to sacrafice Issac on the altar. Would a good God do something like that? It was a servere test, just as Israels was in the time oh Habakkuk, many centuries after Abraham. To pass that test, one had to remain faithful to the covenant, not losing hope, not cursing God, mot taking matters into ones own hands, enduring the humiliation of Chaldean victory. Those without faith would give up on God counting him untrustworthy, and leaving the convenant (even though the were circumsized). Paul uses this quote of Habakkuk to show that God has always counted as righteous those who keep the faith, who are faithful to the convenant, trusting his goodness no matter what. It was not their circumcision that made them pleasing to God but their faith.

-If no one can actually keep all the law (verse 12, for more knowledge look at lev. 18:1-5 when reading verse 12), and if those who please God are those who live by faith in him, not depending on works of law, what is the natural question that arises about justification?
*Why did God give the Law to Moses, if no one could be saved by keeping it? What was the purpose of the law?

If you not look at Galatians 5:6 “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love.”
**Ask yourself this question- what is the difference between “faith alone” and “faith working through love” ?
An initial act of faith in the gospel will not guarantee that the believer will continue to live by faith, If it did, Paul would not have needed to write this kind of letter to the Galatians. Paul was concerned that they would not continue to live by faith. Their faith had to find some kind of expression if it was to make a difference. Our belief in the gospel must be joined to a love for God, a love which cherishes and adores him, which makes the believer loathe to offend him, which disposes the beliver to obey and honor him. Does faith in the gospel automatically lead to that kind of relationship with God? Apparently not, or Paul was worried needlessly.

After Martin Luther suggested we are saved through faith alone…
The Council of Trent ruled that “faith, unless it be joined to hope and charity, neither makes us one with Christ nor loving members of his body.” That is why it is rightly said that, “faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.” -James 2:17 and that in Christ Jesus neither circumcision or uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love" - Council of Trent, De iustificatione, chapter 7

Hope this helps!!

 

[reccanboy]

Thanks for the response.

However, you didn’t answer my main concern, which is: “Was circumcision necessary under the Old Covenant, for justification?”

Paul in essence said that under the Old Covenant, circumcision was not necessary for justification.

However, Catholic teaching tells us that the Jews were required to follow the ceremonial law for final justification.

 

[kristanl]

Well in Acts 14:21-15:18 the apostles and the elders discusses whether or not circumcision was still required. Peter then stood up and realized he must make a decision since there was no direct teaching from Jesus on this topic (Matthew 16:13-20).
In Acts 15:10 Peter decribes the law of circumcision and the ceremonial law.
Peter speaks of a yoke that neither they nor their forefathers “have been able to bear”. He recognized the meaning and impact of the ceremonial law- the convicition of sin. He acknowledged that the Mosaic law was not able to confer life. It wrough judgement, exposing sin for what it was, and preparing and tutoring Israel to understand the need for a Savior.
Peter announces the dogma of the church: Both Jews and Gentiles alike are saved by grace through faith. The Gentiles do not have to bear the heavy burdon of the Mosaic ceremonial law. This is the first time the Apostles discuss and make a decision for the entire Christian Church.

I hope this now answered the question. If not tell me again! lol

 

[Dan_Parker]

Thanks for the response.

However, you didn’t answer my main concern, which is: “Was circumcision necessary under the Old Covenant, for justification?”

Paul in essence said that under the Old Covenant, circumcision was not necessary for justification.

However, Catholic teaching tells us that the Jews were required to follow the ceremonial law for final justification.

Could you please clarify why you believe Paul was speaking about circumcision in the OT?

NAB Galatians 5:4 You are separated from Christ, you who are trying to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. 5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we await the hope of righteousness. 6 For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (1)

At first glance Paul is speaking to those who are are trying to be justified (Greek present tense form) and not those in the OT. It is for those “in” Christ to whom he speaks.

Dan

 

[Texan77]

I am hoping for a Catholic response which can offer an exegesis of the epistle to the Galatians ch. 5:2-4, which I find to support justification by faith alone.

The Galatians being addressed in this letter are said to accept the atonement of Christ, and thus they believe in grace.

Now, I repeat yet again, the audience of Paul’s epistle were part of the Church community, and thus recognized the necessity of the atonement of Christ, but they didn’t recognize the sufficiency of the atonement for justification, which is why they wanted to be circumcised. Thus one cannot say that Paul was arguing against individuals who believed that one is justified solely upon the basis of the Law, apart from grace.

Galatians 5:2-4 “Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.”

I am crystal clear on the fact that Paul recognizes the “works of the law” as being the ceremonial elements of the Law, so I don’t expect posts correcting me on this matter.

This is the heart of the issue:

Paul said that: “it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for The righteous shall live by faith.” (Gal. 3:11)

Paul quotes from the book of Habakkuk, which is from the Old Testament. This means that even in the OT, you were not justified by the law of circumcision, even in light of the coming sacrifice of the messiah.

If any Catholic can help me understand a better interpretation of Galatians, then I would greatly appreciate it.

The Pauline Epistle of Galations is often referred too as the clash of the church titans by some… The main point that St. Paul is making here is that faith in Jesus is what saves us - we do not need to observe Jewish laws such as circumcision or kosher food restrictions…

At no point is Paul saying one no longer needs to follow the commandments of God or is he suggesting that the sacraments are meaningless.

So the truth is that Jesus Christ is our one and only savior - and like the Jews of the OT we too have a covenant relationship with our Lord - to go down the road of faith alone would contradict with much of the NT.

For within the NT we are told that we must believe and be baptized - well what happens if we believe yet we are not baptized - this is just one example of the many issues one has when they accept the false doctrine of faith alone…

We simply cannot look at one particular verse to support our views while the rest of scripture contradicts that belief…

Look forward to your reply…

 

[steve_b]

Thanks for the response.

However, you didn’t answer my main concern, which is: “Was circumcision necessary under the Old Covenant, for justification?”

Paul in essence said that under the Old Covenant, circumcision was not necessary for justification.

However, Catholic teaching tells us that the Jews were required to follow the ceremonial law for final justification.

All emphasis mine

And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. [Rm 4:11]

Then he gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision. And Abraham became the father of Isaac and circumcised him eight days after his birth. Later Isaac became the father of Jacob, and Jacob became the father of the twelve patriarchs. [Acts 7:8]

God gave Abraham the covenant and this command to be circumcized as a sign of the covenant AND his righteousness.

Circumcision therefore, was entrance into the OT covenant. And everyone who was to be in the covenant was to be circumcized.

In the NT it’s baptism which is the sign and entrance into the New covenant

For OT people,

Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. [Rm 2:25]

The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.
[Rm 2:27]

Paul is obviously going to build his case for the NT sacraments and the necessity for them.

To answer the question of justification by faith alone, there is only one verse in scripture that answers that directly.

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

 

[revert_jen]

Hi Reccanboy,

That is an interesting question. My response would be that I think you are making a separation between faith and works which is not inherent to them, either in the OT or the NT.

I am not a scholar, and this is just my opinion, but AFAIK it is consistent with Church teaching.

Hab 2:4 in its entirety reads (RSV-CE):
Behold, he whose soul is not upright in him shall fail, but the righteous shall live by his faith.

I think the connection between uprightness (which involves behavior) and faith is clear here. No OT Jewish person would say, “Well I have faith so the commandments don’t apply to me.” If you have true faith, you will try to adhere to the commandments that God has given. So what I’m saying is that there certainly could have been circumcision without faith in the OT (in fact God was frequently angered by it), but you would never find faith without circumcision. Asking whether circumcision was necessary in the OT, given that the person had faith, is analogous to asking if feeling full is necessary, given that you have just eaten a substantial meal. (I realize it’s not the same, but the idea I’m trying to get across is that it is the same type of thing. Attempting to follow the commandments of God is a natural result of true faith, in the same way that feeling full is a natural result of eating sufficient food.)

Another quotation from James:
2:18 – But some one will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.

I hope ths is helpful. I also think that steve b’s answer was very good.

 

[reccanboy]

All emphasis mine

And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. [Rm 4:11]

Then he gave Abraham the covenant of circumcision. And Abraham became the father of Isaac and circumcised him eight days after his birth. Later Isaac became the father of Jacob, and Jacob became the father of the twelve patriarchs. [Acts 7:8]

God gave Abraham the covenant and this command to be circumcized as a sign of the covenant AND his righteousness.

Circumcision therefore, was entrance into the OT covenant. And everyone who was to be in the covenant was to be circumcized.

In the NT it’s baptism which is the sign and entrance into the New covenant

For OT people,

Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. [Rm 2:25]

The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a lawbreaker.
[Rm 2:27]

Paul is obviously going to build his case for the NT sacraments and the necessity for them.

To answer the question of justification by faith alone, there is only one verse in scripture that answers that directly.

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

Yet again I see that you didn’t understand my original question. If circumcision is the means by which one entered into the Old Covenant, why does Paul quote Habakkuk 2:4, against the concept of justification through circumcision in Galatians 3?

In other words: Why does Paul argue from the Old Testament, that the Law was not the means by which we are justified?

Some would say that Paul is saying that Jesus + Obedience to the Law = salvation…

However, that is exactly what the Judaizers believed, and thus Paul must be arguing AGAINST that concept, which is what Catholics coincidentally hold to.

P.S.: In order to understand what Paul meant, you don’t run to James. James had his own context, but first we should understand what Paul is teaching…that is how one does exegesis.

 

[Nita]

Thanks for the response.

However, you didn’t answer my main concern, which is: “Was circumcision necessary under the Old Covenant, for justification?”

Paul in essence said that under the Old Covenant, circumcision was not necessary for justification.

However, Catholic teaching tells us that the Jews were required to follow the ceremonial law for final justification.

For an OT Jewish male, circumcision was necessary for justification.

BUT, saying circumcision is necessary for justification IS NOT the same thing as saying circumcision “is” justification.
Grace (supernatural life of God) “is” their justification.
Likewise for members of the New Covenant, Grace “is” our justification. But Baptism and faith are necessary.

The Habakkuk quote merely shows that faith (as well as circumcision) was necessary even under the Old Covenant.

 

[PJM]

I am hoping for a Catholic response which can offer an exegesis of the epistle to the Galatians ch. 5:2-4, which I find to support justification by faith alone.

This is the heart of the issue:

Paul said that: “it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for The righteous shall live by faith.” (Gal. 3:11)

Paul quotes from the book of Habakkuk, which is from the Old Testament. This means that even in the OT, you were not justified by the law of circumcision, even in light of the coming sacrifice of the messiah.

If any Catholic can help me understand a better interpretation of Galatians, then I would greatly appreciate it.

Friend I shall be happy to reply but its a bit long.

At root here is the fact that the term law has two distinct meanings. The OT 300+ additions to the Commnadments, and the Commandmends, Beaitudes and other teachings of Chrsit in the NT.

Keep in mind the function of the OT was historical and prophetic, leading to Christ. The NT fulfills and Perfects the OT. One can see evidence of this is Eph. Chapter 2: 7-9 " 7 that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God - **But look at the next verse: 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." **

It seems to me the one can find mutiple Bible verses that appear on their own text to support either position. That is why I wrote an extensive, and I pray logical explaination which I submit in the next several post.

---

Ones personal opinion clearly has little value in any discussion of a theological nature. Therefore it is to be avoided as mush as possible. Still, I can’t seem to escape the reality of logic, as a legitimate means to bring to the fore of this discussion Gods basic nature, and the nature of sin, and its effects on us as individuals, to the community of believers to which we belong, and to society as a whole.

One cannot conduct this discussion without extensive use of the Bible. I will use the Catholic RSV version, as I am a Catholic. Still what I share, in very large part ought to be affirmed by the KJV.

In order to “level the playing field” I acknowledge [and hope you will do likewise] that the Bible clearly seems to affirm both the Catholic position of OSAS not being biblical, and the Protestant view that is clearly is. I hope to minimize the blows and counter blows of seemingly contradicting bible verses by instead, using Gods Word to understand a bit about God’s nature, and the nature of sin.

The Protestant view seems best expressed by Paul in Romans 10: 9-12” because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved. The scripture says, "No one who believes in him will be put to shame."  For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and bestows his riches upon all that call upon him.  For, "every one who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved."

Catholics counter with verses like Paul in Romans 11:17-23. “ But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, a wild olive shoot, were grafted in their place to share the richness of the olive tree, do not boast over the branches. If you do boast, remember it is not you that support the root, but the root that supports you. You will say, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast only through faith. So do not become proud, but stand in awe. For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off. And even the others, if they do not persist in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again***

Please see next post:thumbsup:

 

[PJM]

OSAS a Catholic Perspective cont from previous post

---

My premise is that accepting Paul’s instruction, that salvation is granted by God. It seems clear also by Paul that this gift can be refused, with self-damming results. Thus the issue of sin is necessarily introduced.

Before we enter our discussion of sin, it may be helpful to do a short history of what the Bible shares about Gods Divine [Perfect and unchangeable] Nature.

God is all-Perfect: 2 Sam. 22:3, Mt. 5:48.
God is all- Good: Psalm 100, 2 Cor. 9:8
God is all- Knowing: Buruch 3:32, Sirach 42:18, Lk. 11:17
God is all- Loving: Psalm 146, Titus 3:4
God is all- Merciful: Exo.33: 19-20, Rom. 9:14-18
God is all -Forgiving: Psalm 86:5, Eph.4: 31
God is and HAS TO BE ALSO, all-Just: Isaiah 42:1-4, Mt. 12:18

Nahum 1:3 “ The LORD is slow to anger and of great might, and the LORD will by no means clear the guilty.” This verse seems to sum up who and what God is. God is all-Things good, perfectly. And Gods Justice and fairness are interracial to His Divine Nature. God has no choice but to be Just and fair. Rom. 3” 5 But if our wickedness serves to show the justice of God, what shall we say? That God is unjust to inflict wrath on us? By no means! For then how could God judge the world?”
Keeping in mind Gods attributes, especially the unavoidable fact that fairness and justice are necessary and unchangeable elements of Gods Nature, let us take a look at what the bible says about sin.

The Blessed name of Jesus appears in some 220 various chapters in the NT. 
Sin is mentioned in 228 various Chapters.  Obviously God finds it to be important!

Lets began by sharing a few things about sin as told in the Bible.

“ If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.” 1 Jn. 1:8

“What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?” Rom. 6:1

“He who commits sin is of the devil” Jn. 3:8

"Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the man by whom the temptation comes!” Mt. 18:7

“There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, indeed it cannot; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” Rom. 8:1-8

What are the natures of sin? “ If any one sees his brother committing what is not a mortal sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin, which is mortal; I do not say that one is to pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin, which is not mortal.” 1 Jn. 5: 16. Keep in mind I am not simply sharing Catholic perspective, but the very Word of God. This passage clearly identifies two categories of sin. “Lesser” and “Greater,” what we term “venial sin” and “Mortal sin.”  Notice the term “mortal” is used by John. and “mortal” refers to “death, and or killing.” This is highly significant, as what we are being told, and is supported by a great many other passages is that heaven and hell or real. We are also being told, that even if we were once saved, even if others cannot send us to hell; by virtue of our minds, intellects and freewill’s, we have the power, and sadly the opportunity to “kill” our personal relationship with Christ, causing the possibility of condemning ourselves to hell.

Here is where Gods love and mercy, come into play. Gods gives humanity a mind, intellect and freewill that enables us to sin, and even to sin mortally. And frankly most, if not all of us do at some point. God knows this, and offers us His Way [not our choice, Gods Will] to renter into our loving personal relationship with Him. As I quote these two passages from the KJV Bible and encourage you to accept what they obviously and clearly say as what the LORD actually is telling us. Not to do so WILL result is Grievous Spiritual results for those who choose to ignore or disobey.

---

Please see next post for conclusions:thumbsup:

 

[PJM]

Conclusion A Catholic Perspective on OSAS

---

“And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: [whether one takes this as Peter or the CC, the meaning and mandate are clear] and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Mt. 16:19 KJV

There is no need for a Dr. of Theology to translate the message of these passages.” For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? “ 1 Pet. 4:17

“And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Spirit: whose soever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven unto them; whose soever `sins’ ye retain, they are retained. Jn. 20:22-23 KJV Still it The Holy Spirit not the priest actually forgiving ones sins.

Paul understands when we walk with God in His Grace, we “will not” sin, [Rom.8:10 –14 , take note of verse 13] which only means that God is offering us sufficient grace to avoid sin, IF WE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT. Sometimes we do, sometimes we don’t. But all humanity is susceptible to sin as a result of our “freewill.” So God in justice and fairness must offer a way to return to His Good Graces. And this is what He mandates for all those, once saved, but fallen and failing souls. Repent, convert and confess your sins! That is why Christ instituted the sacrament of Confession.

“Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death “ Jam. 1:15 “Do not be deceived: “Bad company ruins good morals.” Come to your right mind, and sin no more.” 1 Cor. 15 "And now, in order that my lord may not be defeated and his purpose frustrated, death will fall upon them, for a sin has overtaken them by which they are about to provoke their God to anger when they do what is wrong.” Judith 11: 11 “ All such boasting is evil. Whoever knows what is right to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin” Jam. 4:16. “Shun immorality. Every other sin, which a man commits, is outside the body; but the immoral man sins against his own body. ” 1 Cor. 6:17 “ But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we ourselves were found to be sinners, is Christ then an agent of sin? Certainly not! But if I build up again those things which I tore down, then I prove myself a transgressor.” Gal. 2:17

“For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell , and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven other persons, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to ashes he condemned them to extinction and made them an example to those who were to be ungodly then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trial, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority.

“Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?’ ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.’ And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." Mt. 4: 41***

CCC 162. “Faith is an entirely free gift that God makes to man. We can lose this priceless gift, as St. Paul indicated to St. Timothy: ‘Wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith.’ [1 Tim 1:18-19 .] To live, grow and persevere in the faith until the end we must nourish it with the word of God [All of it Pjm]; we must beg the Lord to increase our faith; [Cf. Mk 9:24; Lk 17:5; Lk 22:32.] it must be ‘working through charity,’ abounding in hope, and rooted in the faith of the Church. [Gal 5:6; Rom. 15:13; cf. Jam 2:14-26.]”

This teaching of the CC clearly applies wisely to all of humanity. The prudent will pray for the grace of God to discern the significance of these Biblical and logical truths, factoring in Gods Necessary Justice. We may have been saved is not the pressing issue. Are we now without Mortal Sin, if not, we are doomed.

Love and prayers friends,

 

[tjm190]

Do you understand the difference between having faith and living by faith?

 

[Robbinson]

For an OT Jewish male, circumcision was necessary for justification.

BUT, saying circumcision is necessary for justification IS NOT the same thing as saying circumcision “is” justification.
Grace (supernatural life of God) “is” their justification.
Likewise for members of the New Covenant, Grace “is” our justification. But Baptism and faith are necessary.

The Habakkuk quote merely shows that faith (as well as circumcision) was necessary even under the Old Covenant.

Well said - shalom

Blessings,

Brian

 

[edif_alos]

Paul was simply saying that true faith - clearly seen by our lord only - is what is required by us, his children.
We can’t fool our lord by religious ceremony of any kind. True faith in our hearts turns us fully toward God. In this regard, true faith is the only requirement for the grace of Jesus Christ.
True faith in God results in his Holy Spirit in us, using his special gifts, doing his work on Earth. We can’t take credit in the work of the Holy Spirit through us. Our work, together with the Holy Spirit, does not earn us credit with God on justification. By our faith, our Lord only sees Jesus when judging us as meriting eternal life.
In our quest to know God’s plan for our life, we need to search for the special spiritual gifts that we each have. These gifts are the key to our understanding our life in Christ.
Paul and James are not in disharmony to the hearts of Christians. Though these beautiful scriptures our lord teaches us everything. Through Paul our Lord teaches us the miracle of forgiveness and the power of Christ in our lives. James helps us look deeper in our faith and find our purpose in life. Together they agree and we see Christ clearly.
Catholics and Protestants both need Christ equally. We are together in his death and are united in his resurrection as souls that will spend eternity with our Lord. The separation, between Catholics and Protestants, in only temporal and will come to an end. Spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ is our true work - and is the common ground that should unite us.
So in the end, Faith and Works are both gifts of God. We don’t need and we shouldn’t strive to merit extra credit with God. God’s grace is sufficient – and is all we need.

 

[juliamajor]

If Paul were so anti-circumscion why did he act as a mohel with Timothy?

 

[Ignatius]

Galatians ch. 5:2-4, which I find to support justification by faith alone.

That’s the trouble with basing your theology on one verse taken out of context, you are bound to develop a lopsided understanding. If you read Paul’s letters, you will see that clearly Paul doesn’t intend to say Faith alone, he himself indicates that Faith isn’t even the greatest virtue. You also need Hope and Love. If it were going to be anything alone (which it is not) it would have to be love alone.
“Faith, Hope and Love these three abide; but the greatest of these is Love”.

 

[erikd]

Yet again I see that you didn’t understand my original question. If circumcision is the means by which one entered into the Old Covenant, why does Paul quote Habakkuk 2:4, against the concept of justification through circumcision in Galatians 3?

In other words: Why does Paul argue from the Old Testament, that the Law was not the means by which we are justified?

Habakkuk 2:4 is a prophecy which St. Paul quotes throughout his writings (Romans 1:17, Galatians 3:11, Hebrews 10:38). All of St. Paul’s writings make comparisons between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant. Galatians is no different. St. Paul was not arguing that the Law of Circumcision was not the way the Israelites were justified. St. Paul was quoting from a prophecy where the Prophet Habakkuk, received a revelation from God of something that was to take place in the future:

*2 And the Lord answered me, and said: Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables: that he that readeth it may run over it. *

*3 For as yet the vision is far off, and it shall appear at the end, and shall not lie: if it make any delay, wait for it: for it shall surely come, and it shall not be slack. *
Habakkuk 2:2-3

As yet, this was a vision of the future. The prophet Habakkuk is writing his vision, as presented by God Himself.

"Ver. 3. Slack. That which happens at the time fixed is not. (Worthington) — Hebrew, “the vision is for an appointed time.” Habacuc might live to see the conquest and downfall of Nabuchodonosor. Many think that the first and second coming of Christ (Hebrews x. 36., and Romans i. 17.) are here insinuated, as the dominion of the aforesaid king represented the slavery of mankind under the devil, and the liberty granted by Cyrus was a type of their redemption. The felicity of the Jews is the last event which the prophet specifies, and this is here the literal sense. (St. Cyril) (Calmet)"
Fr. George Leo, 1774-1849: Habakkuk

4 Behold, he that is unbelieving, his soul shall not be right in himself: but the just shall live in his faith.
Habakkuk 2:4

This is the statement of what is to happen, not what was happening at the time it was being written. In the homily below, by St. John Chrysostom, he mentions that there is no salvation through the Law. Yet, we know that this did not happen until the New Covenant replaced the Old Covenant.

“For all have sinned, and are under the curse. However he does not say this yet, lest he should seem to lay it down of himself, but here again establishes his point by a text which concisely states both points; that no man has fulfilled the Law, (wherefore they are under the curse,) and, that Faith justifies. What then is the text? It is in the book of the prophet Habakkuk, “The just shall live by faith,” (Hab. ii: 4.) which not only establishes the righteousness that is of Faith, but also that there is no salvation through the Law. As no one, he says, kept the Law, but all were under the curse, on account of transgression, an easy way was provided, that from Faith, which is in itself a strong proof that no man can be justified by the Law. For the prophet says not, “The just shall live by the Law,” but,” by faith:"
John Chrysostom, St [347-407 AD]
Homily 3 on Galatians

1. "The just man will live by faith" (Rom 1:17; cf. Hab 2:4). He lives by the faithfulness of God to His gifts and promises. He lives by surrendering himself in trust to God’s service. Faith is the principle of life and its plenitude. For this reason the Christian is called faithful-Christ’s faithful (“Christifidelis”). The Revealing God permeates all his existence. The believer’s entire life is governed by principles of faith. They are his basic criteria. The Mystical Doctor observes: “We must in all of this presuppose a fundamental principle which will be like a staff, a continual support for our journey. It must be kept in mind, because it is the light which will be our guide and master in this doctrine. By it we must, amid all these goods, direct joy to God. The principle is this: The will should rejoice only in what is for the honor and glory of God, and the greatest honor we can give Him is to serve Him according to evangelical perfection anything not included in such service is without value to man”
   Pope John Paul II “Master in the Faith”

Some would say that Paul is saying that Jesus + Obedience to the Law = salvation…

However, that is exactly what the Judaizers believed, and thus Paul must be arguing AGAINST that concept, which is what Catholics coincidentally hold to.

The fact that St. Paul quoted from a prophecy of the Old Testament leads us to believe that, as Habakkuk said, “the just shall live in his faith.” Nowhere does it state “in his faith alone” or “not having to follow the commandments” or any such thing. The New Testament makes abundantly clear that Jesus wants us to follow the Commandments (Luke 8:21, 18:20, Mark 10:19).

I tried to give you clarification on the Habakkuk reference, but I’ll be glad to go into Sola Fide, if you’d like.

 

[erikd]

Understanding St. Paul’s Message

Two of the passages most frequently used to prove the idea of sola fide are this:

28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.
Romans 3:28

16 "knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.
Galatians 2:16

Yet when taken in correct context, it could not possibly mean that we are justified by faith alone. After all, the four times Jesus was asked “what must I do to inherit eternal life” (Matthew 19:16, Luke 18:18, Mark 10:17, Luke 10:25) Jesus does not say that faith alone is the answer. As a matter of fact, Jesus quotes several commandments in each one. In each of the stories, there lies an underlying main scenario, where in each one the person involved loved other things, such as money, over God. However, Jesus never told any one of those people that if they loved God more than their money the other commandments mentioned would no longer be necessary to inherit eternal life. Therefore, by saying that this was St. Paul’s interpretation of these Gospel stories would constitute an illogical interpretation of an inerrant Book. How could this be? What could this really mean? All we need to do is keep reading and the answers come to life.

17 "But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not!
18 "For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.
Galatians 2:17-18

If Christ died for our sins, our sins are covered (Romans 4:7) but if we ourselves become sinners again, we make ourselves transgressors. Paul says “I destroyed” because he died with Christ (Romans 6:8, Colossians 2:20, Galatians 2:19) and therefore he, with Jesus as his cornerstone and foundation, destroyed his sins. But in 2:18 he talks of building again. Building again, based on the context presented here, refers to building up of sin through a sinful life. This, St. Paul says, would make him a transgressor.

19 "For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God.
20 "I have been crucified with Christ; 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 for me.
21 “I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.”
Galatians 2:19-21

Christ died for our sins, and through Baptism we died with Him (Romans 6:4, Colossians 2:12). If He is to live in us and we in Him (John 14:20, 15:4, 17:21), it is an invitation to a life of holiness:

48 "Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.
Matthew 5:48

A life in Christ means to be ready for spiritual battle.

1 I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom:
2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.
3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers;
4 and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.
5 But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.
2 Timothy 4:1-5

In verses 3 and 4 St. Paul warns Timothy of people who will not listen to sound doctrine. Many heresies have been seen throughout the history of the Church, but true Church doctrine has always remained the same. Heresies continue on into today with teachings such as the one I am attempting to discredit in this paper. We are called in verse 5 to do exactly as I am doing today. However, we also have another calling. Ultimately, we are called to Christian holiness.

28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.
29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
Romans 8: 28-30

Those who are called are “justified” and “glorified” while those who transgress are not known (Matthew 7:23).