Is faith a gift?

[Counterpoint]

By my generosity I have given you a car so you can come to me. You didn’t get that car yourself so you can’t boast about it.

We are talking about the gift of faith, not a car.

*“What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them?” *- James 2 14

“Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” James 2:18

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Ephesians 2:8-10

“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” Philippians 2:13

The gift of faith produces works. Why? Because it is God who works in the believer “both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”

 

[LongingSoul]

The gift of faith produces works. Why? Because it is God who works in the believer “both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”

Are you saying that the works of faith are not the result of mans love for God… but are God simply moving him like a puppet?

 

[Counterpoint]

But we know that seeing does not *equal *believing. Adam and Eve prove this. Our Priest often says that to ‘believe’ is to ‘be in love’.

What about love at first sight?

Seeing something like say a sunset or a scan of a little embryo in a womb, shows us Truth, but unless we accept that vision for what it is, we are not moved to ‘be in love’ with it. It is the same with faith. It is there as a gift to us all, but unless we accept it for what it is, we are not moved to ‘be in love’ with Truth.

The acceptance is the faith.

 

[LongingSoul]

The acceptance is the faith.

Acceptance is the obedience of faith. From the Catechism…

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.” To live, grow and persevere in the faith until the end we must nourish it with the word of God; we must beg the Lord to increase our faith; it must be “working through charity,” abounding in hope, and rooted in the faith of the Church.

 

[Thorns]

no they did’nt have a choice.

Yes, they indeed did. Those that spoke with God directly, those that witnessed the miracles of Jesus, etc… Some followed Him, some only followed after they saw, and yet many rejected Him because He asked them to give of themselves and take up their crosses. Those are choices different people made.

And as another poster mentioned earlier and one of the most dramatic choices was that of Adam’s and Eve’s.

 

[Counterpoint]

Are you saying that the works of faith are not the result of mans love for God… but are God simply moving him like a puppet?

There are only two options here: either everything is determined or not. If everything is determined, then this implies every event or act that occurs could not have been otherwise. If everything is not determined, then this implies that some (not all) events or acts could have been otherwise only due to some element of pure chance or randomness. Free will must be compatible with either determinism or indeterminism. And regardless how you define it, the moral implications are exactly the same. Why? Because I can be held no more responsible for an act that ultimately reduces to pure chance than for an act that was completely predetermined and could not have been otherwise. (The bottom line is that the “free will” argument does not alleviate God of any culpability.)

 

[Counterpoint]

Acceptance is the obedience of faith. From the Catechism…

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.” To live, grow and persevere in the faith until the end we must nourish it with the word of God; we must beg the Lord to increase our faith; it must be “working through charity,” abounding in hope, and rooted in the faith of the Church.

The CCC contradicts the Scriptures.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Ephesians 2:8-10

“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” Philippians 2:13

 

[GaryTaylor]

There are only two options here: either everything is determined or not. If everything is determined, then this implies every event or act that occurs could not have been otherwise. If everything is not determined, then this implies that some (not all) events or acts could have been otherwise only due to some element of pure chance or randomness. Free will must be compatible with either determinism or indeterminism. And regardless how you define it, the moral implications are exactly the same. Why? Because I can be held no more responsible for an act that ultimately reduces to pure chance than for an act that was completely predetermined and could not have been otherwise. (The bottom line is that the “free will” argument does not alleviate God of any culpability.)

To admit random and chance admits an exemplar, of mutable, an uncreated exemplar. Perhaps the unadulterated truth could be understood looking at Him. The free-will doesn’t alleviate us of responsibility to the higher good. And so follows Gods perfection.

 

[LongingSoul]

The CCC contradicts the Scriptures.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Ephesians 2:8-10

“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” Philippians 2:13

With the perspective you are taking on these verses, how do you understand Romans 2 6-16 ?

"God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For God does not show favoritism.

All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares."

 

[Counterpoint]

With the perspective you are taking on these verses, how do you understand Romans 2 6-16 ?

"God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For God does not show favoritism.

All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares."

Well, it appears to me that God does show favoritism - especially in regards to salvation.

“What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” Romans 9:14-18

The Scriptures clearly teach that if God wants to harden your heart he will. So, it stands to reason that if he wants to soften your heart he will do that also. And Paul says: “If you don’t like that, then that’s just too damn bad. God is God and he can do whatever he damn well pleases.” (I’m paraphrasing here. But that’s the basic gist of Paul’s argument in Romans 9.)

 

[LongingSoul]

The Scriptures clearly teach that if God wants to harden your heart he will. So, it stands to reason that if he wants to soften your heart he will do that also. And Paul says: “If you don’t like that, then that’s just too damn bad. God is God and he can do whatever he damn well pleases.” (I’m paraphrasing here. But that’s the basic gist of Paul’s argument in Romans 9.)

Why is God going to ‘judge’ each person on judgement day then? ‘Judge’ holds very specific meaning regarding the quality of a thing. God would have to judge Himself if He was fully culpable for the qualities of the thing He created. He would only need to ‘sort’ us into heaven or hell bound boxes. Why does Paul say that we will be judged according to our works?

 

[TarkanAttila]

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2:8-9

“For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.” (James 2:26, NKJV).

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+2%3A14-26&version=NKJV

Why do you continue to demonstrate your ignorance? Read the Gospels. Jesus asks us to do things. Faith implies obedience. Obedience implies a choice - acceptance, or rejection.

It’s a gift, and you can accept or reject it.

 

[Counterpoint]

Why is God going to ‘judge’ each person on judgement day then? ‘Judge’ holds very specific meaning regarding the quality of a thing. God would have to judge Himself if He was fully culpable for the qualities of the thing He created. He would only need to ‘sort’ us into heaven or hell bound boxes. Why does Paul say that we will be judged according to our works?

I have already addressed this by giving you the paraphrased version of Paul’s argument. Here’s the actual passage.

“Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory.” Romans 9:19-23

 

[TarkanAttila]

“Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” James 2:18

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Ephesians 2:8-10

“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” Philippians 2:13

The gift of faith produces works. Why? Because it is God who works in the believer “both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”

Gentlemen, I have another idea: rather than bandying about Scripture verses like a couple of Protestants, Counterpoint, why not explain to us your hermeneutic, and demonstrate it to be reliable?

A hermeneutic is an analysis and interpretation of a work, particularly a Scripture.

The hermeneutic of the Catholic Church is not that the Bible alone is sufficient. If you want to know how Christians interpreted Scripture, you don’t just read Scripture. You look at what successive generations of Christians said about what’s in there. That is our hermeneutic. We call it “tradition”.

This is different from merely reading a book. It is more… democratic. Put simply, whatever tradition holds the strongest opinion for the longest time, and from the start, wins the name of the proper interpretation.

Here, for example, are a number of not only Scripture verses but also citations from the Church Fathers - the root of tradition - catalogued for your convenience.

scripturecatholic.com/justification.html#tradition-I

Sound good?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

The CCC contradicts the Scriptures.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Ephesians 2:8-10

“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” Philippians 2:13

Nothing in the CCC contradicts Scriptures.

I’m afraid your sophistry has caught up with you. Of course Longing Soul should have given you the references. Longing Soul quoted # 162 of the CCC as follows:

" 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.”
Ref. 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; we must beg the Lord to increase our faith; "
Ref. Mk 9:24; Lk 17:5; 22:32

" it must be “working through charity,” abounding in hope, and rooted in the faith of the Church. "
Ref. Jas 2:14-26

As you see, the quotation from the CCC is either directly from Scripture or based on Scripture.

But I think you should particularly like Jas 2: 14-16

" [14] What shall it profit, my brethren, if a man say he hath faith, but hath not works? Shall faith be able to save him? [15] And if a brother or sister be naked, and want daily food:

[16] And one of you say to them: Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; yet give them not those things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit? [17] So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself. [18] But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works; and I will shew thee, by works, my faith. [19] Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well: the devils also believe and tremble. [20] But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

[21] Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar? [22] Seest thou, that faith did co-operate with his works; and by works faith was made perfect? [23] And the scripture was fulfilled, saying: Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him to justice, and he was called the friend of God. [24] Do you see that by works a man is justified; and not by faith only? [25] And in like manner also Rahab the harlot, was not she justified by works, receiving the messengers, and sending them out another way?

[26] For even as the body without the spirit is dead; so also faith without works is dead. "

So it is clear that both Faith and Good Works are necessary for salvation. But what does this really matter to a Sophist. You have not declared yourself, so I assume you are merely a Sophist with no other purpose than making endless arguments. I wonder why anyone bothers to engage with someone - well who hides his intentions and purpose. It is like arguing with the wind. And there is really nothing to be gained from that.

Linus2nd

 

[LongingSoul]

Well, it appears to me that God does show favoritism - especially in regards to salvation.

“What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” Romans 9:14-18

The Scriptures clearly teach that if God wants to harden your heart he will. So, it stands to reason that if he wants to soften your heart he will do that also. And Paul says: “If you don’t like that, then that’s just too damn bad. God is God and he can do whatever he damn well pleases.” (I’m paraphrasing here. But that’s the basic gist of Paul’s argument in Romans 9.)

Can I say that it is hard to conduct any train of thought with you when you have so many interconnected threads on the go at once!

Concerning this Chapter, Romans 9… I read it as something almost the opposite of your reading. I prefer to use a modern English version so I’ll link to that here…

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+9

Here Paul is talking to the newly converted or still unconverted Roman gentiles who are immersed in the notion of the ‘genetic’ Jews as the chosen people. The ‘elect’ so to speak. He is explaining how the Jewish people understood the nature of Gods election and he is assuring them that being the sons of Israel or the sons of Abraham doesn’t actually mean physical descent but descent from the promise.

Then Paul still speaking to these people immersed in pre Christian theology pre-empts the question “well if we are also chosen, how come he’ll judge us”?

One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use? - Rom9 19-21

So he is saying it is not for us to question Gods motives as to why he made some special and others not so special… we are all accountable as to His own mind and measure.

Then he says…

What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory - Rom9 22-23

God might say to you… I made this one special and this one ordinary, but I’ve decided to treat this ordinary one as special also to show you all the true measure of Who I AM. That basically explains the bottom line of grace and mercy. Both getting what you don’t deserve and not getting what you do deserve.

And he makes that relevant to the newly converted gentiles by explaining that…

even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? As he says in Hosea:

“I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,” - Rom9 24-25

Isn’t the whole gist of this Chapter that ‘election’ sets a standard by which God gets to display the amazing reality of His grace and mercy? Election is no guarantee of salvation. James further expounds on the nature of faith and works of our salvation…

"What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”

Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead. - James 2 14-26

 

[Counterpoint]

Gentlemen, I have another idea: rather than bandying about Scripture verses like a couple of Protestants, Counterpoint, why not explain to us your hermeneutic, and demonstrate it to be reliable?

This is a philosophy forum (or, at least, it purports to be one). The methodology of philosophy is rationional analysis based on the employment of logic. If we can identify a logical inconsistency with a position (regardless of whom may have stated it), then intellectual honesty demands that we acknowledge it. That’s the only commitment that philosophy requires. So, that is my only obligation - intellectual honesty. (I am not bound to accept the dictates of some tradition which makes the pretension that it, and it alone, has been granted divine authority to make infallible proclamations.)

 

[TarkanAttila]

The methodology of philosophy is rationional analysis based on the employment of logic.

This question is not primarily a philosophical question. It is first an historical one, then a philosophical one.

Really, think about what you are asking. What did the Church Christ founded teach on the question of what faith is and where we get it from? That’s the real question you’re asking when you ask “Does the Baah-bull (Bible in a Southern accent, sorry) say faith is a gift or not?” Which, based on the bandying of Scripture verses about you’ve done, is your question.

It makes sense, to me anyway, to say “Well, why not ask the people who purported to be Christians, first?” Ergo, we look at the “Fathers of the Church”, who wrote - after the Apostles - the earliest explanations of the faith. Where there is consensus - across time and space both - is where there, most likely, a strong Apostolic origin.

Let’s take a very simple question: are infants to be baptised?

Now, various Christians, like yours truly, may cite Acts 16:15 and 16:33, for example. But we might also make note of Justin Martyr’s “First Apology”, Chapter 15, Aristides’s “Apology” S.15, Irenaus’s “Adversus Haereses” Book 2, Ch 22, and many, many others.

If you wished to counterargue, you would do best to cite not only Scripture, but also at least as many Christians who wrote as early or earlier than the ones I’ve given (beginning around 150 with Justin), and/or with sources considered, as a matter of historical consensus, more credible than the ones I’ve cited. (For example, Tacitus’s Annals trump the Book of Mormon.)

Get the picture? That is how Catholics answer the question of “What does the Church teach concerning…?”. Not to the exclusion of philosophy. But if you try to pull this stuff, bud, get in line behind the 5,000 other Protestant interpretations of Scripture by “philosophy”, as you call it. You all use one book, and you get thousands of different ways of reading the one book.

If we can identify a logical inconsistency with a position (regardless of whom may have stated it), then intellectual honesty demands that we acknowledge it.

Stop quoting your philosophy textbook, then, and point out the fallacy in the tradition hermeneutic, then. Or, better yet, provide a better way of interpreting Scripture - if you are so inclined.

Is this why they call them “script kitties”?

(I am not bound to accept the dictates of some tradition which makes the pretension that it, and it alone, has been granted divine authority to make infallible proclamations.)

No, you are not. But you are required to answer the question. As I made note of above, what you’re really asking is not, “Is faith a gift?” but “Does the Church teach that faith is a gift?”, because there is no natural philosophical way to know if faith is a gift or not, because when one has faith, one becomes a Christian. It is impossible to both trust in and not trust in God - to both be a Christian and an atheist at the same time.

Ergo, if you wish to ask a more rational question, I would suggest either “Did Christ rise from the dead?” or “What Church is the one Jesus Christ founded?” because pretty much every other question is a matter less of philosophy and more of “What did God tell our Fathers?”.

If you wish to defeat Christianity, go for the root. Faith is not the root. The Resurrection is the root.

And by the way, while the philosophy forum is about having philosophical discussions, the staff have also made an exception for atheists to ask the questions they have here, philosophical or not.

 

[Counterpoint]

Isn’t the whole gist of this Chapter that ‘election’ sets a standard by which God gets to display the amazing reality of His grace and mercy?

What you are failing to acknowledge is that God is also employing the “election” to display his wrath.

“What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory” Romans 9:22-23

Election is no guarantee of salvation. James further expounds on the nature of faith and works of our salvation…

Well, if it is not God who works in us “both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (Philippians 2:13), then Paul and James clearly contradict each other.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.” Ephesians 2:8-9

“Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” James 2:24

 

[tonyrey]

This is a philosophy forum (or, at least, it purports to be one). The methodology of philosophy is rationional analysis based on the employment of logic. If we can identify a logical inconsistency with a position (regardless of whom may have stated it), then intellectual honesty demands that we acknowledge it. That’s the only commitment that philosophy requires. So, that is my only obligation - intellectual honesty. (I am not bound to accept the dictates of some tradition which makes the pretension that it, and it alone, has been granted divine authority to make infallible proclamations.)

You need to explain how we are capable of intellectual honesty rather than being motivated by our instincts and desires. In other words how can we accept or reject faith if we are simply advanced animals?