Justified by Faith Alone cf. James 2:24

  • Thread starter Thread starter AugustTherese
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
lanman87 said:
Anyway, I think we, along with many people much smarter than us (well maybe not smarter than you but certainly smarter than me) have debated and argued over this for 500 years. I doubt there will be a resolution until the end of the Age then we will all probably be slapping our heads going “Wow, it was that simple!”
Click to expand...
Just think, this has been “debated and argued over for 500 years”; it is interesting that this was never debated until the 16th century. 🤷
 
lanman87.

I’m really disappointed in your answers.

They seem to ignore the passages in large part.

I noticed a lot of your commentary but very little of the actual Scripture passages.

What it all amounts to, is you saying something St. Paul never says, and saying something contrary to what James actually says and giving reasons for why St. Paul doesn’t mean what he is saying.

And I think THAT is why faith alone followers see verses that say something plainly, and are forced into reading into them something that isn’t stated. Especially from St. Paul but elsewhere too.

I’ll try to get to a computer later and extend our discussion then (right now I am at a small android device and its hard to type and place verses into my responses, etc. spelling errors abound w me on an android, wrong auto correct, tiny touch keys etc.).
 
AugustTherese said:
Just think, this has been “debated and argued over for 500 years”; it is interesting that this was never debated until the 16th century. 🤷
Click to expand...
Didn’t Paul and James write the passages being discussed on this thread because people in the 1st century churches were confused and in conflict regarding faith and works? I am sure there were plenty of discussions and disagreements between the 1st and 16th century as well.

Yes, there was a major conflict and divide that happened in the 16th century. A lot had changed in Christianity in regards to justification. Maybe if people weren’t being sold indulgences as a way to merit their salvation, things would have played out differently.
 
susanlo said:
Didn’t Paul and James write the passages being discussed on this thread because people in the 1st century churches were confused and in conflict regarding faith and works? I am sure there were plenty of discussions and disagreements between the 1st and 16th century as well.

Yes, there was a major conflict and divide that happened in the 16th century. A lot had changed in Christianity in regards to justification. Maybe if people weren’t being sold indulgences as a way to merit their salvation, things would have played out differently.
Click to expand...
Hi Susan.

Just to be clear, a person in purgatory goes to heaven no matter what. Just can happen quicker with a indulgence.

But yes, wrong doing took place back then. There’s no doubt about it.

But i think reformation happens even without indulgence abuse. Bibles were hitting the printing press and everyone has their opinions, so it was inevitable.
 
lanman87 said:
So it seems to me you are saying that all grace is not free. That God gives grace freely when you first put your faith in him, but it is not enough.
Click to expand...
So this is a double edge sword. It occurs to me that as you argue that Catholics don’t believe that Grace is sufficient, isn’t God’s grace sufficient to save even those without faith?

We are not talking about what God’s grace is capable of, we are talking about how God chooses to use his grace to bring about man’s salvation.
 
AugustTherese said:
Dear Protestant brothers and sisters,

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

Many of you ascribe your beliefs regarding justification to the view of being justified by faith alone and NOT by works. How would you reconcile your beliefs in light of the aforementioned Scripture verse?

With love,

Your Catholic brother 🙂
Click to expand...
Just some thoughts

From a Catholic- jimmyakin.com/library/justification-by-faith-alone

And another: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13827961&postcount=6

Martin Luther -
Faith must of course be sincere. It must be a faith that performs good works through love. If faith lacks love it is not true faith. Thus the Apostle bars the way of hypocrites to the kingdom of Christ on all sides. He declares on the one hand, “In Christ Jesus circumcision availeth nothing,” i.e., works avail nothing, but faith alone, and that without any merit whatever, avails before God. On the other hand, the Apostle declares that without fruits faith serves no purpose. To think, “If faith justifies without works, let us work nothing,” is to despise the grace of God. Idle faith is not justifying faith. In this terse manner Paul presents the whole life of a Christian. Inwardly it consists in faith towards God, outwardly in love towards our fellow-men.
Click to expand...
 
  • Before saved = God drawing all men to Himself.
  • During salvation moment = Those who respond in faith and in cooperate in Baptism.
  • After initial salvation (process) = The NEED to GROW in grace. A Grace that brings about “the OBEDIENCE of (that) faith.”
That’s the whole backdrop to Romans 2 lanman87 (Romans 1).

And after you are initially justified, you now CAN grow in grace. WHY?

Because Christ is at WORK. Where?

Christ is at WORK . . . IN YOU . . . . that’s where.

OK. So I CAN GROW in grace. Is that all?

No. You MUST grow in obedience and in the life of Christ.

You are now a son or daughter of God. And to whom much is GIVEN . . . Much will be REQUIRED!

There is now grace to bring about the obedience of that faith!

St. Paul isn’t merely talking about Jews and Torah and also Gentiles and natural law in Romans 2 . . . . but contextually also those among the “we” who have “received grace” (in Romans 1).

WHY did “we” receive that grace? To bring about OBEDIENCE that’s why.

ROMANS 1:5 5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations . . .

Notice St. Paul doesn’t divorce his own grace and faith from obedience. Why should we?
lanman87:
I would say that Romans, Ephesians and Galatians aren’t just talking about the Mosaic law but also the Natural Law. Neither the Mosaic Law or the Natural Law alluded to Romans 2:14 are what brings puts us in a right relationship with God.
Click to expand...
Neither the Mosaic Law or the Natural Law . . . puts us in a right relationship with God.
Click to expand...
I think you need to re-read my posts lanman87 because I already said that (here).

Here is part of it again . . . .

COUNCIL OF TRENT . . . . none of those things which precede justification - whether faith or works - merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.
lanman87. Concerning Romans 2:14 you said:
Neither the Mosaic Law or the Natural Law alluded to Romans 2:14 are what brings puts us in a right relationship with God. We are put in a right relationship with God by accepting His gift of grace by faith.
Click to expand...
This is irrelevant for this discussion here lanman87.

Why?

Because I am talking about people who ARE in “a right relationship with God”.

So you bringing that MOMENT ALONE up, when I am discussing the LIFELONG PROCESS of justification is pointless.

lanman87 (post 117):
Neither the Mosaic Law or the Natural Law alluded to Romans 2:14 are what brings puts us in a right relationship with God. We are put in a right relationship with God by accepting His gift of grace by faith.
Click to expand...
St. Paul: For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

Cathoholic: For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

lanman87: Neither the Mosaic Law or the Natural Law alluded to Romans 2:14 are what brings puts us in a right relationship with God.
 
lanman87:
The moment we respond to the Gospel message in faith we are sealed by the Spirit, who guarantees our inheritance.
Click to expand...
This is a partial truth lanman87. I already affirm our “inheritance” is guaranteed.

But like the Prodigal Son (which I mentioned earlier), you can SQUANDER your inheritance and “die” without an inheritance.

LUKE 15:24 24 for this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.’ And they began to make merry.

Now I agree. You MAY repent and regain an undeserved inheritance.

But there isn’t a “guarantee” on THAT occurring too. It “may” but it “may not” occur.

So you trying to go back to the Once Saved Always Saved paradigm isn’t going to work.

I am asking you to address St. Paul, and the lifelong process of justification that comes AFTER the moment of justification.

And you’ve done so only on a PARTIAL basis.
 
I just want to clarify something for people who are reading this thread.

lanman87. You said . . .
We are put in a right relationship with God by accepting His gift of grace by faith.
Click to expand...
By “accepting His gift of grace by faith” I assume you would correctly mean this was initiated by God too.

***But for the benefit of others who may misconstrue this statement . . . . ***

Because if you give God a mere natural belief, and He gives you grace . . . you have YOU making the first move towards God.

That is “Semi-Pelagianism.”

I don’t think you are a semi-pelagian lanman87.

God’s prevenient grace (or God making the initial move TOWARD US) was not a difference of most Protestants and Catholics at the time of the Reformation (as far as I know anyway).

But there MAY be lurkers here who take your statement to mean: “OK. I give God my faith (“I” am making the first move) and God gives me grace” (God responds to ME). That would be wrong.

Semi-Pelagianism is where you think YOU (not God) make the initial move towards God (and not the other way around).

In short . . . Semi-Pelagianism is the DENIAL of God’s Prevenient Grace.

And that was condemned by Trent (and elsewhere) as I already quoted . . . .

COUNCIL OF TRENT . . . . none of those things which precede justification - whether faith or works - merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

Wikipedia . . .
In semipelagian thought, therefore, a distinction is made between the beginning of faith and the increase of faith. Semipelagian thought teaches that the latter half – growing in faith – is the work of God, while the beginning of faith is an act of free will, with grace supervening only later.[1] It too was labeled heresy by the Western Church at the Second Council of Orange in 529.
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semipelagianism
 
lanman87 said:
I believe that many Catholics don’t grasp what Protestants mean by faith. Faith is not an intellectual belief about who Jesus is and what he has done. It is not even agreeing with the intellectual belief about who Jesus is and what he has done. As R.C. Sproul put it, those two things only qualify a person to be a demon.

Saving faith is far more than understanding and agreeing about Jesus.
Click to expand...
I hear you on this one! I have been here for quite a short period compared to others but I still don’t think we are always on the same page as all Catholics with this one.

I once touched on this referring to faith that can move mountains as in the Bible. Then I got informed about the Saint who apparently moved a mountain :confused:

Cs and Ps were equally confused.
 
40.png
lanman87:
I believe that many Catholics don’t grasp what Protestants mean by faith. Faith is not an intellectual belief about who Jesus is and what he has done. It is not even agreeing with the intellectual belief about who Jesus is and what he has done. As R.C. Sproul put it, those two things only qualify a person to be a demon.

Saving faith is far more than understanding and agreeing about Jesus.
Click to expand...
So what is faith according to Protestants?

How is faith explained in the Bible? How is its usage in the Bible?
 
Cathoholic said:
I just want to clarify something for people who are reading this thread.

lanman87. You said . . .

By “accepting His gift of grace by faith” I assume you would correctly mean this was initiated by God too.

***But for the benefit of others who may misconstrue this statement . . . . ***

Because if you give God a mere natural belief, and He gives you grace . . . you have YOU making the first move towards God.

That is “Semi-Pelagianism.”

I don’t think you are a semi-pelagian lanman87.

God’s prevenient grace (or God making the initial move TOWARD US) was not a difference of most Protestants and Catholics at the time of the Reformation (as far as I know anyway).

But there MAY be lurkers here who take your statement to mean: “OK. I give God my faith (“I” am making the first move) and God gives me grace” (God responds to ME). That would be wrong.

Semi-Pelagianism is where you think YOU (not God) make the initial move towards God (and not the other way around).

In short . . . Semi-Pelagianism is the DENIAL of God’s Prevenient Grace.

And that was condemned by Trent (and elsewhere) as I already quoted . . . .

COUNCIL OF TRENT . . . . none of those things which precede justification - whether faith or works - merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace.

Wikipedia . . .

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semipelagianism
Click to expand...
Many evangelicals today also essentially hold a Semi-Pelagian if not an outright Pelagian view…
 
lanman87 said:
I actually said, or meant to say:p, that protestant don’t teach that is okay go to on living in sin. Not that we can’t go on sinning. We all sin, even those of us who seek to live in the Spirit instead of the flesh.

Protestants, at least historically, teach to live in the spirit and put to death the deeds of the body. That this is an ongoing struggle and process. Just as Paul talked about in Romans 7.
Click to expand...
Don’t some protestants believe that following the commandments is not necessary for salvation?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top