Justified by Faith Alone cf. James 2:24

[LatinRight]

Any mortal sin is renouncing Christ. Thankfully, we have the grace of reconciliation if we do fall from grace.

God bless Rcwitness and every readers of the CAF.

What happen if a child/elect of God dies between fall from grace by mortal sin and reconciliation?

God bless.

LatinRight

 

[rcwitness]

God bless Rcwitness and every readers of the CAF.

What happen if a child/elect of God dies between fall from grace by mortal sin and reconciliation?

God bless.

LatinRight

Well, first of all, if that person dies in a state of falling from grace, then there is no “in between”. If there is remorse at the time of death, and the person was unable to make it to confession, then I believe that is a movement towards repentance.

But only God knows the hearts and intentions of man. He alone is able to judge the soul.

 

[AugustTherese]

About Judas, God is clear:
“The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born” (Matthew 26:24)

"But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me, unless it has been granted him from the Father.” John 64-65 (Emphasis added)

How do you propose that Judas was never initially saved from these verses? Does Judas betraying Our Lord mean he was never saved before the betrayal? Christians betray Our Lord everyday and fall from grace, where do you presume that they were not saved before they fell?

I can’t lose my salvation: Hebrews 6:4-6 supports that:
Hebrews 6:4-6 could not possible be written for the authentic Christian.

For whom is it written for, then?

This would mean that anyone who falls into a life of sin has no recourse for forgiveness. And from the totality of the Bible, we know God is a patient and a forgiving God.

“Then when he says, and then commit apostasy, he shows the difficulty in rising, after one has fallen. Here it should be noted that he does not say, ‘fallen’, but ‘fallen away’, i.e. completely fallen, because if they had merely fallen, it should not be difficult to rise: ‘A just man shall fall seven times, and shall rise again’ (Pr. 24:16). But if the Apostle had said it is impossible for those who have fallen away to rise again, then it might be said that in this he was signifying how extremely difficult it is to rise, both because of sin and because of pride, as in the devils. But because he says that those who have once fallen away cannot be renewed unto penance, and there is no sin in this world that man cannot repent of, there must be another explanation.” - Saint Thomas Aquinas

“For it is impossible”: This is an obscure place, differently expounded, which shows how rash it is for the ignorant to pretend to understand the holy Scriptures. Many understand these words, it is impossible, of the sacrament of penance, or of returning to God by a profitable repentance, especially after such heinous sins as an apostasy from the true faith. But then we must take the word impossible, to imply no more than a thing that is very hard to be done, or that seldom happens, as when it is said, (Matthew xix. 26.) that it is impossible for rich men to be saved: and (Luke xvii. 1.) it is impossible that scandals should not come. For it is certain that it is never impossible for the greatest sinners to repent by the assistance which God offers them, who has also left the power to his ministers to forgive in his name the greatest sins." - Haydock Bible Commentary

1. An unbeliever who has heard the Gospel and calling of the Holy Spirit but still rejects Christ.

“You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you". Acts 7:51 NKJV

1. It is a hypothetical statement pointing out it would be impossible for a Christian to fall away, (key word being IF in verse 6) The point being made that it would be impossible (IF a Christian falls away) to renew salvation. That’s because Christ died once for sin (Hebrews 9:28), and if His sacrifice would be insufficient, then there’s no hope at all. And we know His sacrifice was once and for all time sufficient (Hebrews 10)

That is not what it says at all! It does not state, “[IF] it is impossible”, but rather, “It is impossible”. However, refer to the above Bible commentary on ‘impossible’. Also, a believer falling away from grace via deadly sin does not invalidate Christ’s all-sufficient atoning sacrifice, but rather squanders the inheritance of eternal life if sins are left not confessed.

“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” 1 John 1:9 NKJV

Your deadly sins are only forgiven, according to this verse, “IF” you confess your sins.

And we have already agreed to disagree about James’ discourse.

With all due respect, that is a cop-out. Read what Saint James’ epistle says, and not what Protestant theology reads into it.

God bless you

Thank you! God bless you!

 

[LatinRight]

Well, first of all, if that person dies in a state of falling from grace, then there is no “in between”. If there is remorse at the time of death, and the person was unable to make it to confession, then I believe that is a movement towards repentance.

But only God knows the hearts and intentions of man. He alone is able to judge the soul.

Thanks you for your post Rcwitness.

God bless you.

LatinRight

 

[ajcstr]

Can someone be Sanctified, but not Justified?

I think Catholics and Protestants would agree and say no, but for different reasons.

Protestants would see justification as preceding sanctification so one would have to have been justified in order to be sanctified.

Catholics would see sanctification as part of the justification process so to be sanctified would also mean the person is justified. Now what Catholics call “initial justification” would proceed sanctification.

Would my fellow Catholics agree with this? I would also submit that the Catholic approach is more biblical from what I can see.

 

[rcwitness]

I think Catholics and Protestants would agree and say no, but for different reasons.

Yes. There is no good reason why we shouldn’t be able to see much of the same belief and teaching regarding Justification/salvation. This is why I jumped into this thread at post #258 (forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=14651608&postcount=258)

Would my fellow Catholics agree with this? I would also submit that the Catholic approach is more biblical from what I can see.

Well, I believe the more we want to follow Scripture as a rule, the more we must acknowledge the Church as founded on Peter and the Apostles collectively being able to make judgements that are binding on the faithful. This didn’t end with their death, but continues through Laying on Hands as appointing leaders who have the responsibility to rule, shepherd, watch over, and feed the Church

 

[AugustTherese]

Catholics would see sanctification as part of the justification process so to be sanctified would also mean the person is justified. Now what Catholics call “initial justification” would proceed sanctification.

Justification and sanctification are to never be separated! If anything, sanctification would precede justification, if they were to be separated.

Holy Baptism, i.e. “initial justification”, is an infusion of sanctifying grace, hence, we are justified because we have been sanctified.

“And this is what some of you used to be. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.” 1 Corinthians 6:11

Notice what comes first, even though they are both a concurrent and simultaneous act of God.

“[H]e saved us, not because of any works of righteousness that we had done, but according to his mercy, through the water of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit [sanctification in Holy Baptism]. This Spirit he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.” Titus 3:5-7

Again, notice what precedes justification: “through the water of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit”, i.e. Holy Baptism; even though they happen simultaneously.

 

[Cathoholic]

drblank1. You asked in post 240 concerning Judas . . . .

You truly believe that God and Jesus, knew Judas was the betrayer and yet temporarily adopted Judas into His family?

It is irrelevant what my feelings are. . . . .But . . .

No I don’t think Jesus “temporarily” adopted Judas into His family.

I think Jesus “permanently” adopted Judas into His family and then Judas REJECTED this sonship eventually.

---

A “disciple” of Christ is described by St. Luke as someone who renounces all that he has to follow Jesus.

LUKE 16:33 33 So therefore, whoever of you does not renounce all that he has cannot be my disciple.

Yet Judas is EXPLICITLY called a “disciple” of Christ by the Holy Spirit through St. Luke.

• Judas = “Disciple” of Christ

LUKE 6:12-16 12 In these days he went out to the mountain to pray; and all night he continued in prayer to God. 13 And when it was day, he called his disciples, and chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles; 14 Simon, whom he named Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James and John, and Philip, and Bartholomew, 15 and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, 16 and Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.

Yet you said (in post 57) . . . .

he was a devil from the beginning.

When I pointed out that you are inventing that and that assertion isn’t in Scripture (here) . . . .

. . . . . your reply was . . . .

I was not quoting scripture.

Then you appealed to . . .

“The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born” (Matthew 26:24)

But I am not denying Judas condemned himself.

I am saying the same thing Scripture is saying.

That at one time Judas was described as a . . . . “disciple” of Jesus.

You also said . . . .

"But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. 65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me, unless it has been granted him from the Father.” John 64-65 (Emphasis added)

But I am not denying Jesus KNEW EVERYTHING from the beginning and I hope you aren’t either. Jesus is God.

And I also affirm SOME of these people at Capernaum “did not believe”. And Jesus knew that too.

And I affirm Jesus knew Judas would betray Him as well.

But you have to IGNORE Scripture saying Judas was a “disciple” and conclude things about Judas that Scripture never says to come to your conclusion.

And I think it looks like you are doing this to assert “Once Saved, Always Saved” and work backwards and jam that theology into these verses.

And I just don’t think the arguments you presented (on this issue) are persuasive that’s all.

You have made some good points here on this thread drblank1. But I think you are wrong on this one.

Jesus implicitly affirmed Judas had at least a “little faith” in Matthew 8:26.

If Judas was justified by faith ALONE . . . . WHY isn’t Judas in Heaven?

Here is the passage the Holy Spirit gave us . . . .

MATTHEW 8:23-26 23 And when he got into the boat, his disciples followed him. 24 And behold, there arose a great storm on the sea, so that the boat was being swamped by the waves; but he was asleep. 25 And they went and woke him, saying, “Save, Lord; we are perishing.” 26 And he said to them, “Why are you afraid, O men of little faith?”

Here is the passage YOU might give us . . . . .

**NOT MATTHEW 8:23-26 (but a phantom verse) ** 23 And when he got into the boat, his disciples followed him except Judas who in all actuality isn’t a disciple. 24 And behold, there arose a great storm on the sea, so that the boat was being swamped by the waves; but he was asleep. 25 And they went and woke him, saying, “Save, Lord; we are perishing.” 26 And he said to them, “Why are you afraid, O men of little faith? Except for you Judas who have NO faith”

There are other issues with your proposition of trying to cram Judas into an Eternal Security” paradigm but I’ll leave it at that.

This is what happens with following after traditions of men drblank1. You must affirm traditions of men that nullify the Word of God, and work backwards “cramming” these traditions into Scripture.

And it doesn’t work.

I think invoking Judas to try to assert OSAS actually worked against your position.

(And EVEN if Judas was “never” a “disciple” of Jesus, it does not affirm OSAS. It would only affirm ONE guy had never been saved.)

 

[JonNC]

This is how we should understand the doctrine of Faith and Works:

John 14
“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do…"

 

[rcwitness]

Maybe that’s how you would say that’s how we should understand the Faith Alone doctrine?

 

[Cathoholic]

I think asserting . . .

John 14
“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do…"

. . . . is great.

But my only caveat on this would be NOT drawing the following conclusion . . .

NOT John 14
“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will NECESSARILY also do the works that I do…"

Because elsewhere in Scripture (I’ve already exemplified 1st Corinthians 13 earlier in this thread for example) we are ALSO warned that there are some people with faith . . . . “faith to remove mountains” in fact, that gain “nothing” because of their lack of “charity” or “love” (depending on your translation).

 

[ajcstr]

I was struck by today’s Gospel reading as I think it is very much on target for this discussion - especially in the area of OSAS:

Jesus said to his disciples:
“I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine grower.
He takes away every branch in me that does not bear fruit,
and everyone that does he prunes so that it bears more fruit.
You are already pruned because of the word that I spoke to you.
Remain in me, as I remain in you.
Just as a branch cannot bear fruit on its own
unless it remains on the vine,
so neither can you unless you remain in me.
I am the vine, you are the branches.
Whoever remains in me and I in him will bear much fruit,
because without me you can do nothing.
Anyone who does not remain in me
will be thrown out like a branch and wither;
people will gather them and throw them into a fire
and they will be burned.
If you remain in me and my words remain in you,
ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you.
By this is my Father glorified,
that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.”

 

[drblank1]

Yes, works without faith cannot save, and faith without works is vain.

The way Protestants would say this is, vain faith WILL NOT save. Authentic faith saves and one of the bi-product of that authentic faith is works.

 

[drblank1]

I think asserting . . .

Because elsewhere in Scripture (I’ve already exemplified 1st Corinthians 13 earlier in this thread for example) we are ALSO warned that there are some people with faith . . . . “faith to remove mountains” in fact, that gain “nothing” because of their lack of “charity” or “love” (depending on your translation).

What a great chapter to cross reference with James 2:

James 2 - faith without works.
1 Cor 13 - faith without love

Another bi-product of saving faith - love.

 

[drblank1]

I asked for verses which state that experience this is how you know you are saved–when you have that type of lovely emotional response.

The verse above do not say anything of the sort.

I’m sorry if you cannot relate to my experience of filling of the Holy Spirit. I don’t know how else to help you understand beyond God Word.

Please do not think I am comparing my day of salvation to the day of Pentecost because am I not. But that is the only other passage I could help you relate to the experience.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m sorry if you cannot relate to my experience of filling of the Holy Spirit…

Not sure why you say I can’t relate to that.

I can totally relate! It’s a sacramental moment, to be sure!

However, I am asking you where you get the idea from that this experience you had was an indication that you are saved.

That’s not a Biblical thing, AFAIK.

You are simply professing a man-made doctrine, drblank: “When someone has this type of experience, it indicates that they have been saved!”

Not found in a single page of the Bible.

 

[PRmerger]

Thanks to God, He showed me what it really meant to be saved…

I am looking for a Bible verse where you get this ^^.

It sounds like man-made tradition, frankly.

If you could offer a verse that says being knocked to your knees and collapsing into a heap of crying joy is how you know you’re truly saved, that would be helpful

So I thought I was saved until one night when I was 12, the Holy Spirit KNOCKED me to my knees and I collapsed into a heap of crying joy. After 40 solid minutes of this unbelievable joy, I had to be picked up off the alter and helped back into the front seat of the church until it subsided

 

[rcwitness]

I’m sorry if you cannot relate to my experience of filling of the Holy Spirit. I don’t know how else to help you understand beyond God Word.

Please do not think I am comparing my day of salvation to the day of Pentecost because am I not. But that is the only other passage I could help you relate to the experience.

I have not wanted to question your conversion experience at all. Praise Jesus for touching your heart, and you receiving Him with joy!

 

[PRmerger]

I am looking for a Bible verse where you get this ^^.

It sounds like man-made tradition, frankly.

If you could offer a verse that says being knocked to your knees and collapsing into a heap of crying joy is how you know you’re truly saved, that would be helpful

So I’m imagining a conversation like this between you and a non-Believer:

Non-Believer: how do you know if you are saved?

drblank: I knew that I was when I experienced a wonderful, lovely, emotional, tearful moment while praying that knocked me to my knees.

Non-Believer: can you point me to a Bible verse that affirms this?

What’s your answer? The Bible verses you originally cited do not affirm your claim at all.

 

[Cathoholic]

drblank1. You mentioned . . . .

Another bi-product of saving faith - love.

If you want to define a “saving faith” as a faith that NECESSARILY works, and NEEDS to WORK, and CONTINUES working, you will hear no criticism from me.

The Council of Trent’s condemnation of “Justification by faith alone” seems to be OK with that as well.

But the Council was NOT OK with a definition of “faith alone” that means nothing else is required in the way of COOPERATION after your moment.

COUNCIL OF TRENT CANON IX - If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema.

thecounciloftrent.com/ch6.htm

St. Paul puts the NEED for that ongoing COOPERATION in “working” this way . . .

2nd CORINTHIANS 6:1 Working together with him, then, we entreat you not to accept the grace of God in vain.

St. Paul in Romans calls this faith that MUST be working, “the OBEDIENCE of faith”.

Beware though of reducing your justification down to a moment ALONE.

Justification is a moment followed by a process. A lifelong process.