W
Protestansts, If God judges the quality of our imperfect faith for justificaion, then why cant this be true of works?
- Status
S
stevekehl
Guest
The difference is that trying to attain salvation through good works is man’s effort to save himself by his own efforts. This is a Buddhist/Hindu teaching, that we can be saved if our good works outweigh our bad. If this could be done then Christ died for nothing, and Christ did not die for nothing. Faith, as imperfect as it is, is a man acknowledging that only through Christ’s sacrifice can we attain salvation. We submit to God’s plan through faith and affirm that we cannot save ourselves.
M
Mamanurse
Guest
I get a little confused on the faith and works thing that is constantly talked about on this forum between Catholics and Protestants. It seems to me that if the works that you do because of the graces that your faith has brought you, then why do Protestants keep refuting that fact that your salvation isn’t through Faith AND works? I just don’t get it. If I had faith, but never once did a good work in the name of God, then how could I expect to get to Heaven?
Another thing, if Christ didn’t think doing good works were part of salvation then why did He perform so many while on earth? Didn’t he teach us by leading by example? Aren’t we obliged to do as He did?
I am no theologian, and cannot pick out many verses of the Bible like some of you can, so I apologize for not having any Scripture to back my understanding.
Another thing, if Christ didn’t think doing good works were part of salvation then why did He perform so many while on earth? Didn’t he teach us by leading by example? Aren’t we obliged to do as He did?
I am no theologian, and cannot pick out many verses of the Bible like some of you can, so I apologize for not having any Scripture to back my understanding.
O
Odell
Guest
Right. If you believe you can appeal to Gods grace to judge the quality of what you call “saving faith” for justification. And you believe you can please God in the realm of Osanctification knowing that your works are imperfect. I assume it is only because of the atonement of Christ that you believe this possible in that that God views those works and evaluate them in based on grace rather than [LAW]
Catholicism just takes this one step back one step to include justification. God can accept our imperfect faith and works for justification because he looks at us through the eyes of grace as we diligently seek him. Just as you believe he can view them in the realm of sanctification.
Make sense?
O
Odell
Guest
Not only that but tring to save your self by your own effort obligates God. And Paul is set against that. Thank goodness the church does not teach it so. Your not apling that it does are you?
S
stevekehl
Guest
Not implying that at all. In a nutshell, works cannot save us, but, our faith is strengthened and perfected by our works. Like exercising a muscle builds strength and endurance, works exercise our faith to make it stronger and able to endure trials.
O
Odell
Guest
That’s not what you said. You said
Trying to attain salvation in an effort to save yourself; is different than saying works cant save or have no role in our justification.
Scripture is clear we can not save ourselves but scripture is also clear that works have a role in our justification.
O
Odell
Guest
I don’t understand how you are not getting it.
I have showed from scripture that God can be pleased by our works God can view our works when we don’t seek to obligate him. With the eyes of grace, the same way he views our faith.
God views our faith through the eyes of grace. Our faith would never be acceptable if he did not. You must believe this about faith. Since God can be pleased and reward us by our faith he can do the same with our works. As long as we don’t obligate God.
Paul does not have a problem with the law or works when they don’t try to obligate. Paul says in Rom 7:12 “the law is righteous and good” Paul also says Romans 2: 5-10 “of the rigteous judgment of God, who will give to each man according to his works. On the one hand, to those who persist in good works, seeking glory,honor and incorruption, [He will give] eternal life…”
God will give eternal life to those who do good. The difference here and the passages that show us pleasing God is that they do not obligate. God sees those works as good because of grace. He would not if we sought salvation by obligating. Obeying the law or commandments without understanding the spirit behind the law is living merely by a written code without any sense of love and understanding.
It is like the law thaw shall not speed threw a school zone. Do you avoid speeding just to avoid a ticket or because you care for the little children (the spirit behind the law).
This goes well with the doctrine of infusion were God truly desires us to have a inner change. God desires this change and when we obey God it surely will not go unnoticed.
So now you should be able to see how God can see our works by peering into our hearts and he can accept these works and by his grace and reward us as he rewards our faith.
Is this any clearer?
Ok. In the end, then, when you and I talk about justification, and I say it is by faith alone, but that faith is a faith that works through love, and I say that justification must by followed by sanctification, and you talk about faith working through love, that faith hope and charity are alsway together, are we talking - in the end - about essentially the same thing?
Jon
W
WCH
Guest
Who would know better whether it’s a Protestant position are not, guanophore? Me, or you?
It is a VERY Protestant position.
L
lampalm
Guest
If our works could save then Christ did not have to die.
G
guanophore
Guest
Perhaps your experience and knowledge are just limited, so you do not yet understand how to distinguish between the Apostolic faith and those who have departed from it?
This is the Catholic faith. It is taken from a letter by a Catholic, to a Catholic community in Ephesus. It has been the Catholic position for 2000 years.
Aside from the fact that there is no one “Protestant position” (there being almost as many as there are belly buttons), there in espousing it, you have espoused a Teaching of the Catholic Church. This is why I say, the Reformers did not jettison ALL of what the Apostles believed and taught. Just enough to create a different gospel.
When a “protestant position” departs from Catholic faith, it is a result of rebellion against the Teachings of the Apostles. In this case, no such rebellion exists in many Protestant communities.
Maybe you don’t realize that there are many of “protestant position” that reject this teaching, also, and claim that no matter what you do , or don’t do, one is saved after the sinners prayer.
O
Odell
Guest
Essentially
But I think you keep digging a deeper hole when you use language such as “faith alone”. You have to explain constantly what it does not mean. You have words like imputation. That goes hand in hand with faith alone. And so we still have our differences. We believe that we don’t lay claim to someone else’s righteousness (imputation). But that we exercise righteousness; with Gods grace of course. (Infusion). That justification is a process the process comprises both the infusion of righteousness into the individual and God’s recognition of that righteousness.We would argue that sanctification and justification go hand in hand. Paul makes clear that our conforming to the likeness of Christ involves our justification by the way he uses the word "justified " in connection with sanctification.
1 Cor 6:11
“not thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the spirit of God.”
This passage refers exclusively to the time they were intrinsically made righteous. They were once despicable sinners engaged in many and varied sins but at their washing, sanctification and justification, these sins were removed and they became righteous (new creatures) Thus Paul associates the term “justification” with the transformational change.
Titus 3: 5-7 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the** washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost**;
Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior;That being justified by his grace,…
Here we notice that in the same breath that Paul speaks of “being saved through the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit’” he p(name removed by moderator)oints the time this was done for us as “being justified by his grace.” Justification occurs when we were “saved,” “rebirthed,” and “renewed.”
Justification is a rebirth and renewal as much as sanctification and glorification.
This is important to this thread because You know God can view our works as good and pleasing in the realm of sanctification but you cant make the leap to include justification. I understand why you don’t want to make the gospel to become a system of law living merely by a written code.
This is were I think the Catholic Church does a better job of explaining exactly what Paul means when he condemns works of law. Its not that he condemns faith and love or faith and obedience. As you know but some protestants will take it this far. He is condemning law in the sense that it obligates God.
Back to imputation and the quality of faith. Since the imputation depends on the quality of faith, then justification cannot be reduced to the “alien righteousness of Christ.” Christ atonement does not automatically impute righteousness to sinners all together, but is only appropriated by the faith disposition of the individual; thus it is baseless to claim that justification by imputation has any ethical superiority over justification by infusion.
In the end, only justification by infused righteousness is consistent with and allows for the variable of qualified faith (ie faith that works in love) to receive the grace of God.
W
WCH
Guest
Ah, condescension.
G
guanophore
Guest
Forgive me.Ah, condescension.
I know that some people just think concretely, and are not in a position to abstract. If you really believe that a pickle is not substantially different than the cucumber from which it came, then it is not likely that we can productively discuss the spiritual realities of baptism.
W
WCH
Guest
Why not try using Scripture? Or is Scripture too concrete for you?Forgive me.
I know that some people just think concretely, and are not in a position to abstract. If you really believe that a pickle is not substantially different than the cucumber from which it came, then it is not likely that we can productively discuss the spiritual realities of baptism.
G
guanophore
Guest
Understanding the spiritual sense of scripture requires the ability to move beyond the concrete. Baptism contains spiritual realities that are part of the unseen world. If a person cannot accept the fundamental concept of transformation, such as a cucumber being turned to a pickle, then it is not likely that they will be able to grasp it.
W
WCH
Guest
I’ve repeatedly cited to you 2 Cor 3:18 regarding the transformation of believers.
Methinks you’re the one who can’t move beyond the concrete. If you can’t explain your position, I’ll just have to accept that you can’t and leave it at that.
G
guanophore
Guest
You have, but you have related it to sanctification, not justification. A person can be justified, yet not sanctified.
In the moment we are justified before God, we are transformed by His grace.
Indeed, it is difficult to explain mysteries. Do you know what it is about brine that turns a cucumber into a pickle?
W
WCH
Guest
Guanophore, all good things begin at justification.
That’s made painfully obvious by your inability. When you’re able to explain your position concerning baptism from scripture, let me know.
- Status