Refuting Sola fide

[SyCarl]

I do not think that there is any real dispute that faith requires works in the sense that a real faith will result in works as the proof of that faith and as its fruits.

We will be judged according to our works in the same sense that we are judged by the evidence in any trial. Innocence or guilt is a fact before a trial starts. The evidence shows that the judgement is just. The evidence does not make the person innocent or guilty. We must have works so that God’s judgement, which will be just, will also be seen to be just.

I think that the Protestant emphasis is that our good works do not merit anything. If they did then grace would no more be grace. Something can be required without meritting a reward. For example with traffic laws we are expected to obey them but we don’t expect a reward for doing so.

I think that if we are doing good works to merit eternal life, or to avoid hell, that we are doing them for the wrong reason. This is because it tends to keep the person and his wants in the focus. Thus I do good works because I want eternal life is wrong because my benefit is the goal. Similarly I do good works because I don’t want to go to hell is wrong because again our benefit is the goal.

We should be doing good works because that is what God wants and we want to please and glorify God, not because we expect a benefit. Jesus does say in Luke 17:9-10
“He does not thank the slave because he did the the things which were commanded, does he? So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say, 'We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done.”

 

[Teflon93]

how about where Jesus says:
“this is the work of God, that you believe in him whom He has sent.”

that is John chapter 6 (the favorite chapter of most of the catholics i know, it is also one of my favorites). of course Jesus gives His followers things to do, but He says often that believing is the greatest work. and the point of James is that works flow from that faith. Paul in Ephesians says we receive grace through that faith and that faith will produce works, but the catalyst is faith.

Yes, but Jesus answers the salvation question variously throughout the Gospel, and John 6 of course also includes another of these ways which is required—to eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ.

 

[bengal_fan]

Yes, but Jesus answers the salvation question variously throughout the Gospel, and John 6 of course also includes another of these ways which is required—to eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ.

again, something that flows out of belief. in fact, scripture and the church are pretty clear that if we partake of the eucharist without faith we are endangering our souls.

 

[foundthelight]

You can also ask your friend an argument from reason.

“If faith is required for salvation, what happens to the infant, innocent child, or the simpleton who do not know enough to have faith? If they die in this state where do they go? They don’t have faith. Does this mean that they are condemned? What does the Bible say on this?”

Of course, we know that the Bible says that in baptism we receive Grace, the Holy Spirit and the washing clean of the stain of original sin. I am willing to bet that your friend doesn’t believe this even though it is plainly in the Bible.

In Christ,

Willis

 

[Teflon93]

again, something that flows out of belief. in fact, scripture and the church are pretty clear that if we partake of the eucharist without faith we are endangering our souls.

And why is that? Because to do so is to profane the Eucharist.

The more common issue is to be in a state of mortal sin and to take the Eucharist. Mortal sins tend toward things we do rather than things we believe.

You cannot separate our actions out—we will be judged on them. This is why sola fide is a distorted doctrine. It was invented as a means to destroy piety in the Church, particularly devotional piety. It led directly to the stripping of the altars, and the removal of sacraments necessary for sanctification. It is a pernicious thing.

As Christ noted in Luke 6:46: “Why do you call me “Lord, Lord” yet do not do what I tell you to do?”

 

[bengal_fan]

And why is that? Because to do so is to profane the Eucharist.

The more common issue is to be in a state of mortal sin and to take the Eucharist. Mortal sins tend toward things we do rather than things we believe.

You cannot separate our actions out—we will be judged on them. ** This is why sola fide is a distorted doctrine. It was invented as a means to destroy piety in the Church, particularly devotional piety**. It led directly to the stripping of the altars, and the removal of sacraments necessary for sanctification. It is a pernicious thing.

As Christ noted in Luke 6:46: “Why do you call me “Lord, Lord” yet do not do what I tell you to do?”

i don’t think you can say that it was “invented to destroy piety”. that just shows a lack of understanding of the development of the doctrine. we will be judged by our actions but not saved by them. why can’t you understand that? grace cannot be earned. grace is given freely through faith. that faith will produce works. they all go together but the catalyst for the whole process is faith. Jesus is saying just that in Luke 6:46. He asks why do you claim to have faith when it doesn’t produce works… it just goes to show that you have no faith at all. mortal sins are an outward sign of a denial of God inward. it’s what’s happening inside that is affecting our reception of God’s grace NOT the other way around.

 

[Teflon93]

i don’t think you can say that it was “invented to destroy piety”. that just shows a lack of understanding of the development of the doctrine. we will be judged by our actions but not saved by them. why can’t you understand that? grace cannot be earned. ** grace is given freely through faith. that faith will produce works. they all go together but the catalyst for the whole process is faith. Jesus is saying just that in Luke 6:46. He asks why do you claim to have faith when it doesn’t produce works… it just goes to show that you have no faith at all.** mortal sins are an outward sign of a denial of God inward. it’s what’s happening inside that is affecting our reception of God’s grace NOT the other way around.

I have repeatedly said God’s grace cannot be merited. Try reading previous posts before claiming otherwise.

Luke 6:46 says nothing at all of what you claim it does in context, provided here:

30: Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
31: And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
32: For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
33: And if ye **do good **to them which **do good **to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
34: And if ye **lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
35: But love **ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.
36: Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
37: Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:
38: Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.
39: And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?
40: The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.
41: And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
42: Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
43: For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
44: For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.
45: A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.
**46: And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say? **
47: Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom he is like:
48: He is like a man which **built **an house, and **digged **deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.
49: **But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great. **

Yet again, Christ tells us what we must DO. Scripture cannot be tortured sufficiently to extract our actions from our beliefs; faith is dead without works. Has been ever since The Fall, will ever be.

 

[Teflon93]

i don’t think you can say that it was “invented to destroy piety”. that just shows a lack of understanding of the development of the doctrine. we will be judged by our actions but not saved by them. why can’t you understand that? grace cannot be earned. grace is given freely through faith. that faith will produce works. they all go together but the catalyst for the whole process is faith. Jesus is saying just that in Luke 6:46. He asks why do you claim to have faith when it doesn’t produce works… it just goes to show that you have no faith at all. mortal sins are an outward sign of a denial of God inward. it’s what’s happening inside that is affecting our reception of God’s grace NOT the other way around.

As for sola fide’s purpose, read Eamon Duffy’s “The Stripping of the Altars”, which has the best description of what it was the Reformers sought to destroy, and succeeded in so doing.

Piety:

1. reverence for God or devout fulfillment of religious obligations: a prayer full of piety.

The Reformers did nothing more than take away from the Church; they added nothing to her. They stripped sacraments away. They stripped chunks of Scripture away. They stripped theology away. And they stripped the altars themselves, pawning the wealth of the faithful to make their advocates rich beyond all measure.

So what faith had they, then?

 

[Reformed1]

Yes, but Jesus answers the salvation question variously throughout the Gospel, and John 6 of course also includes another of these ways which is required—to eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ.

But your church doesn’t beleive someone must eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ.

Your church has soooo changed the “outside the church there is no salvation” doctrine over the past half century or so that pretty much anyone can be saved. So in short, no your church does not teach that one must “eat the flesh and drink the blood of Christ” anymore. If you disagree with me, just read your own words that you posted a week or so back on the old covenant thread.

Since your church teaches that it’s works + faith = justification, I am curious if you can tell me how many works must one do?

 

[scylla]

0 works, that is why we baptize babies…
Catholics do not keep count all that matters is love of God by God’s Grace, which is expressed in our faith and obedience.

Yet to obey God is necessary when it is possible, so a Catholic must do the action of believing in God, (which is a work), love God (which is a work) and obey (which takes work) but all this is only possible by allowing God to work through the person. So essentially the person does nothing and just lets God do it through him.

Now to make affirm the words Faith Alone is only honest if you redefine Faith Alone to include love of God and obedience. So Faith Alone really isn’t alone but is just called that. It is professing a lie then doing something else. Because to have Faith and not love God since that is a separate thing is wrong.

Who would go to heaven if he denies loving God?

In Christ
Scylla

 

[Reformed1]

As for sola fide’s purpose, read Eamon Duffy’s “The Stripping of the Altars”, which has the best description of what it was the Reformers sought to destroy, and succeeded in so doing.

Piety:

1. reverence for God or devout fulfillment of religious obligations: a prayer full of piety.

The Reformers did nothing more than take away from the Church; they added nothing to her. They stripped sacraments away. They stripped chunks of Scripture away. They stripped theology away. And they stripped the altars themselves, pawning the wealth of the faithful to make their advocates rich beyond all measure.

So what faith had they, then?

This is just silly. Do you really think sola fide sought to destroy a reverance for God? A false reverance full of ridiculous shows of vain “piety” most certainly but true reverance for God, never.

You mention the sacraments but they are just another bit of evidence as to how work oriented your church is.

You go on to say (and this is perhaps the most ironic charge of all but of course you won’t see that being blinded by papist idolatry) “And they stripped the altars themselves, pawning the wealth of the faithful to make their advocates rich beyond all measure.”

If this were true, aren’t you indicting your precious but quite satanic church also? I mean I know you are blinded because of your love for “mother church” but seriously, don’t you see the problem with your charge?

If “they stripped the altars themselves, pawning the wealth of the faithful to make their advocates rich beyond all measure.” is true, it wasn’t the wealth of the “faithful” that was pawned off. It was the wealth of a corrupt church (RCC).

Check this out, 4 out of 5 dioceses have major problems with fraud and embezzlement. You guys have more than your share of problems between a clergy that is predominantly homosexual and fraudulent and a lack of interest among the poor lay people.

catholic.org/national/nat…y.php?id=22414

I know I’ll probably get banned for this post and “good” catholic posters will skate on by (thus showing how hypocritical this forum and it’s moderators really are)…but that’s the price one pays. Oh, well.

 

[ryanoneil]

Even when I cite James 2:24 and Matthew 7:21, my Protestant friend shakes his head and points at Acts 16:31 and Romans 10:9. How do I explain to him that these verses do not imply faith alone is what saves you?

II. Works of Law versus Good Works

Rom. 3:20,28; Gal. 2:16,21; 3:2,5,10; Eph. 2:8-9 - many Protestants err in their understanding of what Paul means by "works of the law” in his teaching on justification. Paul’s teaching that we are not justified by “works of the law” refer to the law of Moses or to any legal system that makes God our debtor. They do not refer to good works done in grace with faith in Christ. This makes sense when we remember that Paul’s mission was to teach that salvation was also for the Gentiles who were not subject to the “works of the law.”

For the proof go to scripturecatholic.com/justification.html#justification-I

 

[bengal_fan]

I have repeatedly said God’s grace cannot be merited. Try reading previous posts before claiming otherwise.

Luke 6:46 says nothing at all of what you claim it does in context, provided here:
.

sorry but you’re wrong. that simple . i have read every post and you continually claim that to receive God’s grace we must do works. that grace comes after faith AND works. i say it comes after faith and works results from that. the reading of Luke should be understood by who Jesus is talking to (and that would be His followers so faith is being assumed by Jesus). they are claiming to believe and follow Him but works are not flowing from this belief so He is questioning their faith. He is not saying that they must do works to receive grace.

 

[Reformed1]

sorry but you’re wrong. that simple . i have read every post and you continually claim that to receive God’s grace we must do works. that grace comes after faith AND works. i say it comes after faith and works results from that. the reading of Luke should be understood by who Jesus is talking to (and that would be His followers so faith is being assumed by Jesus). they are claiming to believe and follow Him but works are not flowing from this belief so He is questioning their faith. He is not saying that they must do works to receive grace.

If he says “that to receive God’s grace we must do works…” he is trying to work his way to heaven. Think about it.

If this is what he said “that to receive God’s grace we must do works…” than grace isn’t grace, it’s merit.

I wonder how much work he has to do to earn God’s grace?

 

[foundthelight]

I don’t understand. Where is it said that acting in obedience to the words of Christ is a work? He told us to be baptised, eat of his body and blood, and do good deeds. How can obeying this be a “Work”?

Doing these things in faith and obedience are salvic as the bible clearly says. Without faith they are nothing, for there is no salvation without faith. Without grace they are nothing, for there is no salvation without grace. Doing these things in obedience to the Word because of our faith they are everything.

 

[Teflon93]

sorry but you’re wrong. that simple . i have read every post and you continually claim that to receive God’s grace we must do works. that grace comes after faith AND works. i say it comes after faith and works results from that. the reading of Luke should be understood by who Jesus is talking to (and that would be His followers so faith is being assumed by Jesus). they are claiming to believe and follow Him but works are not flowing from this belief so He is questioning their faith. He is not saying that they must do works to receive grace.

You don’t know what you’re talking about, as anyone who can use the search function on my posts may attest.

God’s grace is God’s to give alone; it is a gift. We are granted sufficient grace to resist sin and do God’s will. The good we do stems from this gift of God; what we do with this gift matters to God. Christ bids us do many things in Scripture. Luke 6:46 is not about what we believe, but about what we do.

We cannot merit God’s grace; it is a gift beyond all meritability. What we can do is merit salvation (not because we deserve it, but because God judges us and through His mercy saves us) by using God’s grace to resist sin and to serve God.

After all, what we aspire to hear on the day of our judgment is, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant.” Note that the object is “servant”—i.e. one who does.

It is not enough to simply believe in Christ. Satan believed in Christ.

One must do as Christ bid us do. Claiming I am faithful to my wife avails me not if I sleep with other women, no matter how consistently and piously I claim to be faithful. I must refrain from infidelity, and must continuously demonstrate my fidelity, or I am mocking the very notion of faith.

We poor, stunted children of Calvin, Luther, and Zwingli have a great deal of investment in the notion that one need merely believe, but God requires more, and the devoted invariably do more, which is why so few take Luther’s advice to “sin boldly”.

 

[tbulger]

I have used the James passage to try to refute this from a Lutheran friend, and I always hear, “We are more inclined to do works because we’re saved” which I think is wrong because Christians are still able to sin. With the Acts and Romans passage, one thing to note is that neither say that only believing in God saves you". They are saying that is needed but not alone.

Protestants will also cite Romans 3:28 to argue that faith alone saves you. In my Catholic translation (NRSV) it says “For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.” When it says “apart from works” it is saying the old testaments traditions like circumcision won’t save. No where does it say “faith alone”. Also, the bible can’t contradict itself. It is believed that in Luther’s translation he added the word “alone”, which contradicts the protestant belief that that rejects the human authority of the Church (eg. the Pope).

Ask protestants to read Matt 25, where those who do not feed Him, visit Him, give him clothes etc. end up in eternal punishment. This clearly shows that those who don’t do good things can end up in Hell.

Also, read 1 Cor 13:2 “If I have faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.” This says "I can have faith, but lack something else which makes me nothing. This also show that having faith alone can’t save you. We need faith but also together with our works and love done with faith.

I hope this helps.
God Bless

 

[mackbrislawn]

and i would say look at who He is speaking to… His followers. the people who were claiming to believe in Him. so, He was telling them what the people who have faith would be doing. He was not saying the works come before the faith. He is saying that out of faith, works will flow. if they don’t, then you have a dead faith and you will be cut off. works flow from the faith, and it’s the faith that allows us to receive God’s grace which saves us. so we are saved by grace alone (what the church teaches) and we receive that grace by faith and that faith will produce works. the works have nothing to do with receiving the grace, they are the byproduct of receiving the grace.

Often “faith alone” seems to mean that the simple possession of faith is enough. That is the way it comes across anyway. “I believe” therefore I am saved. But that cannot be what you mean?

It seems you mean that because you have faith in Jesus as Lord, you do what He says. That is, you act upon your faith. A faith not acted upon is a dead faith. For example the woman who was bleeding acted upon her faith. Her faith was that “if only I can touch the hem of His garment, I will be healed.” So she did what her faith told her to do, power flowed from Jesus, and she was healed. Jesus said to her, “Your faith has saved you.” Now it was the power of Jesus that healed her, so how can Jesus Himself say it was her faith that did it? By a manner of speaking. If it weren’t for her strong faith, she wouldn’t have done the work necessary. So yes, her faith produced the works necessary.

Another simple example is “Anyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved.” To call upon the name of the Lord first requires that person to have faith in the Lord. If you don’t have faith, you obviously won’t call upon his name. So faith comes first, then action.

So, it is not mere faith alone, but faith acted upon. And it is also God’s grace which enables us to act.

 

[guitar_mike]

Having been on both sides of the fence. I cant stand when Catholics beat up on Protestants and Protestants beat up on Catholics. The basics of the faith on each side are the same. The Apostles creed for instance is a good place to start looking at the similarities. Doctrines are the things that separate us. Jesus asked the Father that His disciples would be one. Even the Holy Father has sent a video message to protestants this year asking for prayer and brotherhood.

*** from the Vatican website : *** 1***By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part**, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works.[11]* 2

31.We confess together that persons are** justified by faith in the gospel “apart from works prescribed by the law” **(Rom 3:28). Christ has fulfilled the law and by his death and resurrection has overcome it as a way to salvation.

the previous statements are from the JOINT DECLARATION
ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION by the Lutheran World Federation
and the Catholic Church

Sounds like Sola fide to me!

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html

We have a lot more in common with our protestant brothers and sisters than we know.
Perhaps we should consider the words of this document and start building bridges of brotherhood instead of throwing stones at one another.

 

[Cathoholic]

Guitar mike.

You said:

Sounds like Sola fide to me!

Depends upon what you mean by faith (fide) in your sola fide.

If you mean a “faith” that is a mere intellectual assent, you are wrong (if you want I will quote this from The Council of Trent).

If you mean a “faith” that is by definition “obedient” (and thus works . . . . such as the preservation and passing on of Apostolic preaching, feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, with Christ at work in you—a supernatural charity etc.) and includes a supernatural hope then you are right.

You also said (bold mine):

The basics of the faith on each side are the same.

Life is pretty “basic”.

Yet for example the PCUSA . . . .

Presbyterian Church (USA) voted down measure to condemn ‘abortion’ of babies born alive

. . . . you are not asserting that this is “the same” as the Catholic Church view are you?