Scripture on Salvation and the Eucharist

[Mikeoffaith]

I may be misunderstanding the phrase “justified by grace through faith” but here’s my problem with it.

Stated in this manner, faith is the means through which God give us the grace of salvation / justification so therefore faith comes first.

Schematically it looks like this : Faith → Grace —> Justification.

It is in effect saying that we acquire faith by our selves and when we have the faith then God gives us the grace to be justified.

But that is ludicrous. It is no better than saying we save ourselves by our works except that in this case we save ourselves by our faith which is our own work.

At the very beginning is Grace. God acts first. God descends.

Through God’s grace, faith is given but here a response is necessary. Faith is both a gift and a response.

So schematically: Grace --.> Faith and Love -->Deifification (Salvation)

The fruits of grace is not limited to faith. The fruits of grace result in both faith and works but sometimes it is just works (perhaps for a time) which is a manifestation of love.

Those who have “fed the hungry, clothe the naked, given drink to the thirsty”, have been able to do this by God’s grace and not everyone who has done this has necessarily found faith in Christ. Some have died not knowing Christ but have nonetheless cooperated with the prompting of the Holy Spirit by their works.

Hi Cory,

Thanks for inviting me here.

Here is a quote from the Defense of The Augsburg Confession Article IV

53] As often, therefore, as we speak of justifying faith, we must keep in mind that these three objects concur: the promise, and that, too, gratuitous, and the merits of Christ, as the price and propitiation. The promise is received by faith; the “gratuitous” excludes our merits, and signifies that the benefit is offered only through mercy; the merits of Christ are the price, because there must be a certain propitiation for our sins. 54] Scripture frequently implores mercy; and the holy Fathers often say that we 55] are saved by mercy. As often, therefore, as mention is made of mercy, we must keep in mind that faith is there required, which receives the promise of mercy. And, again, as often as we speak of faith, we wish an object to be understood, namely, the promised mercy. 56] For faith justifies and saves, not on the ground that it is a work in itself worthy, but only because it receives the promised mercy.

Does this help define it any better for you?

 

[benedictus2]

Hi Mike,

Thanks for joining us.

The text you’ve quoted below does not help much in clarifying this statement at least in the manner that it can support the doctrine of “gratuitous gift of salvation”.

My question was, does it mean we receive the grace of justifification through faith? If this is so then faith preceedes grace. But where did this faith come from? Expressed in this manner it seems we attained faith by ourselves.

But, too look at what you have written here, I have broken this down as separate paragraphs and numbered them for easier reference

As a general comment, I think it is rather poorly written as it lacks clarity.

Here is a quote from the Defense of The Augsburg Confession Article IV

1)

As often, therefore, as we speak of justifying faith, we must keep in mind that these three objects concur: the promise, and that, too, gratuitous, and the merits of Christ, as the price and propitiation.
**
2) The promise is received by faith; the “gratuitous” excludes our merits, ** and signifies that the benefit is offered only through mercy; the merits of Christ are the price, because there must be a certain propitiation for our sins.

3] Scripture frequently implores mercy; and the holy Fathers often say that we are saved by mercy. As often, therefore, as mention is made of mercy, we must keep in mind that faith is there required, which receives the promise of mercy. **

1. **And, again, as often as we speak of faith, we wish an object to be understood, namely, the promised mercy. For faith justifies and saves, not on the ground that it is a work in itself worthy, but only because it receives the promised mercy.

Does this help define it any better for you?
Comments

In number 1, he mentions three objects but enumerates only two - the promise (presumably the promise of mercy) and merits of ourLord. Perhaps the third is faith but that is not explained here.

No 2 says that we receive the promise of mercy through faith so therefore it is not “mercy” that we receive but rather the “promise of mercy”. Why the distinction?

No 3. does not say why faith is required to receive mercy.
If faith is required to receive mercy and without this faith one does not receive mercy from God, therefore God’s mercy is conditional upon faith.

If God’s mercy is conditional upon faith, then those who do not have faith will not receive mercy.

But my question is where does faith come frome? If it is our our own conjuring, then based on this, our salvation does not seem so gratuitous after all since faith is required and nowhere in this short text does it say that faith is itself a free gift from God. Reading this text, one is left with the conclusion that faith must be something that we do ourselves.

Taken in this context, faith is our own so therefore it is no better than the supposedly erroneous theology of justification by works, because here faith is one’s own work.

In No 4, he sys faith justifies and saves. But if faith is of our own conjuring, then I am back to the point I made in the previous paragraph, our salvation is contingent upon our own work. and not a free gift from God.

The scenario becomes like an “I will… if you” from God’s vantage point.

What happened to the gratuitous bit then?

 

[JonNC]

=benedictus2;7337331]I may be misunderstanding the phrase “justified by grace through faith” but here’s my problem with it.

Stated in this manner, faith is the means through which God give us the grace of salvation / justification so therefore faith comes first.

Schematically it looks like this : Faith → Grace —> Justification.

It is in effect saying that we acquire faith by our selves and when we have the faith then God gives us the grace to be justified.

I think, Cory, you are working too hard at finding differences. Your scematic above is, literally “faith through grace”, quite the opposite of what Lutherans claim: we are justified by GRACE through faith. Faith is a gift of grace. Faith cannot happen without grace.

But that is ludicrous. It is no better than saying we save ourselves by our works except that in this case we save ourselves by our faith which is our own work.

You’re right. It is ludicrous. And you know that is not Lutheran teaching.

At the very beginning is Grace. God acts first. God descends.

Through God’s grace, faith is given but here a response is necessary. Faith is both a gift and a response.

Both faith, and our ability to respond, is a gift of grace. Lutherans do not deny the necessity of response to grace through faith.

So schematically: Grace --.> Faith and Love -->Deifification (Salvation)

The fruits of grace is not limited to faith. The fruits of grace result in both faith and works but sometimes it is just works (perhaps for a time) which is a manifestation of love.

I would be reluctant in testifying that good works is even sometimes without faith.

Those who have “fed the hungry, clothe the naked, given drink to the thirsty”, have been able to do this by God’s grace and not everyone who has done this has necessarily found faith in Christ. Some have died not knowing Christ but have nonetheless cooperated with the prompting of the Holy Spirit by their works.

This is a recognition that good works are from the efforts of the Holy Spirit, which I accept.
Scripture tells us we are justified by grace alone through faith in Christ, but that doesn’t limit how God chooses to save. We depend on the grace of God to determine the fate of those never exposed to the message of salvation through the efforts of Christ.

Jon

 

[benedictus2]

JonNC:
I think, Cory, you are working too hard at finding differences.
Not working too hard at finding differences but rather staring hard at the apparent differences .

Your scematic above is, literally “faith through grace”, quite the opposite of what Lutherans claim: we are justified by GRACE through faith. Faith is a gift of grace. Faith cannot happen without grace.

Aaah, that is the correct understanding of salvation, faith itself is a grace. I agree with that.

I would be reluctant in testifying that good works is even sometimes without faith.

Faith of some sort perhaps but not necessarily faith in Christ because we have seen love manifested even by those who do not know Christ. Perhaps we can say broadly, faith in God.

This is a recognition that good works are from the efforts of the Holy Spirit, which I accept.
Scripture tells us we are justified by grace alone through faith in Christ, but that doesn’t limit how God chooses to save. We depend on the grace of God to determine the fate of those never exposed to the message of salvation through the efforts of Christ.

So the correct term is “Grace alone” not “Faith alone” . Grace is all encompassing for we say everything is grace i.e. both faith and works. But “Faith alone” is limiting.

 

[JonNC]

So the correct term is “Grace alone” not “Faith alone” . Grace is all encompassing for we say everything is grace i.e. both faith and works. But “Faith alone” is limiting.

Grace is, indeed, all encompassing. So, I would agree that both faith and good works are the result of Grace.
Yes, faith alone is limiting. It limits us from believing that we can, by our own efforts or merit, come to justification.

Jon

 

[benedictus2]

Grace is, indeed, all encompassing. So, I would agree that both faith and good works are the result of Grace.

Ahh finally we agree on something.

Yes, faith alone is limiting. It limits us from believing that we can, by our own efforts or merit, come to justification.
Jon

No that’s not what I mean. Faith Alone as a doctrine is limiting because it limits God to saving by faith.

You said before " Scripture tells us we are justified by grace alone through faith in Christ, **but that doesn’t limit how God chooses to save."

But the problem with the phrase “faith alone” is it does limit God to “faith alone”. So therefore because it contradicts Grace alone, faith alone is an erroneous doctrine.

**
Contained in your statement is a contradiction: Either God saves by Grace alone - which means God saves by however He wills. Or He saves only by faith in which case He is limited by faith.

You cannot say on the one hand that He saves us only by faith and then at the same time say that He saves us in whichever way He wills because you have already limited His way of saving to faith ALONE which is only a component/manifestation of His Grace.

 

[JonNC]

=benedictus2;7359282]Ahh finally we agree on something.

I think we’ve agreed on more than this.

No that’s not what I mean. Faith Alone as a doctrine is limiting because it limits God to saving by faith.

So then, the Catholic teaching of justification be “faith working through love”, also limits God to this.

You said before " Scripture tells us we are justified by grace alone through faith in Christ, but that doesn’t limit how God chooses to save."

]But the problem with the phrase “faith alone” is it does limit God to “faith alone”. So therefore because it contradicts Grace alone, faith alone is an erroneous doctrine.

By the way you understand it, as someone who doesn’t confess it, perhaps. As someone who does confess it, I can’t/wouldn’t/lack the ability to limit God. As faith is a gift of Grace, they are complimentary, not contradictory.

Contained in your statement is a contradiction: Either God saves by Grace alone - which means God saves by however He wills. Or He saves only by faith in which case He is limited by faith.

See in my previous quote what the limitation is.

You cannot say on the one hand that He saves us only by faith and then at the same time say that He saves us in whichever way He wills because you have already limited His way of saving to faith ALONE which is only a component/manifestation of His Grace.

See above, again, what the “alone” in faith alone excludes - not by our own desire, efforts or acts, but by grace alone through faith in Christ can we come to justification. The limit is on us, not on God. I don’t know if Ghandi, for example is saved. I can’t make the judgement based on his works, nor do I know the faith in his heart, but most importantly,I do not know what other criteria God may choose, since He desires all to be saved.
This should not be hard for a good Catholic to understand. Scripture tells us that, “all have sinned”, and “As it is written: There is not any man just.” And yet, you believe, and I generally concur, that the Blessed Virgin was protected from sin. Is this a contradiction? No. It is evidence that God is not bound to our limits.
Christ said no one comes to the Father but by Him. Did Ghandi come to the Father through Christ?

Jon

 

[benedictus2]

I think we’ve agreed on more than this.

Yes indeed we do.

So then, the Catholic teaching of justification be “faith working through love”, also limits God to this.

No because we never put the word Alone after it.

By the way you understand it, as someone who doesn’t confess it, perhaps. As someone who does confess it, I can’t/wouldn’t/lack the ability to limit God. As faith is a gift of Grace, they are complimentary, not contradictory.

You may understand it that way but the term itself says it: Faith Alone.
As a matter of fact, that Luther tried to change the Bible by adding the “Alone” shows that he intended to change its meaning and limit salvation to faith. It may be that what he was trying to do is to show that not by works are we saved but the problem is he excluded a whole teaching of Christ when he did that. But fiddling with Paul’s epistle he ended up fiddling with the Gospel as well.

That is why this “Alone” - be it Scripture Alone or Faith Alone - becomes contentious. Take the alone out and you actually can craft good theology.

See above, again, what the “alone” in faith alone excludes - not by our own desire, efforts or acts, but by grace alone through faith in Christ can we come to justification.

Then it should not be faith alone. By stating it thus, it excludes everything else except faith so therefore limits God. And you can’t explain it away by saying those who believe the confession understand it this way, because this pesky little word “alone” has big implications on theology.

The limit is on us, not on God. I don’t know if Ghandi, for example is saved. I can’t make the judgement based on his works, nor do I know the faith in his heart, but most importantly,I do not know what other criteria God may choose, since He desires all to be saved.

So therefore not faith ALONE. J You need to note that the statement goes : Justified by faith alone.

One wonders why there should be a need to fiddle with scriptures.

This should not be hard for a good Catholic to understand.

But it is precisely because I understand that I say the statement leads to erroneous conclusions, hence a false doctrine.

Scripture tells us that, “all have sinned”, and “As it is written: There is not any man just.” And yet, you believe, and I generally concur, that the Blessed Virgin was protected from sin. Is this a contradiction? No. It is evidence that God is not bound to our limits.

But that is different because that is doing an exegesis on the way scripture is written not on the way it has been altered to suit a pre-defined theology.

 

[JonNC]

Yes indeed we do.

No because we never put the word Alone after it.

You may understand it that way but the term itself says it: Faith Alone.
As a matter of fact, that Luther tried to change the Bible by adding the “Alone” shows that he intended to change its meaning and limit salvation to faith. It may be that what he was trying to do is to show that not by works are we saved but the problem is he excluded a whole teaching of Christ when he did that. But fiddling with Paul’s epistle he ended up fiddling with the Gospel as well.

That is why this “Alone” - be it Scripture Alone or Faith Alone - becomes contentious. Take the alone out and you actually can craft good theology.

Then it should not be faith alone. By stating it thus, it excludes everything else except faith so therefore limits God. And you can’t explain it away by saying those who believe the confession understand it this way, because this pesky little word “alone” has big implications on theology.

So therefore not faith ALONE. J You need to note that the statement goes : Justified by faith alone.

One wonders why there should be a need to fiddle with scriptures.

But it is precisely because I understand that I say the statement leads to erroneous conclusions, hence a false doctrine.

But that is different because that is doing an exegesis on the way scripture is written not on the way it has been altered to suit a pre-defined theology.

So, my friend, you are stuck on the word, alone. I remind you again of the JDDJ.

*In faith we together hold the conviction that justification is the work of the triune God. *
Not our work, His work.

The Father sent his Son into the world to save sinners. The foundation and presupposition of justification is the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ.

Again, His work ,not ours.

Justification thus means that Christ himself is our righteousness, in which we share through the Holy Spirit in accord with the will of the Father.
Christ Himself is our righteousness.

*Together we confess: *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

This does not say faith alone, nor does it say “faith and works”. I accept this as a true understanding of justification.
Do we agree (again)?

Jon

 

[benedictus2]

So, my friend, you are stuck on the word, alone. I remind you again of the JDDJ.

In faith we together hold the conviction that justification is the work of the triune God.
Not our work, His work.

The Father sent his Son into the world to save sinners. The foundation and presupposition of justification is the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ.

Again, His work ,not ours.

Justification thus means that Christ himself is our righteousness, in which we share through the Holy Spirit in accord with the will of the Father.
Christ Himself is our righteousness.

***Together we confess: *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

This does not say faith alone, nor does it say “faith and works”. I accept this as a true understanding of justification.
Do we agree (again)?

Jon

On that one we most definitely agree.
I particularly like the part I highlighted.

 

[JonNC]

On that one we most definitely agree.
I particularly like the part I highlighted.

Me too.

Jon