- Status
R
Ravemacneil
Guest
Isn’t it more like offered by God? And doesn’t this change everything you wrote that follows?
Perhaps I’m mistaken. It had been my understanding that through Grace faith is given as a gift, and through our free-will rejection of it, we choose to turn away from God. Thus God may pre-elect those to whom such Grace is extended, but as it is an offer, it is the choice of the receiver, not God, to turn it down - thus single predestination.
I thoroughly accept I may be confused at this stage of my study …
†Peace,
RMN
B
benedictus2
Guest
Actually, Lutherans do not follow it to its logical conclusion. Sola Fide is a road that terminates at Predestination but the Lutherans stop midway.We don’t follow to this illogical conclusion.
Let me explain why it is logical
*]Sola Fide means that we are saved by Faith Alone - that is Faith in Christ.
It further affirms that this faith is not something we can have by ourselves but only given by God.
*]If faith comes from God, and faith is how one is saved, then that means that those who do not have faith have not been given faith by God.
*]Now we know for a fact that there millions upon millions of people who do not believe in Christ (Jews and Gentile alike) and who have not even had a chance (no one has preached to them) to come to know Christ.
*]By virtue of Sola Fide then, it follows that these people have no hope of being saved.
*]But, since this faith in Jesus Christ that is a precondition for salvation is a a gift form God, then that means that God has purposely withheld this gift from this vast number of people.
*]Ergo, God has determined that He wants these millions of humanity damned forever in hell.
]So by continuing to walk this road of Sola Fide we have finally arrived at our Pre*destination.
We do not however fall into this error, if we say that we are saved by grace
And rightly so because it is un-scriptural.
For which they have no reason to be, because it is scriptural.
On that we most certainly do.:yyeess:
And may He pour upon us grace upon grace that we may be magnets that bring others to Christ.
B
benedictus2
Guest
I have just replied to Jon which explains a bit why this does not change everything that followed.
To say that faith is offered by God and we have the right to reject it is in some way true.
But then you fall into the quandary that affirms works for our response to this offering is by our will.
I may be mistaken in this but Lutherans (and Protestants in general) believe in total depravity hence by our own will cannot even give an assent to the gift that is being offered. They hold that God overpowers human will to enable it to give the necessary yes.
So we come to the problem of the millions of people who have no faith in Christ, not because they have rejected Him, but because they have not even been taught, or given a chance to know about Christ.
Does it not follow from Sola Fide then, that these quite massive number of humanity are damned all through no fault of their own?
Yes, that is completely correct. But if you look at your phrasing, you said through Grace.
Grace Alone does not put us in the same quandary as Faith Alone, because grace is not limited to faith. Grace is that supernatural gift of God given for our salvation and comes in many forms and in many ways. We can therefore posit that grace is offered to all, even those who do not have faith, for grace is what makes faith possible.
We can also say that grace is given to obey the commandments of Christ (love God and love your neighbour) even where faith in Christ per se is not evident.
By the way you wrote it, you are actually saying double, not single, predestination.
You said God “pre-elected” those to whom such Grace will be extended. If this is so, then that means God also “pre-elected” those to whom such Grace will NOT be extended. If this is the case, then you are saying that God pre-destined some to damnation.
B
benedictus2
Guest
Actually, this is not my scenario. I affirm that salvation is made available for the whole world. This scenario is a logical conclusion from the doctrine of faith alone. So yes you are correct, faith alone contradicts scripture.
Yes and no. The Catholic Church says that salvation is not denied to those who do not come to believe in Christ for every truth that one can find in other religions is a glimmer of the Truth that is in Christ.
To say that faith in Christ is an absolute precondition for salvation means that every single person who has not been baptized is condemned to hell.
Before He ascended, He commissioned the Apostles to go and make disciples of all nations. He knows that before this is done, many would have already perished before the Gospel even reached their shores.
But “God so loved the world” so I don’t think He will condemn these people to hell for failing to have faith on the God they do not even know.
I think God’s grace is active even in hearts that do not personally know Christ, (which is probably due more to our fault for failing to evangelize)
We are justified by faith.
Correct. And unless I’m mistaken, Catholics do not believe man can on his own without grace come to justification.
Not necessarily. Faith can be rejected.
For those who have not, just like infants who have not been baptized, we depend on God’s mercy.
Not entirely true, either. The great commission was proclaimed in order that word and sacrament be taken into all nations. Again, where we have failed to fulfill His commands, we depend on His mercy.
Only if one believes that God is not merciful.
destination.
Double predestination, which Lutherans (and scripture) reject.
And Lutherans beleive that we are saved by Grace alone through faith in Christ alone. Sola fide no more excludes the understanding of Grace than “faith and works”.We do not however fall into this error, if we say that we are saved by grace
So, explain how works add to justification.For which they have no reason to be, because it is scriptural.
Whew!!
Amen!
Jon
B
benedictus2
Guest
JonNC:
Would you add “alone” to that?
I said that Sola Fide means we are saved “by faith alone”.
You clarified with “we are justified by faith”.
Are you trying to say here that one may be justified and yet not be saved?
Does this also mean that there are other preconditions to salvation other than faith?
I am asking this because I am rather intrigued that you thought it necessary to make this distinction.
No, in that we are certainly in accord with you.However, how we say it is that we can reject the promptings of God’s grace.
This is what I tend to query. I think Lutherans like Calvin believe in total depravity. That is why they need for grace to be always efficacious (irresistible) otherwise with the total depravity doctrine, if grace is not always efficiacious then no one will be saved… If Grace is always efficacious then one cannot reject grace.
The only way one can say faith can be rejected is if one takes the Catholic view that grace is not always efficacious but always sufficient.
Where do you stand on that? Is grace always efficacious/irresistible?
Aaah, so there you are then. Sola Fide does not work because if you apply it, then the infants are doomed to hell. One cannot even speak of leaving them in the mercy of God because once you affirm that there is ALONE, one means of salvation (Sola Fide) then logically, you at once excludes all other means.
And salvation by faith is no available to infants so it seems down to hell they all go.
B
benedictus2
Guest
JonNC:
Yes, but who is the we? There are many who have died and will die not reached by the gospel.
So are they damned to hell? Once you start thinking along those lines, that means God purposely damned these people because He did not make sure that the gospel reached them. They didn’t have even a fighting chance because the gospel was not even offered to them. So not even a shot at Sola Fide.
But this is exactly the point I am making. God is incredibly, un-imaginably merciful, that is why one can’t hold to Sola Fide. Once you affirm Sola Fide, you end up with an unjust, unmerciful God because double predestination logically follows from it as I have shown above.
And I am very happy to hear that. However, that puts the whole doctrine of Sola Fide in question since as I have explained before it logically follows.
This is an either/or situation. You either affirm Sola Fide and so accept double predestination or reject Sola Fide so as to reject predestination.
But with a doctrine like Grace Alone, you do not encounter this problem.
I don’t know how you can make a case for accepting both without accepting contradiction.
However, if you have a solution to this quandary I would really like to hear it.
Sola Gratia works better because while it does affirm that one of the graces given is towards faith, it also leaves the possibility that other graces are given which may not necessarily lead to faith in ( per se) but will also be helpful in their salvation.
God offers His grace to everyone and yet we know for a fact that not everyone has faith in Him. Think of the pagans/Hindus/Muslims/Atheists who are so because they have not heard the gospel proclaimed. These are not denied grace. They are all also given grace.
It does NOT ADD to justification. It is PART of justification.
Yesterday’s 1st reading Is very apt for our discussion.
Ezekiel 18 5-9
Suppose there is a righteous man who does what is just and right. He does not eat at the mountain shrines or look to the idols of the house of Israel.
He does not defile his neighbor’s wife or lie with a woman during her period.
He does not oppress anyone, but returns what he took in pledge for a loan.
He does not commit robbery but gives his food to the hungry and provides clothing for the naked.
He does not lend at usury or take excessive interest.
He withholds his hand from doing wrong and judges fairly between man and man.
**He follows my decrees and faithfully keeps my laws. **That man is righteous; he will surely live, **declares the Sovereign LORD. **
Which takes me back to what I have said many times - that when God declares us just, it is because we ARE just.
**
Happy Feast of the Assumption of our Blessed Mother** (even if you don’t believe in it
B
benedictus2
Guest
But it seems that when you speak of Sola Fide “properly understood” it ceases to be Sola Fide.
Completely agree with this.
And here in is where the problem lies.
If you say that we are “justified by faith alone” , does it not follow that we are “saved by faith alone” because we cannot be saved without being justified? Unless you are saying that one can be saved without being justified.
And if this justifying and therefore saving faith is faith ALONE in Christ, then how can you say we leave the dead infants to God’s mercy when you have already said that salvation requires faith in Christ" and this faith ALONE will “get one saved”.
Once you put the word ALONE, that means you are already limiting salvation to those who have this faith. Alone, means alone - the exclusion of everything else. No amount of “proper understanding” will change that fact.
This is why the Bible never said faith alone except in James where it says NOT by faith alone.
Once you allow for other possibilities, it ceases to be “faith in Christ ALONE”
Stepping away from the infant scenario, we face the same problem with the multitude of adult people who have no faith in Christ because they have not heard the gospel. Where does that leave them then if you say that ONLY by faith in Christ are people saved? Does that mean that God has damned all of them?
So, you think my description of sola fide isn’t really sola fide, at least the way you understand it? If so, how?
I am saying that scripture says we are justified by Grace through faith in Christ, and not of ourselves. Evidence of saving faith is a renewal of life, turning away from sin, growing in our sanctification.
Whether or not one can be saved without justification is up to God Himself.
Again, “alone” refers to an exclusion of what we can do, not an exclusion of what God can do or does.
No, it is only limiting whose works do the justifiying - God, not our actions.
As a high school (American) football official, my study of the rules tell me the following:
- only one offensive player (alone) can be in motion before the snap.
- only one offensive player (alone) can break the plane of those on the line of scrimmage (the QB).
“Alone” regarding faith only excludes human works regarding justification. It is not a limitation on God.
We agree that salvation in by Grace alone. If we define the alone here as you are in sola fide, then Christ doesn’t matter. Grace alone, nothing else, including Christ. Obviously, that is not the intent of “Alone” here.
And that is why we recognize that we are justified by faith alone, but that faith is never alone. Faith, as a simple intellectual assent, is not a saving faith, as James tells us.
There are no other possibilties on our part, but God is capable of saving whom He wishes.
Alone only expressed the monergistic nature of justification.
Who are we to say who God damns or saves? Is He a cruel God who refuses to show mercy, or a kind gracious God? That question is answered by the Incarnation. From whom much is given much is expected. There is nothing in scripture that answers the question of what happens to those who never hear the word. My hope and prayer is that Grace overcomes ignorance and innocence.
Jon
B
benedictus2
Guest
Apologies for the lateness of the reply. I have been away from the forum.
To say we are saved by faith alone would be to say that someone at death bed who suddenly comes to faith is all of a sudden saved when in the same doctrine you say that sanctification is required and in this instance it is clear that sanctification has not even happened yet.
So I again go back to my previous statement that it is because of this false dichotomy that the reformation has created that you fall into the problem.
Salvation is never by faith alone but rather through faith working in love.
The doctrine limits the criteria - by which God justifies - to faith alone. The doctrine says Faith Alone not God Alone. The latter is true, the former is false.
But in the doctrine of faith alone, what it is saying is not that God alone is the one doing the work but that God has only one criteria for saving you and that one and only criteria is faith.
Once you say that there is only one criteria, then there is only one criteria.
If the doctrine had been God Alone then it would have been a completely different proposition and it would have been correct.
The moment you add sanctification as a requirement for it, it becomes clear that without sanctification one is clearly not saved.
To say we are saved by faith alone would be to say that someone at death bed who suddenly comes to faith is all of a sudden saved when in the same doctrine you say that sanctification is required and in this instance it is clear that sanctification has not even happened yet.
And we completely agree with that. But notice, we cannot say justified by faith ALONE because the qualifier (sanctification, renewal of life) means it (sanctification) is necessary.
So I again go back to my previous statement that it is because of this false dichotomy that the reformation has created that you fall into the problem.
Salvation is never by faith alone but rather through faith working in love.
But that is just evading the whole point isn’t it? If we say that we are justified by faith and yet it is uncertain whether we are saved after justification if we have not been sanctified is the most uncertain theology of all.
But Faith Alone as a doctrine has nothing to do with whether God can and cannot do something.
The doctrine limits the criteria - by which God justifies - to faith alone. The doctrine says Faith Alone not God Alone. The latter is true, the former is false.
Well actually not. The limiting word “alone” is not attached to God but rather to the criteria for salvation which in this instance is faith. The docrine says that God has a criteria as to who He will save and that criteria is faith and only faith.
Exactly! In all your examples you refer to the one offensive player. Alone here means the one performing that action.
But in the doctrine of faith alone, what it is saying is not that God alone is the one doing the work but that God has only one criteria for saving you and that one and only criteria is faith.
Once you say that there is only one criteria, then there is only one criteria.
If the doctrine had been God Alone then it would have been a completely different proposition and it would have been correct.
B
benedictus2
Guest
Precisely. I concur wholeheartedly with this and that is why I say Faith Alone is an erroneous doctrine for it claims that one is saved through faith in Christ when there is a multitude out there who do not even know Christ through no fault of their own.
What you have said here is that God alone saves and his criteria is not necessarily faith alone but works as well because Christ was quite clear about this - what one does for the least of His brother, he has done to Christ, whether he had faith in Christ or not.
However, it is a different matter altogether for those who have had an opportunity to know Christ and yet refused to believe.
Peace!
Cory
Welcome back, Cory. Hope all is well with you.
Recognize again what sola fide is saying. Sola fide is simply an understanding that we, by our own actions cannot come to justification. We are justified by grace through faith in Christ. Sanctification, our growth in grace, cannot happen without justification, which only comes from grace through faith.
No moreso than when a Catholic says, quite rightly, that initial justification comes by grace through faith. The deathbed conversion has no opportunity for sanctification. the Baptized child infant who dies has no opportunity for sanctification. The thief on the cross, likewise.
Our response to grace, whether one calls it ongoing justification or sanctification, is just that, our response.
Of course we can. Are you saying that our (initial) justification comes from anything that you do? Are you capable, without the work of the Holy Spirit, of coming to justification?
What acts can you do, prior to the work of the Spirit to come to Christ? Do you not reject Pelagiansim as I do? If so, then you agree that you come to justification by grace through faith in Christ.
Only if one misunderstands the intent of sola fide.
Justification is by faith alone, but faith cannot ever be alone. Of course faith must work through love and charity, but works cannot bring us to what you call initial justification. Only grace through faith does that.
Nothing uncertain about it, as His commands and the power of the HS are there to guide us. Why is this uncertain in any way? We have confession / absolution when we faulter. We have the sanctifying grace which comes through the Eucharist, and even the hearing of the word.
Again, faith alone expresses a limit on what we can do - come to justification by our own works, etc.
It is only a reference on what we can do to come to justification, which is nothing. That it is by grace, God’s grace.
Of course it is saying that God alone is the one doing the work to bring us to justification. That is exactly what it is saying. It is a recognition that we are justified by grace alone through faith in Christ alone. The limitation is not on God, it is a recognition of our limits, as a result of original sin.
Of course it is God alone, and that is exactly the point.
You know, Cory, I have come to a greater understanding of the Catholic view of justification - ongoing, but initially as a result of grace through faith in Christ. I do not try to spin it. I accept it when Catholics say that they cannot earn their way to salvation. When I listen to what Catholics say about justification being by faith and works, it makes sense to me when I apply it to Lutheran language, that being, it sounds to my Lutheran ears like you are talking about sanctification. I have no reason to believe that it is Pelagian, or semi-pelagian.
Jon
B
benedictus2
Guest
Thank you. It is good to be back.
But as I said before, this is a false dichotomy.
It is more correct to say that once we have been sanctified then we are justified.
The initial grace that God gives to the sinner to turn and repent is not a case of justification. How can God declare the sinner just at that stage when he clearly is not? However God has indeed began the process of sanctification such that when the process is complete, God can say we are indeed just.
It is not a case of God saying “You’re clean”, then proceeds to wash you.
Rather He washes you and once all that grime is gone He then says : “You’re clean”
And that is what I say is wrong. There is no initial justification. There is only that initial gift of grace to be able to say yes to God. At that stage we are far from justified. It will take the sanctification that you speak of before we can be said to be justified.
Aah, but this is the beauty of the Catholic doctrine. We believe that after we die, sanctification continues via the purgation in purgatory.
So the soteriology is more coherent and fills in the holes that reformed theology, in its false dichotomy of justification and sanctification, creates.
Nope. I am saying there is no initial justification. There is only the initial gift of grace. That is not justification.
This “initial justification” was part of Protestant theology only because of the Nominalism that reigned in Luther’s and Calvin’s philosophy.
But there is no misunderstanding. I know that you are trying to explain what Sola Fide is from your understanding. But the thing is Sola Fide is simply that : Faith is the only criteria that God considers in ascertaining whether one is justified or not. It has nothing to do with whether it was God’s work alone or not.
God indeed is the one at work, but by its very wording, this doctrine is saying that God’s criteria for declaring anyone just is “faith in Christ and nothing else”.
Which as I have explained above cannot be true.
Works does not bring us to initial justification because there is no such thing as initial justification. The Reformers invented that because of their Nominalistic philosophy.
There is the initial grace but that is not justification. The grace is offered yes. But the Lord awaits our response.
Perhaps in your understanding, but I don’t think that is quite what it is. I think it is a case of some people realizing the weakness in the doctrine and tried to re-define it.
The name itself says it all – Faith Alone. It did not say God alone.
can do to come to justification, which is nothing. That it is by grace, God’s grace.
Now you’ve really confused me here.
First you said that Faith Alone refers to what God alone can do.
Now you are saying that the alone that defines “faith” refers to what “we” can do. So faith then is our own work?
. The limitation is not on God, it is a recognition of our limits, as a result of original sin.
But there again you pointed out the problem again. You are saying that we are justified by faith in Christ Alone. That statement means that the criteria for justification is faith in Christ. Isn’t that correct? That you are justified when by God’s grace you come to knowledge of Christ and have faith in Him?
So if the criteria is “faith in Christ alone” then no one who does not have faith in Christ will ever be justified which means a whole chunk of humanity is going to hell.
B
benedictus2
Guest
The Catholic position is not only that justification is ongoing but rather there is no difference between sanctification and justification. There are no split stages. That kind of understanding came only with the reformation. For 1500 years, the Church did not have this dichotomy between sanctification and justification. There is just this process of being transformed into the image of Christ. And once the transformation is complete then God acknowledges you justified and sanctified, because He has completed the work He has began in you, indeed you are now just because you have been made so.
Now that the work is finished you are justified, but not at the beginning. No, God was just starting with you then, there was a fair way to go before you could be said to have been justified.
**
I would like to develop this a bit more by asking you:
**
- How do Lutherans understand Baptism?
- Do you baptise babies?
- If so why?
- Do you consider it a sacrament?
- How do you understand sacrament?
Cory
I guess a difference in definition of terms.
I would’t argue with the idea that sanctification is ongoing.
How then, does He wash one clean? Certainly not by what we do.
I never thought of it (initial justification) that way, either, as a Lutheran. That is what I hear from Catholics. It is what I thought Catholicism teaches. Perhaps I have misunderstood. We would disagree, then, as our view of justification is exactly that: what you call initial grace that brings us to faith (allows us to say yes to God).
I never thought of it as a dichotomy, except to describe what God does, and we do.
As for Purgatory, if one describes it as a momentary cleansing at the time of death, as I have heard it described, I have no problem with that, either.
usccb.org/comm/archives/2006/06-212.shtml
Honestly, I have never heard it called initial justification as a Lutheran.
Why would you think your understanding of sola fide is more valid than mine, coming from what I’ve been taught all my life?
God is indeed the one at work. And that is the point, when compared to those who say one can earn that justification.
See above. Really, your argument is with the Catholics here at CAF who use the term.
And again, we disagree on the definition of the term, then.
Well, Cory, I’m not sure I’m willing to question the motives of others. If I believed for a moment that faith alone meant what you seem to believe it means, I wouldn’t accept it either.
continued
It is a strange notion, that one might believe that all of this, every drop, every fragment of salvation, is by God’s grace alone.
Christ Himself say that no one comes to the Father except by Him. He tells us we come to Him by grace through faith. I’m not in a position, beyond that, to say how God saves or condemns. I, personally, rely on His Grace regarding those who are not Christian. On the other hand, it isn’t my Church that claimed at one time there is no salvation outside of it.
I don’t mean that to sound harsh, and I recognize the “development” in latter years of this statement. But there are those Catholics even today that say I can’t be saved (or at least it is difficult) because our priests can’t confer absolution at confession, etc.
But sola fide in no way displaces the truth that all salvation is by Grace alone, that even faith is a gift of grace.
Jon
- Status