Sola Scriptura -- what is the actual authority?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lenten_ashes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You just used the word “impute”. Only Calvinists use that (awesome) word. Ergo, you must be a Calvinist. I knew it! 🙂
 
Yours:

Saving faith in Christ fundamentally rewires the soul in a profound conversion experience. This conversion results in the impossibility of the Christian ever to lose this saving faith and to never sin again. Only the person himself knows whether or not he truly converted as fruits can be deceiving.

Yet: Post conversion, a Christian can sin and continue in sin and even refuse to repent. God disciplines the sinner in an escalating fashion until the death penalty is imposed.
Or: The sinner only appeared to convert and thus deceived others knowingly.

Regardless of having saving faith or not having saving faith; a Christian goes to heaven. Even an unrepentant sinner can go to heaven.
Not exactly. Only those who have a saving faith go to heaven. Fruits are a result of that faith but not a perfect barometer of a saving faith as even non-Christians can be good people and do good things. A true Christian is one whom “The Spirit testifies with our spirit that we are the children of God” and which is shown by the works of the Spirit in the life of the believer.

If someone who claimed they had faith but falls away then one of three things is true/happens.
  1. They never really had a saving faith (were never converted-which I believe is the most common explantion)
  2. The did have a saving faith (were really converted) and they fall under the discipline of God and repent (which is the norm for those who were really converted)
  3. If they (who were really converted) refuse to repent then they receive the most severe discipline of all, they are turned over to Satan (allowed to wallow in their sins even to the point of death) but they will be saved on the day of judgement.
I never said those with a saving faith never commit another sin.

I’ve shown you in scripture were the precedent is for those teachings. You may not agree but you asked so I answered.
 
Last edited:
40.png
goout:
What basis do you have for this thought?
Because when we die we are delivered from the sin nature. We no longer have the desire to sin.
So those who are in hell are delivered from a sin nature?!
And no longer have a desire for sin?
!
 
Straw man as I didn’t say just disappointing I said very disappointing.

You don’t think you already fail him miserably on a daily basis? Because i know i do.
 
So those who are in hell are delivered from a sin nature?!
And no longer have a desire for sin?
!
I’ve never thought about it from the perspective of those in hell.

But according to 1 John 3:2 we shall be like Jesus. Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is
 
I don’t think you have grasped what Protestants believe by Faith alone.

Salvation by works or salvation by faith plus works falsely says that we are saved partly by God and partly by us. Ephesians 2:8-9 says that the merit for our salvation is 100% from Christ, and 0% from us.

Antinomianism or easy-believism falsely says that all we have to do is intellectually believe some things and say some things and we are done. But James 2:14-24 says that if a person does not turn our lives over to God, and continues to live as the ungodly do, then their faith is useless, i.e. they are going to Hell, despite what they intellectually believed.

If you have truly given your life over to Jesus, as your LORD and Savior, you are going to want to do good works to show your love and gratitude to God. But if you don’t, that is a sign that you have not give your life over to Him; in other words, you never were truly saved in the first place.
 
Luther: We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.
We say that justification is effective without works, not that faith is without works. For that faith which lacks fruit is not an efficacious but a reigned faith. “Without works” is ambiguous, then. For that reason this argument settles nothing. It is one thing that faith justifies without works; it is another thing that faith exists without works.” - Luther.
I examined this topic ad nauseum over the years. It really seems like the 2 sides are just splitting hairs as grace saves us and grace enables us to do any of these good works.
I agree.
 
40.png
Michael16:
Hahahahaha

It sounds like to me that they argue Sola Fide; yet accept the necessity of works.

🤔
Those two things are not mutually exclusive. They are mutually inclusive.
Sola fide does not deny the necessity of good works.
Yes, it does. Do you not claim that you are saved unto good works? That good works are not necessary FOR justification?
 
Luther: We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.
A self contradicting statement. It is just a way to get around Scripture. Scripture says:

James 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
We say that justification is effective without works,
Do you say that faith is effects justification without works?
not that faith is without works.
But Scripture says:

James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
For that faith which lacks fruit is not an efficacious but a reigned faith. “Without works” is ambiguous, then. For that reason this argument settles nothing. It is one thing that faith justifies without works; it is another thing that faith exists without works.” - Luther.
Still Luther trying to dance around the Scripture. Faith does not justify without works. Nor does faith exist without works.

Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
 
Thank you so much.

I’ve struggled so much on how to clearly articulate the position that Sola Fide basically says that we’re saved by faith alone but still requires works to show proof of that faith; while saying it’s faith alone.

Anyone else see the self contradicting paradox?
 
Essentially, Jon:

Luther says we’re saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone.

Let’s examine the thesis together.

If works have no value in the economy of salvation; then why does God require works alongside faith?

Reference Saint James 2:17 and 2:24 and Romans 2:13.

If works are required to show proof of faith; then it must follow that they have value in the economy of salvation.

Thus, works have value.

If works are required as proof and have value in the economy of salvation; thereby faith alone cannot save.
 
Last edited:
I accept my mistake in imputing the impossibility of post conversion sin.

However:

The whole position of Sola Fide: faith alone, yet requires works to prove faith; really is hairsplitting to preserve Sola Fide while accepting the necessity of works.

If I’m understanding you right, Ianman87; saving faith is all that’s required for salvation.

See Romans 2:13, Saint James 2:17 and 2:24.

Thus, we see that works are necessary as well as faith.

Indeed, as Saint James 2:24 attests; works proves a man’s justification. Thus, works are a reliable indicator.

🤔 There goes saving faith and the unreliability of works as an indicator.

The Spirit testimony and works in the spirit of the believer.

That’s the operations of the Holy Spirit in the Christian within a state of grace. The Holy Spirit helps Christians in their relationship with God.

Totally understandable in Catholic doctrine.
 
Last edited:
Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
“By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified” Romans 3: 20

All have sinned and come short of the glory of God: being justified freely by his grace that is in Jesus ( was the only doer of the Law?). Rom3 :23/24

“Therefore we conclude a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the law…now we have the law of faith” Rom 3:28
I examined this topic ad nauseum over the years. It really seems like the 2 sides are just splitting hairs as grace saves us and grace enables us to do any of these good works.
Amen.

“For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.” Heb. 4:12

He splits even the hair on this topic. One on side is trusting fully in Christ unto salvation, the other in works unto death. If we trust in works we aren’t fully trusting in Christ, if it all, like we should.

Whilst God may say here that faith justified Abraham and elsewhere his obedience ( work) justified him, I dare say God knows that his heart boasted not in his obedience or work, but in grace and God given faith.
 
Last edited:
A self contradicting statement. It is just a way to get around Scripture. Scripture says:

James 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
You just restated the same thing. Sola fide never excludes the necessity of good works.
Do you say that faith is effects justification without works?
Read the words. Read Galatians 5:6.
Still Luther trying to dance around the Scripture. Faith does not justify without works. Nor does faith exist without works.

Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
The dancing is done by those who think sola fide means an exclusion of good works.
So, tell me how one can do the law without grace.
 
Yes, it does. Do you not claim that you are saved unto good works? That good works are not necessary FOR justification?
Two contradictory statements. Even Catholics believe we come to justification by grace through faith.
I believe that justification comes by grace through faith, and that it must be a faith the works through love. There must be good fruits.
The claim that sola fide denies the necessity of good works is false.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top