St Augustine on Salvation By Faith Alone

[rcwitness]

So then; is your answer to my previous question;
Someone is saved by faith plus something else?

I say we are saved by Jesus, through faith that is repentant, obedient, and loves God and neighbor. Unless you include these in your definition of faith, then faith alone.

 

[Duane1966]

no; it doesn’t mean I’m omniscient:
it means I am as sure as any fallible human can be about anything: including the sun coming up tomorrow.

Here are the questions that determine everything else.
**
Question 1: Does God want those who have eternal life to know they have eternal life?**

1 John 5:13
I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

Question 2: does God want those who are elect to confirm their election?

2 Peter 1:10
Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election

Mu answer is " yes"
what is your answer?

I have already answered these questions on another thread with yes. You have already admitted that you are fallible, and that you are not omniscient. So in reality, by your own admission, you might have a false sense of security, because you cannot know the future, because you admitted you are not omniscient. You believe you will not fall away, but you cannot know for certain that you will not fall away. You have no way of actually knowing, until the end whether you will persevere.

You cannot in any way show that your faith is any different than Simon the Magi, or the preacher Charles Templeton, from my post. Charles Templeton explicitly said on TV the same things you have said. The best you can say is that they were never really saved in the first place. But the same could be said about you.

once accepted: it cannot be discarded
the old is gone: it does not come back.
NEVER will the old return

Contradicted by these two passages of Scripture:

4For it is impossible in the case of those who have once been enlightened and tasted the heavenly gift and shared in the holy Spiritc 5and tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6and then have fallen away,** to bring them to repentance again, since they are recrucifying the Son of God for themselves* and holding him up to contempt.d 7

This is Hebrews, and it says quite clearly, they were saved, tasted the Heavenly gift, and fell away.

Peter 2

For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. It has happened to them according to the true proverb, The dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is washed only to wallow in the mire.

Peter right here says the old can return, in inerrant Scripture. In fact he says it has happened to them. This is not some hypothetical. It happened to Christians who were enlightened, and turned back to the old ways.

By the way, I want to be clear, that I do not know if anyone I have held up as an example of falling away, actually was eternally damned. I pray that they repented, and God was merciful.

 

[alwayswill]

I have already answered these questions on another thread with yes. You have already admitted that you are fallible, and that you are not omniscient. So in reality, by your own admission, you might have a false sense of security, because you cannot know the future, because you admitted you are not omniscient. You believe you will not fall away, but you cannot know for certain that you will not fall away. You have no way of actually knowing, until the end whether you will persevere.

You cannot in any way show that your faith is any different than Simon the Magi, or the preacher Charles Templeton, from my post. Charles Templeton explicitly said on TV the same things you have said. The best you can say is that they were never really saved in the first place. But the same could be said about you.
.

sure can know the difference : evidence

Scripture teaches that real faith inevitably produces a changed life (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Salvation includes a transformation of the inner person (Galatians 2:20).
The nature of the Christian is new and different (Romans 6:6).
The unbroken pattern of sin and enmity with God will not continue when a person is born again (1 John 3:9-10).
Those with genuine faith follow Christ (John 10:27),
love their brothers (1 John 3:14),
obey God’s commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14),
do the will of God (Matthew 12:50),
abide in God’s Word (John 8:31),
keep God’s Word (John 17:6),
do good works (Ephesians 2:10),
and continue in the faith (Colossians 1:21-23; Hebrews 3:14)

 

[alwayswill]

I have already answered these questions on another thread with yes. You have already admitted that you are fallible, and that you are not omniscient. So in reality, by your own admission, you might have a false sense of security, because you cannot know the future, because you admitted you are not omniscient. You believe you will not fall away, but you cannot know for certain that you will not fall away. You have no way of actually knowing, until the end whether you will persevere.

You cannot in any way show that your faith is any different than Simon the Magi, or the preacher Charles Templeton, from my post. Charles Templeton explicitly said on TV the same things you have said. The best you can say is that they were never really saved in the first place. But the same could be said about you.

Contradicted by these two passages of Scripture:This is Hebrews, and it says quite clearly, they were saved, tasted the Heavenly gift, and fell away.

Peter right here says the old can return, in inerrant Scripture. In fact he says it has happened to them. This is not some hypothetical. It happened to Christians who were enlightened, and turned back to the old ways.

…

nope:

Knowing the Lord and knowing the way of righteousness does not mean that a person has believed in his or her heart. The Greek words used there are all forms of “gnosis,” which means to know. The Greek word for believe is not related to “gnosis”, and it doesn’t appear anywhere in the passage.

Those Peter is describing have learned enough to be teachers, but haven’t believed what they’ve learned and are actually leading their students astray. Peter said it would be better for them if they had remained ignorant.

The context of 2 Peter 2 is false teachers and their destruction. From other clear passages explaining the certainty of our salvation and the Lord’s commitment not to lose even one of us, we can conclude that those Peter refers to are not and never were saved.

Speaking about false teachers John said, “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us” (1 John 2:19).

 

[Duane1966]

sure can know the difference : evidence

Scripture teaches that real faith inevitably produces a changed life (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Salvation includes a transformation of the inner person (Galatians 2:20).
The nature of the Christian is new and different (Romans 6:6).
The unbroken pattern of sin and enmity with God will not continue when a person is born again (1 John 3:9-10).
Those with genuine faith follow Christ (John 10:27),
love their brothers (1 John 3:14),
obey God’s commandments (1 John 2:3; John 15:14),
do the will of God (Matthew 12:50),
abide in God’s Word (John 8:31),
keep God’s Word (John 17:6),
do good works (Ephesians 2:10),
and continue in the faith (Colossians 1:21-23; Hebrews 3:14)

What I have highlighted, is perseverance. Charles Templeton believed he had all of those, as do you. But we know that after many years, he did not continue in the faith.

 

[alwayswill]

What I have highlighted, is perseverance. Charles Templeton believed he had all of those, as do you. But we know that after many years, he did not continue in the faith.

do you preserve because you are truly saved:
or are you truly saved because you preserver?

I say this is what is true:
“you preserve because you are truly saved:”

and what do you say?

 

[Duane1966]

nope:

Knowing the Lord and knowing the way of righteousness does not mean that a person has believed in his or her heart. The Greek words used there are all forms of “gnosis,” which means to know. The Greek word for believe is not related to “gnosis”, and it doesn’t appear anywhere in the passage.

Those Peter is describing have learned enough to be teachers, but haven’t believed what they’ve learned and are actually leading their students astray. Peter said it would be better for them if they had remained ignorant.

The context of 2 Peter 2 is false teachers and their destruction. From other clear passages explaining the certainty of our salvation and the Lord’s commitment not to lose even one of us, we can conclude that those Peter refers to are not and never were saved.

Speaking about false teachers John said, “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us” (1 John 2:19).

Wrong. Read the passage. He says they escaped the defilements of this world. That can only be interpreted as having been saved. If they were not saved, Peter could not say they had escaped the defilements of this world. He said they escaped, and turned back. Not only that. He says they turned back to their old ways. Turning back means you must have been on a different road. How could it be worse for them if they had never left the road they were on? It is clearly only worse because they were on the right road, and turned back.

Hebrews says they were enlightened, tasted the Heavenly Gift, shared in the Holy Spirit, and still turned back. How could they have shared in the Holy Spirit, and still turn back?

Jesus says remain in him. Why, if there is no possibility of ever leaving? Doesn’t His exhortations to remain, mean that we could leave?

 

[alwayswill]

What I have highlighted, is perseverance. Charles Templeton believed he had all of those, as do you. But we know that after many years, he did not continue in the faith.

i don’t really know who Charles Templeton was:

But a quick search reveals he never truly believed huge sections of the Bible:

That’s not my case

 

[Contarini]

Jesus said if we love Him we will keep His commandments.

it is hard to imagine being saved if we do not love Jesus.

That isn’t under dispute.

The question is whether loving Jesus and keeping his commandments is

a) the inevitable consequence of having saving faith, a faith which once obtained cannot be lost, or
b) something we must choose to do in addition to faith and may choose to stop doing.

 

[rcwitness]

do you preserve because you are truly saved:
or are you truly saved because you preserver?

I say this is what is true:
“you preserve because you are truly saved:”

and what do you say?

We persevere because we love God. We love God because He first loved us. Faith is with every good thought and deed. The passage in my signature upholds the faith. Without it, our faith no longer saves, but after we were freed, more deadly Spirits came in to destroy.

 

[Duane1966]

do you preserve because you are truly saved:
or are you truly saved because you preserver?

I say this is what is true:
“you preserve because you are truly saved:”

and what do you say?

Matthew 24:13

But he that shall persevere to the end, he shall be saved.

shall definition - expressing the future tense.

Scripture contradicts you.

 

[alwayswill]

Matthew 24:13

shall definition - expressing the future tense.

Scripture contradicts you.

Scripture cannot contradict Scripture:

Jesus said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” (Luke 7:50)

For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? (Rom 8:24)

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. (Eph 2:8-9)

But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, who has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. (2 Tim 1:8-9)

But when the kindness and love of God our Saviour appeared, he saved us,** not because of righteous things we had done**, but because of his mercy. (Titus 3:4-5)

But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved. (Heb 10:39)

now what are you going to do with all of those past tenses?

 

[Duane1966]

i don’t really know who Charles Templeton was:

But a quick search reveals he never truly believed huge sections of the Bible:

That’s not my case

It really doesn’t matter if it’s not your case. If you had asked him if he was assured of his salvation, when he first made his profession of faith, he would have said yes, as would those around him. If he had died the night of that first profession of faith, everyone would have thought he was in Heaven. Now you say he never really was saved, but he sure didn’t know that, on that night of his profession, nor would you have if you were a simple person in the church that night. He believed he had true faith. What good did the doctrine of Eternal Security do him, on that night? Did it help him to have true faith?

What good does that doctrine do you? I have the same assurance you do. I know that if I love God and keep his commandments, I will have eternal life. The only thing I do not know is if I will persevere, because I have free will.

Do a quick internet search on all the evangelical pastors who are now atheists. Look how many of them believed in Eternal Security, fervently. They all believed they had true living faith.

Saint Paul in his Epistle to the Romans (11:19-22), says:

"Thou wilt say then, the branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear, For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed least he also spare not thee. Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but towards thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off."

Another passage that says we can be in him, and then cast away because we do not persevere.

 

[Peter_J]

once accepted: it cannot be discarded

We disagree on that, not surprisingly … but if I understand you, you believe that our free will is involved (albeit not necessarily in the exactly the same way that RCs see it)?

 

[Duane1966]

Scripture cannot contradict Scripture:

Jesus said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” (Luke 7:50)

For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he already has? (Rom 8:24)

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. (Eph 2:8-9)

But join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God, who has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. (2 Tim 1:8-9)

But when the kindness and love of God our Saviour appeared, he saved us,** not because of righteous things we had done**, but because of his mercy. (Titus 3:4-5)

But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved. (Heb 10:39)

now what are you going to do with all of those past tenses?

I don’t have to do anything with them, since I believe salvation is a process. I can give you at least four verses that show salvation in the present tense, and at least eleven showing salvation to be a future event. So all the verses that show salvation is a past, present, and future event, fit nicely in the Catholic view of salvation. Implicit in all the verses you posted, is that they are conditional, meaning they apply if we remain in a state of grace. While in this state, every one of your verses apply. But none of your verses say that we cannot walk away. I can say yes to everyone of those verses.

You on the other hand, can do nothing with the verses that show salvation as a future event, which is why you did not answer Matthew 24.

Again I ask you, why does Jesus say remain in Him, if it is not possible for us to leave?

 

[Porknpie]

Scripture cannot contradict Scripture:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. (Eph 2:8-9)

The works that St. Paul is speaking of here are the works of the Law. They can not save.

St James on the other hand is speaking of works of love when he says:

“24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (James 2:24)

It’s the same point that he makes regarding Abraham:

“21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works,”

Faith without works (of love) can not save.

 

[Duane1966]

From this website: shamelesspopery.com/assurance-of-salvation-and-evanescent-grace/

John Calvin clearly taught something called evanescent grace in which God gives a ‘fake grace’ to the Reprobate to make them think and act as if they were Saved, and this only so that He could damn them with greater punishment for such deceptive behavior (other Reformed teachers will reluctantly admit God does this too).

What Nick’s referring to is Calvin’s teaching in Book III, Chapter II, Section 11 of Institutes of the Christian Religion (skip down to where it begins, ” I am aware it seems unaccountable”). And it’s exactly as he describes. Calvin taught that the gift of faith was the fruit of God’s unconditional election. If you believed, it was because you were already saved: instead of the Biblical teaching that salvation comes through faith, Calvin taught that faith comes through salvation.

But there’s an enormous flaw in Calvin’s entire religious schema: countless people seem to believe (and believe they believe), and then fall away from the faith. These people, in an earlier day, counted themselves as believers, and were considered believers by their peers. I’ve addressed this issue elsewhere, including particular cases like Simon the Magi, who Acts 8:13 says “believed and was baptized,” yet fell away and was in peril of damnation by Acts 8:20-24. But if that’s so, then by definition, it’s possible to have faith without it being the fruit of God’s unconditional election. According to Calvin, if Simon had the true gift of faith, it was because he was already unconditionally saved: nothing he did would change his status as elect, including his attempt to buy the Holy Spirit. So this leaves Calvin with two options: either St. Luke is wrong in Acts 8:13 (and Simon didn’t really believe), or St. Peter is wrong in Acts 8:20-24, and Simon has nothing to worry about. Calvin’s answer, in effect, says that Luke is wrong. He creates, out of whole cloth and without even attempting to tie his argument into the Bible or the teachings of the Early Church Fathers, a doctrine that says that God sometimes gives the damned a false sense of assurance of salvation, called evanescent grace.

This false sense of security is so strong that it’s indistinguishable even to the believer (or non-believer who thinks he’s a believer). Or, as Calvin put it: “though none are enlightened into faith, and truly feel the efficacy of the Gospel, with the exception of those who are fore-ordained to salvation, yet experience shows that the reprobate are sometimes affected in a way so similar to the elect, that even in their own judgment there is no difference between them. “

But this raises a second question: if the damned have a false sense of assurance, how can an individual tell if they’re saved or damned? Calvin’s already answered this — you can’t (“even in their own judgment…”). The damned “know” they’re saved, but aren’t, while the saved know they’re saved, and are. In fact, Calvin argues that the damned, afflicted with this deceiving grace, experience all of the internal and external manifestations of salvation.

So God reveals to these damned a sense of His Mercy, and of His Goodness, and reveals His Grace to them. They accept His Grace, although confusedly. They think they’re saved (“the reprobate are sometimes affected in a way so similar to the elect, that even in their own judgment there is no difference between them.“), and others think they’re saved, since “under a covering of hypocrisy, they seem to have a principle of faith in common” with the saved. Yet, Calvin argues that when God “shows himself propitious to them, it is not as if he had truly rescued them from death, and taken them under his protection.” So according to Calvin, God pretends to save them, gives them fake assurances of salvation, and then damns them.

Calvin does distinguish between the graces experienced by the saved v. the confused damned. The saved get the real thing, while the damned lay hold “of the shadow rather than the substance.” In other words, if the saved are drinking Coke, the damned are drinking Diet Coke. But since neither the saved nor the damned have ever had the other kind, and all of the external characteristics are the same, there’s no way of knowing which you’re drinking. Read over Calvin’s teachings in the link above, and I think you’ll see that the following is a pretty accurate chart depicting how you can figure out which one you are:

------------------------------Saved, With Saving Grace …/…Damned, With Evanescent Grace------------------------------

Sense of Grace? …yes …/…yes
Internal working of the Spirit? …yes…/…yes
Appear to be Saved? …yes …/…yes
Believe They Have Faith?..yes…/…yes
Believe They’re Saved?..yes…/…yes
Actually Saved?..yes…/…NO

 

[alwayswill]

From this website: shamelesspopery.com/assurance-of-salvation-and-evanescent-grace/

got it: the reprobate may wrongly think they are saved:
I have never once brought that up… the questions asked were:

Question 1: Does God want those who have eternal life to know they have eternal life?

Question 2: does God want those who are elect to confirm their election?

I answer yes.
It is God’s desire and a blessing to know and confirm.

 

[alwayswill]

The works that St. Paul is speaking of here are the works of the Law. They can not save.

St James on the other hand is speaking of works of love when he says:

“24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (James 2:24)

It’s the same point that he makes regarding Abraham:

“21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works,”

Faith without works (of love) can not save.

justified to/by whom?
God or man?

From You Can Understand The Bible By Peter Kreeft
amazon.com/You-Can-Unders…der_1586170457
page 291:
Quote from page 291;
The apparent contradiction between James, who says that we, like Abraham, are justified by works (2:21), and Paul, who says that we, like Abraham, are justified by faith (Rom.4:3), is explained by looking at the context.
Pauls context is the relationship between the believer and God, while James context is the relationship between the believer and his neighbor.
God sees your faith; your neighbor sees your works.
Faith justifies us before God; works justify us before our neighbors. End quote

read that again in case you missed it

Peter Kreeft ;Catholic apologeticist said about James 2

Faith justifies us before God; works justify us before our neighbors

 

[alwayswill]

…

Faith without works (of love) can not save.

There is no such thing as a faith that comes from God that does not include the desire to obey God’s commands:

an analogy:
Catholic farmer: the fields are very dry.
Protestant farmer: Some rain would fix the dryness…
Catholic farmer: Only “if” rain is wet…

of course rain is wet
of course true faith includes works charity, in love
Embracing love and charity is a characteristic of a faith that saves
Opposing charity, in love would be a symptom of not having a saving faith.

From the Vatican website
vatican.va/roman_curia/po…unione_en.html

"128.** Since faith is understood not only as affirmative knowledge, but also as the trust of the heart that bases itself on the Word of God,** it can further be said jointly: “Justification takes place ‘by grace alone’ (JD nos 15 and 16), by faith alone; the person is justified ‘apart from works’ (Rom 3:28, cf. JD no. 25)” (JDDJ, Annex 2C).(44) "

From the Vatican website
vatican.va/roman_curia/po…ration_en.html
“25.We confess together that sinners are justified by faith in the saving action of God in Christ. By the action of the Holy Spirit in baptism, they are granted the gift of salvation, which lays the basis for the whole Christian life. They place their trust in God’s gracious promise by justifying faith, which includes hope in God and love for him. Such a faith is active in love and thus the Christian cannot and should not remain without works.
**But whatever in the justified precedes or follows the free gift of faith is neither the basis of justification nor merits it. **”​

read that again:

But whatever in the justified
precedes
or
follows the free gift of faith
is neither the basis of justification nor merits it.

nothing is basis of justification nor merits justification EXCEPT the free gift of faith that come from God:

That’s what a faith from God accomplishes.

I know its inconceivable to you:
but the Catholic Church is moving to the Reformed view of justification by Faith alone

**Pope Benedict **
By defining “faith” as “identification with Christ expressed in love for God and neighbor,” **Pope Benedict **qualified his statement, noting that the Apostle Paul had written about such faith in his letters, especially the one to the Philippians.

According to this report, **Benedict affirmed that Luther had correctly translated Paul’s words as ‘justified by faith alone’ – the well known sola fide. **

. "Yet, said the Pope, it was indeed biblical to say, as did Luther, that it was the faith of a Christian, not his works that saved him."

According to Fountain, the Pope highlighted the fact that prior to his Damascus Road conversion, Paul had strictly adhered to all the Pharisaical laws and rules. **However, after meeting the Lord Jesus in his vision, Paul began leading a lifestyle of faith alone.​

Pope Francis**

Pope Francis says he agrees with Martin Luther about justification
dennyburk.com/pope-franci…justification/
“I think that the intentions of Martin Luther were not mistaken. He was a reformer. Perhaps some methods were not correct. But in that time, if we read the story of the Pastor, a German Lutheran who then converted when he saw reality – he became Catholic – in that time, the Church was not exactly a model to imitate. There was corruption in the Church, there was worldliness, attachment to money, to power…and this he protested. Then he was intelligent and took some steps forward justifying, and because he did this. And today Lutherans and Catholics, Protestants, all of us agree on the doctrine of justification. On this point, which is very important, he did not err. He made a medicine for the Church…”
-Pope Francis

“Luther was correct”
“Luther did not err”

consider what has been coming out of the Vatican for the last 50 years and try to understand what the Reformers have been saying all along