St Augustine on Salvation By Faith Alone

[alwayswill]

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)?

your free will choices can only be in accordance with your nature:

God changes your nature; therefore your free will choices will be different.

That’s why the theological order of salvation is regeneration before belief.
God changes you first , then you believe.

 

[rcwitness]

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

Yes, there is. Peter uses that simple definition of faith in 2 Peter 1
For this very reason make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge,6and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness,7and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love.
For if these things are yours and abound, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.9*For whoever lacks these things is blind and shortsighted and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.

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

No, catholics would say the water gives birth to the seed. Once the seed is sprouted, it will ALSO need the sun to grow. Not Water Alone. Did the water alone give birth? Yes. Can the water alone give fruit? No.

"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) "

With this definition of faith, Catholics would have to agree.

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. **”

Again, hope and love are ADDED to this definition of faith. Also Baptism. Do you agree with this?​

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

No. Both Catholics and Protestants are learning to speak the same language by putting pride aside. When you see that the Church contradicts Trent, then you can say she is moving to the Reformed view.

**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. **

Bolded is very important.

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.I have said 3 times before: I don’t believe the Pope said this. It is not in line with anything. Paul even says he worked harder than all the Apostles. Was faith present? Of course. Was it completed by works? Yes.​

 

[alwayswill]

Yes, there is. Peter uses that simple definition of faith in 2 Peter 1
For this very reason make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge,6and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness,7and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love.
For if these things are yours and abound, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.9*For whoever lacks these things is blind and shortsighted and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.
No, catholics would say the water gives birth to the seed. Once the seed is sprouted, it will ALSO need the sun to grow. Not Water Alone. Did the water alone give birth? Yes. Can the water alone give fruit? No.

With this definition of faith, Catholics would have to agree.

Again, hope and love are ADDED to this definition of faith. Also Baptism. Do you agree with this?​

---

i have read that verse a dozen time now:
where does is it say later “supplements” save

This is the “when” someone is saved

Ephesians 1:13
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,

when they truly believe:

not after they complete the "do to " list

 

[Duane1966]

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.

We have answered you more than once on those questions.

The question asked of you was how do you know you are one of the elect?

You answered that you know you are elect, but you have just admitted the reprobate will wrongly believe they are saved, and we know they will feel the exact same things that you feel, which means you might fall into that category. So I, am left with the knowledge, under the eternal security of the elect paradigm, that while you may look like a member of the elect, and you say you are a member of the elect, **this could in reality just be God trying to fool you. **

So then the next question becomes, how can you objectively know that you are not one of the reprobate? Everything you have listed, Calvin admits many reprobates also experience. You could fall into the category of the reprobate, and have no way of knowing.

You still have not answered these questions:

1.) If salvation is a one time event, and not a process, how do you read Matthew 24, where he does not say you were saved and you persevere because of it, he instead says you shall be saved (quite clearly future tense) because of perseverance?

2.) Why does Jesus exhort us to remain in Him? Who could this passage be aimed at? According to you, Jesus cannot be talking to any member of the saved, because they are already saved and cannot fall away. He also, according to you, cannot be talking to the reprobate, because they are never saved at all.

But let’s look at the parable:

1* “I am the true vine,* and my Father is the vine grower.a 2He takes away every branch in me that does not bear fruit, and every one that does he prunes* so that it bears more fruit. 3You are already pruned because of the word that I spoke to you.b 4Remain in me, as I remain in you. Just as a branch cannot bear fruit on its own unless it remains on the vine, so neither can you unless you remain in me. 5I am the vine, you are the branches. Whoever remains in me and I in him will bear much fruit, because without me you can do nothing. 6* c Anyone who does not remain in me will be thrown out like a branch and wither; people will gather them and throw them into a fire and they will be burned. 7If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you.d 8By this is my Father glorified, that you bear much fruit and become my disciples.e 9As the Father loves me, so I also love you. Remain in my love.f 10If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and remain in his love.g

11“I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and your joy may be complete.h 12This is my commandment: love one another as I love you.i 13* No one has greater love than this,j to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. 14You are my friends if you do what I command you.

Verse 3, says we are saved, and we will stay saved, but only IF we keep his commandments. But if is a conditional word. It means there is more than one possible outcome, and Jesus quite clearly says that any other outcome will lead to damnation. And all of those conditionals He places after He says they are saved.

 

[rcwitness]

i have read that verse a dozen time now:
where does is it say later “supplements” save

This is the “when” someone is saved

Ephesians 1:13
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,

when they truly believe:

not after they complete the "do to " list

Yes and no. Yes, because salvation is always on account of the grace of God. This is what we should and can have one, unified faith in. No, because being saved (forgiven and received into the Covenant) does no good if we do not continue and grow. The Catholic understanding of cooperation with grace through “working in love” does NOT mean that is what earned justification/salvation. But it keeps us in Christian and Him in us. And furthermore, it is He who is working in us, and the converted believer who cooperates and completes faith with the virtues of salvation. Faith is the first and principle means to receiving God’s life. Participation with Him is the completion of this faith.

 

[alwayswill]

Yes, there is. Peter uses that simple definition of faith in 2 Peter 1​

Is this definition of faith acceptable to you?

From the Vatican website
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/lutheran-fed-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_2013_dal-conflitto-alla-comunione_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)

“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.”

google.com/search?q=%22Yet%2C+said+the+Pope%2C+it+was+indeed+biblical+to+say%2C+as+did+Luther%2C+that+it+was+the+faith+of+a+Christian%2C+not+his+works+that+saved+him.%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

 

[rcwitness]

Is this definition of faith acceptable to you?

From the Vatican website
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/lutheran-fed-docs/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_2013_dal-conflitto-alla-comunione_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)

“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.”

google.com/search?q=%22Yet%2C+said+the+Pope%2C+it+was+indeed+biblical+to+say%2C+as+did+Luther%2C+that+it+was+the+faith+of+a+Christian%2C+not+his+works+that+saved+him.%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

In a snippet, yes. But it also must include the love of God and neighbor. This means justification is not a one time **only **event, but the duration of our life on earth.

 

[rcwitness]

Alwayswill, do you believe that Trent and the Catechism have correctly Taught Justification?

 

[alwayswill]

In a snippet, yes. But it also must include the love of God and neighbor. This means justification is not a one time **only **event, but the duration of our life on earth.

i understand you use the word justification differently than Protestants:
but initial justification is a one time event: right?

once again :
there is no such thing as a faith from from God that does not include the characteristic of love any more than there is rain that is not wet.

whether justification is a process or one time event
the VATICAN website states this:

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

It can’t be more clear than that

 

[rcwitness]

i understand you use the word justification differently than Protestants:
but initial justification is a one time event: right?

Yes, Initial Justification is a one time event, which includes water Baptism (or its desire if prevented against the will of the believer). Final Justification has the condition that faith was completed and fruits of repentance.

once again :
there is no such thing as a faith from from God that does not include the characteristic of love any more than there is rain that is not wet.

whether justification is a process or one time event
the VATICAN website states this:

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

It can’t be more clear than that

Yes. The Basis and merit is in Christ’s sacrifice. This is maintained in the faith of the believer with participation in His Body and Blood of Communion (if not prevented because of no fault of one’s self, and done in a worthy manner).

 

[alwayswill]

knowing.

You still have not answered these questions:

1.) If salvation is a one time event, and not a process, how do you read Matthew 24, where he does not say you were saved and you persevere because of it, he instead says you shall be saved (quite clearly future tense) because of perseverance?

2.) Why does Jesus exhort us to remain in Him? Who could this passage be aimed at? According to you, Jesus cannot be talking to any member of the saved, because they are already saved and cannot fall away. He also, according to you, cannot be talking to the reprobate, because they are never saved at all.

.

**
we were saved the moment we believe by faith alone prior to any good works:**
We are being sved by obeying the commands are God
we will be saved on the Last Day

 

[alwayswill]

Alwayswill, do you believe that Trent and the Catechism have correctly Taught Justification?

I think the century long understanding of Trent and the recent past understanding of the CCC is in error…

Well if Trent meant “XYZ” then it is correct;
but is the Reformers meant “ABC” then they are correct"

From the Vatican’s website, from multiple Catholic apologeticists, from the last Popes:
The Catholic Church is moving to the Reformed view of justification by faith alone:

You may say that Catholic and Protestants are now agreeing on the terminology: but I don’t see the Lutherans changing their definition of faith from trust to mere mental assent…

Century old understandings will be “clarified” with the opposite meanings

I think Catholics will be very surprised what will be coming out of the Vatican in 2017 for 500th Anniversary of the Reformation.

 

[Duane1966]

i understand you use the word justification differently than Protestants:
but initial justification is a one time event: right?

once again :
there is no such thing as a faith from from God that does not include the characteristic of love any more than there is rain that is not wet.

whether justification is a process or one time event
the VATICAN website states this:

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

It can’t be more clear than that

Correct. But what is our final judgment based on? Is it based on when we were initially justified, or what we did after that initial justification?

Can works increase our justification? Trent, the catechism, St. Augustine, and other fathers of the Church say yes. They also say justification can also be lost. Nothing in you links contradict this.

The agreement with the Lutherans is how we are initially justified. And the agreement is exactly what the Council of Trent taught in the sixteenth century. But Trent also said that justification is a process, and can be lost. Guess what? Your links to what the popes said do not contradict any of Trent.

 

[rcwitness]

I think the century long understanding of Trent and the recent past understanding of the CCC is in error…

Do you believe Trent or the Catechism has Taught Justification and Salvation correctly? Yes, or No?

 

[alwayswill]

Do you believe Trent or the Catechism has Taught Justification and Salvation correctly? Yes, or No?

i think the previous understandings are in error

the plain reading of Trent or the Catechism has Taught Justification and Salvation in error

 

[Duane1966]

**
we were saved the moment we believe by faith alone prior to any good works:**
We are being sved by obeying the commands are God
we will be saved on the Last Day

Unless it is a process (where a person could fall back, and the end is unknown), if you were saved in the past, how are you being saved presently by obeying the commands of God, and how will you be saved on the Last Day, if, as you say, you were saved way back then and cannot fall? Present and future tense salvation verses cannot apply to you, but according to you they cannot apply to the reprobate either. Who do those verses apply to?

Please expound on the Parable of the Vines to me. If we can never fall, why does Jesus exhort us to remain in him? Who is Jesus addressing this parable to? According to you, it cannot be the elect, or the reprobate.

 

[rcwitness]

i think the previous understandings are in error

the plain reading of Trent or the Catechism has Taught Justification and Salvation in error

Can you demonstrate where?

 

[Duane1966]

I think the century long understanding of Trent and the recent past understanding of the CCC is in error…

Well if Trent meant “XYZ” then it is correct;
but is the Reformers meant “ABC” then they are correct"

From the Vatican’s website, from multiple Catholic apologeticists, from the last Popes:
The Catholic Church is moving to the Reformed view of justification by faith alone:

You may say that Catholic and Protestants are now agreeing on the terminology: but I don’t see the Lutherans changing their definition of faith from trust to mere mental assent…

Century old understandings will be “clarified” with the opposite meanings

I think Catholics will be very surprised what will be coming out of the Vatican in 2017 for 500th Anniversary of the Reformation.

We will be surprised. But Pope Francis has already said that he is a faithful son of the Catholic Church, and that he accepts everything that the councils have taught.

The agreement was on how we are initially justified, and the agreement is exctly what Trent taught in the sixteenth century.

From Catholic.com:

In October of 1999, the Catholic Church and the Lutheran World Federation signed a document known as the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification (JD).

Neither Catholics nor Lutherans retracted their positions on justification. The document that both signed clarified one.aspect of justification that both sides could agree to, with the hope that more dialogue and agreements will follow in years to come.

Lutherans have been suspicious for a long time that the Church’s discussion of good works means that one must do good works in order to enter a state of justification. But the Catholic Church has never taught this. In Catholic teaching, one is not capable of doing supernaturally good works outside of a state of justification because one does not have the virtue of charity in one’s soul–the thing that makes good works good. Consequently, the Council of Trent taught “none of those things that precede justification, whether faith or works, merit the grace of justification” (JD 8).

 

[alwayswill]

Can you demonstrate where?

really?
it strains credibility to suggest that Trent was not in response to the Reformation views on on Faith alone.

there is no doubt the the Catholics over 400 years ago knew exactly what the Reformers meant by Faith…

to say in 2016-2017 that we actually agree is to wilful disregard history…

Is your view that Trent was in response to a straw man understanding of the Reformation?

 

[rcwitness]

We will be surprised. But Pope Francis has already said that he is a faithful son of the Catholic Church, and that he accepts everything that the councils have taught.

The agreement was on how we are initially justified, and the agreement is what Trent taught in the sixteenth century.

I agree. But I think the joint declaration found common ground (Universal) in defining Faith, and what constitutes saving faith. Principally, we are justified apart from anything we have done. Grace must be preserved in all things.