The Truth: We Are Saved By Faith Alone

[Bishopite]

What does Matthew 25 teach on that? Works are most certainly required. They are the evidence of our faith. They don’t cause our faith, they grow out of our faith. Being in relationship to the livnig God requires a living faith. As James says, faith without works is dead, and dead faith gets us nowhere. But works before faith is meaningless, it is like trying to earn one’s way to heaven when it is Christ’s work on the cross that is the instrument of our salvation.

All due deference pastor, but your version is a Protestant version. However, there are some Protestants on this thread i.e., Kaycee who say that works done after being justified are not required for salvation, who’s to say what is “biblical.” But I can agree more with your version indeed.

The problem some seem to have is that of trying to take a mesage that was intended as practicle advice for believers on how to live out their faith, and draw conclusions from it as to how people are saved. Certainly the theif on the cross was saved, but didn’'t do any works of the nature that James was referring to. But James wasn’t addressing the thief on the cross either.

I disagree. First of all, James is using sorterological language in chapter 2, not just practicle advice; that is reserved for the book of Proverbs. I believe you are making the leap that works by faith have to be physical works only but that’s not always the case and an example of this would be a paraplegic person who can’t physically do anything but can speak and still do “works” of mercy (like pray) which is what James is alluding to in chapter 2. The thief on the cross was essentially in the same situation…
Luke 23:40-43
"But the other [thief on the cross] rebuked him [the other thief], saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

Notice the thief did “do” something, he repented and acted upon the faith Jesus gave him, repenting is an “act” of the will. He did that which he was able, (see Luke 12:48) by rebuking the other thief and therefore he did a work of mercy in attempting to show the other thief that he was wrong and pleading to Jesus to save him.

So, can one have faith without works? If one is in the midst of dying wihen one comes to faith, it is not necessary nor expected. Faith alone is all that is absolutely needed. But if you got enough life left in you to put a smile on your face, then we are expected to show joy inside of us with our life, and most certainly works arising from that faith are expected, and without it is evidence that you don’t really have a living faith, and thus I would hazard to say you also don’t have saving faith.

Again, you are paralleling physical works of mercy with works of mercy done that are not physical actions. Praying is an action and is an act of mercy and love toward another (Mt 6:9-13) but it is not physical in nature; the elderly quite often pray for others from their beds within their rest homes.
Now without coming off as rude, which I don’t mean to be, you really seem to be speaking with double speak when you say “Works are most certainly required” then say “Faith alone is all that is absolutely required” unless you believe that the word “faith” in “faith alone” is a verb, an active word, which in that case if you do, you actually affirm works as being required with faith but are just packaging it within the word “faith.”

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

If you believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God, then you MUST accept all that is presented within the Bible at its face value.

That, in a nutshell, is the fundamental problem with much of what passes for “scriptural exegesis:” the tendency to “pick and choose what pleases…and discard that which does not please…”

Write On! RobHom!

Robert

 

[Jerry-Jet]

“Faith alone” is never in the Bible.

Why should anyone believe it?

 

[Grace_Seeker]

All due deference pastor, but your version is a Protestant version. However, there are some Protestants on this thread i.e., Kaycee who say that works done after being justified are not required for salvation, who’s to say what is “biblical.” But I can agree more with your version indeed.

I disagree. First of all, James is using sorterological language in chapter 2, not just practicle advice; that is reserved for the book of Proverbs. I believe you are making the leap that works by faith have to be physical works only but that’s not always the case and an example of this would be a paraplegic person who can’t physically do anything but can speak and still do “works” of mercy (like pray) which is what James is alluding to in chapter 2. The thief on the cross was essentially in the same situation…
Luke 23:40-43
"But the other [thief on the cross] rebuked him [the other thief], saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong.” And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”

Notice the thief did “do” something, he repented and acted upon the faith Jesus gave him, repenting is an “act” of the will. He did that which he was able, (see Luke 12:48) by rebuking the other thief and therefore he did a work of mercy in attempting to show the other thief that he was wrong and pleading to Jesus to save him.

Again, you are paralleling physical works of mercy with works of mercy done that are not physical actions. Praying is an action and is an act of mercy and love toward another (Mt 6:9-13) but it is not physical in nature; the elderly quite often pray for others from their beds within their rest homes.
Now without coming off as rude, which I don’t mean to be, you really seem to be speaking with double speak when you say “Works are most certainly required” then say “Faith alone is all that is absolutely required” unless you believe that the word “faith” in “faith alone” is a verb, an active word, which in that case if you do, you actually affirm works as being required with faith but are just packaging it within the word “faith.”

I appreciate your views and that you took the time to actually read what I wrote rather than just assume what I might have written. So, I certainly don’t think you rude for accusing me of “double speak”, for I admit I walk a very narrow line on the one hand linking faith and work for all, and then on the other hand making the statement which you object to of ones such as the thief on the cross of a person dying in the hospital of not being able to offer up works and so just having faith alone.

Now, why do I do that? Especially given that I agree with you that prayer is also a work, for I did not mean just works of mercy. But, when I read James 2 what do I see given as examples by James? I see commands to do something – to speak, to act (vs. 12). Indeed, with regard to prayer, James challenges us to do more than just offer words but to actually do something for our brother who is in need (vs. 15-17). This is not soterological language here, it is a very pragmatic example of the type of actions that James is speaking of.

I also think that you have stretched the definiton of work too far when you speak of the act of repentance as a work with regard to the thief on the cross. If that is the case, then there are none who could ever practice “faith alone”, the issue is moot because you have defined it out of existence. If I repent and do nothing else, I can always say that I have both faith and works, I have the work of repentence. I don’t believe that was the type of work that James had in mind, nor what Jesus had in mind when he talked about those who do the will of the father (Matthew 7:21).

What we are agreed on is that faith and actions are to work together. What I think you may have missed is that I also take into account to whom James wrote this letter, he did not write it for people who were dying on crosses or in hospital rooms, he wrote for those who are capable of doing works of mercy and he expects it of them. In that sense the book of James doesn’t even speak to the thief on the cross at all.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

“Faith alone” is never in the Bible.

Why should anyone believe it?

There are lots of things not specifically mentioned in the Bible that I believe in. I believe in the Trinity. I believe in “doing a good turn daily” and “random acts of kindness”. I believe in the Constitution of the United States of America. And I believe in my wife. None of these things are never in the Bible but I still believe in them.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Actually, faith alone is in the Bible. It is explicity stated in the book of James as something we are not justified by.
James 2:24:

See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Now works alone is something that can not be found in the Bible (unless someone can prove otherwise).

Of course we are justified by faith, but not faith alone. We are justified by works, but not by works alone. I don’t think there much more to add to this conversation by yours truly than that. The rest of you can iron out the details for the rest of us.

 

[JFonseka]

Is that comment directed at me or the original poster?

Well I just found it funny that he said it cannot be proven and you proved it in 1 short line So I was kind of making fun of him for making such a bold seemingly definitive statement, which was proven wrong.

 

[SFLCatholic]

So, are you objecting to my view of faith and works and the interrelatedness between them or agreeing with it? I can’t really tell.

As to your last question, I am sure it would seem to you that way. But, is there something not Biblical about the view I presented?

You stated originally that your posts were of a biblical view that did not exclude one for the other. But the implication is that your biblical view is from a certain bias. Namely, Protestant and most likely Sola Scriptura and Faith alone ideology.

If so, those Christian ideologies are a defective understanding of Scripture. They fall short of the True Nature of Jesus’ testimony as a Human and as a Human who was God.

Jesus taught us in parables because we could not grasp the totality and infiniteness of His wisdom. He wanted us to understand that God is in communion with us from the moment of conception. Gen. 2:7. And that life is a dichotomy. Its death and life.

He wanted us to know that everything is a work. Even our LORD God had to breath life into us to give us our being. Without Him we are nothing.

All life, all salvation, is predicated on some act. Even the act of Faith, the lynchpin for salvific Grace, is still an act. You have to consciously invoke Faith or else it does not exist for you.

So even if you say that Faith alone is enough, its still an act. But an act that can only carry you so far. Yes Jesus will save based on a repentant sinner’s faith. We see this in the Prodigal Son story and the criminal on the cross at Calvary.

But there is another side to those sinners that honestly seek and yet are denied. The parable of the rich man who would not give up his treasure and was therefore denied salvation until he did so. Or the parable of the talents where the master rebuked the servant who buried the talent and did not at least try to earn the master a profit. The message being that if we are granted this gracious gift, we have to act on it.

Its not as free as we think. God asks of us that if given a chance at salvation, to keep proving to Him that we are worthy of His gracious gift. Otherwise, it can be lost.

I am agreeing to the interrelatedness of them. Because as we know from Jesus’ Gospels, faith without works is dead. But I don’t agree with the once saved always saved cop out. Its just not there scripturally.

And again, if you really did have a biblical view that did not exclude one for the other, then you would be a Catholic. For it is the source.

 

[SFLCatholic]

So, can one have faith without works? If one is in the midst of dying wihen one comes to faith, it is not necessary nor expected. Faith alone is all that is absolutely needed. But if you got enough life left in you to put a smile on your face, then we are expected to show joy inside of us with our life, and most certainly works arising from that faith are expected, and without it is evidence that you don’t really have a living faith, and thus I would hazard to say you also don’t have saving faith.

But this still begs the question. And all you did was throw the ball back in our court and admit that Faith without works is most certainly dead.

If faith is all you need, then there would be no standard to which faith is a saving faith and which faith isn’t. Jesus never, ever, ever said that. This is why He gave us so many examples of the kinds of faith that can save.

I think you have the right and Catholic idea, you just haven’t enunciated it clearly yet. I can’t fault you for this. Its the current teaching you are upholding.

Why do you think Pope Benedict XVI just re-announced that Catholicism is the One True Faith? And further stated that non-Catholic Christian teachings are defective? You recent post is a perfect example. Non-Catholics have alot of confusion about Scripture and Jesus’ teachings.

But by no means take this as a slam against you. I don’t mean it in any malicious way. Its just your confusion about faith shows the misguidedness of your thinking. And you are a Pastor nonetheless.

Get your swim trunks on and start swimming over. We are waiting for you.

 

[JFonseka]

Simply put, we need faith AND works, because he wants us to do good works, he is letting us know, it is not solely by our works that we are saved, but by his mercy, his grace, but that doesn’t put away the fact that we need to do works in this life, we are judged by what we do and what we don’t do in the end.

The Bible has example of people doing ‘works’, if works are not important, then why is it filled with works, Jesus himself did these ‘works’ and obviously wants others to do it.

 

[fullofzeal]

But this still begs the question. And all you did was throw the ball back in our court and admit that Faith without works is most certainly dead.

If faith is all you need, then there would be no standard to which faith is a saving faith and which faith isn’t. Jesus never, ever, ever said that. This is why He gave us so many examples of the kinds of faith that can save.

I think you have the right and Catholic idea, you just haven’t enunciated it clearly yet. I can’t fault you for this. Its the current teaching you are upholding.

Why do you think Pope Benedict XVI just re-announced that Catholicism is the One True Faith? And further stated that non-Catholic Christian teachings are defective? You recent post is a perfect example. Non-Catholics have alot of confusion about Scripture and Jesus’ teachings.

But by no means take this as a slam against you. I don’t mean it in any malicious way. Its just your confusion about faith shows the misguidedness of your thinking. And you are a Pastor nonetheless.

Get your swim trunks on and start swimming over. We are waiting for you.

swim, indeed!
one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. come home!!

 

[Bishopite]

Grace Seeker;2547089]
Now, why do I do that? Especially given that I agree with you that prayer is also a work, for I did not mean just works of mercy. But, when I read James 2 what do I see given as examples by James? I see commands to do something – to speak, to act (vs. 12). Indeed, with regard to prayer, James challenges us to do more than just offer words but to actually do something for our brother who is in need (vs. 15-17). This is not soterological language here, it is a very pragmatic example of the type of actions that James is speaking of.

James is speaking with a salvific negative by saying we are not saved by faith alone in James 2:17 and 2:24 for starters, how can you say James is not using sorterological language? "Not saved" is a salvific statement.

I also think that you have stretched the definiton of work too far when you speak of the act of repentance as a work with regard to the thief on the cross. If that is the case, then there are none who could ever practice “faith alone”, the issue is moot because you have defined it out of existence. If I repent and do nothing else, I can always say that I have both faith and works, I have the work of repentence. I don’t believe that was the type of work that James had in mind, nor what Jesus had in mind when he talked about those who do the will of the father (Matthew 7:21).

Not at all. Repentance wouldn’t you agree isn’t just intellectual assent? Repentance requires geniune life changing action, therefore it is a work also and we know that we can’t repent until God gives us the first to be able to repent.

What we are agreed on is that faith and actions are to work together. What I think you may have missed is that I also take into account to whom James wrote this letter, he did not write it for people who were dying on crosses or in hospital rooms, he wrote for those who are capable of doing works of mercy and he expects it of them. In that sense the book of James doesn’t even speak to the thief on the cross at all.

I will say that you are closer to my position on the sola fide issue than most Protestants and I respect you for your honesty.
Sure James is addressing the common Christian capable of doing works, however, I never said James was speaking of those incapable of doing works, I quoted Luke 23:40-43 after you brought up the theif on the cross first. I am merely pointing out that “works” do not subsist with the physical only and the thief wasn’t saved by faith alone for he did act upon his faith and rebuked the other thief and defended truth by acting on that truth which IS a work, therefore the theif wasn’t saved by faith alone!

 

[Grace_Seeker]

But this still begs the question. And all you did was throw the ball back in our court and admit that Faith without works is most certainly dead.

If faith is all you need, then there would be no standard to which faith is a saving faith and which faith isn’t. Jesus never, ever, ever said that. This is why He gave us so many examples of the kinds of faith that can save.

I think you have the right and Catholic idea, you just haven’t enunciated it clearly yet. I can’t fault you for this. Its the current teaching you are upholding.

Why do you think Pope Benedict XVI just re-announced that Catholicism is the One True Faith? And further stated that non-Catholic Christian teachings are defective? You recent post is a perfect example. Non-Catholics have alot of confusion about Scripture and Jesus’ teachings.

But by no means take this as a slam against you. I don’t mean it in any malicious way. Its just your confusion about faith shows the misguidedness of your thinking. And you are a Pastor nonetheless.

Get your swim trunks on and start swimming over. We are waiting for you.

If you read more carefully, you will find that in the end I don’t hold to any of the following positions: “Faith alone”, “Works righteousness”, or even “Faith and Works”. Ultimately we are saved by one work and one work only – Christ’s offering on the cross. That God applies the benefit of this to our lives and saves us by means of it, is purely an act of grace and something I do not contribute to at all except subsequent to my actual experience of it. So, just to get everyone attacking me, I think we are saved by grace alone.

As far as swimming the Tiber, I heard it was once used as sewer. While it may be cleaned up now, I still think I stick with running the race before me rather than swimming.

 

[SFLCatholic]

As far as swimming the Tiber, I heard it was once used as sewer. While it may be cleaned up now, I still think I stick with running the race before me rather than swimming.

I was going to answer, since I like your arguments, but with that last uncalled for comment, I think I will just leave well enough alone.

Comments like that only prove you have no argument. And from a pastor no less. Is that really Christian?

You should be ashamed.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

James is speaking with a salvific negative by saying we are not saved by faith alone in James 2:17 and 2:24 for starters, how can you say James is not using sorterological language? "Not saved" is a salvific statement.

Not at all. Repentance wouldn’t you agree isn’t just intellectual assent? Repentance requires geniune life changing action, therefore it is a work also and we know that we can’t repent until God gives us the first to be able to repent.

I will say that you are closer to my position on the sola fide issue than most Protestants and I respect you for your honesty.
Sure James is addressing the common Christian capable of doing works, however, I never said James was speaking of those incapable of doing works, I quoted Luke 23:40-43 after you brought up the theif on the cross first. I am merely pointing out that “works” do not subsist with the physical only and the thief wasn’t saved by faith alone for he did act upon his faith and rebuked the other thief and defended truth by acting on that truth which IS a work, therefore the theif wasn’t saved by faith alone!

Really, I don’t have much argument with what you have written. Yes, I would agree that repentance isn’t just intellectual assent. You make a good point in saying that it true repentance requires an action, the action of making a U-turn in our previous actions/thoughts/behaviors/attitudes or whatever it is that we need to repent of.

My problem is that it appears you are about to define every aspect of the Christian life as being a “work” of one type or another. I don’t think that this is how James was using the term, and for us to make James say that seems, to me at least, to being playing fast and loose with the interpreation of scripture. Something I probably have inadvertantly done in the past, which I try to avoid doing when I am conscious of it. So, that leaves me with these questions:

1. Is there ever the occasion when a person might not be able to perform some sort of work?
   I think that perhaps you might say, “No,” for faith you might conceive of faith itself as being a “work”. As I said, I have trouble with that understanding of these words in this context. And so, I have to say, “Yes.” It is conceivable to me that a person might not be able to perform some sort of work?

This brings me to the next question.
2) Can a person who is not able to perform some sort of work still be able to be saved by God?
Given that I think that nothing is impossible for God, I have to answer that question, Yes. Well, then how would this be? It would be like God does for all of us, by his grace. This grace is something that we appropriate I am told in scripture through faith.

Faith as I understand it is not just faith about Jesus, but faith in Jesus. The difference in those prepositions is enormous. Faith {b]in or belief in, pistis eis is the way it is termed by the likes of John and Paul is about more than mental assent – your point with regard to repentance. {i]Pistis eis is about entering into a relationship. It is trusting. I believe in Jesus. I trust Jesus to do for me what I could never do for myself. I trust that God is going to credit me righteous even when I am not. I trust. It is a very active word. And for that reason, for those of us that are capable of action, it always is associated with action, deeds, works of faith. But, for those who might never had the ability to put there faith into action, it is enough to simply trust in Jesus for he will not let us down. He will always act to save those who put their faith, their trust in him. It is enough. We can trust him to be faithful.

 

[Grace_Seeker]

I was going to answer, since I like your arguments, but with that last uncalled for comment, I think I will just leave well enough alone.

Comments like that only prove you have no argument. And from a pastor no less. Is that really Christian?

You should be ashamed.

What upset you about those comments? You invited me for a swim. And I have declined it. Truly, I did not post to offend or even to bait. If I said something wrong, I apologize. And if you will tell me what it is and I can still delete it, I will.

 

[Bishopite]

Grace Seeker;2549703]

1. Is there ever the occasion when a person might not be able to perform some sort of work?

Yes, if a person is comatos, that would indeed keep them from doing any type of work.

I think that perhaps you might say, “No,” for faith you might conceive of faith itself as being a “work”. As I said, I have trouble with that understanding of these words in this context. And so, I have to say, “Yes.” It is conceivable to me that a person might not be able to perform some sort of work?

Me too, and sometimes even physical works of faith.

This brings me to the next question.
2) Can a person who is not able to perform some sort of work still be able to be saved by God?

No, not in my definition. A “work” is being able to freely by ones will, choose Christ. All people who will to be saved will do some sort of work even the paraplegic since it is a freely chosen act of the will. The person I earlier described as being in a coma can’t act within their will, yet they are still alive and if they die, yet they did trust their life to Christ, they will be saved. If they did not trust in Christ and die then they won’t be saved.

Given that I think that nothing is impossible for God, I have to answer that question, Yes. Well, then how would this be? It would be like God does for all of us, by his grace. This grace is something that we appropriate I am told in scripture through faith.

Your idea of what constitutes a work differs from mine so I can see your position on saying yes and if I purely defined a work of faith as physical, then I would affirm your view. A work again, isn’t just physical, as prayer is a work; it is a work of mercy and love. Perhaps you have prayer warriors in your congregation? They are working for the body of Christ by their prayers, James 5:14…the prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
If a person is cast into prison in a foreign country and in that cell turns to Christ Jesus and all he/she can do is pray and therefore pray for their friends/family and immediately there after is executed, that persons prayer is a work, it is a work of love, a work of faith.
That they couldn’t do physical acts of charity doesn’t mean they acted with faith alone (unless one defines faith as a verb) and God doesn’t require that of them because they could only do what they had been given, Luke 12:48…to much is given much is required, therefore to much isn’t given much isn’t required

faith as I understand it is not just faith about Jesus, but faith in Jesus. The difference in those prepositions is enormous

I agree. The first is intellectual assent, the second true geniune love of Jesus and it is as I mentioned before with Mt 25:34-46 the difference between those in verses 41-46 and those in 34-40.
In Catholic theology they are differentiated as fide informis which is unformed faith (or intellectual assent) and fide formata which is geniune faith.

Faith {b]in

or belief in, pistis eis is the way it is termed by the likes of John and Paul is about more than mental assent – your point with regard to repentance. {i]Pistis eis is about entering into a relationship. It is trusting. I believe in Jesus. I trust Jesus to do for me what I could never do for myself. I trust that God is going to credit me righteous even when I am not. I trust. It is a very active word. And for that reason, for those of us that are capable of action, it always is associated with action, deeds, works of faith. But, for those who might never had the ability to put there faith into action, it is enough to simply trust in Jesus for he will not let us down. He will always act to save those who put their faith, their trust in him. It is enough. We can trust him to be faithful.

Perhaps we are really close in our meaning but again, your definition of works is physical only, mine isn’t just purely physical, so for me to say that those who can’t do physical works of faith in Jesus, still are in my definition doing works of faith because they could only “do” what God allowed them the ability to do; sometimes that is as little as saying a prayer to God with a contrite heart.

Yes, I

 

[Grace_Seeker]

Perhaps we are really close in our meaning but again, your definition of works is physical only, mine isn’t just purely physical, so for me to say that those who can’t do physical works of faith in Jesus, still are in my definition doing works of faith because they could only “do” what God allowed them the ability to do; sometimes that is as little as saying a prayer to God with a contrite heart.

Yes, I

We are so close that it boils down, as you said, to what we mean by “work”. While I agree with you that prayer and genuine repentance can indeed be seen as works of faith; however, I don’t think that this was what James had in his mind when he wrote his epistle. I don’t think he was thinking of the comatose, the person in jail, the thief on the cross either. It appears to me (purely an unsubstantiated and unsubstantiatable assumption on my part) that he was thinking of people who were able to go about their daily business. And so I only seek to apply his directives to those who are in those positions.

I’m not saying that you are wrong in considering the person who is confined for the rest of their life to lay in a bed drinking through a straw as doing works of faith by his/her prayers. I agree they are. I just think that such as person is already saved before s/he started praying. And that except for the prayer we offering turning our lives over to God, that all of our prayers are in response to what Christ has done in saving us – that is what makes them works of faith, rather than just works of the law.

So, how about the prayer that we offer turning our lives over to Jesus. Well, that is a prayer of faith, faith that we can trust in Jesus to do what he has promised and save us, not a work of faith. The moment that idea comes to our mind that we need to offer up such a prayer, I believe God declares us justified in his sight.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

There are lots of things not specifically mentioned in the Bible that I believe in. I believe in the Trinity. I believe in “doing a good turn daily” and “random acts of kindness”. I believe in the Constitution of the United States of America. And I believe in my wife. None of these things are never in the Bible but I still believe in them.

You’re missing the point, Grace Seeker.

By relying on ‘text proofing’ you cannot change the rules of the game unless there are really NO rules to begin with in your view concerning the ‘faith alone’ assertion by Protestants.

It would be dishonest and hypocritical, to say nothing of being viewed as a few books (say, 7) short of a Bible.

Robert

 

[Grace_Seeker]

You’re missing the point, Grace Seeker.

By relying on ‘text proofing’ you cannot change the rules of the game unless there are really NO rules to begin with in your view concerning the ‘faith alone’ assertion by Protestants.

It would be dishonest and hypocritical, to say nothing of being viewed as a few books (say, 7) short of a Bible.

Robert

Excuse me, but aren’t you the one looking for whether or not you can specifically find something mentioned in the text.

And why do you ascribe to me a “faith alone” point of view? I never said that I believed in that, or is this something you just assume is true without finding it in what I have written?