Why say "Sola Fide"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EZweber
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I don’t necessarily think that Lutherans deny that the state/act/process of Justification produces a change in the believer, I think that they do not believe that the change can be meritorious on account of two things: First that the change does not come from one’s will but is a result of the action of the Holy Spirit and thus is attributed to God and not the believer, and Second, that the change is progressive and can never completely attain to a level of perfection in this life. Therefore Lutherans (as I understand it) believe in the new man and in participation with God’s grace in their sanctification, but these are more the formal cause of the justified life and not the efficient cause of justification.
 
Last edited:
What you did was move the bar and then told me you agree with the moved bar. That is not the same thing as agreeing. You have also moved the bar again by using the term “sweeten the deal”.

I were referencing a parable of Jesus, one of the many which present transactional interaction.

Abba Father can be happy. Do you have children? If you do are they able ever to do anything that makes you happy? I think you have a wrong perception of God. If we perhaps look at the interaction of Jesus Christ with the people around him who would you picture yourself as.

With regards to protestant hell, it is not God’s hell that I refer to, that is the one that He controls, I am referring to protestant hell.
Except for your attempt at “Protestant Hell” you may have had something here!
 
First that the change does not come from one’s will but is a result of the action of the Holy Spirit and thus is attributed to God and not the believer,
It is a result of our cooperation with the Holy Spirit, but it is impossible without the Holy Spirit.
the change is progressive and can never completely attain to a level of perfection in this life.
If we cooperated fully with the Holy Spirit, we could attain perfection. However, there is only one non divine person I believe to have fully cooperated with the Holy Spirit… “Let it be done unto me according to thy word.”
 
This is different from what I understand to be Lutheran theology, in which you are covered by the merits of Christ to “hide” your sins. In Catholic theology the sin is completely destroyed.
This is a significant difference. Protestants, is it a description you agree with? The Catholic part rings true for me, I recognize the Spirit’s work in it.

Some spoke up thread of a rejection of anything transactional. In my view it is absolutely essential as giving assent to salvation.

As a little girl, I loved to dance with my daddy. I didn’t know the steps, so I put my feet on his and away we went …

My work was to keep my feet on his so that I made the same movements in response to his; a transaction that allowed me to dance with my father - his grace necessary, as well as my assent and follow up.
 
But even if one could be perfect at the moment of death, could one be considered perfect with the cumulative evaluation of their life? I suppose that one could say that confession offers a clean slate, but the difference is that Lutheran Theology denies that mankind can ever fully overcome the effects of sin except in heaven, where as the Catholicism states that it is possible. Ultimately it seems to me that the question of whether or not humanity can be completely liberated from sin in this life is the defining difference between whether one is a Protestant or Catholic when it comes to Justification.
 
When St. Paul says “faith, hope, and love” in 1 Corinthians 13, he finishes by saying, “the greatest of these is love.” In context, he begins the chapter by rebuking the believers in Corinth for focusing on the miraculous gifts, and that if they don’t have love, their gifts are worthless. So, he’s not talking about salvific faith (whether it be by “faith alone” vs. “faith working together through love.”) From what I gather, when Protestants talk about “faith alone,” they are basing it on passages like Romans 1:16-17, where St. Paul quotes the book of Habakkuk, which states “the righteous will live by faith.” According to them, when St. Paul says “live,” he’s not talking about living physically, but coming “alive” through faith (alone), which is how one is credited the righteousness of God, which Martin Luther referred to as a “foreign righteousness” that’s not our own. Maybe that’s where they get “sola fide” from?
 
Last edited:
When St. Paul says “faith, hope, and love” in 1 Corinthians 13, he finishes by saying, “the greatest of these is love.” In context, he begins the chapter by rebuking the believers in Corinth for focusing on the miraculous gifts, and that if they don’t have love, their gifts are worthless. So, he’s not talking about salvific faith (whether it be by “faith alone” vs. “faith working together through love.”) From what I gather, when Protestants talk about “faith alone,” they are basing it on passages like Romans 1:16-17, where St. Paul quotes the book of Habakkuk, which states “the righteous will live by faith.” According to them, when St. Paul says “live,” he’s not talking about living physically, but coming “alive” through faith (alone), which is how one is credited the righteousness of God, which Martin Luther referred to as a “foreign righteousness” that’s not our own. Maybe that’s where they get “sola fide” from?
Sola Fide, remember is an ablative, so it is a means of Justification. Sola Fide is the assertion that faith alone is sufficient for justification. For example, a person who lived a life of Atheism, but came to a place of true faith upon their death would, in the Lutheran understanding, go to heaven on the merit of their faith alone. So Faith Alone is not set up as an ideal or a rule for Christian life, but a sort of minimum requirement and assurance for believers who may be troubled they are in risk of hell from a former action or a future sin. It is actually something I have seen in Catholic discussions as well, but more emphasized in Lutheranism. I have seen some Catholics worry that they will not go to heaven if they die before they go to Confession, even if they believe in Jesus’ work on the Cross. Faith Alone is the Lutheran answer to this uncertainty, that their faith alone is sufficient to earn God’s favor to enter heaven.
 
… which Martin Luther referred to as a “foreign righteousness” that’s not our own. Maybe that’s where they get “sola fide” from?
Also To See What Martin Luther Had to Say About the 2 Kinds of Righteousness:

5] Therefore this alien righteousness, instilled in us without our works by grace alone—while the Father, to be sure, inwardly draws us to Christ—is set opposite original sin, likewise alien, which we acquire without our works by birth alone. Christ daily drives out the old Adam more and more in accordance with the extent to which faith and knowledge of Christ grow. For alien righteousness is not instilled all at once, but it begins, makes progress, and is finally perfected at the end through death.
[6] The second kind of righteousness is our proper righteousness, not because we alone work it, but because we work with that first and alien righteousness. This is that manner of life spent profitably in good works, in the first place, in slaying the flesh and crucifying the desires with respect to the self, of which we read in Gal. 5:24, “And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.” In the second place, this righteousness consists in love to one’s neighbor, and in the third place, in meekness and fear towards God. The Apostle is full of references to these, as is all the rest of Scripture. He briefly summarizes everything, however, in Titus 2:12, “ In this world let us live soberly (pertaining to crucifying one’s own flesh), justly (referring to one’s neighbor), and devoutly (relating to God).”
[7] This righteousness is the product of the righteousness of the first type, actually its fruit and consequence, for we read in Gal. 5:22, “But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.” For because the works mentioned are works of men, it is obvious that in this passage a spiritual man is called “spirit.” In John 3:6 we read, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” This righteousness goes on to complete the first for it ever strives to do away with the old Adam and to destroy the body of sin. Therefore it hates itself and loves its neighbor; it does not seek its own good, but that of another, and in this its whole way of living consists. For in that it hates itself and does not seek its own, it crucifies the flesh. Because it seeks the good of another, it works love. Thus in each sphere it does God’s will living soberly with self, justly with neighbor, devoutly toward God.
[8] This righteousness follows the example of Christ in this respect and is transformed into his likeness. It is precisely this that Christ requires. Just as he himself did all things for us, not seeking his own good but ours only—and in this he was most obedient to God the Father—so he desires that we also should set the same example for our neighbors.
 
This is different from what I understand to be Lutheran theology, in which you are covered by the merits of Christ to “hide” your sins. In Catholic theology the sin is completely destroyed.
Not really. It is true that justification concerns our standing before God so that our sins are covered and God judges us based on Christ’s righteousness. However, to say that Protestants believe we remain in this state of sin covered by Christ and that it is never destroyed in us is false. It’s a mistake to reduce salvation to justification; there are more aspects to it such as regeneration and sanctification. If we believed that sin was never destroyed then some of the greatest Protestant hymns are literally false doctrine to us! Take for example “O For a Thousand Tongues to Sing” where we sing:

Jesus! the name that charms our fears,
That bids our sorrows cease;
’Tis music in the sinner’s ears,
’Tis life, and health, and peace.

He breaks the power of canceled sin,
He sets the prisoner free;
His blood can make the foulest clean,
His blood availed for me.

Yes, our sins are canceled out and forgiven. But the power of sin in our lives is also broken, and we are like prisoners set free and washed completely clean. Sin is canceled, and on the basis of that cancellation its power over us is destroyed as seen in our empowerment to oppose and conquer sin in our own lives.
 
Last edited:
I have seen some Catholics worry that they will not go to heaven if they die before they go to Confession, even if they believe in Jesus’ work on the Cross. Faith Alone is the Lutheran answer to this uncertainty, that their faith alone is sufficient to earn God’s favor to enter heaven.
And yet the thief on the cross was also at least contrite. In any case he did the best he could with the lot he was given at the time.
 
God judges us based on Christ’s righteousness
And that righteousness yet demands some kind of transaction that confirms acceptance of salvation, even though it be as primitive as …
the thief on the cross was also at least contrite. In any case he did the best he could with the lot he was given at the time.
God gives grace and is the judge of the works.
 
But even if one could be perfect at the moment of death, could one be considered perfect with the cumulative evaluation of their life?
Theoretically. It would require a special grace, but one could always do the will of God. It’s not exactly common though.
 
So once justified is one saved? And can one lose that status and, if so, how?
 
So in that case aren’t you saying that faith is all that’s required to be justified, rather than the means to justice for man; any other justice, etc, such as love being unnecessary. Can sin, the failure to love, distance one from God again, causing them to forfeit their state of justice?
 
Last edited:
So in that case aren’t you saying that faith is all that’s required to be justified, rather than the means to justice for man
Well, sola fide does mean “faith alone”.
any other justice, etc, such as love being unnecessary.
Once again, faith working through love.
Can sin, the failure to love, distance one from God again, causing them to forfeit their state of justice?
Sin is disobedience is it not?
And can one lose that status and, if so, how?
 
Ok, so not faith alone but also love and obedience in order to remain in a state of justice.

In Catholicism sins aren’t merely forgiven and righteousness isn’t merely imputed. But real justice is given at justification including more faith along with hope and love.
 
Last edited:
Maybe a mild examination of what “sola fides” has come down to.

Three protestants walk into a bar. The first one says to the others “I am the used chewing-gum stuck to the sole of the shoe of God”. The second one says “I am the vomit stuck to the used chewing-gum on the sole of the shoe of God”. The third one says “I am the dung that is stuck to the vomit of the used chewing-gum on the sole of the shoe of God”.

The bar tender says “You are not elevating God by putting yourself down”.
 
The righteousness that is required is Christ’s righteousness, which we receive by faith. This does not mean that we as Christians do not have responsibilities to work out our salvation. We have a responsibility to take advantage of the means of grace that have been provided for us, to constantly feed on God’s word, to yield to the ministry of the Holy Spirit, and maintain unbroken fellowship with God through prayer. Through faith, obedience and yielding to God’s will, we continue to have fellowship with God. It is not obedience that saves us. It is not even faith that saves us. We are not saved by these nor are we kept saved by these. Rather, it is faith and obedience that keeps us in fellowship with Christ, who is faithful to keep that which we have committed to him.
So if we “have responsibilities to work out our salvation”, apparently we must do more than believe, or in any case justification at the beginning isn’t necessarily sufficient to realize salvation. Would that be correct?
 
Last edited:
I like this because that righteousness is a real righteousness for man, and appears to be linked in some manner to justification and salvation. I understand the alien or foreign righteousness to be one that is foreign to fallen man only -as it’s simply the righteousness that man is meant to have, the “righteousness of God” as it were as opposed to the “righteousness” that man has when he’s essentially autonomous from God, no longer subjugated to Him as is the right order of things, doing what’s right in our own eyes instead.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top