"Works" Salvation? Part 2

[Church_Militant]

He doesn’t need me, or my cooperation, or anything. But what He chooses to do is not based on a “need.” He chooses to act based on our responses.

Thinking God NEEDS anything is a cheap view of God. God is sovereign. He also gave us free will as a second order of creation. He sustains us every second (providence) and also works all things for God for those who love Him - without compromising our free will. Neither is God a rapist, forcing someone to believe against their will. Neither is there no predestination.

Well said! :clapping: :clapping: :clapping: :knight1:

 

[davidmammola]

1.) If salvation comes from faith alone (according to the understanding of this phrase condemned at Trent), why did no Christian in history until the time of Luther believe in or espouse this doctrine? If my assertion here is wrong, please provide proof that any early Church Father believed in this doctrine (which is supposed to be so central to the Christian message). How could Christ and the Holy Spirit (which is given to lead the Church into all truth) have allowed it to be obscured so successfully for 1500 years?
2.) Why would St. Paul himself offer several lists of sins that he says will cut a Christian off from salvation if works are of no importance to our salvation?
3.) The rich young man asks Jesus point blank, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?” and Jesus answers, “Keep the commandments.” This seems pretty clear to me, and from the highest authority – Jesus Himself. To continue on the road to salvation, one must cooperate with the grace of salvation that Christ gives him as a free gift.
4.) To go to heaven, one must freely choose to accept Christ. This choice itself is an action. Prayer is necessary to have relationship with God and thus eternal unity with Him. Prayer is an action. According to the Scriptures, “Baptism now saves” us. Baptism is an action through which God grants His grace to us. One must repent for sins committed to be saved. Repentance is an action. One must love God in order to go to heaven. Love is not just a feeling but an action. Remember, St. Paul tells us that love is the greatest of the virtues. Of course, true love incorporates faith and vice versa.
5.) Furthermore, Protestants themselves do not agree on this doctrine (Episcopalians, Baptists, Calvinists, Fundamentalists, Lutherans, etc. do not all see it the same way). If the Bible clearly teaches “faith alone” why do “Bible Christians” disagree about it?
6.) What about James 2?
7.) I would like to discuss this with Christian charity, so let’s look for some common ground here. I admit that some verses seem to suggest that faith saves us (which, when properly understood, is true in one sense). Is there a faith alone/Bible alone Protestant out there honest enough to admit that there are many other Scriptures that seem to say that love or actions of some kind are important for our salvation? If this cannot be admitted, I do not see how any fruitful dialog about this issue can proceed on this forum (by the way, I think it would be better for us Christians to keep silent than to insult one another to no end over a doctrinal issue). I pray that both sides in this discussion are sincerely searching for truth, and not just trying to win arguments.

 

[sandusky]

Church Militant:

Really? That certainly seems to be your interpretation…but not what the Lord says. Especially in Matthew 25:31-46.

All of the good things done in Mt 25 were done through faith alone (cf Rom 1:17; Hab 2:4; Gal 3:11; Heb 10:38).
Church Militant:

I think n-Cs can cherry pick proof texts til hell freezes over and it still won’t hold up for anyone who has actually read the New Testament all the way through.

I think the same way toward Catholics.
Church Militant:

That’s Calvinist hooey.

Standard Catholic argument; namely, “those verses don’t mean what they say…”
Church Militant:

Defying the very words of Our Lord Himself whan he said. (John 12:32) and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself."

Paul believed it!

My step-father, a Roman Catholic RCIA instructor, and Eucharistic minister, is, as you seem to be, a universalist with respect to salvation—everyone will be saved, because we are all basically good people, and Christ will draw everyone to Himself. He is also a non-evangelist because of that belief.

**Repentance isn’t the only thing of course…**and St. Paul believed it because it was the first thing that he heard upon his conversion. Acts 22:16: And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

Without repentance, you won’t do anything else.

I thought the first thing Paul heard upon his conversion was, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting, but get up and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do.”

 

[apophasis]

Truthstalker:

Don’t you believe He can give someone the power to live a perfectly sinless life?

No. Not unless He completely reverses creation itself. Men are “sinners” not simply because they’ve sinned practically, but they’re “born” so, in Adam. They’re sinners from womb to tomb, as long as they remain “in Adam.” The only “someone” to whom God could give the power to live a perfectly sinless life is “someone” not of Adam’s race. Your question is totally outside the realm of Biblical revelation, i.e., that which is divinely revealed concerning who/what man is.

Sinlessness was only an issue with Adam before the fall, and then only with the “last Adam,” Jesus Christ, after the fall.

The divine issue of salvation regarding Adam’s fallen race never was, nor ever is, about achieving sinlessness. But about sins forgiven through faith “in” the Sinless One who, as the unblemished Lamb of God, bore our sins in His body on the cross, and through faith “in” Him, by the power of God, are “born again” out of Adam and into the resurrected “last Adam.” Given a whole new identity, a whole new life, eternally “in Him” - no longer a “sinner” but a “saint.”

And speaking of the saints in Christ, Paul writes:2 Cor. 5:14-17 "For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died; and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf. Therefore from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh; even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know no longer. Therefore if anyone is in Christ, {he is} a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come."Salvation was never about achieving sinlessness (achieving the impossible), but having sins forgiven along with a whole new identity in the resurrected Sinless One - the “last Adam.”

After all, He did it on earth. We are to follow His example and not just make excuses like we can’t cut it.

The truth is, it is the religious who will constantly, throughout their entire, frustrated lives, give “excuses” why they fail to live “a perfectly sinless life.” Something which God calls no man to do, since ALL men are born in a state of sin. A birth reality which cannot be reversed - only remedied via the divine miracle of a “new creation,” being “born again” out of Adam and into Christ resurrected.Rom 5:18-19 "So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men. For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous."TS, Jesus said,Jn. 6:29 "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent."There’s a vast difference between believing “of” Him whom He has sent, and personally believing “in” Him whom He has sent.

The former “lifts Him up” as an example of how he may achieve salvation, the latter abandons all self-effort and humbly believes the message that by the mercies of God He “was lifted up” for our salvation (see Jn. 3:14-18). There is no salvation achieved by the exercise of the former (only condemnation), but it (salvation) is graciously gifted through the exercise of the latter.

In Pauline theology there’s far more significance to Christ’s resurrection than just being an historical event celebrated annually by Christendom.

 

[Milliardo]

All of the good things done in Mt 25 were done through faith alone (cf Rom 1:17; Hab 2:4; Gal 3:11; Heb 10:38).

Are you saying that the deeds done were done so in obedience to God? If that is so, then that is exactly what the Catholic Church is saying.

I thought the first thing Paul heard upon his conversion was, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting, but get up and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do.”

Even here it’s seen that Paul must do something, not just that he went up, believed, and that’s the end of it. Good job making Catholic apologetics easier for us.

No. Not unless He completely reverses creation itself. Men are “sinners” not simply because they’ve sinned practically, but they’re “born” so, in Adam. They’re sinners from womb to tomb, as long as they remain “in Adam.” The only “someone” to whom God could give the power to live a perfectly sinless life is “someone” not of Adam’s race. Your question is totally outside the realm of Biblical revelation, i.e., that which is divinely revealed concerning who/what man is.

And yet, what did Jesus say? “Be perfect, just as my Father in heaven is perfect”> This is not something He said offhand. It is a command. Now, some object to this (surprisingly) and say that we cannot be perfect. How can that be so? Again, we find that nothing is impossible with God. So then, for Christ it is not impossible for us to be perfect. He knows what He’s saying, and He would not say that if He sees it’s impossible. But He sees that man is capable of perfecting himself with Him. So, there it is. It is Jesus who gives this power for us to live a perfect life, as you stated. But no, it is not impossible–that possibility is there.

 

[davidmammola]

With regard to the question of Jesus “not being powerful enough to save us without our help,” allow me to clear up a serious misunderstanding. Jesus is powerful enough to accomplish anything possible. He has simply chosen to allow humanity to participate and cooperate in the process of our sanctification and salvation just as God allows us to participate in the act of creation. No human being can really create anything ex nihilo. However, God permits us (graces us, really) with the ability to work together with Him to bring a new human being into the world. In the same way, no human being can save himself from sin and death. Only God has the power to do this. But in His infinite mercy and love, He invites us to cooperate in His work of salvation. He could easily do it without us, and in one sense, He already did. But He has also chosen to allow us to participate in the process so that we may freely choose Him. Our love and our faithful responses to His grace are only meaningful because they are freely chosen. Otherwise, we would be of no greater dignity than robots.

 

[guanophore]

and the New Testament says what? Galatians 5:6: For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love. So that is what the the Church teaches is it not?

(I know Miliardo knows what he’s talking about, but he may not have expressed it very well. That happens when ya get in a rush to post. :yup: )

Yes, I think the problem many reformed folks have, and Catholics as well, is an improper and inadequate understanding of the initial justification by grace. Without this foundation, or “root” as Traveller I think called it, then it is a bad tree, with bad fruits (works of no avail). Any work that is not based in salvation by grace through faith is sin (missing the mark). And in no case do works “save” a person, which can only be done by faith.

 

[Church_Militant]

All of the good things done in Mt 25 were done through faith alone (cf Rom 1:17; Hab 2:4; Gal 3:11; Heb 10:38).

According to you…

I think the same way toward Catholics.

so…that doesn’t make you less wrong.

Standard Catholic argument; namely, “those verses don’t mean what they say…

” “I think the same way toward” most n-Cs.

My step-father, a Roman Catholic RCIA instructor, and Eucharistic minister, is, as you seem to be, a universalist with respect to salvation—everyone will be saved, because we are all basically good people, and Christ will draw everyone to Himself. He is also a non-evangelist because of that belief.

The Church and the rest of Catholicism is not responsible for your step father’s errors. His error does not in any way invalidate the truth taught by our most holy faith. Nonetheless, he is dead wrong. And if that is your best refutation, you really are hurting.

Without repentance, you won’t do anything else.

and repentance is a deed…a work; according to the Word of God anyway…

I thought the first thing Paul heard upon his conversion

was, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting, but get up and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do.” Better go read your New Testament more carefully.

Still no refutation of the New Testament scriptures that I have provided.

 

[Church_Militant]

Yes, I think the problem many reformed folks have, and Catholics as well, is an improper and inadequate understanding of the initial justification by grace. Without this foundation, or “root” as Traveller I think called it, then it is a bad tree, with bad fruits (works of no avail). Any work that is not based in salvation by grace through faith is sin (missing the mark). And in no case do works “save” a person, which can only be done by faith.

:yup: Pretty much.

 

[sandusky]

Milliardo:

Are you saying that the deeds done were done so in obedience to God? If that is so, then that is exactly what the Catholic Church is saying.

I didn’t say anything about obedience, Milliardo, but that good things are done, primarily, through the instrument of faith; that is what the scripture teaches; scripture teaches as well, that the one who has faith exercises that faith by being obedient to God’s commands; that is primarily a scriptural teaching, and, secondarily, and not exclusively, a Catholic teaching.

Milliardo:

Even here it’s seen that Paul must do something, not just that he went up, believed, and that’s the end of it. Good job making Catholic apologetics easier for us.

Prior to his conversion, the Lord had declared that Paul must love the Lord His God with all his heart, all his soul, and all his mind; and that Paul must love his neighbor as himself; but Paul did not want to do that, nor could he do that; instead, he preferred to continue in his persecution of his neighbor; it was only after his conversion, that Paul, on the basis of faith, was able to love his neighbor, as well as go into the city, as the Lord instructed.

 

[sandusky]

Church Militant:

The Church and the rest of Catholicism is not responsible for your step father’s errors. His error does not in any way invalidate the truth taught by our most holy faith. Nonetheless, he is dead wrong. And if that is your best refutation, you really are hurting.

So what are you saying that John 12:32 is saying?

 

[Milliardo]

I didn’t say anything about obedience, Milliardo, but that good things are done, primarily, through the instrument of faith

Yet when you obey God, you do it in faith, unless this is your trying to get around the notion of obedience by making semantic gymnastics (wow, that rhymes )

scripture teaches as well, that the one who has faith exercises that faith by being obedient to God’s commands; that is primarily a scriptural teaching, and, secondarily, and not exclusively, a Catholic teaching.

Ah, so you agree finally that what the Church teaches is true. I’m glad you agree then.

Prior to his conversion, the Lord had declared that Paul must love the Lord His God with all his heart, all his soul, and all his mind; and that Paul must love his neighbor as himself; but Paul did not want to do that, nor could he do that; instead, he preferred to continue in his persecution of his neighbor; it was only after his conversion, that Paul, on the basis of faith, was able to love his neighbor, as well as go into the city, as the Lord instructed.

Doesn’t change the fact that Paul still has to do something, which totally negates faith alone. Paul still has to do something, and he is bound by faith to obey Christ. Again, very Catholic stuff.

 

[guanophore]

That is a Catholic teaching, and that is why Catholics believe that they can lose their justification/salvation.

I think we are talking apples and oranges here. To say that it can never be justifiable (excusable) to go against God’s moral law is not the same as saying that one can be justified (saved) by following it.

The corollary to not being good enough to earn salvation, is not being bad enough to lose it.

While it is true that there are no sins too big for God to forgive, one can either refuse forgiveness, or throw it away. This rejection of the Holy Spirit is the only unforgivable sin,a nd can result in a loss of salvation.

That is because it is God who is at work in the Christian to work and to will (Php 2), and because the Christian is kept by the power of God through faith for salvation (1 Pet 1:3).

So long as that Christian also works with God!

If you can lose justification/salvation, that can only be because it is based upon your performance, be it negatively, or positively; either way, it is your performance that is in view

But in both cases is it performance is first a result of faith. If one is unbelieving, and rejects the Holy Spirit, then one cannot be convicted and forgiven of sins. This is unbelief. Out of that arises breaking of the commandments, and from that, guilt of the whole law.

That is a false assumption; namely, that the omnipotent God of the universe is impotent when it comes to getting the preaching of the Gospel to those He intends to save.

It is a false assumption to think that it is all up to God. We are co-creators, and His grace must be met by our faith in order for salvation to occur. God’s power and grace are not lessened, just because people refuse to receive them. Some mocked, some scoffed, and some believed. The power of the gospel message was no weaker.

 

[Truthstalker]

No. Not unless He completely reverses creation itself…

The thing is, that He DID reverse the order of creation. Death itself started working backwards with the resurrection. Adam’s fall was broken; the curse destroyed; man can be born again and set free from sin. Its power is not diminished but destroyed - it rattles on like a dead thing until the end of the world, but its fire is out.

And I believe in Him - enough to forsake all and follow Him, even to forsake Protestant theology and follow Him into the Catholic Church. Salvation is a gift - a higher and deeper and more costly one - costly to Him, free to me - than I imagined as a Protestant.

We are born again in baptism; we have a new nature; we are of Christ and no longer of Adam. With God all things are possible. You fail to understand the signficance of what you have read, and written. Jesus meant what He said.

You are still dead in your sins, by your own words, still a slave of sin. According to you salvation is a cheap gift without content, and faith is a sham, and Jesus is a liar. You say He has not set you free. You simply don’t believe Him or His promises. He said “be perfect”; where He commands, He empowers. Unless you think He was devious, or a liar. In either case He then was not telling the truth. You do not have to sin any more. Jesus can set you free.

You should not limit yourself to Pauline theology, That is a mistake right there. There are reasons Paul didn’t write the whole NT. Nor do you adequately grasp Paul, not even the quotes you have furnished. They say much more than you realize.

There is nothing attractive in your theology. It is the dead letter of the law continued without power, a cheap and shallow imitation of Catholicism, like a child’s sandcastle on the beach next to a mighty fortress of stone built on rock, a compromise with despair. What is good in it is expressed more profoundly and surely in Catholicism. Grace, on the other hand, is the power to change and live a holy life. It takes imagination, faith and courage to be Catholic.

 

[Church_Militant]

So what are you saying that John 12:32 is saying?

The same thing that the Catholic Church teaches, that all men are called to salvation in Christ. Nowhere does that or any other passage of scripture nor teaching of the Catholic Church support your step father’s errant universalism.

So…your comments on his beliefs are actually irrelevant, with this caveat, that you have not misunderstood him or misrepresented what he believes. Always a possibility…

 

[RNRobert]

Matthew 13:58 And he wrought not many miracles there, because of their unbelief. (RSV 58: And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.)

Thanks!

I noticed that many times when Jesus healed someone, He tells them “Your faith has made you whole” or words to that effect.

 

[Church_Militant]

Thanks!

I noticed that many times when Jesus healed someone, He tells them “Your faith has made you whole” or words to that effect.

[SIGN]Yep[/SIGN] He sure does. That and “Go and sin no more.”

 

[apophasis]

Yes, I think the problem many reformed folks have, and Catholics as well, is an improper and inadequate understanding of the initial justification by grace.

Well, if you’re talking Biblically, an improper and inadequae understanding of justification is when the word “initial” is attached. Paul is the greatest teacher of this doctrine and nowhere does he attach that word.

Any work that is not based in salvation by grace through faith is sin (missing the mark).

But Paul says that “all sinned (i.e., in Adam) and are continually falling short of the glory of God, being justified (through “faith works” that make the mark,”** NO!**) through the redemption which is IN CHRIST JESUS" (Rom. 3:22-23).

“Missing the mark,” according to Paul, has nothing to do with works of any kind, but having had sinned and continually falling short of God’s glory (His perfection). IOW, no human works of any kind can or could ever bridge the gap. According to Paul only a divine justification can do that, and the kind of justification which is gifted (not earned/merited), based solely on the redemptive work of Another (the cross), the Son of God Himself.

And in no case do works “save” a person, which can only be done by faith.

But RCs don’t believe they can be fully saved in this life. You’re still in the* process* of being saved (a doctrine akin to Rome’s “initial” justification). IOW, when you become a RC you enter into a life on probation - waiting yet your final judgment.

Now the question is, on what then is that final judgment based? On what basis does a RC finally merit salvation (if at all)?

 

[apophasis]

[SIGN]Yep[/SIGN] He sure does. That and "Go and sin no more."

For the sake of attaining one’s salvation?

The phrase, “go and sin no more,” is found in only one place (Jn. 8:11). And the story itself is not found in most of the old manuscripts.

 

[Truthstalker]

Well,On what basis does a RC finally merit salvation (if at all)?

Grace.