Faith vs. Works

[Vanguard PCD]

No, this is not another debate thread about Faith vs. Works.

I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and as such was taught that we are saved through faith alone. However, as I got older (and in more recent years) I started really digging deep into the various English translations of the Bible, while also learning some Hebrew and Greek. I started questioning the concept of sola fide, because clearly there are verses that contradict it.

Most of the debates come down to which side you agree with: Paul or James.

Then it dawned on me one day, out of the blue. It is as if the light bulb went on inside my head. I had an "AH HA!" moment...

Paul and James both agree on the same thing; they are just expressing different points within the concept of salvation. Paul says that it is faith alone that saves, and he is right. James says faith and good works is what saves, and he is also right. Confused? Allow me to elaborate.

Paul's expression is straight forward. There is no question as to what he means. Through your faith in Jesus, you are saved. You can't buy your way into paradise. A lifetime of doing good, without faith, does not grant you salvation. End of story.

James' expression is not so straight forward, but the end result is the same. The difference is that James is stating that TRUE FAITH does indeed save you, and that if you have TRUE FAITH you will produce good works, as they go hand in hand. If you claim to have faith but do not produce good works, your faith is empty, dead and meaningless. You have to do more than just "talk the talk."

So you see, they are saying the same thing, but are approaching it from two different angles. Faith and works are akin to fire and heat...they are linked together. You can't have one without the other!

Now let's deal with Revelation 20:12-13...

12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.

13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds.

Those two verses indicate that we are judged based off of our deeds [works]. Some would argue that they solidify the position of faith + works. However, I would argue that the judgment is to test the mettle of your faith, and to see if you truly "walked the walk" as indicated by the works your TRUE FAITH produced.

In other words...

My Soul: Lord, I stand before you awaiting judgment on my life. I claim to have faith, and through my faith I did the best that I could with good deeds [works].

God: You are indeed being judged, based on your faith produced deeds, to see if your faith was true or not. Did you claim to be a Christian but then stopped there, or did you sincerely mean it, and lived your life accordingly? I have read the Books, and you...

 

[stenerson]

Not exactly. They are dealing with 2 different topic altogether.
Justification before God (Paul) and justification before man (James).
We are justified before God the moment we believe. Before doing any work God sees us in His Son and accepts His perfect obedience in our behalf.
James is dealing with justification before men, or the fruits that test our profession before men. A false faith never fools God, but men may be fooled for a while. Ultimately though, a false faith will show bad fruit which will be seen among men. Jesus used the term in this context also when He said "But wisdom is justified of her children."

 

[Danoh]

From the Mid-Acts Perspective, James is writing James "to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad," in light of Acts 8:1 and 11:19.

And that, in light of what the Lord commamded his disciples in Matt. 23:1-5. The passage is the very issue James is addressing in James 2 - and its context - The Law.

Or what Paul later describes "MOSES describeth the righteousness WHICH IS OF THE LAW, that the man WHICH DOETH THOSE THINGS, shall live BY them," Rom. 10:5

Thus, the sense of James' writing is as in his Acts 21:20 statement about "how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zelous OF THE LAW:"

In this, James is talking about how "God... shall justify the circumcusion BY faith," while Paul is talking about how "God... shall justify... the uncircumcision THROUGH faith," Rom. 3:30.

James is dealing with the issue of "that righteousness OF THE LAW," that the Circumcision were under. Paul is dealing with that "righteousness which is of faith" which began to be revealed with Paul, and which he preached to the Uncircumcision.

What remains is to identify who these Uncircumcision were, which; per Rom. 2, included "all the Jews... among the Gentiles," Acts 21:21.

What we see in this is two assemblies - the one [the Israel of God, Rom. 2, Gal. 6] TEMPORARILY being "diminished" Rom. 11:12, 25-29, "til the fulness of the Gentile" one "be come in."

In this, our attempt at reasoning through the intended sense of these things must be in light of Paul's and James' context - Gal. 2:7-9.

It MUST supercede our attempt to get at their sense via "the sense of the Greek word" as well as, via " now, let me see, how might I harmonize this, with this over here..."

We can arrive at "what makes sense to me" by that, but only becuase it is both, bereft of their context, as well as our unawareness of just what that context was.

Bereft of those two, what "makes sense to me," does only to that context we have unawares viewed these things through.

In this, the Hebrews writer's words come to mind as to "many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing," Heb. 5:11.

That's what can happen to us when we go so long attempting to look at these things outside their actual context, our own, the context.

Just something to think on...

 

[SMA12]

I have always held that people on both sides of the debate are closer than they realize.

I optimistically think most of us can agree on the following line of reasoning:

Does faith save us?
Yes.

Which kind of faith- a dead faith or a living (saving) faith?
A living faith.

Can a dead faith save us?
No.

What is the difference between a living faith and a dead faith?
A living faith produces good works. Faith without works is dead.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just a few notes on the posts this far (These I assume will draw more criticism. Oh well.)...

Paul never says we are saved by "faith alone". Those 2 words are only found together once in all of Scripture, when James says we are not saved by faith alone. However, when Paul speaks of being saved by faith, I believe its reasonable to assume he is talking about a living faith as opposed to a dead faith. James tells us the difference between the two: works.

Secondly, I see no context in James that suggests he is talking about justification before man as opposed to God. Is there even such a thing?

 

[Danoh]

Depends on what you understand justification before men to mean. There is warrant for it in Scripture - BUT SCRIPTURE'S OWN CONTEXT rules. Thus, some may not see it, and even less might understand its particular, applicable economy. "But wisdom is" indeed "justified of all her children," Luke 7:35.

Anyway...

Some years ago, while sharing the various salvation or hell fire option passages with a former street thug, as I shared them, he trusted Christ.

Knowing the mess that the traditions of men would sooner or later come along and attempt to confuse him with, I asked this brand new believer, the simple question, 'Now, what happens when you sin?'

"Well, Christ died for my sin, so... I'm forgiven," he replied.

Then, a split second after that, he greedily added, "Wait a minute... that means I can do anything I want... "

I couldn't help thinking, 'this new believer understands Grace more than most seasoned.preachers, wow... he understands that grace is not grace if it is unable to risk it's abuse... okay, he's got that - time to begin his Romans 6-8 understanding of how that grace is not a license to sin, rather, power over sin..."

See, its not about a so called living faith. Rather, about THE VERY MOMENT you trust that Christ died FOR you, God saves you in His Son.

And THAT is "NOT of works, lest ANY man should boast," Eph. 2:9.

Thus, this new brother's equaly new issue had been, right then and there one of a living faith, for he was saved IN THE VERY MOMENT THAT HE "TRUSTED, after that he heard the Word of Truth, the gospel of your salvation: in Whom ALSO AFTER THAT YE BELIEVED, ye were SEALED WITH that Holy Spirit of Promise," v. 13.

His issue was "I beseech you THEREFORE, brethren, by the mercies of God" - on the basis of His love toward us in Christ - "that ye present your BODIES a LIVING sacrifice" for this is who he now was, in Christ - ALIVE in Him. Thus, he was now to be "holy" separate from the course of this world, "acceptable unto God," as to his "REASONABLE service," now, Rom. 12:1.

His was still the mind of his former life. Now it was time for him to begin the process of "be NOT conformed to this world: BUT be ye transformed" as to your outer, "by the renewing of your mind," as to your new, inward man status, v. 2.

James is addressing what only appears a similar issue in that, while Paul is addressing the issue of how a member of the Body of Christ should conduct himself - in light of who God has made him in Christ - James is addressing the Israel of God as to who they are and how they are to conduct themselves.

The Israel of God is identified by Paul, by the way, in Romans 2 and 9...

In Romans 2, Paul, having presented God's case against the Gentiles, moves on to present God's case against Israel - why God announced through Paul that His salvation was temporarily going to the Gentiles directly, rather than as prophesied, rather than through Israel...

"...he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that OF THE HEART, in the spirit, and not in the letter: whose praise is not of men, but OF GOD," Rom. 2:29.

Those last two words, together with the following in light of it, identify the "Israel of God," mentioned at the end of Gal. 6.

"Israel, which followed after THE LAW of righteousness, hath NOT attained to THE LAW of righteousness. WHEREFORE? BECAUSE THEY sought it NOT BY FAITH, BUT as it were, by the works of the law..." Rom. 9:31, 32.

That is what James is talking about - outward works under THE LAW, that, inwardly, lacked faith.

They claimed Moses, but in their dead works denied him. John 8.

Hence, James' looking back at Abraham sometime AFTER he received the sign of Circumcision, which was when he went up to sacrifice Isaac, in faith.

In contrast, Paul takes things back to before Abraham's Circumcision, per Romans 4.

In James' perspective, the Israel of God's works under the Law, are not a dead, faithless display of the things of the Law, rather, works under the Law done in faith, as in Luke 1:6.

In Paul's perspective - NOT under the Law, but under Grace - "as ye have received Him" - under Grace, BY FAITH, SO walk ye in Him" - "under Grace, by FAITH."

Two systems of faith - one by Covenant entered into by Israel, that they manifest themselves the Israel of God - the other by Grace, that the Body of Christ walk in those "good works" that are particular to being under Grace: that "we" as "His workmanship," have been "created IN Christ Jesus" unto, "which God hath BEFORE ordained that we should walk in," Eph. 2:10

 

[Steeno7]

Not exactly. They are dealing with 2 different topic altogether.
Justification before God (Paul) and justification before man (James).
We are justified before God the moment we believe. Before doing any work God sees us in His Son and accepts His perfect obedience in our behalf.
James is dealing with justification before men, or the fruits that test our profession before men. A false faith never fools God, but men may be fooled for a while. Ultimately though, a false faith will show bad fruit which will be seen among men. Jesus used the term in this context also when He said "But wisdom is justified of her children."

^^^THIS^^^

 

[Harry3142]

James taught that if a Christian's faith is genuine, it will be exhibited through his compassion for others. This teaching is in agreement with Paul's teaching that those Christians whose faith is genuine will have implanted within us a new nature. This nature will have motivations at its core that will urge us to perform the tasks that God has set before us:

So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.

The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other. (Galatians 5:16-26,NIV)

There are those today who attempt to convince us that anyone who pays lipservice to Christ's atoning sacrifice is automatically guaranteed salvation, irregardless of the lifestyle that they choose to follow. But this passage makes it quite clear that those of us who have genuinely and with a contrite heart accepted Jesus Christ's atoning sacrifice have by so doing crucified the sinful nature, thus permitting God's Spirit to implant within us a new nature. And with this new nature as the impetus for our actions we find ourselves performing the tasks that God has set before us to do.

Our freedom from the law is not to be seen as a license to sin. It is instead to be seen as the implanting within us of a new nature containing those motivations which lie at the heart of the law. That's why the words which immediately follow the listing of 'the fruit of the Spirit' are, "Against such things there is no law."

 

[SMA12]

James taught that if a Christian's faith is genuine, it will be exhibited through his compassion for others. This teaching is in agreement with Paul's teaching that those Christians whose faith is genuine will have implanted within us a new nature. This nature will have motivations at its core that will urge us to perform the tasks that God has set before us:

So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.

The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other. (Galatians 5:16-26,NIV)

There are those today who attempt to convince us that anyone who pays lipservice to Christ's atoning sacrifice is automatically guaranteed salvation, irregardless of the lifestyle that they choose to follow. But this passage makes it quite clear that those of us who have genuinely and with a contrite heart accepted Jesus Christ's atoning sacrifice have by so doing crucified the sinful nature, thus permitting God's Spirit to implant within us a new nature. And with this new nature as the impetus for our actions we find ourselves performing the tasks that God has set before us to do.

Our freedom from the law is not to be seen as a license to sin. It is instead to be seen as the implanting within us of a new nature containing those motivations which lie at the heart of the law. That's why the words which immediately follow the listing of 'the fruit of the Spirit' are, "Against such things there is no law."

Well said

 

[Hawkiz]

I would tend to agree that this is an area of contention where Catholic and Protestant alike are closer to each other than they may know. It becomes a matter of how each side expresses their belief to the other. An argument of language rather than of actual doctrine.

The Catholic Church's longstanding teaching on justification is not an easy one to wrap the brain around...it is often stated as 'both/and' in regards to faith/works; rather than the (common but not exclusive) position of 'either/or'. The 'both/and' concept is difficult to accept, I will grant anyone this with regard to justification. However, this is exactly what Scripture shows us to be true, and therefor, the Protestant and the Catholic need not squabble amongst each other since...as the Church teaches, both are correct! Let's examine the Scriptures to see if the Church teaching here is the Truth:

Justification is by works.
Scripture tells us (quite clearly) that God does not justify those who do not do His work, as in Matthew 7:21 ('not everyone who calls me Lord, Lord will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but he who does the will of My Father...). And further in Romans 2:3-13, where St. Paul tells us that it is not the hearers of the law, but the doers of the law who shall be justified (in the eyes of God when taken in context).
God does not justify those who do not do His will, only those who keep His commands are justified...thus, works can and do justify us.
BUT
Justification is also NOT by works.
Scripture (again, quite clearly) tells us that we can never hope to obtain salvation of our own accords. We can not possibly hope to stand before God in judgement and say 'Nope. I'm good. No need for you to do anything God. I washed my own sins, cleansed my own soul and have no need for any interference from You.' Clearly as Christians, none of us would dream of this being true, and the good news is that none of us attend Church where this is taught! Catholic and Protestant alike would be lightning quick to distance themselves from this line of thinking.
And Scripture supports us saying that it is not by works that we are justified...just as Christ Himself said of the Pharisee in Luke 18: 9-14. We are all called to be humble before The Lord and count on Him for ALL OF OUR JUSTIFICATION, and NOT in or on ourselves. We do not justify ourselves. We do not wash ourselves of sin. That is ALL God's work. And the Catholic Church has taught this and continues to teach this (catechism #1994). St. Augustine taught (and the Church teaches) that justification is by God alone. And justification of the sinner, i.e. you and I, is the greatest sign of God's eternal mercy. What better way for God to show His Love than to justify one that can not ever justify himself?
Thus, justification is not by any act that we can perform. There is no 'earning' Heaven.

Clear as mud so far?
Continued below:

 

[Hawkiz]

How can it be by faith alone? Answer: it is, but not in the modern Protestant way of thinking, although it is very close to the Catholic teaching on faith alone...

Scripture tells us in Romans 2:13 that only those who do the will of God will be justified. There really isn't any getting around that aspect.
Revelation 22:12-15 goes further to tell us similarly that we must DO in order to be blessed.

How then, does faith 'alone' lend itself to justification and salvation?

Answer: through the Sacraments. When we approach the Sacraments properly, we express our faith in action just as Abraham did.

It is by faith alone that God justifies those who believe His promises.

It is by faith alone that the Catholic believes that God washes away sin through our Baptism. It is by faith alone that we believe that God seals us in the Holy Spirit through Confirmation. It is by faith alone that we believe God removes our sins through Confession. It is by faith alone that we believe that we receive the Body and Blood of our Lord in the Eucharist. It is by faith alone that we believe God joins two people to become one in Holy Matrimony. It is by faith alone that we trust in God to heal our afflictions through the Annointing of the Sick. It is by faith alone that we believe that God sets some aside to serve His Works in a special way through Holy Orders.

We can not accomplish ANY of these ourselves. None of us can wash away our own sins. None of us can seal ourselves in the Holy Spirit. No one can remove their own sin. None of us can transform bread and wine into our Lord's Body and Blood. We can not declare ourselves to be one with another person. We can not heal our own afflictions. We can not set ourselves apart. These are ALL things that only God can do.
Therefor, it is by faith alone that we are justified in the Sacraments.

But WAIT! Many of you are screaming! How can it be faith alone?!?!?! 'The only time those words are together in Scripture is when faith alone is described as NOT enough! And you are correct...which leads us back to it being BOTH faith AND works, at the same time, and never separated, just as the Church teaches...

For example:
A man enters a church and asks to be baptized. However, he is drunk, cursing the name of The Lord, and has a prostitute on each arm. The minister will look at him and say: 'well...you are going to have to make some changes...some BIG changes. You are going to have to repent of your sinful ways.' The guy joins the church, says prayers, 'Amens', reads Scripture, goes to church every Sunday, etc. but he never repents... Catholic and Protestant alike would say that baptism isn't going to save this person by itself...the work for the works sake means nothing without the faith that accompanies it. Some would say he didn't have a 'saving' faith, others would say he never had a true faith, and still others would say he was a hypocrite and that the minister should not have baptized him, while others would say that we can only pray that baptism opens the door of the mans heart and allows the Holy Spirit to begin to transform him. Which is the path filled with the Love of God?

Anyway, I hope and pray that this demonstrates that the Catholic and the Protestant are NOT far away from each other with regard to the argument over justification. And I pray that we seek to unify rather than divide over our words about this subject.

Peace in Christ

 

[SMA12]

How can it be by faith alone? Answer: it is, but not in the modern Protestant way of thinking, although it is very close to the Catholic teaching on faith alone...

Scripture tells us in Romans 2:13 that only those who do the will of God will be justified. There really isn't any getting around that aspect.
Revelation 22:12-15 goes further to tell us similarly that we must DO in order to be blessed.

How then, does faith 'alone' lend itself to justification and salvation?

Answer: through the Sacraments. When we approach the Sacraments properly, we express our faith in action just as Abraham did.

It is by faith alone that God justifies those who believe His promises.

It is by faith alone that the Catholic believes that God washes away sin through our Baptism. It is by faith alone that we believe that God seals us in the Holy Spirit through Confirmation. It is by faith alone that we believe God removes our sins through Confession. It is by faith alone that we believe that we receive the Body and Blood of our Lord in the Eucharist. It is by faith alone that we believe God joins two people to become one in Holy Matrimony. It is by faith alone that we trust in God to heal our afflictions through the Annointing of the Sick. It is by faith alone that we believe that God sets some aside to serve His Works in a special way through Holy Orders.

We can not accomplish ANY of these ourselves. None of us can wash away our own sins. None of us can seal ourselves in the Holy Spirit. No one can remove their own sin. None of us can transform bread and wine into our Lord's Body and Blood. We can not declare ourselves to be one with another person. We can not heal our own afflictions. We can not set ourselves apart. These are ALL things that only God can do.
Therefor, it is by faith alone that we are justified in the Sacraments.

But WAIT! Many of you are screaming! How can it be faith alone?!?!?! 'The only time those words are together in Scripture is when faith alone is described as NOT enough! And you are correct...which leads us back to it being BOTH faith AND works, at the same time, and never separated, just as the Church teaches...

For example:
A man enters a church and asks to be baptized. However, he is drunk, cursing the name of The Lord, and has a prostitute on each arm. The minister will look at him and say: 'well...you are going to have to make some changes...some BIG changes. You are going to have to repent of your sinful ways.' The guy joins the church, says prayers, 'Amens', reads Scripture, goes to church every Sunday, etc. but he never repents... Catholic and Protestant alike would say that baptism isn't going to save this person by itself...the work for the works sake means nothing without the faith that accompanies it. Some would say he didn't have a 'saving' faith, others would say he never had a true faith, and still others would say he was a hypocrite and that the minister should not have baptized him, while others would say that we can only pray that baptism opens the door of the mans heart and allows the Holy Spirit to begin to transform him. Which is the path filled with the Love of God?

Anyway, I hope and pray that this demonstrates that the Catholic and the Protestant are NOT far away from each other with regard to the argument over justification. And I pray that we seek to unify rather than divide over our words about this subject.

Peace in Christ

Very well thought out and written! I think you nailed it and I am interested to hear what some others, especially non-Catholics, think about what you wrote.

 

[Hawkiz]

Very well thought out and written! I think you nailed it and I am interested to hear what some others, especially non-Catholics, think about what you wrote.

I can't and won't take full credit for it. I certainly had lots of help in expressing the ideas...through conversations with Catholic priests, Presbyterian ministers, and a deep study of the Church and what she actually teaches, but I think it all comes down to how it gets worded that makes so many attack the Church as 'works-based', or 'works-focused', when in reality, She is not and has defended and fought against those who have been. I pray for greater unity among all Christians! And I thank you from the bottom of my heart for your support.

Peace in Christ

 

[biblestudyresources]

I would interpret the verse from Revelation this way. Those that are believers are saved by faith and not judged by our deeds. Those that are not saved will be judged by their deeds (not that their deeds can save them because they are already doomed for punishment) but the severity of their punishment will depend on the amount of bad deeds they have done. The Bible does talk about people who receive "few lashes" and those who receive "many lashes".

No, this is not another debate thread about Faith vs. Works.

I grew up as a Southern Baptist, and as such was taught that we are saved through faith alone. However, as I got older (and in more recent years) I started really digging deep into the various English translations of the Bible, while also learning some Hebrew and Greek. I started questioning the concept of sola fide, because clearly there are verses that contradict it.

Most of the debates come down to which side you agree with: Paul or James.

Then it dawned on me one day, out of the blue. It is as if the light bulb went on inside my head. I had an "AH HA!" moment...

Paul and James both agree on the same thing; they are just expressing different points within the concept of salvation. Paul says that it is faith alone that saves, and he is right. James says faith and good works is what saves, and he is also right. Confused? Allow me to elaborate.

Paul's expression is straight forward. There is no question as to what he means. Through your faith in Jesus, you are saved. You can't buy your way into paradise. A lifetime of doing good, without faith, does not grant you salvation. End of story.

James' expression is not so straight forward, but the end result is the same. The difference is that James is stating that TRUE FAITH does indeed save you, and that if you have TRUE FAITH you will produce good works, as they go hand in hand. If you claim to have faith but do not produce good works, your faith is empty, dead and meaningless. You have to do more than just "talk the talk."

So you see, they are saying the same thing, but are approaching it from two different angles. Faith and works are akin to fire and heat...they are linked together. You can't have one without the other!

Now let's deal with Revelation 20:12-13...

12 And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.

13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds.

Those two verses indicate that we are judged based off of our deeds [works]. Some would argue that they solidify the position of faith + works. However, I would argue that the judgment is to test the mettle of your faith, and to see if you truly "walked the walk" as indicated by the works your TRUE FAITH produced.

In other words...

My Soul: Lord, I stand before you awaiting judgment on my life. I claim to have faith, and through my faith I did the best that I could with good deeds [works].

God: You are indeed being judged, based on your faith produced deeds, to see if your faith was true or not. Did you claim to be a Christian but then stopped there, or did you sincerely mean it, and lived your life accordingly? I have read the Books, and you...

 

[EmSw]

I would interpret the verse from Revelation this way. Those that are believers are saved by faith and not judged by our deeds. Those that are not saved will be judged by their deeds (not that their deeds can save them because they are already doomed for punishment) but the severity of their punishment will depend on the amount of bad deeds they have done. The Bible does talk about people who receive "few lashes" and those who receive "many lashes".

1 Peter 1:17
And if you invoke as Father him who judges each one impartially according to his deeds,

Romans 2:6
For he will render to every man according to his works:

Jeremiah 17:10
I, the Lord, search the heart, I test the mind, even to give to each man according to his ways, according to the results of his deeds.

Jeremiah 32:19
great in counsel and mighty in deed, whose eyes are open to all the ways of the sons of men, giving to everyone according to his ways and according to the fruit of his deeds;

Ezekiel 24:14
I, the Lord, have spoken; it is coming and I will act. I will not relent, and I will not pity and I will not be sorry; according to your ways and according to your deeds I will judge you,” declares the Lord God.

Matthew 16:27
For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then repay every man according to his deeds.

Revelation 2:23
And I will kill her children with pestilence, and all the churches will know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds.

Ezekiel 18:30
Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct, declares the Lord God.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Originally Posted by Hawkiz

How can it be by faith alone? Answer: it is, but not in the modern Protestant way of thinking, although it is very close to the Catholic teaching on faith alone...

Scripture tells us in Romans 2:13 that only those who do the will of God will be justified. There really isn't any getting around that aspect.
Revelation 22:12-15 goes further to tell us similarly that we must DO in order to be blessed.

How then, does faith 'alone' lend itself to justification and salvation?

Answer: through the Sacraments. When we approach the Sacraments properly, we express our faith in action just as Abraham did.

It is by faith alone that God justifies those who believe His promises.

It is by faith alone that the Catholic believes that God washes away sin through our Baptism. It is by faith alone that we believe that God seals us in the Holy Spirit through Confirmation. It is by faith alone that we believe God removes our sins through Confession. It is by faith alone that we believe that we receive the Body and Blood of our Lord in the Eucharist. It is by faith alone that we believe God joins two people to become one in Holy Matrimony. It is by faith alone that we trust in God to heal our afflictions through the Annointing of the Sick. It is by faith alone that we believe that God sets some aside to serve His Works in a special way through Holy Orders.

We can not accomplish ANY of these ourselves. None of us can wash away our own sins. None of us can seal ourselves in the Holy Spirit. No one can remove their own sin. None of us can transform bread and wine into our Lord's Body and Blood. We can not declare ourselves to be one with another person. We can not heal our own afflictions. We can not set ourselves apart. These are ALL things that only God can do.
Therefor, it is by faith alone that we are justified in the Sacraments.

But WAIT! Many of you are screaming! How can it be faith alone?!?!?! 'The only time those words are together in Scripture is when faith alone is described as NOT enough! And you are correct...which leads us back to it being BOTH faith AND works, at the same time, and never separated, just as the Church teaches...

For example:
A man enters a church and asks to be baptized. However, he is drunk, cursing the name of The Lord, and has a prostitute on each arm. The minister will look at him and say: 'well...you are going to have to make some changes...some BIG changes. You are going to have to repent of your sinful ways.' The guy joins the church, says prayers, 'Amens', reads Scripture, goes to church every Sunday, etc. but he never repents... Catholic and Protestant alike would say that baptism isn't going to save this person by itself...the work for the works sake means nothing without the faith that accompanies it. Some would say he didn't have a 'saving' faith, others would say he never had a true faith, and still others would say he was a hypocrite and that the minister should not have baptized him, while others would say that we can only pray that baptism opens the door of the mans heart and allows the Holy Spirit to begin to transform him. Which is the path filled with the Love of God?

Anyway, I hope and pray that this demonstrates that the Catholic and the Protestant are NOT far away from each other with regard to the argument over justification. And I pray that we seek to unify rather than divide over our words about this subject.

Peace in Christ
​

Very well thought out and written! I think you nailed it and I am interested to hear what some others, especially non-Catholics, think about what you wrote.

As an evangelical Protestant -I'll take a shot at it.

The subject of the relationship of faith and works is an interesting and important one as most Catholics and Protestants would agree.

The Council of Trent (official Catholic doctrine affirmed by the Pope) taught:

If anyone denies that in the sacrament of the most Holy Eucharist are contained truly, really and substantially the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as in a sign, or figure or force, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA.

If anyone says that in the sacred and, holy sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and denies that wonderful and singular change of the whole substance of the bread into the body and the whole substance of the wine into the blood, the appearances only of bread and wine remaining, which change the Catholic Church most aptly calls transubstantiation LET HIM BE ANATHEMA.

Definition Anathema-2. a formal curse by a pope or a council of the Church, excommunicating a person for denouncing a doctrine.

[FONT=&quot]The Heidelberg Catechism describes the error of transubstantiation very fully and correctly.

"What difference is there between the Lord's Supper and the popish mass?

"The Lord's Supper testifies to us, that we have a full pardon of all sin by the only sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which he himself has once accomplished on the cross; and that we by the Holy Ghost are engrafted into Christ, who according to his human nature is now not on earth, but in heaven on the right hand of God his Father, and will there be worshipped by us:—but the mass teaches, that the living and dead have not the pardon of sins through the sufferings of Christ, unless Christ is also daily offered for them by the priests; and further, that Christ is bodily under the form of bread and wine, and therefore is to be worshipped in them; so that the mass, at bottom, is nothing else than a denial of the one sacrifice and sufferings of Jesus Christ, and an accursed idolatry."

I [/FONT]agree totally with the Heidelberg Catechism as would most Protestants. As a result we are under a curse according to official Roman Catholic dogma.

Time and space would fail us if I listed all of the things I hold most sacred for which the Catholic Church curses me. I, on the other hand, am willing to let the Lord decide how offensive He finds Catholic practices. I "curse" no one.

But - as long as good works are defined in any way as being aligned with certain offensive Roman Catholic practices - we will be in irreconcilable disagreement as to the place of works vs. faith.

Multitudes died at the stake and other horrible means to break out of that horrendous system. We aren't about to turn back the clock now.

Remove the curses and we can talk about the subject in a productive manner. The discussion might even prove to be considered a good work when the Lord sorts it all out.

 

[Hawkiz]

You are better than this response demonstrates. I have read other posts of yours that were thoughtful and intelligent.
You claim to curse no one yet manage to do so multiple times in your post.

And while many Catholics may sympathize that it hurts you to be called anathema, you turn and point to Heidelberg, which in turn curses all who believe that Christ is present in the sacrament...

And if you would like to have an in depth discussion about the Eucharist, I am open and ready. But we were talking about faith and works...and I see little in your reply addressing that subject, except for one line that states that we are in disagreement...(a lime which also again calls Catholic practices offensive).

Both of our respective Churches believe that they hold the truth...can they both be right? My post attempted to show that when it comes to the roles of faith and works, the answer is closer to YES when we both understand what the Catholic Church actually teaches. I apologize if I didn't communicate that well enough.

I am trying to move us past name calling and finger-pointing. I pray that you will come with me on that journey and I welcome you responding to what I wrote.

Peace in Christ

 

[Marvin Knox]

You are better than this response demonstrates. I have read other posts of yours that were thoughtful and intelligent.
You claim to curse no one yet manage to do so multiple times in your post.

And while many Catholics may sympathize that it hurts you to be called anathema, you turn and point to Heidelberg, which in turn curses all who believe that Christ is present in the sacrament...

And if you would like to have an in depth discussion about the Eucharist, I am open and ready. But we were talking about faith and works...and I see little in your reply addressing that subject, except for one line that states that we are in disagreement...(a lime which also again calls Catholic practices offensive).

Both of our respective Churches believe that they hold the truth...can they both be right? My post attempted to show that when it comes to the roles of faith and works, the answer is closer to YES when we both understand what the Catholic Church actually teaches. I apologize if I didn't communicate that well enough.

I am trying to move us past name calling and finger-pointing. I pray that you will come with me on that journey and I welcome you responding to what I wrote.

Peace in Christ

[FONT=&quot]
I [/FONT]agree totally with the Heidelberg Catechism as would most Protestants. As a result we are under a curse according to official Roman Catholic dogma.

Time and space would fail us if I listed all of the things I hold most sacred for which the Catholic Church curses me. I, on the other hand, am willing to let the Lord decide how offensive He finds Catholic practices. I "curse" no one.

But - as long as good works are defined in any way as being aligned with certain offensive Roman Catholic practices - we will be in irreconcilable disagreement as to the place of works vs. faith.

Multitudes died at the stake and other horrible means to break out of that horrendous system. We aren't about to turn back the clock now.

Remove the curses and we can talk about the subject in a productive manner. The discussion might even prove to be considered a good work when the Lord sorts it all out.

Thank you for your thoughtful words about my past posts.

But I don't agree that I have shown a bad spirit in my last post at all. I don't mean this post to be argumentative in a bad way. I just want to clear the air a little.

I was asked to comment as a Protestant on your statement which contained reference to the Eucharist. The celebration of the Mass was held up as a prime example of a work which showed forth faith. I gave my opinion as a Protestant - which I believe reflects that of many if not most other Protestants who have considered it.

I also referenced the fact that there were and are other practices which most Protestants would agree don't qualify as God pleasing works.

The Heidelberg called the mass an "accursed idolatry".

The Council of Trent (official Catholic doctrine affirmed by the Pope) teaches:

"If anyone denies" ........LET HIM BE ANATHEMA.

"If anyone says" .......... LET HIM BE ANATHEMA.

There is a profound difference between cursing a doctrine and cursing an individual. I held Heidelberg up as a document which does the former. Trent was held up as a document which does the later.

There is as much difference between those two documents as there was between the debate podium at the "Imperial Diet of Worms" and the stake at which John Hus was burned alive.

If saying that is "finger pointing" - it'll have to remain so.

For the record, I would no more consider you cursed than I would my Grandmother who was a Catholic. I try to refrain from making a dogmatic judgment concerning the salvation of individuals.

I disagree profoundly concerning the doctrine of many in the Christian religion. I have Mormons, J.W.'s, Catholics, Arminians, Calvinists, Pentecostals, Baptists a few others in my family and counted as my friends.

It makes for some lively debates. I even share my concern for their salvation.

But I make a strong effort to never say that they are "cursed" - that they are not "saved". I do believe that in many cases they are not saved. I see warnings to that effect in Scripture. That's why I find it important to share my view concerning salvation. Obviously we usually disagree.

But in the case of those who would officially name me as one who is cursed - it's impossible to move past that.

That is why I indicated that it would be necessary to deny the validity of the Papal curses upon me before I could have a meaningful conversation concerning the relationship between faith and works.

To do that a Catholic would have to deny the infallibility of the Popes. Any Catholic who would do that is officially "cursed" according to Catholic dogma as I understand it.

I don't consider many sacramental Catholic practices to be works which show forth faith. Quite the contrary.

In your post you held forth Catholic sacraments to make your point concerning works and faith being combined as it were. Had you simply pointed to the eating of the bread and the drinking of the cup, or to baptism in general, or to Christian marriage, or to praying for and anointing the sick, or any number of Christian practices we have in common - as showing a connection between a living faith and our works, we probably would be in total agreement as far as what was said.

But you did not. You defined these Christian practices rather narrowly as per Catholic doctrine. You even went so far as to point to receiving "holy orders" as being an acceptable work. That would include the Catholic priesthood and higher priestly offices including the Pope. I couldn't disagree with you more on that point.

Properly understood Protestant practices would align very well with a liberal view of the Catholic sacraments. They are diametrically opposed to the conservative view you espouse.

The poster asked for a Protestant opinion and I gave it. You may find a more soothing opinion from some lukewarm Protestant with more flexible opinions. But I don't believe that you will find one that is offered in a more well meaning way than mine.

 

[Hawkiz]

Fair enough. Perhaps I had my 'sensitive pants' on (it IS a Monday after all )

I very much would enjoy a continuing conversation about how we can tear down the walls that divide us as followers of Christ.

The Eucharist is, for Catholics, the peak and pinnacle of our faith. I won't speak for Trent, but in modern language, it might sounds like this:

The Catholic Church teaches and believes that Jesus is truly present, body, blood, soul, and divinity in the Sacrament. To deny the Eucharist is to therefor deny Christ. No matter what your view of salvation, I suspect you would agree that one can't both deny Christ AND be saved. The two are incompatible. Thus, denying that the Eucharist IS Christ is to not be part of the Catholic Church. I understand that this may be upsetting, but the Church is just as 'hard-lined' about this as you and your Church might be about other issues. This is one area where the Catholic simply can't be 'lukewarm'. And I am thankful that it has never softened its stance on this or other issues. What some outside the Church may see as arrogant, the Church sees as holding fast to the Truth.

As a lay person, I am willing to listen to why it is painful to hear that your beliefs do not match up to the Church's and thus you are 'anathema'. I personally would never use that language to describe you, even though you disagree with the Church on this and other issues...but I most certainly would (and will) pray that we both seek and see the Truth...all of it. I will start trying to tear down what separates us by admitting: the Church has a human element to it...it is managed by people, and thus, sin exists within it. Scripture gives us fair warning that this will indeed be the case. But Scripture also tells us that The Church is 'the pillar and bulwark of truth.' So while the Church's methods of gaining or keeping members have not always been perfect (go ahead and insert Inquisition, etc. in here), we must have faith that the substance of what She teaches is perfect.
Anyway. I do not doubt your faith, and appreciate your defending what you believe...your passion for The Lord is revealed in that you are not afraid nor shy about expressing your beliefs. I pray that neither of us will lose our fire for Christ while at the same time striving to become One Flock.

Peace in Christ

 

[Marvin Knox]

I very much would enjoy a continuing conversation about how we can tear down the walls that divide us as followers of Christ.

Peace in Christ

I made a slight edit to my prior post. But unfortunately I was working on it when you posted your last. I doubt that it would change much. But you might want to read my edited version again if you have the time.

 

[mercy1061]

James taught that if a Christian's faith is genuine, it will be exhibited through his compassion for others. This teaching is in agreement with Paul's teaching that those Christians whose faith is genuine will have implanted within us a new nature. This nature will have motivations at its core that will urge us to perform the tasks that God has set before us:

So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.

The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other. (Galatians 5:16-26,NIV)

There are those today who attempt to convince us that anyone who pays lipservice to Christ's atoning sacrifice is automatically guaranteed salvation, irregardless of the lifestyle that they choose to follow. But this passage makes it quite clear that those of us who have genuinely and with a contrite heart accepted Jesus Christ's atoning sacrifice have by so doing crucified the sinful nature, thus permitting God's Spirit to implant within us a new nature. And with this new nature as the impetus for our actions we find ourselves performing the tasks that God has set before us to do.

Our freedom from the law is not to be seen as a license to sin. It is instead to be seen as the implanting within us of a new nature containing those motivations which lie at the heart of the law. That's why the words which immediately follow the listing of 'the fruit of the Spirit' are, "Against such things there is no law."

Faith is dead without works, like the body is dead without the Spirit. Yeshua placed his Spirit in his father's hands. The body of Christ was dead, buried in the grave, the body is dead without the Spirit. The peoples faith in Christ also died with him. What happened to that dead body on the third day? What happened to the apostles faith?