Featured Catholics and Faith Alone

You couldn't possibly say that if you have ever read any reformed theology.

We're not foolish enough to think anyone is infallible. That's your assertion and it's obviously proven wrong.

Luther was one of you guys. Read his original protest. He got tired of the cynical money making practice of selling indulgences and the deliberate misleading of people that that would save them - all for money. If you think that is OK then go with it. You always start out the same way, with some kind of conciliary proposal of common ground. But soon you go back to your Roman ranting. It didn't take long this time either. I took the time to reply because there is always a chance someone is looking for answers. I don't think so in your case.

 

[/QUOTE]

While your post was not addressed to me, I feel I can't just ignore the statement that I quoted above. I fully believe the doctrines of grace (so I'm "in the Reformed camp", to use your term), but I certainly don't believe that in saying salvation is by faith alone, it somehow means that Christians aren't to show their faith by their obedience. We're not saved by our works, but our love to Jesus Christ should show itself in our actions/behaviour. I don't know of anybody of the "reformed camp" who would say otherwise, although obviously I am not personally acquainted with them all!!

 

No. I'm saying that the Reformers have spent more time refuting that than anyone, including Roman Catholics. That is what drew me to Reformed theology at first.

 

A quick search of the internet will help here. Richard Baxter, a Puritan who became upset with the rank antinomianism of the professing Christians he met in the army tried to come up with an answer to this. In the process he wrote some things on justification that seemed to be moving back towards a Romanist view on justification which combines faith and works. Most Reformed theologians consider his theology at best a wreak and at worst say he was a heretic.

John Piper recently wrote a book on faith and you can read similar reviews claiming that he also messes up justification by faith alone. Jonathan Edwards wrote some things on justification that have received the same criticism, that he was not completely "orthodox" on justification by faith alone. I noticed above you said this:

This shows your fear of mixing up faith and works. Owen said you were saved by faith alone but a faith that is never alone, not that it should or ought to show itself by works. Owen also said that saving faith had within it and as part of it in itself an intention to obey and follow Christ. Many reformed theologians say this goes too far also. @Cathode is correct in that this antinomian attitude is a true problem in Protestant Christianity. The whole "free grace" movement and the "carnal Christian" doctrines are based on this, where an intellectual assent to the propositions of the gospel result in eternal salvation and then living a Christian life is an optional choice that may or may not follow.

The part you quoted was me trying to say that a Protestant who says faith alone which must and will be followed by a changed life and good works is not that much different from a Roman Catholic who combines the two by definition but is believing essentially the same concept. In other words, as a Reformed Protestant, do I want to listen to Owen, who said that saving faith is "never alone" and then turn around and condemn someone who says it's "faith and works".

 

Hi Cathode, I really enjoyed your entire post, I edited it simply to focus on my response.

1) Faith acting through love seems to me to mean our devotion to Christ and our siblings in Christ results in our faithful thoughts and actions to carry out the ministry of Christ.

2) I do not think our love and devotion to Christ, plus our trust in our salvation through Christ, plus our faithfulness in expressing our Love with thoughts and deeds, will save us. This does not, in my opinion define "Saving Faith." In my opinion, Saving faith is our faith in Christ which is credited by God alone, as righteousness. Based on this crediting, God transfers our human spirit into the spiritual body of Christ, where we are born anew, made alive together with Christ.

 

Yes, that's what I thought you meant, but I wanted to make clear that not all people who hold to reformed doctrines believe what you say Baxter and others do. I would say that there is a great difference between saying that you must do certain works in order to be saved, and doing good works as a result of having been saved, those works Paul writes of in Ephesians 2:

“For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.” (Eph 2:10 NKJV)

Thank you for replying.

 

The Catholic Church Teaches Salvation by Works (justforcatholics.org)

 

Again, I liked many of your observations, but edited your post to focus on our point of significant disagreement.

Here is my view:

In my opinion, Saving faith is our faith in Christ which is credited by God alone, as righteousness. Based on this crediting, God transfers our human spirit into the spiritual body of Christ, where we are born anew, made alive together with Christ. ​

And here is my understanding of your (Catholic?) view:

When Faith (capital indicating an action by God?) acts on [our] will by grace to Love (Capital indicating God caused love) that is the transfer (of our human spirit), as we are then the body of Christ, because we are exhibiting Christ's command to love God and others. ​

To present more fully my view:

1) I believe we (all humans) are made (conceived as) sinners, thus we start out in a sinful, separated from God, spiritually dead state. Romans 5:19

2) This separated from God state is referred to in scripture as being "in Adam" (1 Corinthians 15:22) and being in the "domain of darkness (or under the dominion of darkness, see Colossians 1:13).

3) The action to transfer our human spirit from being separated from God, to being together with God, is accomplished by God's action alone and does not depend upon our faith. (Romans 9:16)

4) The action to be placed (relocated) in Christ is performed by God. (1 Corinthians 1:30).

5) This relocation action by God is referred to as "the sanctification by the Spirit" (2 Thessalonians 2:13) and as being "called," "baptized" and "given." 1 Peter 2:9-10, Romans 6:3, and John 6:37. Note in all cases, the action is by God, and is not automatic because of our belief.

 

I don't agree with your (typical of evangelicals) application of 'saved', but I very much agree with the gist of what you're saying. Good works come naturally to those with 'the law written in their hearts':

13 for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified:
14 (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves;
15 in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them); Ro 2

 

In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims (key word) he has faith but has no works (to evidence his claim). That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So, when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith.

So, James does not teach that we are saved "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine. Simple!

 

In regard to "faith being alone" (vs. 17) or "faith without works is dead," (vs. 20) James does not mean that faith is dead until it produces works and then it becomes a living faith or that works are the source of life in faith. That would be like saying that a tree is dead until it produces fruit and then it becomes a living tree, and the fruit is the source of life in the tree. James is simply saying faith that is not accompanied by evidential works demonstrates that it's dead. Again, if someone merely says-claims they have faith, but lack resulting evidential works, then they demonstrate that they have an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith. (James 2:14)

 

In James 2:19, we read that the demons believe "mental assent" that "there is one God," but they do not believe in/have faith in/trust in/reliance in Jesus Christ for salvation. In other words, they do not believe in/on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31) and are not saved. Their trust and reliance are in Satan (and not in Jesus) as demonstrated by their rebellion in heaven and continuous evil works.

 

James does not use the word "justified" (vs. 21,24) to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3)

 

Yeah. If you go over to The Trinity Foundation website, they have a lot on this, especially in regards to John Piper, who they take to task for moving back towards a Roman Catholic view of justification. I think MacArthur got accused of the same thing with his teaching on "Lordship Salvation".

 

Yes, views that upset our presuppositions complicate our view of reality.

Our love and devotion to Christ does not result in God transferring us into Christ. It is God alone who knows our heart, who decides whether or not to credit our faith, love and devotion as flawed as they may be, as righteousness.

1 Peter 1:1-2

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who ... are chosen according to the foreknowledge [implementation of a predetermined plan] of God the Father, by the sanctifying [setting apart in Christ] work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you.​