UPDATE: 11:13:08 Open commenting is now over, and moderated commenting will be the norm for the foreseeable future. Expect ACTIVE moderation.
Several years ago I wrote an essay on sola fide- salvation by faith alone- that I really liked, but no one else seemed to like.
At the time, when I was just starting to get a little attention for my writing, I thought that it was simply overlooked. Today, I have another theory.
Evangelicals have gone pretty soft on salvation by faith ALONE.
Sola fide doesn’t sit very well with a lot of evangelicals. In fact, I’m not sure they believe it. I’m quite sure that a sizable group has thought it over and they don’t believe it.
Sola fide is that annoying little item over which we had a reformation. Roman Catholics really don’t care for that word “alone”, and they have some reasonable basis for concern. Articulation of sola fide by Protestants is notoriously bad.
What we believe- as I understand it- is something like this. (Theological Attack Bloggers: Cut me some slack please. I’m not a Ph.d.)
We are justified by the work of Christ alone, credited to us as righteousness as we place our faith in Christ- alone. This is ultimately the work of God alone, and therefore is all of grace.
Works of any kind, including any conception of faith as a “work,†is extraneous to justification per se, but not extraneous to the reality of faith. So faith is accompanied by imperfect but genuine repentance, love, obedience, confession and perseverance. None of these things are identical with faith and all partake of the both faith and works. Properly we say that these are the works of faith that accompany true faith. When we see faith, it is accompanied by these friends, but they are not identical.
This is all a lot of trouble and semantics from the ordinary Joe’s point of view, and I am really sympathetic. I really am. But when I consider the importance of sola fide, I have to conclude that it’s worth all that trouble. Wake up the kids, Martha. We need to talk.
Mixing “faith alone†with anything else produces a bastardized notion of salvation; a synergism that is eventually going to be tilted toward works in a way that will sink the ship on the rocks of despair, legalism or intellectualism.
Sola fide is like Nehemiah’s wall. Build it. Build it before you do anything else. Build it if you have to fight while you build it. Build it if you have enemies outside the walls and subversives within. (You’ll have both.)
Hold onto sola fide and you will be saved. Best of all, the Holy Spirit will give you the sweet assurance that you are saved because salvation is by grace alone, by Christ alone and by faith- simple faith- alone. That you need “saving†and that you believe Christ provides it for you sufficiently by his person and work- this is all that is required.
But what concerns me today is not some theologically subtleties. What concerns me are the practical denials of sola fide that seem to pour out of evangelicalism’s transformation of itself from a “Gospel†movement to a “culture war†movement.
Just listen and read, and you will hear exceptions to sola fide from right and left.
The burden of sola fide seems to be too much for many of us. We glibly talk as if it is really nothing unusual if we add our theological preferences, our politics or our social/cultural causes to what “must†be believed. Our own astonishment that someone would feel/act/believe differently than we do intrudes into sola fide with such ease that we ought to be shocked and ashamed. But we’re not.
I grew up in a church that would have told you that you had to believe in salvation by faith alone to be a Baptist. I minister among those same people today.
And what do I hear?
I hear that no Christian could read Harry Potter.
I hear that no Christian would wear that t-shirt or listen to that kind of music.
I hear that no Christian could possibly not see in the Bible all the things that I see there.
I hear that if you are a Christian, you must support these political views.
I hear that a person can’t be a Christian and not oppose another set of political views.’
I hear dress codes called “the way Christians should dress.â€
I hear in reference to any number of sins common to human beings that “no one could be a Christian and do that.â€
And with every statement (and many more) sola fide is dismantled a bit more.
Martyn Lloyd-Jones once said that if you aren’t regularly accused of being an antinomian, you probably haven’t preached the Gospel. I absolutely agree.
I’m tired of the young Christians I disciple, preach to and teach hearing the fine print, the extra bonus messages and the added essentials. One order of sola fide, please. Hold the artificial additives.
I believe in the reformation Gospel of the five solas, not only because scripture teaches them, but because I can’t be saved otherwise.
If you put the human element- even in the guise of theology, or culture transformation or politics- into the Gospel, I’m doomed and damned. If works or sincerity or character change are in there at all, I’m toast.
Sola fide, 120 proof grace and no works on my part are the only way I am going to be saved.
When you begin to talk about the works of love that always come from faith, I agree. But I also know that all my righteousness is as filthy rags, and once my fingers are on the ark, I’m dropped dead.
Sola fide can’t be tampered with, and evangelicals are not just tampering with it. Many are in the kitchen completely remixing the recipe.
I don’t know what cake they are baking, but it doesn’t smell like Jesus or his salvation.
I say let’s toss whatever isn’t sola fide to the back yard and bring out the good stuff.
The Internet Monk Archives 
I hope this isn’t too far down on this thread…
…a number of early authors before Luther understood the sense of Romans 3:28 to mean “sola†with the word faith.
Apparently there is a way to see “faith alone” in Romans 3:28, at least Pope Benedict thinks so…
For this reason Luther’s phrase: “faith alone” is true, if it is not opposed to faith in charity, in love. Faith is looking at Christ, entrusting oneself to Christ, being united to Christ, conformed to Christ, to his life. And the form, the life of Christ, is love; hence to believe is to conform to Christ and to enter into his love. So it is that in the Letter to the Galatians in which he primarily developed his teaching on justification St Paul speaks of faith that works through love (cf. Gal 5: 14). (Source)
As an aside, be very careful when you pray for humility. This has been my 10th lesson in a week and my knees are starting to bleed…
LikeLike
WlE7tGeNhhpEn
LikeLike
“Strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to life..not everyone who says to me,Lord,Lord,shall enter into the kingdom of heaven,but he that does the will of my Father” We are to hold in balance two complementary truths:without God’s grace we can do nothing;but without our voluntary co-operation God will do nothing. “The will of man is an essential condition,for without it God does nothing”. Our salvation results from the convergence of two factors,unequal in value yet both indispensable:divine initiative and human response.What God does is incomparably the more important,but man’s participation is also required.
…The Orthodox Way..Bishop Kallistos Ware
2Peter..read its short…
LikeLike
why was God incarnate, why didn’t He just descend in a glorified body and tell the world, I’m the creator believe Me and have eternity in my presence or don’t and live in darkness! no need to fix your illness,just come as you are!no need for atonement, repentance,the angels could have told Abraham,Moses there was no need for all that non essential stuff,no need for all that scripture,the church,all that have died to protect His holy name.Come,come as you are as long as you believe I am who I say I am,I didn’t mean it when I said, when you did not do it to the least of these you did it also to me,so no damnation for your unrepentive illness.No need to overcome death.Death just come as you are, by the way my most beautiful angel, you know who I am come no need to heal your illness either!
LikeLike
Michael,
Now that we found at least a small point of agreement I want to find the limits of Sola Fide. If faith alone is needed why baptize? If faith alone is needed why repent and do penance or make reparations (like return stolen goods etc)? Isn’t that unnecessary? Further if faith alone includes these things to be considered true faith then what distinguishes those things from works born of faith? Finally if Sola Fide really means you don’t need to Baptize or do anything else, why tithe or go to Church at all or read the Bible? Why not be fully slack?
LikeLike
so living faith is doing His will, following Him(i’m guessing that means to imitate Him),this sounds like trusting and working to me!..and if you don’t you will go the way of the goats…unless you accept His grace of forgiveness by turning back to the way of the sheep(which sounds like more work to me,in way of repentance)…which tells me its better to believe in His fullness(teaching), than to sit around waiting for a free pass, that will send you with the goats…its clear to me if works reveal faith and they are living,then a good judgment by Gods “mercy” will put you in His Kingdom…
LikeLike
>If the God of the Bible says to me that salvation includes works, then I simply cannot be saved. I have absolutely no works at all of any kind that are in any way even approaching acceptability to God.
>Faith is never alone. I made that clear. It is accompanied by many things, but if those things contribute anything to God’s view of me, then I’m not going to be saved.
On a purely personal and non-theological note, I really appreciated these statements. Although I believe in grace as the singular impetus for my salvation…I still constantly attempt to somehow merit my standing with God. This is countered at other times by the surrendering and declaration to God that if He needs more, I cannot provide it and I am lost. Maybe the most honest thing one can say to God. Son of David have mercy on me is the cry of one who cannot help himself and needs Him “alone”.
LikeLike
Many eschatological judgment passages feature works. Works reveal living faith. Faith without works is dead. Since judgment is evidentiary, the books are opened and works are reported.
But faith is the premise of all works and is throughout the Bible starting with Cain, Noah, Abraham, etc.
John 6:29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.â€
LikeLike
okay, tell me why does the Lord separate the goats and the sheep by their works. good works to the kingdom,no good works to everlasting damnation?
LikeLike
By faith alone. I am once again moved by Jesus’ sacrifice and His grace. When we substitute works for grace (in the million little ways we do this) it dulls the shocking (humbling!) truth that without His grace we are doomed and damned. I’m not as excited by a salvation that comes by reading my bible every day, attending church regularly, only reading Christian authors, or thinking Obama is the Antichrist. I’m moved to my knees, and into a live-changing faith, by the life of Jesus.
My husband and I often grieve the “salvation-by-works-and…” subtext in our evangelical circle of friends. It’s alarming how many friends DO NOT believe in sola fide. They say they do, until we start discussing the particulars. Most times, I don’t even want what they call Christianity.
What you described here is like music to my ears. I’m so glad I’m not crazy. I’m so glad it only takes faith to reach Jesus, because if it took something more I’d be doomed. No matter how much “better” I am now, I know my goodness is like filthy rags.
LikeLike
I agree in much of what you say. Faith is the key work Christ seeks: John 6:28-29 (if I’m going to use John 6 against Sola Fide then I need to refer to it when it supports you). I think we Catholics view faithful charity, as imperfect as it is, as a way to show love for God. Since there are many ways to show love for Him and since faith is required for works to be of any use clearly faith >> works. So as you said it has some value, if it’s for God’s sake, and we can find some ground to agree on.
I’d rather define the limits of the disagreement than to fight round 536.
LikeLike
You see, where I think the problem comes is that as a Protestant, I believe in works, but I believe all my works are completely impotent to save, to provide anything that contributes salvation or assurance. They are- in REFERENCE TO GOD’S HOLINESS- of a completely different essence than faith. BOTH faith and works are imperfect and tainted by sin, but faith rests on Christ alone, doing nothing, except trusting in him to be the resurrection and the life. So I value works for God’s sake and as God’s command.
LikeLike
“Works ADORN the Gospel, but they provide NO assurance.” OK I agree with this, because I don’t believe in assurance – but the point was that when motivated by faith, works are simply a good thing, quite independently of any reward that may or may not be given.
By the way, I would count your honest discussion of God and sincere search for Christ as a good work especially in that it gives witness of your faith and it’s centrality in you life. That’s no small thing in this faithless cynical world.
LikeLike
Aggie:
I am complacent. I am lazy. My spiritual life is a wreck. In terms of anything accomplished for Christ, I’m a mess.
I have to disagree with my good friends on the place of works.
Works ADORN the Gospel, but they provide NO assurance. Assurance is a Gospel work.
The high view of works in James in contra a faulty view of the faith, not the Gospel view of faith.
peace
MS
LikeLike
Michael,
Do you share the concern that Fr. Ernesto mentions that “Sola Fide” may lead to complacency? Let’s ignore the argument about whether it’s correct and assume for the sake of discussion Sola Fide is correct that once saved your Heaven bound without doubt.
Surely works, performed out of the love of God and for His glorification, do have value or He would not have asked us to do them. Further we have verses speaking of laying up treasures in Heaven rather than Earth. So surely if we love God, we would naturally do the works He asked us to do. If we do them imperfectly, make that when we do them imperfectly or infrequently or reluctantly we are still showing our love for Him and indeed worshiping Him through works. So even if it does not influence our salvation one bit – it helps us to understand Him and to fulfill the commandment He gave us to strive to love Him with all that we have. What I mean to say is that regardless of whether Sola Fide is true or not, a Christian ought to live the same way. Either way, works in His name are inherantly part of the Christian life.
LikeLike
“I don’t know what your runner-up religions are, but my list starts with a pessimistic form of nihilism. If I can’t look to the cross and say, “Jesus did it all,†then I’m as good as dead.”
Gammell, thank you for this powerful reminder of who I once was. Before being saved by God (before becoming a Christian), I *lived* this “pessimistic form of nihilism.” If God ever released me from His grip, I would go right back to that terrible place. I thank God that He won’t ever release me from His grip. Romans 8:30 is an unbreakable chain, praise be to God!
“And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.”
LikeLike
I am sorry if I am repeating someone else’s words or thoughts. I read through the first half of the postings, but have to get going and wanted to comment.
imonk is right, but I have a slightly different perspective on the issue. There is a difference between the state of being saved and doing things which please the Almighty and bring Him honor and glory.
To use an extreme example; the Christian who is unfaithful to his wife does not lose his salvation, but he does dishonor the Lord and humiliate and shames his wife and in some cases ruins his marriage.
The woman who, as imonk mentioned, “dresses like that” does not lose her salvation, but wearing a short, tight skirt to church will place a stumbling block in front of some of her brothers, and some may be tempted to sin by lusting after her.
Paul states that women are to dress modestly. Yes, evangelicals have taken to defining what this means right down to the length of the skirt and all of that. I am not saying that we should do this, but what is Paul talking about in that passage?
Having faith in God is a bit like Loving God. Jesus could say that the commandment “Love the Lord your God…” was the greatest commandment, because God had defined what it meant to love Him. Jesus goes on to define it “if you love me you will keep my commandments”
There are those out there who say that they show their love for God by killing people. There are those who say they show their love for God by smoking pot. God, Himself defines what love is and tells His creation how we are to love Him.
It’s the same with having faith in God. There must be some definition to “faith”. “Faith” is demonstrated in myriad ways in the life of the individual believer. The Bible gives some very clear ways that faith in Christ will be demonstrated, and when we see something that runs completely counter to that, should it not at least give us pause?
LikeLike
Gong back to the original post: What could any of us possibly do to earn our salvation? It’s a free gift. Period. However, once I have been given real life, eternal life, I will be different than I was before. Perhaps that will be difficult for others to see, especially at first, but God and I should both be seeing it.
Based on personal experience, I have found that this new life does produce growth. As I grow in Christ, I become more like him. It seems to be a somewhat slow process for me. How about you?
I have absolutely no need to run around inspecting other people, trying to figure out if they fit my requirements for being really alive in Christ. That’s between them and God. Yes, there are some people who take it upon themselves to do such things. I’ve known a bunch of them, and you probably have too. Perhaps your experiences vary from mine, but I have always found one or all of the following characteristics in those people:
1) They are doing a poor job of running their own lives and growing in Christ, so they seem to feel the need to tell me or you how to do it. I suppose they think we are an easier project than they are. They imagine themselves to be “experts†on such matters. They especially love to point out where they think we fall short or need improvements.
2) They are unable to run/manage/control their own family, so they want to run me or you.
3) They are an eternal “parent†who want to tell not only their own children, young or not, how to run their lives, but also you and me.
I’ve got my hands full with running my own life. Sorry, I’m not interested in trying to run yours. If you feel the need to examine my works, please examine your own first and when they’re all in perfect order I’d be happy to hear about how you did it.
LikeLike
Patrick: Sorry for letting that one fly through without some attention. My apologies to the RCs in the discussion.
LikeLike
Joe, you’re probably right. All of us Roman Catholics have been betrayed by our now obviously-apostate church, whose demented, Christ-denying Bishop is determined to take to Hell with him.
We should probably renounce it and join your denomination. What did you say that was, again?
LikeLike
joe only God saves,can you say what limit Gods mercy is? faith is not against good works, faith is about taking the image of Christ. God didn’t come in glory to declare Himself. He came in humility to show what mans glory could be and that glory is to emulate Him. I let you decide what He did while He was among us!
LikeLike
Christina:
>What if you stop trusting? What if you decide that today you can do it on your own? Have you lost your assurance?
A quote from a recent episode of the NBC sitcom,”30 Rock” seems appropriate to this kind of question:
Kenneth: “I don’t believe in hypotheticals. It’s like lying to your brain.”
LikeLike
Christiana:
Pope Benedict believes even an atheist who has good intentions can be saved, [mod edited]. That makes the Faith vs Works argument almost entirely moot to begin with….[mod edited] Only Evangelicals and ‘Evangelical Catholics’ argue over the Reformation contoversy: the modern RCC has decided neither faith OR works are really essential anyway, as long as some vestige of goodness remains. The flock or Roman apologists are beating what is a dead horse for Rome.
[Mod note: Sorry that I didn’t read this one more carefully. My apologies to the thread.]
LikeLike
Been following this one closely. Way to go iMonk!
Ultimately assurance is about confidence that God is good and will keep the promises He made to us in His Son. Phillip Carey says that to undermine the hard promises of Christ made to the beiever is to call Him a liar. Some of us are absolutely unable to “do the Christian life” under a cloud of doubt as to God’s disposition towards us, especially if His disposition can change on a daily basis depending on how well we are “living the Christian life”. How warped do people end up when they grow up uncertain of a parent’s love and constantly scared about damaging that love beyond repair by being “bad”? Even more so with our heavenly Father. And lack of certainty is a good thing according to some of you guys? You Evangelicals who reject Sola Fide need to talk to your RC brethren and see if you can join up under a “Roman Catholic lite” clause in Canon law, because minus the sacraments, saints, and pope, you guys are preaching the same message.
I’m with iMonk, if its not grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, to hell with the whole business, Zen Buddhism, here I come.
LikeLike
Christine, please don’t ask for another post on Indulgences. The last one was way more than enough for a lifetime. Check the archives…
LikeLike
(Tim=quote)
I couldn’t agree more, if we don’t know for sure where we stand before God it is the pit of despair. Nothing can seperate us from Christ’s love–why? Because it is God who justifies. No charge of guilt can hang over us–despite any sins we might commit. (Romans 8:31-35).
Excactly Tim, this is the only way we can have “The joy of our salvation”, because justification comes from God alone. We will never measure up to God’s requirments, we just have to have faith that Jesus is enough.
LikeLike
End of assurance issue.
I was really confused until you posted this. I didn’t realize assurance was off topic. I tend to wander off quite often huh?
Since I don’t want to drive you to Buddhism I’ll wander off into my own world for now. Perhaps you could do a post on Purgatory and indulgences (I missed the last one)…that would be fun 😉
Please keep me in your prayers!
Christina
LikeLike
“The Myth of Certainty isn’t about the Gospel or assurance…”
I know this is a pretty standard Evangelical take, but, in the post-Evangelical wilderness, does it look any different to you? Has your understanding of the meaning of this statement changed in the last 20 years in the SBC?
LikeLike
addendum: I just read in an article that Fr. Capon once referred to Augustine as having a “romantic” stance on Christianity – YES!!!! That’s what I’m talking about.
LikeLike
The Myth of Certainty isn’t about the Gospel or assurance. It’s about all the things we attach to our faith about which scripture doesn’t give us a sure word.
But Jesus = salvation is a sure word. There’s one mediator and he has me.
End of assurance issue.
LikeLike
Differences evaporate.
When you had a Capon quote up awhile back, I thought to myself, “I’m not sure I like this guy”. In my experience, instinctive contempt really means one of two things: 1) I have an idea, or 2) I’m about to be won over and I don’t like it.
Sounds like I’m going to be reading some Capon. This is another example of a random Protestant being more Catholic than most of us, I think.
From his wiki,
“Capon described himself in the introduction to one of his books as an “old-fashioned high churchman and a Thomist to boot.â€
Thanks, dude.
LikeLike
imonk: i was a little surprised to hear you talk so much about assurance and despair, considering your praise on several occasions for The Myth of Certainty. isn’t commitment what is important, not just assurance or certainty of any sort of security? do we love God because he first loved us or because we have a get out of jail free card? i certainly am not trying to convert you to anything different or of course not try to send your faith into despair–but isn’t “faith” in the fullness of the word much stronger than it’s attachment to simply one concept?
LikeLike
Patrick:
>Salvation is something we SEE attained for us mystically, so what we DO because of it reveals to US how weak and uncertain our faith in Jesus really is.
This sentence is highly descriptive of my understanding of salvation via Luther and Capon.
Let me channel Capon for a second:
The cross is a sacramental event that reveals a salvation that exists eternally in the person of the second person of the Trinity, who has always been the mediator between God and all of creation for all time.
In the cross I apprehend the complete salvation that is in God himself. God is the Gospel (That’s Piper, not Capon.)
In the story of the Prodigal, the son’s faith is imperfect. We know nothing of what he will do tomorrow. What we know is 1) the God who was always forgiving him through his own mercy and 2) the elder brother’s works based, transaction based understanding of the family.
The son is imperfect at all times, but he is “alive again,” and discovers this fin his father’s embrace. Such grace was always his, but he refused it. This did not change it, only his experience of it.
We repent, believe, confess our sins, exp forgiveness in real time etc because of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
This is in the eucharist for me: the true presence of the mediator revealed in the Biblical story and available to all, for nothing. Imperfect faith and DEATH are the ways to find life.
peace
ms
LikeLike
This is the abyss for me. I can’t speak for anyone else. But it is the pit of despair.
I hear that. I don’t know what your runner-up religions are, but my list starts with a pessimistic form of nihilism. If I can’t look to the cross and say, “Jesus did it all,” then I’m as good as dead.
LikeLike
Christina:
OK. That’s the last word on that.
The point of IM is to NOT have that discussion. Attempting to convert me, you or other commenters is simply not allowed here. Since you’re new, you probably weren’t aware of that.
I appreciate the invitation to join the one true Church. Trust me, it would be a lot less trouble at my house if I did.
But these conversations move me a lot closer to Buddhism than to another team of Christians.
So peace
MS
LikeLike
Tim and Michael, you guys are doing a pretty good job of convincing me that I didn’t understand sola fide to begin with, just by how you’re talking about it here.
Michael, when you said this though,
“I once heard Mark Shea say that only after his conversion to Catholicism, when he was NO LONGER SURE he was going to heaven, did he really feel he was living the Christian life… This is the abyss for me.”
I have to admit that I feel the complete opposite.
I’m going to extemporize a little bit, to see if I can’t find us some common ground.
I guess it comes down to where the Bible is in your life: if you’re looking into it for a roadmap to salvation, you go to war with your inner doubt intellectually. Certainty of salvation is proof of salvation. But Catholics are taught the meaning of our faith in the Mass: we look around at each other, see the giant cross in front of us, and recall that not everybody at the foot of the first cross believed in Jesus, and find ourselves humbled accordingly.
I can’t speak for all of us, but all the Catholics I know find the faith humiliating to their desire for certainty. We have a rational religion and we have the sacraments: in between, a sea of people are discovering their moral ignorance and confessing it. Catholic Christianity, in that sense, is better understood as an attitude – distinct from the attitude we observe in a ‘Sanctified, Sold-Out, Spirit-Filled Faith In Jesus As My Lord and Savior (TM)’. We’re just not naive enough to believe that the our struggling faith and fool-ass living is evidence of God’s greatness and sacrifice.
Salvation is something we SEE attained for us mystically, so what we DO because of it reveals to US how weak and uncertain our faith in Jesus really is. We connect our actions to eternal salvation reflexively, because all of Catholicism is tied up in words we hear at Mass every week: “do this in memory of me.”
I’m getting a lot out of the incidental little things you say (here and in your article). It’s obvious to me that I have a lot of knots to untie in my own faith if it’s ever going to mean anything. Keep it up.
LikeLike
You are christian if you’ve been validly baptized, that’s true, but all Christians are imperfectly joined with the Catholic Church if not in union with Rome.
I don’t know if the metaphor of the ship mixes well with that truth, I didn’t mean to imply that you were not a Christian.
Purgatory is off topic, but I will say that your understanding is incomplete.
Scripture is resounding that there is no condemnation for those who are IN Christ Jesus.
What does “in Christ” mean?
If it means I trust in Christ alone and in myself NOT AT ALL, then I have assurance. And I do.
What if you stop trusting? What if you decide that today you can do it on your own? Have you lost your assurance?
If that means “In formal communion with the Bishop of Rome,†then there’s no assurance.
You’re right, there is no assurance that I know today I’ll be in Heaven when I die. That’s presumption. However, I know what Rome teaches since there is the Catechism. Even if I didn’t, what is required is the obedience to the authorities Jesus has given us. Am I obedient? If not I can go to confession to be forgiven. Not assurance, but hope, strong powerful hope.
LikeLike
This is a great site. I have ready many of the comments. I am sure many will mot like what I am going to say. Countless Christians have made their particulars churchs or demonination an idol in their hearts giving to its name or programs a loyal and devotion that ought to be giving to God.
Jesus is Lord you don’t make Him Lord of your life. You submit to His Lordship. You don’t have the ability to make Him Lord, that would make you greater than the Lord if it was possible for you to make Him Lord. Is is God 100% and it will always be God.
LikeLike
>Now I’m not saying you can’t get there as you are, you sound like a great swimmer, but it’s much safer on the boat.
Not on a boat that teaches justification and sanctification are the same thing, that purgatory completes Christ’s work and that the church is still handing out indulgences. I’m stick with my piece of evangelcial driftwood.
Now where are all the Catholics who have been telling me for months that I really am a Christian? C’mon Alan and Amy 🙂
If I lack assurance, it’s not because assurance isn’t available. Scripture is resounding that there is no condemnation for those who are IN Christ Jesus. If that means “In formal communion with the Bishop of Rome,” then there’s no assurance. If it means I trust in Christ alone and in myself NOT AT ALL, then I have assurance. And I do.
In fact, I think the problem most people, Catholics and Protestants, have with the Gospel is that it offers too much assurance. Way more than anyone can deal with from the standpoint of defending religion as necessary for mediation with God. It’s the elder brother coming to my party where I’ve been raised from the dead by my father and saying “Well….you have some hope that the father will receive you if you join the Catholic church etc etc etc.”
Excuse me, I’m going to the buffet. This is MY resurrection party.
See Keller, The Prodigal God
peace
MS
LikeLike
*produces good works out of love* accidentally left that out…
LikeLike
OK. I’m getting preached at, which is not what IM is about. Since I’m not converting to Catholicism, we can all relax.
Yes I got emotional, I want to rejoice with you in heaven. Now I’m not saying you can’t get there as you are, you sound like a great swimmer, but it’s much safer on the boat. 😉 However, I will try to limit my emotional outbursts from now on.
It’s very odd for you to tell me that the RCC is offering me a gracious Gospel of absolute assurance, because I know that the RCC doesn’t offer that assurance, but only a hope.
I didn’t mean to imply I was offering a gospel of absolute assurance. I tried to make it clear that we can fall away and reject God’s love, but our hope is real and strong.
I would like to point out that you don’t offer absolute assurance either. What is living faith? How many works does it take to go from dead faith to living? Are you really saved? Are you sure?
And don’t even start me on purgatory, Indulgences, etc.
No, we’re not allowed to go off topic 😉
As for Grace, I feel “faith alone” denies grace on some level. I feel that we’re saved by God’s Grace and our response (acceptance) is faith working in love. I think we’re actually very close, for as I understand it you say we’re saved by Grace and our response is faith which produces love.
I’m reading your article now though, I just wanted to clarify those items first.
LikeLike
OK. I’m getting preached at, which is not what IM is about. Since I’m not converting to Catholicism, we can all relax.
Christina:
It’s very odd for a Catholic to be telling me that I have somehow denied that salvation is by grace. I’ve said it over and over, from almost the first paragraph of the post. Please recognize that I’m not dense or uninformed on the RCC’s concept of grace. I live with a Catholic and I’ve done nothing much the last two years but listen to and read the Catholic case.
It’s very odd for you to tell me that the RCC is offering me a gracious Gospel of absolute assurance, because I know that the RCC doesn’t offer that assurance, but only a hope. And don’t even start me on purgatory, Indulgences, etc.
I’ve talked about grace here. It’s THE reason I’m not moving from the solas to Rome’s Gospel.
https://internetmonk.com/articles/G/grace.html
Peace
MS
LikeLike
Tim,
we receive a forensic verdict and a righteousness outside ourselves (justification) God’s WORD is powerful. If God were to say, “Christina you’re a man.” It’s not just an extrinsic act, I would begin changing into a man.
Now that may be a silly example, but it’s illustrating the point that when God speaks it happens. His very Word creates because the “Word is God and through the Word all things came into being.”
To say that God says “your righteous” and it doesn’t really happen is to make God a liar.
if we don’t know for sure where we stand before God it is the pit of despair.
I KNOW where I stand before God, I’m his beloved, flawed, often disobedient child. I know when I’m disobedient and I know when I need to apologize (if not through my shame, then he usually lets me know. I know that I’m far from perfect now, but I trust God to train me in the way of perfection and will eventual lead me whole into his kingdom.
LikeLike
I sat on the couch and thought long and hard about this last night. Were I to get up this morning convinced that salvation is real only through works of faith, I would be in complete despair.
For me what you say is the abyss. If my salvation was based on my faith, my fickleness would frighten me.
My salvation is not dependent upon works or faith, but upon GRACE.
– We are adopted into God’s family (Baptism – ALL GRACE)
– We accept the teachings and rules of the house (faith brought by GRACE).
– We try to live according to those teachings (works in GRACE).
– We graduate and it’s decided whether or not we come back to live in the house forever (Judgment).
When a child does the dishes or takes out the trash, they’ve not EARNED the right to live in the family, to have the family name. BUT that same child can consistently CHOOSE to not live by the house rules and thereby need to be forcibly removed from the house (or choose to remove himself, disowning his family).
Can we do any good on our own? NO! Apart from God’s grace we can do nothing! Take the dishes example. In order to do the dishes the child must be a member of the house, be provided with the training, the dishes, the soap, the time/reminder, the promptings even. Yet the parent praises the child…for what? For choosing to do what the parent asked. EVEN if the parent had to help every step of the way because the child was prone to drop/break the dishes the child is still praised.
Should the child refuse to do the dishes, even lashing out at the parent who tries to help then the child is punished. If the child continuously refuses to live by the faith they say they profess, upon reaching ‘independence’ their removed from the home – or they run away earlier. They’ve chosen to leave and for us, the point it’s final is death. God delays this as long as possible, giving us every opportunity to turn to him, but if we choose to reject his love he lets us do so!
You need not be afraid of this teaching my brother, for it contains life! We do not EARN our right to be members of the family, either by the strength of our weak faith OR by the number of our works. We are members by our Adoption through the blood of Jesus Christ! Yes we can reject our adoption, it’s silliness to presume that because you said “I believe” when you were 16 that will be your ticket to heaven.
Yet you KNOW this is silliness so you’ve created some mysterious “living faith”. Yet the more you describe it it’s not “faith alone” at all! What you believe is that you must be saved by God’s grace, made manifest in your faith (through God’s grace) working in love (possible only with God’s grace).
Grace alone will set you free from this and solves this problem. Why do you cling to something that is bringing you down? You’re drowning in a sea of contradictory teachings over something that doesn’t even exist in the bible! There is a safe ship you can board and be free of these fears!
Our relationship with God is not a legal “I believe therefor you MUST let me in” nor is it a legal “I did X,Y, and Z therefore you MUST let me in.” but a love! “I trust you lord to help my unbelief, train me in the way of perfection so I can be “perfect as you are” I trust you Lord that you will not let me die in rebellion, but will give me every possible opportunity of returning to you and repenting.” I TRUST you Lord with my life and my salvation and I seek to conform my will to yours in every action of every day. I trust that every event you’ve put in my life is a lesson to how to serve you better. I trust you’ll punish me when I fail so that I won’t become a spoiled brat and leave the house in a tantrum. I trust in your grace and your grace alone to perfect me in holiness. Lord I give everything I am and will be to your divine providence, I AM YOURS!”
In heaven we will be perfect as our father is perfect, as Jesus REQUIRES of us. It will be not by our own power that happens, but through God’s grace. We’ll not be “snow covered dung-hills”; my heart yearns for more. I want to truly love, to give of myself and be given back. I want to be able to give COMPLETELY of myself and to be able to accept another back completely. This is heaven! We cannot do that unless we’re perfect. God offers us this cleansing, TRUE cleansing. He doesn’t pretend we’re clean, but cleans us through the events in our lives. He teaches us and raises us as children, for that’s what we are, children! It is a family room and a court room. We’re raised by the Father so that when we stand before the Judge, who is one and the same, we are judged by the Father. What a terrible knowledge and wonderful blessing!
Our works do not save us, but nor does our faith! They are elements by which we respond to what does save us, God’s grace and his grace alone.
LikeLike
Christina,
We have a different concept of how salvation works and what it means to be saved. You’re saved in a court room, we’re saved in a family room.
Just to echo what iMonk said after your last post and add my own thought. There is a difference between the family room and the court room. They are distinct but inseperable.
I think two elements that wed these together– (1) Union with Christ and (2) Covenant. In our union with Christ, we recieve a forensic verdict and a righteousness outside ourselves (justification) and we are transformed which produces righteousness (sanctification) inside of us (albeit never perfection that we need before God). In this respect justification and sanctification are distinct but always inseperable. The end of union with Christ is of course full glorification. This union is experienced through faith alone although it evidences itself through the fruit of the Spirit.
(2) Covenant is one of those images that in the Bible weds the legal with the familial. Covenants have legal concepts in the Old Testament especially when you consider the covenant lawsuit of the prophets. Covenants also have relational (you might say familial) overtones as well–particularly as you think of the marriage supper of the Lamb and other Biblical covenants.
iMonk,
I couldn’t agree more, if we don’t know for sure where we stand before God it is the pit of despair. Nothing can seperate us from Christ’s love–why? Because it is God who justifies. No charge of guilt can hang over us–despite any sins we might commit. (Romans 8:31-35).
-Tim
LikeLike
Thanks for giving me a little more time, IMonk.
skerrib, I agree totally that “if we think we’re somehow gaining God’s favor with them we’re dead wrong.” That’s not what I’m trying to propose, at least, but I see that the distinction isn’t ridiculously apparent.
yall have a good weekend
LikeLike
>Justification is the working out of that Salvation through the Works of Faith.
Thanks for the kind response Sam.
Of course, you realize that all of Protestantism disagrees with the sentence above, and the disagreement is at the heart of the Gospel.
As I’ve said multiple times, by this definition, I cannot go to heaven or be declared right with God, and really, I couldn’t be a Christian.
I sat on the couch and thought long and hard about this last night. Were I to get up this morning convinced that salvation is real only through works of faith, I would be in complete despair.
It is a small theological distinction you’re promoting, but I once heard Mark Shea say that only after his conversion to Catholicism, when he was NO LONGER SURE he was going to heaven, did he really feel he was living the Christian life. (Or something similar. Forgive me Mark if I misquote too badly.)
This is the abyss for me. I can’t speak for anyone else. But it is the pit of despair. I am currently teaching Galatians, and every day I do I go home rejoicing that Paul said three times in one paragraph no one is justified by works of the law.
I believe that living faith produces works. I also believe that my faith is insufficient, my works are insufficient and my righteousness is insufficient. Any command that I “work out my salvation by “works of faith” rather than by “faith that produces works” damns me and leaves me in despair.
One mediator. One gift of righteousness. One sovereign declaration of justification. One salvation by faith, grace, Christ alone that produces imperfect repentance, obedience, etc.
Convince me otherwise, and convince me to abandon Christianity.
peace
MS
LikeLike
I liked this post a lot Mr. Spencer. I think David Wells makes a great case in The Courage to Be Protestant that evangelicals – if they are to survive, much less thrive – need to recapture their understanding and embrace of the Solas.
Keep up the writing…
Nick
LikeLike
Again Michael, you aren’t making the distinction between *Salvation* and *Justification* in your thinking. I feel Paul best sums up the distinction in I Corinthians 3:12-15 :
“Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— each one’s work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. If the work that anyone has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.”
You are right, works are not necessary for your salvation, but we have Scriptural assurance that our works bring us further reward in Heaven, even though as Paul says a few verses earlier we can only do them by the Grace of God. You say that Justification is by “Faith Alone”, but need to qualify this with “not a faith that is alone”. This makes Sola Fide a useless teaching, as it needs to be qualified out of existence.
Again I emphasize, Justification is not Salvation. Salvation is by Grace Alone, and Justification is the working out of that Salvation through the Works of Faith, as taught by Jesus, Paul, and James.
LikeLike
Works are all well & good, but if we think we’re somehow gaining God’s favor with them we’re dead wrong. Which works are the saving works? How many of them do I have to do to make sure I’ve done enough? If I stumble, how long before my works “bank” is low enough that I need to be concerned about my salvation again?
There are two dangerous outcomes to this–some people can become neurotic, chronically discouraged, constantly chasing God’s favor, exhausting themselves & everyone around them always trying to be good. Others can get a pretty good handle on good works, and think they must be doing well with God because of all these good things they’re doing…and then become smug & self-righteous.
I’m going to bring up part of Ephesians 2:8-9, the passage I mentioned earlier: “…not by works, so that no man can boast.”
In my opinion, it’s salvation that produces the good works, as a result of being a new creation. With Christ living in me, it’s not me doing the works by my own efforts; rather, it’s evidence of Christ’s life in me producing the desire to do such works.
And those who know me personally can attest that on my own efforts I get pretty much nowhere. 🙂 Any good on my part has to be because of Christ in me.
LikeLike
My view on all of this is deeply influenced by the teaching of Robert Capon. Read “Between Noon and Three” and really any of his books.
I’m very committed to the law/Gospel distinction, and I’d rather err on the side of universalism than any other direction. I reject transactionalism and I believe salvation comes by the gracious existential application of the sacrament of the cross/Gospel to a broken world under judgement.
In the IM archives, you might want to read “Our Problem With Grace.” That can also be found in the iMonk 101 category.
Jesus convinces me that salvation is revealed utterly and completely in the grace of God and comes by faith alone by Christ the mediator alone. If this were not true, I would say Christianity is inferior to at least two other religions.
So to me, this is the deal breaker.
MS
LikeLike
“Living faith produces many things that do not contribute to justification.”
This, I found to be an extremely helpful observation.
Hm.
This is really good, Michael.
Hmph..
LikeLike
The harmonizations and oppositions of James and Paul have been going for for centuries and won’t ever stop.
I’m simply speaking honestly. If the God of the Bible says to me that salvation includes works, then I simply cannot be saved. I have absolutely no works at all of any kind that are in any way even approaching acceptability to God.
Faith is never alone. I made that clear. It is accompanied by many things, but if those things contribute anything to God’s view of me, then I’m not going to be saved.
You cited Luther: >Therefore justification does not require the works of the Law; but it does require a living faith, which performs its works.â€
That’s exactly what I believe and exactly what I’ve blogged above. Living faith produces many things that do not contribute to justification.
peace
MS
LikeLike
And “works are necessary for salvation” isn’t exactly what James says–and all I’m trying to get at is what James is saying–it’s that faith is not dead is a faith that is made complete by having works active with it. It’s a qualification for the way we talk about “faith” in the context of ‘a thing that justifies.’
LikeLike
“no matter what the Bible says” — come on now, you already advocated the other solas. That response didn’t have any substance outside of it’s humility. If the Bible *does* say what I’m think it clearly says, then there’s got to be more to say to all this than “no matter what the Bible says”.
I love the phrase “faith seeking understanding”–that’s what I’ve got, and I spend a lot of time seeking understanding. I need wiser, better-read, more experienced people, people whom God has given a gift of teaching to, like yourself to help me with that, and a response like that is no help.
I’m not trying to be unfair to you in saying that, I just know you can say so much more.
LikeLike
Dead faith cannot save. I completely agree.
But if works are necessary for salvation, I’m not going to be saved, no matter what the Bible says.
LikeLike
[Moderator edited] I’m going to have to disagree totally on how you’re reading James/Paul here.
“Paul said that a man is justified through faith without the works of the law, but not without those works of which James here speaks.” – Augustine
I agree totally with the Saint here. James and Paul (Romans or Galatians) simply are not talking about the same works… James is talking about “works”, Paul is expressly talking about “works of the law”. Even if there were no distinction right there, the same distinction can be seen in the way the two use the story of Abraham. James’s use of Abraham is to show that Abraham does a work (the binding of Isaac) and thereby fulfills what has already been said of his ‘believing and it being counted to him as righteousness’ (“You see that faith was active along with his works, and *faith was completed by his works*. . . You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone”). Paul, on the other hand, looks at Abraham in Romans 4 to show that Abraham is justified, *even though he hadn’t been circumcised yet*. In Galatians he’s focusing on the fact that Abraham is promised and inheritance through promise *as opposed to through the law* (though he goes on to point out that “faith working through love” is the only thing that ‘counts for anything’). Paul’s talking about the law. James is not.
And Martin Luther understood this distinction: “When the blessed James and the apostle [Paul, referring to Gal. 5:6 and Rom. 2:13] say that man is justified by works, they are disputing the false conception of those who contended that a faith without works would be sufficient. However, the apostle does not say that faith is without its characteristic works-for then there would be no faith at all since ‘activity reveals the nature of a thing’ according to philosophers-but that it justifies without the works of the Law. Therefore justification does not require the works of the Law; but it does require a living faith, which performs its works.”
And if the Paul that everyone offers to counter James isn’t actually talking about the same thing that James is talking about, then if we want to think about faith and works the best place to look, where it’s outlined most thoroughly and clearly *is James*. James ought to be read for what he’s saying, instead of having an essentially unrelated Pauline passage force on him a certain interpretation.
James talks a lot about “dead faith”, obviously, but where there’s a dead faith, there’s a living one. The faith that he presents are saving, useful, good, etc. is what Luther calls “living faith”: it’s that complete faith that is believing and working. The whole thrust of the passage in James is that you can not separate faith from working. Faith is made complete, perfect, without works. It cannot save one (the implication of verse 14) without works. You may well take this “faith without works” to mean simple, intellectual consent (though I’m inclined to disagree, as it is a thing that makes the demons shudder), but even if you do, the *only* alternative to the faith that James is attacking in the passage is ‘faith with works’. He’s not advocating some other thing, some ambiguous ‘Christian faith’ that is separate from works, yet whole. You simply can not get that conclusion from James.
And unlike Paul, James is very clear and concise. He’s repetitive, the language is simple, he gives multiple analogies and examples… his meaning in this passage is really straightforward, I think. Faith without works is dead; it’s incomplete. To teach that this dead, incomplete thing saves is just not Biblical.
LikeLike
There was a discussion recently concerning whether Satan actually wants to send us to hell or not.
I believe that the consensus or at least the consensus that made sense was that no, he not has no interest in sending us to hell but does not believe that hell is his final destination.
I think what sola scriptura does show us is that he is dedicated to damaging and hurt to the saints.
All of us who are believers in the finished work of Christ are Saints. No arguments allowed on this post.
[Moderator edited]
Damaged by the heresies of works added to faith and grace.
You PHD types need to get into the Hebrew and Greek and Armenian and whatever but the Word is clear.
Matthew 11:30 in context please (taken with sola scriptura as a whole).
This is not hard.
We make it hard.
God has made it easy.
What is expected?
A true heart. Hebrews 10:22
[Moderator edited]
LikeLike
“In some cases it seems like their circumstances (homosexuality, depression, Asperger’s syndrome, bipolar disorder) prevent them from having any hope in coming to Christ.”
That’s odd. When somebody mentions depressed gays with Aspergers, Christians are the first group of people I think of…
LikeLike
I do have to say I have found a home, this is by far the greatest blog I have ever found.
I notice that a few post use the will of God, as in, we have to do God’s will. My question is, What is God’s will? Is it not to have the faith that grace is sufficient. I know others can quote scripture and I am not a-very good at that, but I heard a sermon by Steven Brown titled The Death of Evangilism. In that sermon he said the scripture says that after salvation we arise a new creation. Most in my church would say that after salvation you will no longer have the urge to sin. I, like Steven Brown take that to mean, we are still as dirty rags even after salvation, but through grace, God has giving us the only path that will lead us to Him.
LikeLike
What they probably mean is you have to quit doing things they don’t like before they will really believe you’re a Christian.
Jesus accepts you, but I say lose the piercing.
LikeLike
nice post, i tend to agree
as a baptist, i’m used to hearing that faith AND repentance bring salvation. i think i’ve finally created my own definition of what this must mean – faith brings salvation, and salvation necessarily displays itself in a repentant lifestyle and good works. i’m afraid, however, that many who stress faith AND repentance mean it more literally & rigidly, meaning that they believe to be saved one must sprinkle their belief with some good works to be saved.
i agree, faith alone, but i don’t think i’m able to say that without adding that repentance and a changed life reveal if one has exercised faith or merely belief, which even the demons have.
good post, though, thanks
mike
LikeLike
If you are justified in a family room, then something is wrong. You are justified when a judge says you are right with the law.
You are adopted in a family room. You’re born in a family room. You are loved in a family room. We all believe that.
But if justification isn’t primarily a legal image, then we’re got some definiton problems.
(And I say that as a fan of NT Wright.)
LikeLike
Tim,
I suppose I jumped a bit, probably about as much as you would have had I quoted one of Luther’s sermons and said that he had some concept of salvation by works. 😉
When you mentioned the forensic nature of justification and imputation of righteousness I realized that might be an issue why faith alone is held so strongly, despite needing to qualify it so frequently (faith [that displays works] alone, etc). We have a different concept of how salvation works and what it means to be saved. You’re saved in a court room, we’re saved in a family room.
God offers us his love; we are his children. Yet children can disobey and go astray. They are still children, yet they’ve forsaken the family. No action of ours merits staying in the family, but we can choose to leave the family.
Like a child doing the dishes, doing the dishes doesn’t “merit” the father’s love, but the child doesn’t want to disobey the father. First out of fear of punishment, but later, out of love for the father. We are to grow in our relationship of God, like Fr Ernesto said in his comment, through fear of the Lord to love.
As for Aquinas, I will see if I can find this passage (I go to a Dominican parish with a great library, so perhaps I can give some context.)
LikeLike
MDS:
My experience has been that there seems to be the traditional “churchianity.” But there exists the true Body of Christ….the “lively stones..fittly joined together.’ These ‘lively stones’ fellowship with God in spiritual worship…from the heart…as a response to His magnicicant Grace. These ‘stones’ put on the face of Christ…as He continually transforms these willing persons into His image. Each ‘stone’ is a person who yields his or her body as ‘the Temple of God.” The fruits brought forth, either collectively or individually, will be deeds of service to others…including the unlovable. God is no respector of persons. But, MDS, I have found that Christ perhaps works best when He doesn’t have to take time to get the group together. 🙂 People with needs are generally encountered as we go through our usual daily routines e.g. the grocery carry-out guy who shares that he’s about to begin treatment for melinoma cancer. You give him a bear hug, your cell phone number, and you say “Call me if you need help in any way. I’d be happy to drive you, to sit with you, to bring you food….please call. And he says, “I will” because he knows it is Christ within you who really has compassion for his trouble.
LikeLike
Christina,
I’ve not read all these authors, but I have read some of Thomas Aquinas. There is no possible way he believed in anything close to the protestant doctrine of sola fide unless you completely take him out of context or Aquinas was schizo.
I didn’t say that they believed the protestant doctrine of sola fide, I said: “a number of early authors before Luther understood the sense of Romans 8:28 to mean “sola†with the word faith.” (It should have said Romans 3:28, that was a bad typo on my part). I guess I should have been more clear on what I meant when I said, ‘the history of sola fide’. I was refering more narrowly to the notion of ‘faith alone’ and not trying to imply that all these guys were closet Protestants… the issues of history are more complicated and I don’t want to be anachronistic about it.
I’m not saying they articulated the protestant doctrine in its fullness (forensic nature of justification, imputation of righteousness that is extra nos, etc). But Aquinas does say, “Therefore the hope of justification is not found in them [refering to the moral and ceremonial requirements of the law], but in faith alone, Rom. 3:28…” from Aquinas Expositio in Ep. I ad Timotheum cap. 1 lect. 3 (qtd. Fitzmyer, Romans, p.360) [sorry, but I don’t have access to the context]. This doesn’t mean though that he works out the rest of his theology like a proto-protestant.
Please don’t misunderstand me in quoting Aquinas either. The issues are more complex then just saying Romans 3:28 should be understood as ‘sola fide’ and then holding up authors before Luther. Issues, among other things, include the Latin difference between iustitia vs. the Greek word dikiao and how that led to misunderstandings. This led to different conceptions of how righteousness was concieved.
-Tim
LikeLike
Oh, I might add that you’re right about community… I think that if the community of faith REALLY exercised the same Grace that God does, we’d end up helping each other ‘get better’ without realizing it, also.
Remember in John 14, Jesus said that the world would know us and come to Him by our LOVE for one another. He didn’t say it would be by how holy of a community we were.
LikeLike
MDS,
My experience is actually quite the opposite. In the faith communities I’ve been in, Faith and Grace tend to be viewed as only a starting point and are generally ignored post-salvation. Everything is focused on becoming more holy and more obedient after that. The problem I found is that you end up just spinning your wheels ‘cuz the “sanctification” process is carried out on our own strength without really looking to God unless it’s to confess how much we suck for failing.
I found when I accepted and rejoiced in God’s grace being the active part of BOTH salvation and sanctification, I ‘got better’ in many areas in spite of myself. By not focusing so much on my efforts and failures but rather just focusing on God’s goodness, I tended to fail less without even trying so hard.
Granted, there are still MAJOR areas of failure. I’m not perfect, but I’m getting better. Or rather, He’s making me better as I let Him be the one to transform me rather than trying to force His hand all the time.
LikeLike
Michael: Good words and I agree. Some of the comments are hard for me to read because it shows the damage of not believing and living faith in Christ alone, even though that is what is taught.
LikeLike
Hi, iMonk:
Amen, and amen some more. Sola fide just sounds like such foolishness, doesn’t it? Faith given by the grace of God, not depending on what I have done or will do? Nonsense. I had the joy of teaching a class in a Presby church about the solas, and the number of long-standing members who just spit the bit out over faith+nothing was amazing to me. Saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Why, that could apply to anyone regardless of merit or past or political party or sinfulness or anything!
To which I can only say, thank you Jesus.
LikeLike
“turn the topic into Round 535 of a fight that won’t be over till Jesus returns and straightens out everyone who disagrees with me.” Love it , humor really helps
LikeLike
I hate jumping in on posts with this many comments, but what the heck.
In my experience, it seems that (we as) Evangelicals have been so concerned with promoting the idea that we can’t save ourselves that the message has evolved from “You can’t do anything to be saved” into “Do whatever the hell you want, as long as you’re saved.” And now we’re hesitant to correct that misrepresentation, since we don’t want to appear to be saying “Well, you actually can do something to be saved.” Maybe we don’t see the problem, or maybe we just don’t know how to say it.
Or maybe this is just our lot, as it were. One of the theories behind the authorship of James is that James was correcting a congregation who had misunderstood (or perhaps deliberately msiconstrued) Paul’s teaching on salvation by faith alone, and turned “faith” into “mere belief.” So James had to step in and say, “You’ve gone too far now, boys.” So maybe that’s where we’re at. We’ve gone from “faith alone” to “belief alone,” and in time we may very well shift too far to the other side into legalism.
LikeLike
Very well said. In the end we are saved by faith alone. I am tired of seeing modern Christians exclude people and becoming more elitist.
If we add any additional steps, anything we must do ourselves beyond just having sincere faith, then we are saying that what Jesus did wasn’t enough. That’s a bold statement indeed.
I so wish the majority of modern Christians could come back to this and re-realize this and stop trying to exclude their brothers and sisters because they disagree on theological issues.
I agree that Theology should not pollute whether you are saved or not, the Bible is quite clear. We are saved because of what Jesus did, nothing else. Theology doesn’t define whether you are a Christian or not, in comes after that and shouldn’t be placed where it isn’t.
LikeLike
I am reminded of the ninth verse of Paul Speratus’s great hymn “Salvation unto Us Has Come”:
Faith clings to Jesus’ cross alone
And rests in Him unceasing;
And by its fruits true faith is known,
With love and hope increasing.
Yet faith alone doth justify,
Works serve thy neighbor and supply
The proof that faith is living.
It seems to me that misidentifying the recipient and purpose of good works is where many evangelicals / fundamentalists / Protestants go wrong. God doesn’t need our good works. Our neighbor does.
LikeLike
Joe M made a good point. There are enough Scriptures in the New Testament, including from Jesus himself, that point to judgment including a behavioral component that it should warn us about any interpretation of Scripture that discounts our personal behavior.
Matthew 7:21 – Not everyone who says to me, “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
It is not my intention to get into a Scripture quotation battle, but only to say that St. Paul alone cannot a theology establish when there are multiple quotations from multiple other authors of the New Testament that go against a viewpoint that would see sanctification as faith alone.
Moreover, a viewpoint of justification by faith alone that results in an assurance that regardless of your actions you will be saved leads to a false sense of security. Even St. Paul had to end up writing that justification does not mean that we can sin more or without worry.
In fact, I would argue that it is St. Paul, not St. James, that has been misunderstood. I would further argue that an over-emphasis on the inability of humans has led not to a loving reliance on God’s grace but to St. Paul having to defend himself against the logical conclusion that grace abounds so much that our sins no longer matter as much. He did defend himself, but it points out how easy he is to misinterpret.
It is only when we do hold the New Testament balance that includes both what Jesus said about how he will not lose one that the Father has given him along with what Jesus said about those who say only “Lord, Lord” not making it in that we can come to a firm and balanced appreciation of salvation by grace.
There is no doubt that salvation is purely and only by grace. There is no doubt that we are then called to use our redeemed wills to follow our Lord. It is a false argument to try to state that unless we follow him perfectly then it matters naught. It clearly does matter since our Lord was the one who said that it matters whether you simply speak the words or whether you do the will of the Father.
Forgiveness of our failures was part of what our Lord built into the fabric of the Church, from the Divine Liturgy to the rest of the Sacraments to the indwelling Holy Spirit to the life of the community. It is that forgiveness that provides the wineskin within which we strive for Christian growth and work out our salvation in fear and trembling, which is from St. Paul, not from St. James. But, and here is the warning from Jesus, James, Paul, John, and the author of Hebrews, if we are not striving to grow, even if do so imperfectly, then the forgiveness may not be present.
Now, as to fear, the argument about fear and uncertainty has been wildly overdone as an argument for the five solas. First, both Solomon and St. Paul insist that fear is the beginning of wisdom. That is where we begin but not where we end. St. John is right that perfect love casts out fear. As we grow in Him, fear does give way to love. But, we tend to want to skip that stage nowadays and to explain it away simply as reverential awe. Rather we need to say with Jesus that we begin by fearing him who can destroy our soul so that we may learn to not fear him who can destroy only our body. But, we do not stop there; we go on.
That going on is called synergy. But that is another topic for another day.
LikeLike
Tim,
…a number of early authors before Luther understood the sense of Romans 8:28 to mean “sola†with the word faith. Including: Origen, Hilary, Basil, Ambrosiaster, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Bernard, Theophylact, Theodoret, Thomas Aquinas, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Marius Victorinus and Augustine.
I’ve not read all these authors, but I have read some of Thomas Aquinas. There is no possible way he believed in anything close to the protestant doctrine of sola fide unless you completely take him out of context or Aquinas was schizo.
LikeLike
MDS,
I know your question is directed at Michael, but I wanted to put in my two cents worth.
At the risk of sounding extremely simplistic, we become the face of Christ to the world by becoming the face of Christ to the world. We see “the least of these” and do what we can to ease their pain or hunger or loneliness, either singly or in groups, knowing we can do very little but that we are doing it as unto Jesus, and He takes care of our becoming the face of Christ to the world. I don’t think we stress and strain over it; we just do it because He said to. He takes care of the rest. The more conscious we are of “being the face of Christ to the world,” the less we are the face of Christ to the world. It is a mystery.
I confess that I have not been a a very good example myself. Do what I say, not what I do (I’m beginning to sound like my Dad).
LikeLike
like dkmonroe said, isn’t there a difference between “faith” and “belief”? and the idea of being faithful is so much more than just a mental assertion, when “faithful” is the same greek word as “faith.” does anyone want to speak to this?
bluejeangospel: thanks for your response. i think the idea of “mixing” vs. “confirming” faith by works is an interesting one. i’m am still rolling all this over and wrestling with the new scholarship on paul.
but practically this discussion shouldn’t effect how we live too much aside from avoiding legalism. we must still live with many works, or throw out have the bible and have “cheap grace.” “Grace is opposed to earning, not to effort.” –Dallas Willard
LikeLike
One last and rather simple comment upon the interplay of faith and works.
I will not purposely walk in front of a moving bus on a busy street because I am confident and have faith that it would maim or destroy me. Faith that this will be the inevitable result of the action of placing myself in front of a bus causes me to behave as though this were true. Faith and action are intrinsically related. True faith leads to concrete action. Concrete action is the result of true faith.
However, in my Christian life, too often my actions fail to follow the faith I proclaim. Concrete actions and behaviors that one would expect if my faith were real are not evident. And so I must question my profession of faith, repent, and ask God for a faith that will result in life that is lived in harmony with that faith.
Isn’t this what James is trying to say? The test of true faith is seen in the concrete practice of life? If this is so, there is no contradiction. Faith without works is actually dead. If it is not dead in the way it connects me to God, it is certainly dead with regard to the benefit it may have for others and to our life as it is lived in this world in the same way the “wealth” of the father was lost to the prodigal and those around him.
LikeLike
MDS writes: ‘ “You are simply trying to gain favor with God. Salvation is by grace through faith alone. There is nothing you can do.†In other words, it’s all about salvation or gaining entrance into heaven. After that, just relax and enjoy yourself, and wait to die.’
MDS, I really recommend that you read Luther’s commentary on Galatians. You would have a lot of things sorted out. It was truly seminal and freeing in my life.
Nobody says there is nothing that you do. There is the daily battle with “sin, death, and the devil”, which requires ever vigilance and fresh repentance and fresh forgiveness. This forgiveness is found in the church and that is how the church supports you. The main program of the church is forgiveness of sins.
You must do battle with your own sins of doing and not doing. But this must not be mixed in with knowing that God’s mercy is for you, for sure, and complete, and forever, and always available. Keep fleeing to that place. This is true even for persistent sins. 70×70. All our deeds are as “filthy rags”. We can put no stock in them.
But you can put stock on God’s promise and act of salvation. He actually demands you to. Believe!
LikeLike
After the experience written of in my two prior posts, I soon found that I yet yearned for genuine holiness. The gap between the call of Christ and my life as lived was still too great. I couldn’t begin to imagine that I would ever be able to say as Paul did, “Imitate me as I have imitated Christâ€. No doubt, I fell back and away in the direction of trying to clothe myself in holiness. But “Just let go and let God…..†theology made me schizoid and split me in two. How is it that one makes progress in Christ likeness?
I received no help in this anxious struggle. Once more I felt condemnation from others and myself for my lack of holiness, but was offered no kind words of wisdom that might guide or comfort me. Again I was alone. Yes, God had brought me out of Egypt, but the charge and thrill of that experience grew dim with time.
Here is the crux of my beef. The community failed me. Though God had worked a miracle in my life, I was yet a young Christian and much in need of personal help and guidance. But it was not given, nor found.
Not until I discovered Dallas Willard was I given hope once more that it was possible to actually grow in Christ likeness in this life, that it was normal to expect godly transformation, that Christ had actually made his Church to be a means for this change as well as a womb within which it would occur, and that He had also provided practices by which I/we could participate and cooperate with Him as He made those changes in us.
And here is where I am finally to my question. It is at this precise intersection that I have most run up against the evangelical church in my efforts to change our practices so that we begin to become the grace of God to others as we help and aid those who desire to grow, no longer leaving them alone and wounded to struggle as I and so many others have had to.
Sola fide, or what I believe is a perversion and misunderstanding of the doctrine, is most responsible for the evangelical church abandoning the call to sanctification, discipleship, and spiritual formation in the life of the Christian. Everywhere I have tried to bring this into the church, I have been opposed by statements such as, “You are simply trying to gain favor with God. Salvation is by grace through faith alone. There is nothing you can do.†In other words, it’s all about salvation or gaining entrance into heaven. After that, just relax and enjoy yourself, and wait to die.
So how do we move past this? How do we get beyond this Lone Ranger mentality? How do we begin to become the face of Christ to the world if we are not a true community working together to grow up into the fullness of God?
Have you found the same distortion of sola fide in your experience of the church? Do you agree or disagree with how I have framed it? What is the way forward?
MDS
LikeLike
Thank you IM. My father is a pastor of a very legalistic oriented denomination, though he himself is not, my mother took care of that part most of her life. As her time was closing, I believe she found grace, or faith, it brought peace, she was able to “work” as never before, with power. I’ve fought against the darkness of works all my life, but when I let faith lead the battle I too found peace and in that power that was not me, but truly God through me. When you have faith, or recognize grace, works happen, you don’t do them they do themselves. See the response from the sheep and goats.
LikeLike
What is the faith that saves us?
Is it a belief that Jesus actually lived?
That seems like such a minor thing. A thing that could easily be misconstrued.
I’ve seen that you are a big fan of Lewis. Surely you’re aware that Lewis seemed a bit uncomfortable with the idea of all “non-believers” getting sent to hell. In Mere Christianity, The Great Divorce, and The Last Battle, Lewis seems to suggest faith is highly related to works.
Can one choose to not believe that Jesus was who he said he was or that he even lived and still be saved by God’s grace through the direction of their life?
I’ve struggled with this a long time. I have many friends who are not Christians. In some cases it seems like their circumstances (homosexuality, depression, Asperger’s syndrome, bipolar disorder) prevent them from having any hope in coming to Christ.
It seems unfair that circumstances in my life (given to me by God) have led me to a life of faith, while circumstances in other people’s lives have led them away from it. Certainly one could say it’s due to election, but that notion of how God works doesn’t make sense to me. The idea of God working that way makes me angry and sad.
How does this fit with the parable of the worker who said he would not do his master’s will but did it anyway?
I don’t mean to imply that I’m a universalist, because I’m not. I do however wonder if faith is what we usually say it is and I have hope that God’s grace extends farther than we think it does.
LikeLike
Aggie:
What I would prefer is for people to make statements of their beliefs without demanding answers from the group or individuals AND/OR without attempting to turn the topic into Round 535 of a fight that won’t be over till Jesus returns and straightens out everyone who disagrees with me.
🙂
So I want participation, but I do want more sharing and less “My question must be answered.” I understand that some issues are very important to commenters, and they may feel that issue holds the key to the discussion, but it’s just a matter of discipline.
ms
LikeLike
I really appreciated this article. As a pastor, I completely agree that we have lost sight of what is so essential to the gospel. Now we have a generation that is raised craving issues that aren’t even secondary or tertiary. Having been feed a diet of junk food long term, it is like they can expect no less. Thanks for the reminder that getting this issue wrong leaves people “toast†and “damnedâ€â€”after all these things have eternal consequences.
Sola Fide used to be a hallmark of evangelicalism, a non-negotiable, and a thing by which we fundamentally defined ourselves by (whether you were Calvinist, Arminian or didn’t know the difference). It is sad the something so essential has been relegated to the back room, put away like a fading old family photo now sitting in a musty closet.
While I only had time to read some of the comments, I thought I might at my two cents about the history of sola fide. It is interesting that Joseph Fitzmyer (a Roman Catholic) in his commentary on Romans notes that a number of early authors before Luther understood the sense of Romans 8:28 to mean “sola” with the word faith. Including: Origen, Hilary, Basil, Ambrosiaster, John Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Bernard, Theophylact, Theodoret, Thomas Aquinas, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Marius Victorinus and Augustine. Fitzmyer notes that Pelagius wrote against the phrase ‘sola fides’ which evidences the phrase was already in use at the time (particularly significant if he had to mount an argument against it).
Granted Protestants have always recognized that the only statement of “faith alone” in the Bible is in James 2:24. However (1) this fails to distinguish the context of James and his argument from the argument the Reformers were making–they too were aware of such things (Calvin for example handles James 2 quite well) and (2) denying ‘faith alone,’ in my opinion, fails to take seriously the force of “apart from” (choris) in Romans 3:28.
Anyways thanks for the great pastoral theology–would the more Christian today head such advice. I hope an essay like this light a fire under more people’s bottoms. We need to keep the main thing the main thing.
LikeLike
Please excuse the fact that I’ve been off the theological debate team for some time but I have an observation.
Eph. 2 1-9 says that we are saved by grace through faith, not by faith itself. It is grace which saves, faith would appear to be the way we receive it. But faith is a rather broad word – does it not imply action as well as belief? A “faithful husband” is not only faithful in the mind or spirit, there is also action (and restraint) involved in being faithful. Now, one might say, “There’s a difference between ‘having faith’ and ‘being faithful’ but I think that there must be some sort of link between the two.
I do think that there is some tension in our understanding of faith and this is perhaps caused by a reductionistic understand of what “faith” means. Christians rightly say that “faith” and “belief” are two different things, but we are not always clear as to what that difference entails.
LikeLike
IMONK..your blog is an example of ‘come let us reason together. All blogger comments are rich with thought and reason…..pointing the way to a truthful conclusion. Well done!
Concerning GRACE…grace has to be an action word. As the fall of Eve was necessary to complete the creation of man in God’s image….’now they have become as we…knowing both good and evil’……likewise, the response of man to GRACE is necessary for its intended application. GRACE REQUIRES A RESPONSE FROM MAN. The response is contrition, repentance, belief, faith, transformation…sanctification…having the mind of Christ. The old Law indicted man of sin…..Christ….the new Law…is the fulfilling of the old Law. Law was never complete until Christ came to earth…gave His soul to the death of hell…and resurrected through GRACE to His present status of being ‘the first born of many brethren.’ SIN IS SERIOUS BUSINESS. AND IGNORANCE IS NO EXCUSE. THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH. HE DWELLS WITH US. WE YIELD OUR BODIES AS HIS TEMPLE OR WE DON’T. WE SERVE GOD OR WE SERVE SATAN’S FLESH. The tragedy is that God has shown us in the Word that FEW will understand the simple great commandment of ‘Love God with all your heart, soul, and mind…and the second great commandment…love your neighbor as yourself.’ I THINK GOD REALLY IS SAYING TO US, ‘ SHUT UP! LET LOVE DO ITS WORK! LOVE NEVER FAILS!
But we all know…there is precious little LOVE in this dying world!
LikeLike
Great post. I could say more, but I won’t. Great post. Thanks, E.
LikeLike
I know arguing from experience is dangerous, look at where Pentacostalism in many of its forms has gone, but experience can sometines be a pointer in the right (I hope) direction. I believe my experience has been somewhat like Martin Luther’s: I see how all my attempts at good works are corrupted by impure motives, lousy execution, etc. And I constantly think how as a member of North American culture I am so busy ‘just getting by’ that I don’t have time for very many ‘good works’. I know, I know, I should be simplifying my life so I have time to do the good works Christ commands we do. But I’m too lazy, and ignorant, on how to do the simplifying . . . so I can do more badly executed good works that come from impure motives . . . this is a hopeless spiral downward to despair. And when do I know I’ve done enough? enough good-enough ones? Part of my turn from contemporary evangelical theology to the solas of the reformation is the despair that threatens whenever I consider how I can do more.
Way earlier in the discussion Gloria talked about how our works are the basis for our reward, not our salvation. That view has been how I’ve reconciled salvation by grace versus being judged for our works. But even looking at our works as the basis for our reward . . . poorly done with impure motives. I have to believe the rewards are also acts of grace. I read somewhere it’s like a father prizing the scribbled drawings of his four year old son; it’s not the intrinsic value of the (art) work, but the source and motive that created it. And where did the motive and desire to please come from? . . . grace.
LikeLike
MDS, thanks for your story!
LikeLike
This discussion is making my brain hurt. Not because it is bad, but because I am hashing this thing out in my mind all the time–so that I can better live it and preach it to my congregation.
It is a fine balance to walk; to impress upon people that they cannot earn their salvation, but to also teach them that they cannot use their liberty as a license to sin.
I’ll be back to read more later, but right now I think I’m going to go eat a doughnut. Then I’m going to think about the Lord Jesus.
LikeLike
Grace alone is not the same thing as Faith alone. It’s by Grace that we have the ability to say “I believe” (Faith). It’s by Grace that we have the ability to work. It’s Grace that gives us the choice.
It’s we who must do the choosing.
As for the good thief, was he was saved without works? He was dying on a cross for his sins and chose to believe in Jesus. He rebuked his friend. He then asked, humbly, for forgiveness. He’s done three works so far, recognizing Jesus when it would have been easier to focus on his own pain, standing up to his companion, and asking for Jesus’s mercy.
i-Monk, I’m a Catholic “revert”; I fell away in college and then came back. I just recently started reading your blog back at “Are you offended” and didn’t realize that I’d wandered off my normal Catholic blog roll until you mentioned your main audience didn’t think the human body was good. But I promise to stay on topic from now on 🙂
LikeLike
My previous posting last night described my “sola gratia†experience. Wrong sola, I know, but the radical nature of the grace I found in that moment of crisis was inseparable in experience from the doctrine of sola fide. What but faith alone enabled me to see and know Christ’s presence in the moment I had abandoned all hope? Even the gift nature of faith was made manifest in the experience, for it was revealed to me that the hope I had abandoned was a hope and faith in myself; a hope and faith that I could somehow find a way to live up to the high call of Christ. In the abandonment of any shred of hope or faith in self, and in the realization of the presence of God with me at the instant of that abandonment, a faith not of me allowed me to enjoy resting in the caress of God. Sola fide connected me to sola gratia.
Suddenly I understood what Paul meant when he spoke of himself as “the chief of sinnersâ€, or Isaiah’s “Woe is me……..I am a man of unclean lipsâ€. The presence of God creates such a response. The dry, intellectual, and sterile qualities of doctrine take on life, warmth, and meaning through moments such as these.
Doctrine is nothing but words given to describe and shape our experience of life with God. It is not something we try to squeeze ourselves into through contorting the shape of our bodies and minds, but is custom designed clothing from God that cover and protect the weakness of our flesh as it is. And as clothing from God, it grows and forms us toward the shape of Christ.
This was not where I had intended to go. My question will have to wait. Hopefully you’ll still have this thread going when I can try again. I really do have a question related to sola fide that I’d like your input on Michael.
MDS
LikeLike
Awesome post Clavem – especially the distinction between predestination to faith and that of glory. Fits perfectly with todays reading 2 John: 4-9
Michael – are there some posts you’d prefer we Catholics opt out of? I think we understand each other, even if we do not agree. I’m not really adding anything to the Sola Fide concept except contrast.
LikeLike
Has anyone here ever noticed that strange paradox where those who preach faith alone, anti works, and maybe even go antinomian (for real) end up being the most legalistic people out there? Making a work out of avoiding works? Then you find the people who believe in works, though not works of the law, like Paul refers to, but works in the sense that James speaks of, tend to display more reliance on grace than the worst antinomian? It’s something that has bugged me for a while and just want to know if anyone else has seen this same thing.
LikeLike
Sole Fide Sola gratia Sola Christus Sola Scriptura
I am convinced that the cross was Gods plan to have intimacy with his creation and so we dont get too full of ourselves. The Gospel message has the ability to stop the spin we create in how we perceive ourselves if we ponder the deep meaning of Christ and the Cross deeply enough
http://spadinofamily.wordpress.com/category/intimacy/
LikeLike
Joe M:
I didn’t “edit” your post. It was waiting for comment moderation.
LikeLike
Nobody is better at explaining justification by faith alone than Martin Luther, even today. I highly recommend everything that he wrote on the subject.
BTW I am not a Lutheran. I am a Luthero-Calvinist. 🙂
LikeLike
My take on James 2:24 is that its our very ” faith ” that must be worked, in other words get out of our comfort zones once in a while, then God gets a chance to prove himself
Its whenever I’ve stepped out of my comfort zone by the unction of the Holy Spirit (and to the protest of family and fellow church members) that I’ve experienced signs, wonders and miracles! Faith worked leads to knowledge and understanding, which leads to greater faith which leads……etc….. ultimately leaving you with a testimony
And its by the word of our testimony that one brings others to the Kingdom
Talking about our faith doesn’t cut it, it has to be demonstrated
LikeLike
What about Ephesians 2:8-9? It seems to really clearly say “faith, not works.” Is there some other interpretation of this passage that says differently?
LikeLike
It is not the only place that Scripture speaks about faith. And nobody should argue that we are ‘saved’ by ‘grace’ through ‘faith’. It’s the move from a statement like that to ‘faith alone’ which is a highly suspect interpretive leap.
LikeLike
Michael, the only scriptural reference to “faith alone” is the one in James. The Galatians quote does not discuss ‘faith alone’. Rather it combats those who would require “the works of the law”. There, having grown up with many spiritual influences and coming to Christianity with some degree of knowledge of Judaism, I agree wholeheartedly with N.T. Wright. “Works of the law” refers specifically to those things (particularly circumcision, holy days, and food laws) which distinguished Jews from Gentiles. The reformers interpreted it instead in light of their views of “natural law”. And that was simply a poor interpretation.
James is the only place where Scripture directly says anything about “faith alone”. Everything else is an interpretive lens. And the sola fide lens has … issues.
LikeLike
Michael,
Thanks for editing my previous post. I didn’t like it much either.
LikeLike
I have a dear friend who is one of the best people I know anywhere.
He runs a charity to gives used athletic shoes to poor people all over the world on a pittance in near poverty.
He completely rejects the idea that any sacrifice is needed for his “salvation”.
He has bought the whole Jesus as a wise man like Buddha, Mohammad, Baha’i and himself and me and you.
God is in all of us and nature.
He’s the best person I know.
If works will get you saved, he’s in.
I fail to see the difference in my friend’s philosophy and that of adding to the finished work of Christ. Just different degrees.
BTW, we don’t argue about this, I love him and he knows my position.
I cannot understand why what is crystal clear in both testaments is even a controversy.
From Genesis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 it all Christ all the time and nothing else.
Everything points to Him and his COMPLETELY sufficient work.
License and all the other nonsense is addressed.
Read it.
Faith is not a work. Faith is a movement of God.
LikeLike
This will be in two parts. The first recounts my “Grace†experience. The second will be a question for Mr. Spencer (a genuine question, not a test).
I became a Christian a few years after college. Soon after this I thought I was being called to the ministry and was asked to fill a one year position as a lay pastor. Just after taking this on, I read the scripture saying, “Be ye Holy as I am holy†and immediately fell into spiritual depression. I wasn’t holy, and had no idea how I could be. I didn’t want to give God a bad name or drag the little congregation I was supposedly pastoring down to my level, so I faked it. This was also the start of my learning to become a holy liar.
After that year, I left the denomination and joined a newly forming Reformed church. Its teaching and doctrine reinforced my sense of separation from the holiness of God. After a year of feeling that God was distant and busy taking care of more important matters than my weak willed struggles, I threw my hands up and declared, “OK! I’m not holy! I never will be holy! The only way I’ll ever be holy is the way I am now; full of holes. That’s what I am, and that’s all I ever will be. And if I have to go to hell for it, then so be it.â€
And in that very moment I realized………………that I wasn’t alone……………that God was beside me, holding me……and that he’d always been with me. In the precise moment that I had come face to face with the black darkness of my soul, God was with me. He loved me. He even liked me. And then it hit me…………OH!…….. That’s what grace is. Here I am, an absolute asshole (you’ll likely want to edit that), utterly unholy, incapable of living up to anything worthy of God, and still he is with me.
And HE WAS with me.
And HE IS with me.
And HE IS my holiness.
And then I KNEW grace.
I lost all patience with legalists after that. Though I was nothing, God was with me. So who could hurt me? If anyone tried to make me feel I wasn’t living up to their holy standards, they couldn’t touch me. Of course I wasn’t living up to their standards. So they soon left me alone. Legalists are just bullies that prey on the weak and defenseless. Stand up to them and they go away.
But they also soon found that I was death to them when they tried to hurt someone else. I became like that multi-headed, eight-armed ugly Hindu god when they tried to pull that stuff on someone that was incapable of defending themselves. I had no stomach for it. Grace can cut too. Blood and grace travel together.
That is what I later came to refer to as my “Grace Experienceâ€.
I’ll post my question tomorrow. It is related and connects to sanctification, discipleship, and spiritual formation.
LikeLike
When we read the gospel scene of the Good Thief we all can relate to him – saved by faith alone, no baptism, no good work, just Grace. But when we read Mt 25 and see judgment occurring based how we have treated each other, we should also relate to those being judged. What is the point of that story?
Maybe people get mixed up about this because the New Testament in many, many different places says that both faith in God and how we live somehow matter come judgment day. I believe I am saved by that gift of faith, but what are all those verses about judgment supposed to mean to me? Why does Jesus say that my sins will not be forgiven unless I forgive (Mt 6)? I don’t think I will ever quite get this. But what the heck, God loves us and He will work it all out the way it should work out – I guess that is faith.
LikeLike
Scott
You said it perfectly. I have tried to explain that to people for a long, long time.
There is no “but” when it comes to grace. Grace is 100% freely given by God as a way for us to commune with Him.
I tell people all the time, He overcame the cross we put Him on, He overcame the hell we put Him through, and He overcame the grave we put Him in, Why? because He loves us that much.
I think when people finally understand that there is nothing we can give to pay for the sacrifice on the cross, they finally understand Grace.
LikeLike
One church I have attended says people need to be saved. Another church I have attended says people need to be saved and filled with the Holy Spirit. Yet another church I have attended says people need to be saved, sanctified, and filled with the Holy Spirit. Maybe the “You can’t be a Christian if you ____________” crowd (wear those clothes, read those books, listen to that kind of music, go to those places, whatever) have confused the saved part and the sanctified part. They also seem pretty much in the dark about the being filled with the Holy Spirit part.
I think works have more to do with our sanctification/holiness/Christian walk than with our salvation/eternal destiny. Each believer must work out his or her own salvation with fear and trembling. If he or she is not busy at working out his or her own salvation with fear and trembling, perhaps he or she is not really a believer. But this task has nothing to do with whether you wear a certain tee-shirt, avoid certain movies, or comply with other people’s lists of do’s and dont’s. We have enough trouble trying to obey what God is telling us without trying to please anybody else.
LikeLike
Scott: I didn’t want to say it, but you said it.
Christina:
I’m happy to have new readers, Catholic readers, Catholic converts (which I’m going to guess you are) and other kinds of readers. But I really strive to make the discussions here at IM different from the usual blogs. There are many places that the battles between Catholics and Protestants are being fought and refought by apologists from both sides.
Here at IM, there are many Protestants who are not looking to convert, but are very aware of the RC answers and the issues from the Catholic side. This isn’t a Catholic bashing blog. Sometimes we look squarely at an issue and talk about the differences, such as the recent post on Indulgences. What I try to do in moderating is not attract the kind of posters who want to argue issues that aren’t interesting to most of the audience.
You’re free to acknowledge all of your beliefs, but I’m not a big fan of any of our commenters having to publicly answer questions that they have already answered by their commitment to Protestantism or Catholicism.
peace
MS
LikeLike
…appreciate that quote Glenda.
Luke,
Michael will most likely address your comments in much better detail and verbiage than I will. However, I couldn’t help but think about Paul’s vehement and bold stance against the behavior of Peter for his convenient slide back into a mix faith and works. We have the example right there in black and white you state is missing with Paul (why didn’t he wrestle with legalism and speak against people trying to live by “worksâ€).
True faith never mixes with works—it is merely confirmed by works. And Paul, if anyone ever has, pointed out that the distinction here is paramount.
Your points on Luther are heard, and I agree to a degree, but he, like Paul, was just another sinner saved by grace. And while Paul was instrumental for some awesome contributions to the Kingdom and the Holy Scriptures—that shouldn’t discount the role Luther (or Augustine, Edwards, or Billy Graham for that matter) has played in passing along a tradition many of us have God to thank for.
Wouldn’t the book of Galatians be Paul’s line in the sand when it comes to any notions that he didn’t despise and denounce any sort of salvation and subsequent freedom secured by anything other than a faith doused and drowned in grace?
Just some thoughts.
LikeLike
How interesting. Alot of the commentators on this post have said in essence, “Sure, I believe in grace alone, BUT…” Whenever you put a “but” after grace alone, you really don’t believe in grace alone.
The comment thread is the pudding that proves this post.
LikeLike
Mr. Monk.
You have eloquently stated the only possible position that any clear reading of scripture would lead one to.
Anything at all that attempts to add one iota to the finished work of Christ is law and law is sin. Scripture is extremely clear. Even James.
Thank you.
LikeLike
I’m sorry, I’m new to the blog and didn’t realize that was a rule. I’ll stick to citing scripture if that is what you wish, but I feel this is something that needs to be addressed among non-Catholics if you’re to reach any agreement on these important issues.
As for works vs faith. What kind of works is Paul speaking about? He says we’re not justified by works “of the law” and many times he mentions circumcision. What if he’s talking about the Jewish ritual laws and practices, foremost circumcision? The Jews at that time believed that if you were circumcised you were saved (with no other action required on your part).
If we go through Romans it’s clear that he’s speaking to Jews who put their trust in circumcision alone (I suppose this can be seen as works alone, or for that matter, faith alone). This one act (circumcision/baptism/saying “I believe”) will get me to heaven.
“For when the Gentiles who do not have the law by nature observe the prescriptions of the law…they show that the demands of the law are written in their hearts [and] God will judge people’s hidden works through Christ Jesus” “Circumcision to be sure has value, if you keep the law, but if you break the law your circumcision has become uncircumcision.” “Indeed those who are physically uncircumcised but carry out the law will pass judgment on you with your written law and circumcision who break the law.”
If you read Romans you see him stressing over and over again the need to obey the [moral] law apart from the law of circumcision. I think it becomes very clear at Romans 3:10 where he quotes Psalm 14, “No one is just, not one.” This psalm was written by David who was lamenting that even the Jews, God’s chosen people, his own family, were out to get him. That there were representative from both the Jews and the Gentiles who wanted to kill him.
Thus he doesn’t say you don’t need the moral law, on the contrary, he stresses it’s necessity. What he’s saying is that just because you’re a Jew doesn’t mean you’ll be saved. Just because you did this “ritual”, as good as it is, doesn’t mean you’ve earned salvation. You must obey the moral law as well.
LikeLike
Sola Fide is, for me at least, an almost-impossible belief – not because I think it’s inherently flawed, but because it’s like grabbing a handful of water for a person like me.
My brain doesn’t like the idea that it’s not really involved, and my body doesn’t like the idea that it’s business (the ethics of being alive) isn’t superordinate when it comes to salvation.
There’s great value to be had by discovering things that annoy you obsessively and letting them do their work, fighting them the whole time…
LikeLike
>…how do you know your interpretation of scriptures is correct?
I don’t know it. I also wouldn’t know it if my position was endorsed by the pope and magisterium. No one knows beyond a doubt. You take something on faith, based on reason, evidence and the consensus you choose as authoritative for you.
I don’t know if you are a Catholic, but I generally ask RC commenters to not turn all of our conversations this direction. We’re all aware that the differences between Protestants and Catholics come down to authority.
peace
MS
LikeLike
I wonder, how do you know that it’s truly faith alone that saves? Nowhere (apart from where Luther added it in) does it say that in the bible. In order to get to that conclusion you must interpret scriptures.
As someone said, you must have Romans open when reading James. Could not the reverse be true? What if you need James open when you read Romans?
I think what I’m asking is how do you know your interpretation of scriptures is correct? If so many Christians disagree with you (as you’ve stated), are they all not guided by the Holy Spirit? How do you know who the real teachers are? How do you know who is leading you astray?
I can provide scripture after scripture demonstrating my point of view, and you could counter with yours, which of us is right? How we get to heaven is a big deal, I don’t want to be wrong.
LikeLike
Thanks Glenda. Powerful stuff.
LikeLike
A quote from Robert Farrar Capon that means a lot to me…
The reformation was a time when men went blind, staggering drunk because they had discovered, in the dusty basement of late medievalism, a whole cellarful of fifteen-hundred-year-old, two hundred proof grace — of bottle after bottle of pure distillate of Scripture, one sip of which would convince anyone that God saves us single-handedly. The word of the gospel — after all those centuries of trying to lift yourself into heaven by worrying about the perfection of your bootstraps — suddenly turned out to be a flat announcement that the saved were home before they started…Grace has to be drunk straight boys: no water, no ice, and certainly no ginger ale; neither goodness, nor badness, nor the flowers that bloom in the spring of super spirituality could be allowed to enter into the case.
LikeLike
People have a problem with this? Scary.
LikeLike
Alden,
No argument here! Amen and Amen.
LikeLike
I was going to comment on your previous post, but see that it’s closed (sigh). It was such a beautiful, poignant post.
I recently “shifted” from a Baptist church to an evangelical Episcpalian church (after 15 years at the former church and a lifetime in the tradition) and one of the first things I heard from one friend was, “Isn’t evangelical episcopalian an oxymoron?”
LikeLike
i’m not a phd holder either, but recently i’ve been rolling some of this stuff over–so here are some thoughts from a self labeled post-evangelical who grew up in a very reformed tradition.
i think it is important to make the distinction that luther was not paul, and our goal is to be Christ-followers, not just protestants, right? so we should hear all voices and not hold any as highly as scripture, as i feel many do with luther’s “sole fide.” granted that is a large part of our heritage, but do we hold it over paul himself?
all that to say that “pistis” (again i’m no scholar), the greek word for “faith” is also the same word for “faithfulness.” it is a matter of translation. i think that opens up the doors as to what paul is actually saying anytime you encounter the word “faith” in scripture. if paul was all about “sole fide” why didn’t he wrestle with legalism and speak against people trying to live by “works” or standards of living. why do we not see a sharper distinction in paul between “justification” and “sanctification” as we have created? why does paul constantly fill his letters with directives about “works”?
i don’t think there are easy answers to these questions. and as poorly as i’ve put forth these ideas they are explained much better through the thoughts of barth, yooder, and hauerwas in douglas harink’s Paul Among the Post-Liberals. would be interested in your thoughts michael.
LikeLike
Ah – the great James versus Paul Celebrity Death Match.
I’m not going to get into this one, thanks all the same, but I will just give you an opinion – James is probably, I think, addressing a particular problem that had cropped up, the same way Paul had to rap the Corinthians over the knuckles for losing the run of themselves, (amongst other things, the better-off stuffing their faces with their friends when gathered for the Supper whilst the poorer members of the congregation go hungry).
It sounds to me like James is dealing with some who haven’t quite grasped the point of the Parable of the Good Samaritan and need to be hit over the head with the question of “Who is my neighbour?” Yes, you with the ‘just getting by’ way of making a living, you do have to help out the less fortunate and you cannot get away any longer with “My faith is sufficient; works of the Law are now all done away with, including almsgiving” as an excuse.
Which all fits into the larger principle of “By their fruits you shall know them”: if you are now living a new life by faith, then going on the same way as before you were converted is edifying to neither your pagan friends nor your Christian brothers. It’s not trying to ‘earn’ salvation; it’s changing your ways because you want to live according to the will of God in a way pleasing to Him.
LikeLike
Cartman: “Whateva! Sola fide! I do what I want!” 🙂
LikeLike
Grace is like a boat which saves during a flood. But…..you have to believe the boat is deliverance….then you have to GET IN THE BOAT !
LikeLike
Jen E, the problem with distinguishing between salvation and sanctification is dealt with in Galatians 3: “After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?”
As someone once said, “the way in is the way on.”
Faith, and the presence of the Holy Spirit, will produce works. How do we “be transformed by the renewing of our minds?” How are we “being changed into [Jesus’] likeness with ever-increasing glory?”
Why do we “work out our salvation?”
It all comes back to grace & faith.
LikeLike
This essay is a clue.
Thanks!
LikeLike
Chaplain Mike,
What is the difference between “faith alone” and “faith that is alone”? Also, how is faith, itself, not a work?
Perhaps also it would be a good idea to distinguish between justification and salvation as Sam points out. Do you mean the act of getting into heaven or the becoming a member of God’s family? There’s a difference…
1. We become, through no merit of our own, purely by God’s grace, adopted children of God through baptism.
2. We can; however, reject this gift and must therefore continue to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling” Phil 2:12) conforming our will to His Will relying on his Grace to sustain our faith working in love.
One key feature, it’s all Grace. If we all agree on Grace alone, why are we splitting hairs at when faith stops and works begin?
Another example, through no merit of my own, I’m a child of my earthly father. When my father asks me to do something I obey out of love for him. My obedience doesn’t merit my last name, but my lack of obedience can remove me from the house. I can reject my family through disobedience. In the same way we do not “merit” heaven by our works, but we can reject heaven by refusing God’s gift (seen in our lack of works).
LikeLike
Amen IM,
While honestly and sincerely preaching grace and justification (being made righteous), evangelicals have too often turned right around and created a church culture of rules, codes and external judgments that enslaved individuals and the entire community to fear, to guilt, to judgment and to condemnation — to everything they should have been saved from by the all satisfying death of Christ! Because that death should “satisfy” not only in some eternal account book in the sky but in the depths of the human heart and in the experience of the believer in Christian community.
To tie this in with another of your notes, the above is taken from an in-house critique of Piper’s “The Achilles Heel of the Next Geneneration.”
Read it here if you like.
LikeLike
In the old testament they had sacrifices to cover sin and then, separately, pre and post mosaic law, there were blessings and curses based on right or wrong actions.
In the new testament, faith unleashes God’s grace which covers our sin secures (once and for all in Jesus’ perfect sacrifice) our salvation and changes us into a new creature. Grace is unconditional and has nothing to do with our actions or it nullifies the perfection of Jesus’ sacrifice.
Works on the other hand unleashes blessings – tapping into the positive “If…then” statements of the scripture which allows us to “lay up treasure in heaven”. The curses were the domain of the devil and we are no longer subject to them since we are in Christ. Blessings, the perfect gifts that flow from God are still tied to our actions.
This is why I think Paul seems to have no problem saying what he does about grace (all things are permissible) and then turning around and saying we need to work out our salvation (not all things are profitable). There IS movement required on our part – not a terrified flight to escape the fire of an angry God, but the deliberate, calculated pace of an athlete toward a prize at the end of the race.
LikeLike
One can make too much of the difference between the Roman Catholic and Protestant doctrine of sola fide. The Lutheran-Catholic Joint Declaration on Justification makes some pretty strong statements concerning the primacy of faith and the necessity of works for both groups. That should caution anyone attempting to drive a wedge into a hairline fracture.
But the blogger’s post was not about this but about the existence of a species of legalism within a body that professes sola fide. Legalism here seems to mean that the group insists that the definition of being a Christian consists in following a detailed moral code, while also maintaining, in principle, that the definition of a Christian is one who has faith in Christ. Manipulation of the notion of a “true Christian” is the key issue here. The reasoning here is quite logical.
1) A Christian has faith.
2) Faith necessarily produces good fruit.
3) If there is a lack of good fruit, there is no faith.
4) If there is no faith, the person is not a Christian.
The logic is sound but there is something wrong with it. The problem, if you consider this a problem, is that evangelicals are unwilling to allow that one can be a true Christian with true faith by true grace at a certain moment in life, and still be finally damned. This refusal forces one through the first two propositions I stated above, and the two conclusions follow.
If one disallows the doctrine of “once saved, always saved”, one is not forced into the first two propositions: a true Christian can, after a while, apostatize and real faith may, after a while, stop producing good fruit. Thus, the two conclusions do not necessarily follow. Predestination to grace (the gift of faith) is not the same thing as predestination to glory (the gift of perseverance in faith). One can be given the first and not the second. And although we can assure ourselves that we possess the first gift, it is presumption to claim assurance of the second.
Thus, in the Catholic Church, we threaten unrepentant sinners with excommunication on the very grounds that they are still Christian. They do not prove by their perfidy that they are certainly reprobate or were never Christian. Their being Christian is a gift of God and no law can take that away. Mind you, we have our own form of legalism, but this usually consists in being satisfied with the form of a thing and negligent of the spirit thereof. Also, some fall into the trap of viewing works or virtues as the formal cause of justification, but this is due mainly to lack of education, since the Church has condemned this notion again and again.
LikeLike
James is speaking of the nature of the faith that saves. It isn’t the insubstantial sort of faith where all we have to do is believe stuff and we’re saved, ’cause the demons believe in one God and that doesn’t save them. It’s the substantial sort of faith where believing God means we’ll actually do what He tells us to. If our faith doesn’t lead to works, it’s the wrong sort of faith.
And obviously the faith has to come first. We can’t perform the faith-works without the faith to begin with. So it starts with faith, produces works, and the works fulfill, or (as the ESV puts it) completes that faith.
I think, though, that a lot of the folks saying, “No Christian would _____†aren’t going Pelagian on us and insisting its faith plus works. They’re saying that the works they see aren’t the fruit consistent with repentance. The reason they don’t have a leg to stand on is ’cause they’re looking at the wrong fruit entirely. Paul didn’t list dress codes, politics, music styles, reading material, and young-earth creationism as fruit of the Spirit. He listed love, joy, peace… you know the list. I only question a Christian’s salvation when I see both the fruit of the Spirit lacking, and the works of the flesh prevailing. When you see loveless, joyless, peaceless, jealous, bad-tempered, mean, and nasty folks who call themselves Christians, I just gotta doubt they have any saving faith behind it all.
LikeLike
Mmmmmm?
Romans 3:25…to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins THAT ARE PAST…
Romans 6: 15-16…What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness.
LikeLike
Mike says: “If you put the human element- even in the guise of theology, or culture transformation or politics- into the Gospel, I’m doomed and damned. If works or sincerity or character change are in there at all, I’m toast.”
That’s just it. We would be toast. If we are honest. Or else we’ve come up with some self-made rules, that we can keep, but are not God’s commands. That kind of hypocrisy is an insult.
LikeLike
I read a Jerry Bridges book where he asserted that where most evangelicals get confused in applying sola fide is not to salvation, but to sanctification. Most of us would agree that we’re saved through efforts not of our own, but solely Christ. Then we live out our salvation in the sanctification process as if blessing from God depends on our performance. iMonk, perhaps your use of the term “salvation” encompasses both salvation/sanctification, so I may not be adding anything to the conversation here.
His book was very freeing (as have Steve Brown’s books) because I certainly lived like that for a long time. And, even though I understand grace better now than I did before, that temptation to “earn my way” still rears its ugly head every now and then.
It’s occurred to me many times that when we have “laws” or “rules” we know what is expected of us and it’s comfortable. Faith requires a relationship and those are much more nebulous, more difficult and usually more time consuming, not to mention painful. Rules and laws are the easy way out. Relationships are the harder choice, and that includes choosing to relate to Christ rather than make up rules about what a follower of Christ does or not do.
LikeLike
…couldn’t agree more with you Michael. I have seen it on all fronts—it wasn’t popular at my Bible college 20 years ago and it seems it’s getting less face time today in even our most “traditional” evangelical circles. Augustine’s words ring true—“If you believe what you like in the Gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the Gospel you believe, but yourself.”
LikeLike
I agree with you, I don’t think most Evangelicals do actually believe in Sola Fides, when push comes to shove. That doesn’t entirely explain the legalism though, since many Catholics manage to believe in Justification by Faith and Works without condemning Harry Potter as Satanic.
There seems to be some muddling of Justification and Salvation in your summary. They are seperate, though related.
Pax et bonum,
Sam Urfer
LikeLike
I had an “aha” kind of moment today when I read that works aren’t something that we do for God’s sake, but what God allows us to do for our own sake so we learn and stretch and grow.
I actually preached an “I’m not a Christian” sermon the week before the election because 1) I think the evolution debate is silly (I’m from Kansas and refused to vote for the “Christian” candidate for state school board); 2) because I’d rather hang out with an imperfect homosexual than a Christian who spews hatred about gays; and 3) because I read–and enjoyed–the entire Harry Potter series AND the DaVinci Code.
Oh, and–I refuse to forward the emails that tell me I’m not a Christian if I don’t forward a message to everyone on my list.
LikeLike
Dude, it’s been 3 hours almost, and you only have 5 comments, 2 of which are yours? You’re slipping man! That, or you’ve finally converted most of the masses.
LikeLike
Mr. Spencer,
While I appreciate the sentiment of your post (no one is saved by what they do) the discussion quickly becomes nonsensical.
You said, “Hold onto sola fide and you will be saved.” Need I point out the oxymoronic nature of that statement?
And then the caveat..”So faith is accompanied by imperfect but genuine repentance, love, obedience, confession and perseverance.” Does any sort of “I hear no real Christian would _________” fit your list?
It boils down to an inescapable tension in my view. A firm belief that we are save (justified) by Christ alone but one must work at the saved life. And while I may not be able to say whether or not a person is truly saved I can certainly tell them that they are exhibiting no evidence or evidence to the contrary.
Melancthon (possibly) said something like, “It is faith alone that saves but the faith that saves is never alone.” That’s the appropriate tension.
LikeLike
Michael,
I understand faith as an absolute requirement and that faithless works are useless. But you’re right it’s the “alone” part that we disagree on. I think your reading of James is correct by the way. We disagree on John 6:50-60.
LikeLike
200 Proof Grace for me. 120 Proof = 60%
LikeLike
Christina, as brother Luther said, we are saved by faith alone, but not by faith that is alone. Faith works, just as the sun shines and the wind blows.
The other question Michael raises here is “What kind of works are produced by genuine faith?” Paul says what does NOT count is the kind of religious, self-justifying and moralistic works that we do to keep ourselves separated from the world and people around us, rather what counts is love: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that counts is faith working through love” (Gal. 5.6)
LikeLike
I’ve been told that one shouldn’t read James unless one has Romans in the other hand.
iMonk, I assume the “sunken ship” you refer to is the original article?
LikeLike
Exactly, Michael! It’s not “faith plus works” that saves us, it’s “faith that works”!
LikeLike
I agree. Isn’t this one of the two hardest things to accept: God’s total sovereignty and His grace plus nothing? Seems like you clip the grace vine, and the sovereignty vine goes along with it, and pretty soon the whole mess comes crashing down around your head. You’re back where you started from: reliance on works to “complete” your salvation.
Romans for the position and Galatians for the liberation.
LikeLike
The earlier part of the same chapter of James has this to say:
“Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him?”
The emphasis is put firmly back on God – and by extension faith and grace. He calls us heirs rather than servants, we are saved due to a relationship rather than something we do.
James is using the term ‘justify’ in roughly the same sense as we would when we ask someone to ‘justify their argument’ (prove their argument).
LikeLike
Yes, Catholics and Protestants do differ, and I believe it’s a very unfortunate and perhaps unnecessary.
For if you define faith as more than an intellectual agreement, as a “genuine personal trust in Christ that bears fruit in one’s life” then you’ve just defined a “work”. It takes work to say “I believe and will trust you today and will seek to do your will Lord.” does it not? It’s certainly an act of will for me, one which I wouldn’t be able to make without the grace of God.
In this way you agree with the Catholics, we are not saved by faith alone [intellectual agreement], but by faith working through love (Gal 5:6).
LikeLike
Actually, no. I don’t.
I could say that’s right “strawy.”
Instead I’ll take your James 2:24 and raise you a Galatians 2:16ff
16 yet we know that n a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
I believe I said Protestants and Catholics differ on this one.
Here’s the ESVSB on James 2:24:
For James, “faith alone†means a bogus kind of faith, mere intellectual agreement without a genuine personal trust in Christ that bears fruit in one’s life. On justified, see note on James 2:21. James, in agreement with Paul, argues that true faith is never alone, that it always produces works (cf. Eph. 2:10).
LikeLike
But Sola Fide isn’t biblical. Do you not take the bible as inerrant?
“You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.” (James 2:24)
LikeLike
I don’t want to raise that particular sunken ship. Let it lie.
Steve Brown’s message on this is incredibly needed. It’s interesting how the guy who is arguably the most grace saturated PCA preacher out there is viewed as too “dangerous” for the reformed mainstream.
LikeLike
Sola fide, 120 proof grace and no works on my part are the only way I am going to be saved
Exactly. I’ve been lamenting this very trend for a while now. It seems that the fear of being antinomian has turned us into legalists. I remember hearing Steve Brown say that he (along with Jesus and Paul) often sounds antinomian, but aren’t. Oftentimes sola fide sounds antinomian, but it really isn’t.
At any rate, do you have a link to the original article? I’m certain it was before my time and I’d love to read it.
LikeLike
AMEN!
Dr. Rosenbladt on a recent Issues Etc. on the Solas
http://www.newreformationpress.com/blog/
LikeLike