You wrote this at the end of one your earlier posts: (see below; Protestant either/or mentality vs. Catholic "both/and")
"Protestants will say that Catholics believe we are saved by our works; Catholics say that our works demonstrate our response to our salvation."
The whole tenor of this post goes against that statement. Now, instead of interpreting the works as fruits and demonstrations of real faith; you are now basing judgment on works alone.
Most of the Biblical citations you provide are condemning all in their sins, yes, because of evil deeds and sins; all are condemned to hell. anger and hatred condemns us; pride condemns us; lust condemns us; selfishness condemns us -- that is what most of the verses you cite are saying
Only grace alone and faith alone in Christ alone can deliver one from judgment to a relationship with God.
"He who does not believe is condemned already, because He has not believed in the name of the only Son of God." John 3:18
The one that does have good works that are truly wrought in God ( John 3:19-21); the good works are results of true faith; so the sheep who did those good deeds in Matthew 25 are true believers who first trusted Christ, and then as a result of being true believers, did good works. Otherwise you are completely contradicting Galatians and Romans, John, and Acts.
Once a person trusts Christ to save from him from his sins, there is a judgment of degree of rewards and loss of rewards for wrong motivations. I Cor. 4:5, 3:9-15.
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." John 5:24
"And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the fire." Revelation 20:15
Ken,
No offense, but you are doing exactly what Matt Slick and other Protestants have done, raise faith alone (with works being simply the "fruit" of "true faith) to a status that the actual Biblical evidence doesnt speak of....ESPECIALLY in the context of the last Judgement.
NOWHERE is having "true faith" the deciding factor. The crystal clear Biblical testimony is that Christians were turning to lives of sin and that is what Jesus, Paul, James and John (Revelation), spent considerable time trying to correct.
Your theological position leads you to radically re-interpret or brush off (consciously and unconsciously) any passage (eg Gal 5:19-21) that goes against your ideas of salvation by Faith Alone.
I could go through just about every passage you cited above and show in the same CONTEXT something that goes against your Faith Alone theology and its ramifications:
You mentioned Jn 3:18, I have read that the "believe" in this chapter is not a one time act of faith, but rather a faith that must continue. Thus combining that verse with your previous comments of "only grace alone and faith alone" leading to a one time done deal justification is improper. You are judged on the state of your faith at the end of your life. The context of Jn 3 is entering into a relationship with God, not the final judgment nor a guarantee.
You mentioned Mat 25, but your "true believers" interpretation has no warrant in the passage. Worse yet, God is letting people into Heaven based on what THEY did, yet under your Protestant system Heaven is soley granted because of Christ's obedience to those commandments. On top of that the FIRST HALF of Mat 25 strongly hurts the faith alone interpretation and puts salvation based on what people could have done but disobeyed.
You mention 1 Cor 4:5, yet the context (esp v4) is extremely clear that Paul himself doesnt PRESUME to think he has a free ride to Heaven, he says his conscience is clear, but it is God who judges. The term "justify" is even used in reference to the future.
You mentioned Jn 5:24, yet if you keep reading we see judment based on actions:
"28"Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. "
(I didnt see this referenced in Dave's list)
Further, earlier in that chapter we see a man put faith in Jesus, yet after Jesus heals him Jesus says: "14Afterward Jesus found him in the temple and said to him, "Behold, you have become well; do not sin anymore, so that nothing worse happens to you."
You mentioned Rev20:15 about the book of life, the fact is there is mention of names being "blotted out" of that book, Rev 3:5 (a concept that goes back to the OT, eg Ex 32:33). Other passages like Rev 22:19 make it clear you can "lose your share" in eternal life through sin.
You mentioned Jn 5:24, yet if you keep reading we see judment based on actions:
"28"Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice, 29and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment. "
(I didnt see this referenced in Dave's list)
------------------
Excellent Nick. I'll now add it to my paper!
Ken, the problem with your view is that because of SOLA fide, Protestants define faith too narrowly. True faith doesn't mean just believing in Christ, it means a faith that works. The "goats" at Mt. 25:31-46 obviously believed in Jesus because they recognized Him and called Him Lord. Their failure was not seeing Christ in others.
Likewise, Jesus states at Mt. 7:21-24 that not everyone who says, "Lord, Lord" will enter the kingdom of heaven. Only those who DO the will of the Father and those who hear Jesus' words and DOES them will they enter heaven. This is at the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus instructed His disciples and the people there what they must do.
Likewise, this is why St. Paul at 1 Cor. 13 tells us that while faith, hope and love are three most important virtues, he tells us how empty faith is without action. Likewise, an empty faith that does what we are told to do because we have to as opposed to putting our faith into action because we are motivated by love can not save either. Love is the highest virtue. Jesus says the same thing at Mt. 22:37-39. In all those solas, why don't Protestants have a sola amare?
Sola fide rightfully points out that doing works to try to earn heaven is pointless. We gain nothing by doing works because we "have to". However, sola fide's flaw is that it fails to show us what true faith means. True faith is not merely believing in Jesus Christ, it means doing what He said to do, not only the things Dave listed but to also take up the cross, shoulder and suffer as Christ did. (Mt. 10:38, Mt. 16:26, Mk. 8:34, Lk. 9:23, Lk. 14:27.
That is also the whole point of Mt. 15:1-9 and Mk. 7:1-13. Jesus was not condemning the Pharisees customs and traditions per se. He was condemning the Pharisees' emphasis on the external practices and using the Scriptures like they were some sort of instruction manual book or rules of a contest when they should have taken what God's words said to heart and did what the Scriptures said to do out of love of God and their fellow man.
The bottom line is this: doing works to demonstrates one's faith (sola fide) is just as deadly as works alone according to 1 Cor. 13:1-3. Such a faith is merely giving lip-service to obeying the Word of God (Mt. 15:8-9) and is nothing but a sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. Works and faith are inseparable if one is to gain heaven.
Ken,
Another point that Dave may want to add is when the rich young man approached Christ, on his way through Judea, and asked Him, "Lord, what must I DO to have eternal life? (Matt. 19:16; Mark 10:17) Jesus then says, "silly man...all you have to do is have faith alone in me and you will see God" Whoops...I must have been reading a different version of the bible
In fact, Jesus tells him things to DO--obey the commandments, give your possessions to the poor, and follow me. Not once does He say to him, which He could have easily done, "just have faith in me and you will have eternal life". Instead Jesus requires the man to refrain from sinful behaviors, be generous with the gifts that he has been given and not be controlled by them, and lastly, most importantly following HIM. In following Him we not ONLY believe but we conform our thoughts, our actions, our desires to Him so that we willlingly take on our cross as well as bear each others burdens--just as He did (and does) for us. It's not about believing (alone) what Christ did, but becoming Christ-like by responding to his portioned grace. Faith alone...I don't think so.
In Truth,
Matthew
You'll notice that the number of passages is now up to 50. I didn't count the one that included "faithless" before (even though it doesn't teach faith alone as the way to be saved), so the true count before was 31. I have added nine more today:
1 Sam 28:15-19
2 Kings 22:13
Isaiah 59:18
Jeremiah 4:4
Micah 5:15
Zeph 2:3
Matt 25:14-30 (parable of the talents)
Jude 6-16
Jude 20-21
I also added 2 Thess 1:9-12 to the existing passage 2 Thess 1:7-8 (thus expanding it).
By counting the cross-references in the synoptic Gospels and elsewhere (those in parentheses), the number was increased to 50.
Will that be enough biblical evidence to convince our Protestant friends that they are wrong on this? No? They require 100 or 200 passages before they get it and realize that some motif or thought is "biblical"?
The Virgin Birth only has two or three passages that assert it. Protestants have no problem believing that. Why, then, are 50 not sufficient in the present case?
Dave:
thanks for posting this article. I'm glad to have so many handy examples of biblical imperatives to act in faith for the sake of God's kingdom and our salvation.
Your bro,
(with works being simply the "fruit" of "true faith)
Why couldn't you have written:
with works being the fruit of true faith. ? or
with works being the immediate and inevitable fruit of true faith ?
Why is this need to "poo" "poo" it by "simply" or "merely" (Trent does this in canon 24).
Understand the opponents' argument (the prerequisite of all constructive dialogue) and interact with it . . . I get precious little of either from the few Protestants who ever interact with my arguments at all. So much the worse for their position if our presentations stand essentially unopposed.
I must have been reading a different version of the bible In fact, Jesus tells him things to DO--obey the commandments, give your possessions to the poor, and follow me.
of course -- Jesus is actually showing him that he actually does not keep all hte commands, that he is a sinner -- because his problem is that he does not realize he is a sinner -- he has the audacity to think he has kept all the commandments since his childhood. Money was his idol, and he did not realize he has broken the first and second commandment. Jesus has to bring home a sharp illustration for him. one must first realize he is lost before he can be ready for the answer, "trust Christ" or believe in Christ. "What must I do to be saved? Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved. Acts 16:31
Not once does He say to him, which He could have easily done, "just have faith in me and you will have eternal life".
Jesus is exposing his sin and hard-heartedness -- he walked away sad -- he did not realize he was a sinner. he was not ready for the "believe or trust Christ" yet. He needed the condemnation of the law first. That is what most of these verses you are using are doing.
Instead Jesus requires the man to refrain from sinful behaviors, be generous with the gifts that he has been given and not be controlled by them, and lastly, most importantly following HIM.
Yes, but no one will do any of those things unless they first realize they are sinful and undone and repent and fall upon Christ alone to save and make them new; only the grace and power of Christ can produce those good new behaviors.
In following Him we not ONLY believe but we
conform our thoughts, our actions, our desires to Him so that we willlingly take on our cross as well as bear each others burdens--just as He did (and does) for us. It's not about believing (alone) what Christ did, but becoming Christ-like by responding to his portioned grace. Faith alone...I don't think so.
you seem to misunderstand what "faith alone" means -- it does not mean that it is mere intellectual assent that Christ died for my sins. It is a personal heartfelt trust in all to Jesus to do all of those things you mentioned -- change us and make us good, etc.
Your theological position leads you to radically re-interpret or brush off (consciously and unconsciously) any passage (eg Gal 5:19-21) that goes against your ideas of salvation by Faith Alone.
We take Gal. 5:19-21 very seriously -- a person who claims to be a believer, and there is no change in their heart and behaviors and is still doing those kinds of sins (praciticing them as a lifestyle) indicates that they were not saved or changed by the power of God. "those who practice such things will not enter the kingdom of God". This speaks against "easy believe ism" or "I am saved because I raised my hand or went down the aisle or said the sinner's prayer. Those things do not save people. A changed life in behavior is the only evidence of real faith.
"Protestants will say that Catholics believe we are saved by our works; Catholics say that our works demonstrate our response to our salvation."
You still did not answer my main point; that your article here seems to contradict what you wrote here. (from the earlier article "either/or Protestant mentality vs. Catholic "both/and")
Who is not understanding the other's position here?
Case in point . . .
Not only does Scripture require faith and works but there is also this from the Athanasian Creed:
"He (Jesus) sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies, and SHALL GIVE ACCOUNT FOR THEIR OWN WORKS. And Thet that have DONE good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have DONE evil into everlasting fire." (Emphasis added).
Ken, Your explanation is attempting to create a distinction without a difference. I understand what you are saying but if our works are only a sign of our faith and count for nothing, why are we judged on them?
Trusting in God is merely the start of a Christian's life. We also have to DO His will. We are the means by which His works are made manifest in this world. That is the whole point of the parable of the talents in the same chapter of St. Matthew.
Ken,
You dont take Gal 5:19-21 seriously, infact it doesnt even apply to you. You think the people in that topic and Gal 5:4 were never really Christians, yet Paul gives no hint of such a thing. The fact is Christians were turning to lives of sin, Paul spent about 1/3 of his work trying to get them back in line. In Gal 5:19-21 Paul is talking directly to Christians, not unbelievers. Jesus says the same thing in passages like Mk 9:43-47.
I do take Gal. 5:19-21 seriously.
If a person comes to a pastor or a pastor or elder or another Christian confronts someone who has those habits of sin (those who practice such things), and they refuse to be broken or repent or penitent over their sinful habits; or they are cavilier about sin; then we have the right to question whether that person is truly saved or not. "but I went forward years ago and walked the aisle . . . !", etc.
No, Gal. 5:19-21 indicates you were never changed on the inside and made a new creature or have those good works follow in someone who has trusted Christ -- Ephesians 2:8-10. Grace and Faith come first (Ephesians 2:8-9); then good works -- eph. 2:10)
We use these verses in counseling and discipleship to cause people to examine themselves to see if they are in the faith. I Cor. 11, 2 Cor. 13:5
Yes, we do take them seriously.
Gal. 5:4 -- "you who are seeking to be justified by law" (by obeying the law) "you have fallen from grace"; "you have been severed from Christ"
If the Galatian church was taught the way of justification by grace alone and through faith in Christ and not by works; then when the Judiazers came and started teaching works salvation, to be tempted to go toward that teaching is "being severed" and "fallen" from grace. It does not mean that those idividuals were actually once converted and regenerated and now they are not.
In fact, putting, Gal. 5:6 and 6:15 together "Faith through love" and "a new creation" are the same, parallel.
A changed life is what counts, and a sinner cannot change his life; only Christ can.
Those who have had a life of good works at the judgment (John 5:28-29) are those who were changed first by faith and repentace in Christ alone - only He can change an evil person; and we are all evil. Those good works are the result of being transformed and re-created (Ephesians 2:10 is the result of Ephesians 2:8-9).
The one who does evil are the ones who never had a personal relationship with Jesus; which begins by faith alone in Christ alone. "depart from Me, you who do wickedness, or practice lawlessness, I never knew you." Matthew 7:21-23.
Yes, we will all be judged by our works. But those in Christ are new creatures and they produce good works. People without Christ have only evil deeds and so they go to hell.
This is the best way to understand John 5:28-29 and the Athanasian Creed; for it takes into account all of the Scrptures and not just those verses about that Dave picked out. RCC really does seem to teach and emphasize a works salvation; you have left out the gospel.
You have the law in that presentation. The soul that sins it shall die. The wages of sin is death. All are condemned; all are evil doers; all are unrighteous; no, not one is good -- those verses are meant to show we are all condemned without Christ. We need the righteousness of another, in order to stand before God at the judgment.
Ken,
>If the Galatian church was taught the way of justification by grace alone and through faith in Christ and not by works<
You are making a big conditional statement with that "if." There is no evidence that I can see that Paul here means what you want him to. "Works" in Galatians is ALWAYS clarified by "of the Law.." which is Mosaic Law. The Law of Moses does nothing for these people and for them to believe otherwise is dangerous for their souls. Behavior is still important... but relying on Mosaic Commandments for justification is a problem.
Ken,
You cant take Gal 5:19-21 seriously by the very fact you dont believe you can commit such sins. You dont believe that passage even applies to you.
The way it is written Paul is "warning" Christians about living that lifestyle, he is not talking to non-Christians nor is he talking about non-Christians. It should be read as "I warn you Nick and Ken, as I did before, that those who practice such things will not enter Heaven". Paul is warning us because we can commit those sins. Nothing in that passage suggests "you were never changed on the inside", in fact the previous text Paul is warning them to live by the Spirit and avoid living according to lustful desires.
And here arises the ultimate circular logic of the Reformed position: Salvation cannot be lost, thus if a Christian engages in adultery their salvation is not on the line, yet if a Christian engages in adultery you are to question whether they were ever saved or not.
It is circular and bankrupt reasoning.
As for your comments on Gal 5:4 you have basically turned "severed from Christ, fallen from grace" to be a non-issue, it doesnt affect their souls. The context and verse itself couldnt be more clear however, v1 "dont let youselves be burdended by the yoke of slavery", v2 if you do this "Christ will be of no use to you", v7 "you were running a good race, who stepped in and kept you from obeying the truth", etc, etc. Paul gives no hint these people were never changed, on the contrary, Paul considers them genuine Christians who have turned to lives of sin.
Quote:
----------------
You have the law in that presentation. The soul that sins it shall die. The wages of sin is death. All are condemned; all are evil doers; all are unrighteous; no, not one is good -- those verses are meant to show we are all condemned without Christ. We need the righteousness of another, in order to stand before God at the judgment.
---------------
Your reasoning, while perfectly in line with Protestant thought, is un-Biblical in its "solution" and causes you to re-interpret the whole Bible to fit your presupposed "solution".
Your last line is the foundation of your theology and drives your interpretations of Scripture, yet that foundational concept isnt even Biblical, 
It is enough to drive one nuts, of all the passages Dave mentioned regarding the judgment there is no mention of the need or actuality of "the Righteousness of another" to take our place before God at the judgment.
On the CHNI board where I cross-posted this, I clarified some more, as to my purpose:
--------------------
The person who is in good graces with God will do lots of good works. Protestants believe this as well, but they formally separate sanctification from justification, whereas we do not. Salvation is ultimately a gift from God, by grace alone, through Jesus' redemptive work on the cross. But good works will necessarily follow in any true Christian's life.
And if we fall short on every jot and tittle of righteousness, as virtually all of us do and will at the time we die, then there is the great mercy of purgatory to rectify that sin and render us fit to enter into God's presence in the fullest way (Beatific Vision) in heaven.
---------------------------
One must properly understand the exact purpose and nature of my post.
I'm not denying grace alone or faith in the least, as I think I made clear at the beginning of the paper. Catholics DO NOT believe in "salvation by works." Trent makes this crystal-clear.
What I am doing is presenting all the biblical data I could find concerning what is discussed or made a criterion of who is damned or saved at the time of judgment. It's not a treatise on grace or justification. I've done that elsewhere. It's only about judgment and what we can know about it based on revelation.
So, when asked what we would say to God when we died, and why we should be saved, I have shown all that I could find that is indicated in the Bible itself. It's always about works, not professions of faith.
And that can't fail to be striking to one who adheres to Protestant theology. We don't deny grace, but many of them seem to deny the necessity of works, based on James: "faith without works is dead."
---------------------------------
The structure of my rhetorical argument was as follows:
1) You [Protestant] want to ask me what I would say to God as the reason I should go to heaven?
2) Okay, since you guys pride yourselves on being so Bible-oriented and believing in Bible Alone as the only infallible authority in all theological matters (over against us Catholics), let's see what the Bible says about such a thing, rather than do our own extra-biblical speculation. The Bible is something we do have in common, and we both revere it as God's Word.
3) And we find that the Bible always talks about works in judgment scenes and never faith alone. One time out of 50 it does mention being "faithless" in addition to many works mentioned.
4) So, going back to #1, if you ask me what I would say, and I base my words on biblical revelation, then I would talk about the works I've done.
5) After all, if Jesus says He let someone in because they "fed the hungry," then it makes sense if He asks ME why I should get in, that I, too, would (quite obviously) say that I fed the hungry (among other works mentioned by God as reasons to be saved and let into heaven.
None of this is meant to undermine the equally crucial role of grace and faith and the cross, at all; not in the slightest, but only to highlight the "biblical" way of responding to such questions, and to show that -- as so often -- Catholics are far, far more biblical in every respect than Protestants (as a generalization, of course).
(continued from above)
This all comes back to Luther's alleged, but accurate, analogy of a snow covered dung hill to explain Protestant theology.
The snow must act as that "righteousness of another" and, contrary to your above claims of a true inner change, this "imputation" has no effect upon the dung hill (the unrighteous soull). With this imputation in place the actual status of your soul plays no part in how God views you, your status of "righteous" remains even during the moments of grave sin in your life (should the occur), and thus your actions logically play no role in the Final Judgment according to Protestants.
The Biblical Evidence however, which Catholics teach, is of God judging the actual status of your soul at the Final Judgment, not accepting an alternative in your place.
One thing that should be pointed out is that Trent points to those few occurrences of "faithless/unbelievers" in those lists of sins as evidence that this judgment is NOT just about believers and unbelievers, unbelief is ONE of the many different sins that will condemn. The Protestant system has the judgment between believers who are unable to sin and unbelievers who can only sin.
More from the CHNI board. A Catholic there wrote:
"I just cannot agree with point 5 [see my previous comment above]. To personally tell God why the things we have done prove us righteous puts us more in danger of being like the Pharisee who did not go away justified as the sinner who prayed for mercy. I agree with the theology, just not the possibility of ever using it as a personal defense of my righteousness before God. For all I know I will point to my works, and He will show me how selfish or sinful my motivations were or why they simply were not done in love. . . . only God is able to say why and if any of us or our faith or works are what He is looking for. Therefore, I can not say I would think it best for us to answer the question if asked by God or anyone why we personally should get into heaven. . . . It is not as if I disagree with anything theologically you are saying, I just do not think that your conclusion fits into the greater scheme of other spiritual principles."
--------------------------------------------------
---------------------
I agree with you as to what you would prefer saying. I'm exactly the same way. I wouldn't want to talk about myself in the presence of God, but about His mercy and grace, without which I wouldn't be there. No disagreement whatsoever on that. I don't even like to talk about myself much on earth (which is one reason I keep refusing to go on The Journey Home: Marcus or Jim have now asked me about eight times, I think!)
I still think you are generalizing my limited goal in this paper to the larger scheme of things, when that is not its intention. It's rhetorical. It's specifically a counter-argument, and one designed to make Protestants uncomfortable with certain of their questionable premises and to challenge them to be more biblical. When asked by a Protestant, "what would you say to God when you get to heaven?" I found it very interesting that all the data we have about such a scenario in heaven is about works.
So I wasn't contending so much that this is what anyone should say to God, but rather, the different notion of "to say such a thing would be perfectly permissible, biblically-speaking; not 'unbiblical' in the slightest." That is our beef with some of our Protestant brethren. As I have reiterated over and over: we don't disagree with grace alone or a huge role that faith plays (though not "alone"); we only disagree with their exclusion of works from salvation altogether, as if they are not organically related to faith.
Bottom line: if Jesus says He is letting us into heaven because "I have been a 'doer of the law.' " (#31 on my original list and a great biblical, Pauline theme indeed), then we can say the same thing. If a thing is true, we can point it out, just as God can, without having to necessarily be proud, or denying the grace that made the thing possible from the outset.
Neither you nor anyone else have to say any of this. If you appeal to God's love and mercy and grace, and your undeserved status as a saved person, that's perfectly fine with me. It's what I would say too. But if you said the other, no one could object on biblical grounds. That's my point.
We really have no disagreement (that I can see, anyway). But I'm happy to have the opportunity to clarify, because at least two Protestants on my blog or on their own have greatly misunderstood the very nature of my post (and I suspect a great many more could and would do so as well because of how they are taught to think, with that dreadful "either/or" mentality and presuppositional framework).
If God infused faith into us and the main product of that is good works then why isn't He interested in our good works?
Commenting by HaloScan
