[Tj3]

Ah, the Tj two-step. Okay, partner, let's dance.

I am trying to discuss God's word. You are the one who wants to dance.

"No one, including myself said that works do not matter."

See my post #36 (on the thread "How will you be judged on judgment day?"): "I took it to be blazingly obvious that when I have employed the locution "works don't matter" I meant this to be shorthand for "works aren't relevant for the purposes of salvation".

I have and had all along stated clearly that works were important as a response to our salvation. Therefore if you in fact meant salvation, then I can only assume that your words were deliberately deceptive and a deliberate mis-representation of what I said.

"More to the point, in most cases you have not actually addressed the points that have been raised."

Well, I addressed each of the points you cared to make (as is evident to anyone who cares to glance at the last couple of pages of the other thread--I assumed this is why you withdrew). And here I am, doing it again. I've already addressed each of the Scriptural passages you adduced--and De Maria provided lots of Scriptural evidence that works do matter (you weren't able to show that she had misunderstood those passages, whereas I did show that you misunderstand the passages you favor).

As shown above, your responses do not address the points raised.

On Romans 3: Recall that, as I pointed out at #32 and again at #33, the faith/works distinction isn't the same as the faith/law distinction.

I could spend all day giving links to old messages if you like as well. That is why I asked if you just want to copy and paste the whole debate once again. I also responded to your claims.

Now as for your claim, scripture is consistent throughout that we are saved by faith, and not by works. Whether we are speaking of "good works" towards others or works under the law - anything that you are trying to do to gain merit to get you into heaven is doomed to fail, because once you claim that you can "work" yourself into heaven in part or in whole, you have place yourself under the law.

What you have yet to show us is where scripture says that works are essential for salvation.

"That alone ends the discussion because that tells us that His sacrifice is sufficient. Nothing more can be or needs to be added."

See my post #36: "All righteousness comes through Christ. Right. But where does justification come from? What justifies me? Christ. Well, then what about faith? If your latest gloss on 1 Jn. is that all that matters is Christ's sacrifice, then does faith not matter either? (In the sense of "matter" adumbrated above, just to be clear.) If I am saved just by virtue of the fact that Christ died, then I must not need faith in order to be saved.

Someone always brings up this weak argument. Once again, faith in scripture is the same as faithfulness. Christ died on the cross for our sins. If you really believe in Him, you will respond and receive that in faith / faithfulness. I addressed this once before - receiving a gift is not a work.

And you have undermined your whole position because if we are righteous through the perfect righteousness imputed to us by Christ - Christ's righteousness, then nothing more is required unless you are telling me that Christ's righteousness is not complete and perfect, and that sinful man is able to fill that gap.

Oh, and just to reiterate, a-friggin'-gain: The "wider context" of Eph.2 shows that the "it" that is unmerited, that is a gift, is grace. Grace and faith aren't the same thing. These are just basic distinctions

No one argued that they were. This is a strawman argument. Unmerited favour of God fits in well with the context of the passage showing that it is NOT by our merit, not our works, but God's unmerited favour by imputing Christ's righteousness to us. This was addressed a number of times previously.

Why not just return to the other thread and respond to my objections there, rather than taking up here a line that you failed to vindicate just a couple of weeks ago?

Why not waste less time on strawman arguments (I exposed two above) and more time on trying to defending your position. Putting up a strawman argument and then saying that others are not refuting it is not an honest way of debating. If you really believe that you are right, then address the points that are being raised by your opponent.

[Akoue]

Leaving to one side the other exchange in which I'm embroiled on this thread, I'd like to take up artlady's very nice post.

Like you, many of us find distressing the idea that one can claim to be saved in spite of performing heinous actions. God's mercy is infinite, to be sure, but so is his justice. If someone who has lived badly comes to God... well, that's all to the good, of course. But it makes me terribly uncomfortable for people to claim on their own behalf that they are saved, that they are going to heaven, what have you. This just sounds profoundly arrogant to my ears: Who am I, who are any of us, to say that we are saved? Where's the "fear and trembling" in that? Where's the humility? Judgment is God's prerogative, and I'm not to arrogate that to myself. Tell me that you have faith, tell me that you are striving to be better, tell me that you long for heaven, and I'm all ears. Tell me that it's a done deal and all I can do is shake my head.

This doesn't speak to Fred's question, I know, except in a roundabout way. But I found artlady's remarks thoughtful and thought-provoking, and I wanted to acknowledge that.

[N0help4u]

Some people just have so much faith it feels like gold in the bank.
Sure some people are arrogant that they are going to heaven but some proclaim it because their faith is soooo overwhelming they have enough faith to claim they are going to heaven.

[Tj3]

Like you, many of us find distressing the idea that one can claim to be saved in spite of performing heinous actions. God's mercy is infinite, to be sure, but so is his justice. If someone who has lived badly comes to God... well, that's all to the good, of course.

Yes, isn't it good that salvation is not based upon our merit, our works (good or bad), but upon God's grace?

But it makes me terribly uncomfortable for people to claim on their own behalf that they are saved, that they are going to heaven, what have you. This just sounds profoundly arrogant to my ears: Who am I, who are any of us, to say that we are saved?

Hmmm... Are you saying that the speaker here was profoundly arrogant?

Titus 3:4-7
4 But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, 5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
NKJV

2 Tim 1:8-9
8 Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, 9 who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,
NKJV

[Tj3]

Some people just have so much faith it feels like gold in the bank.
Sure some people are arrogant that they are going to heaven but some proclaim it because their faith is soooo overwhelming they have enough faith to claim they are going to heaven.

Scripture speaks of that:

Heb 10:19-23

19 Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, 20 by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21 and having a High Priest over the house of God, 22 let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.
NKJV

Arrogance would be to focus on us that having done something to merit our salvation (i.e. good works), whereas faith points to Christ and His work on the cross that accomplished and was solely sufficient our salvation. All glory goes to Him. Nothing for us to boast about or be arrogant. This is one reason that Ephesians says not to say that our salvation has anything to do with works, because then we are boasting that we did it - in part or in whole. We are the reason that Christ's had to come. That is the part that works played in our eternal destiny. Our works condemned us. It is the work on the cross (no of our works lest any man should boast) that saves us.

[Tj3]

To provide an answer directly to the original question, I believe that we see these evil ones each day. We see those who use Jesus' name but then teach a different god, or teach a different gospel.

We see those even in leadership of churches who teach that men can become God or becomes gods, contrary to what scripture says.

We see those who teach false signs signs and wonders while failing to teach the gospel of our sinfulness and Christ's sacrifice on the cross.

Are all these people unsaved? That is for God to judge, but I do fear that many of these who falsely claim to be apostles and are not will be hearing those words from Jesus that He never knew them unless they turn things around and submit themselves to Him and His word.

[Akoue]

"Yes, isn't it good that salvation is not based upon our merit, our works (good or bad), but upon God's grace?"

It sure is. Lucky for them, Catholics and Orthodox think the same thing. No salvation without grace. No faith without grace. No works without grace. Grace is a freely given, unmerited, gift of God.

1. No salvation without faith and works.
2. No faith without grace.
3. No works without grace.
4. Therefore: No salvation without grace. QED

As I've said many times before, this looks like a deductively valid argument. The only problem for Catholic-Orthodox teaching would come from a Scriptual passage that says: "Faith is required for salvation and works are not." There are a ton of passages that assert that faith is required for salvation. This I've granted many times. It isn't controversial. Likewise, it's uncontroversial to say that grace is required for salvation--we can't win our salvation by our own unaided efforts. But works matter because I can fail to respond to that gift. To use your example: Someone can hand me a gift and I can throw it to the ground. I can reject that gift. The giving of the gift isn't sufficient; it has to be accepted, appropriated, made truly one's own. And this is what the Catholic-Orthodox view holds: It is by GOd's grace that I do good works. But the performing of those works is my response to God, my taking up and into myself the gift that he has generously offered. (The same is true of faith: I can reject the gift, I can repudiate it. Its merely being offered isn't sufficient for my salvation: I have to respond to that reality.)

What could possibly be so repugnant about such a view? Isn't there something lovely about it?

[Tj3]

"Yes, isn't it good that salvation is not based upon our merit, our works (good or bad), but upon God's grace?"

It sure is. Lucky for them, Catholics and Orthodox think the same thing. No salvation without grace. No faith without grace. No works without grace. Grace is a freely given, unmerited, gift of God.

If it without merit then it is without anything that we can add to it - therefore no works (as Eph 2:4 and other passages - indeed the whole context of the gospel tells us).

1. No salvation without faith and works.

How you manage to say "grace" and then add "works" contrary to what scripture says is beyond me. Jesus' sacrifice on the cross was sufficient PERIOD.

[De Maria]

Yes, isn't it good that salvation is not based upon our merit, our works (good or bad), but upon God's grace?

Sure it is. The confusion stems from some misunderstanding which Reformed theology has regarding what St. Paul said on the subject. Forgetting that Scripture says:

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

When we put them in their context and take into account the difficulty which Scripture highlights concerning St. Paul's writings, then we see that they are both saying the same thing.

Romans 3: 24Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

Now, if we are justified "freely", why is there a need for faith? After all, faith itself is a work.

John 6: 28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

St. Paul used the same formula often. Lets break it down and compare it to other statements he makes on the subject:
Romans 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Note that faith gives us access to grace. In other words, by faith, we merit grace.

So, in order to obtain the grace of God we must do the work of God, we must have faith.

So, now we can compare this Rom 3:24 precisely with other verses:

Romans 1:5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship,
Romans 3: 24Being justified freely by his grace
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved

Romans 1:5 cont'd for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
Romans 3:24 cont'd through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Ephesians 2:8 cont'd through faith;

So, the question now is, do we merit salvation by faith without works?

No need to go to St. James. He explicitly says, "No!"

James 2:20
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

Does St. Paul say that we merit salvation, eternal life, by faith alone?
Since St. Paul says that Jesus only saves those that are obedient, I would say that St. Paul also condemns the idea of faith without works:

Hebrews 5:9
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

Philippians 2:12
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.


Sincerely,

De Maria

[Akoue]

Again, BASIC distinction: Grace is required for faith and for works. I can't earn the gift of grace, but I can do the hard work of living my faith.

[Tj3]

Again, BASIC distinction: Grace is required for faith and for works.

People can do good works without either grace or faith - that si clear from scripture and from real life. But the works do not save and are not required for salvation. Works are an evidence of salvation, but not sufficient evidence by themselves.

I can't earn the gift of grace, but I can do the hard work of living my faith.

Note that the works follow the faith.

[Akoue]

Man, oh, man. Again, BASIC distinction (I've made it so often my fingers are going numb): NO ONE THINKS THAT WORKS WITHOUT FAITH MERIT SALVATION. Notice, PLEASE, the CONJUNCTION (not disjunction) of the premise: No salvation without faith AND works. Nobody thinks works alone are sufficient. (Look up the distinction between a necessary condition and a sufficient condition. Works are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for salvation.)

[N0help4u]

Works are only the evidence and result that follow the faith
Faith without works is dead

I think we are all saying the same thing and turning it into a semantics argument or something.

[Tj3]

Sure it is. The confusion stems from some misunderstanding which Reformed theology has regarding what St. Paul said on the subject.

If you wish to debate Reformed theology, you may wish to seek a discussion with someone to holds to Reformed theology. I do not.

Romans 3: 24Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

Now, if we are justified "freely", why is there a need for faith? After all, faith itself is a work.

Really? Faith is a work that we do?

John 6: 28Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

You seem to be mixing belief and faith. There is a relationship, but they are not the same. Nonetheless, this does not say that faith or belief is a work of man but of God. Once again, our works are left out of the equation for salvation.

So, the question now is, do we merit salvation by faith without works?

No need to go to St. James. He explicitly says, "No!"

James 2:20
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

I note that those who quote this in support of the erroneous works gospel fail to deal with either the Greek or the context. Keep in mind that in the original Greek of the NT, the word use for faith is the same as faithfulness, so if one has faith, then the natural consequence is that one will act on that faith. For example, if you have a child and you love that child, you will provide for that child and do what you can to make the child healthy and happy - but it is not to prove to others that you love the child, but it is a natural consequence of the love that you have for the child. It is the evidence of that love. The same is true with faith and faithfulness. Thus if you were a person who was reading this in Koine Greek, it would read to you like:

"Faithfulness without works is dead"

This means that having been saved, having faith, having received grace, the expectation is that your faithfulness is evidenced by works.

[Tj3]

works are only the evidence and result that follow the faith
Faith without works is dead

Correct.

I think we are all saying the same thing and turning it into a semantics argument or something.

No, Catholicism teaches that works in addition to faith are required for salvation. Scripture says that our faith in Jesus Christ is required for salvation, and our faithfulness is then demonstrated by works.

[Tj3]

works are only the evidence and result that follow the faith
Faith without works is dead

Correct.

I think we are all saying the same thing and turning it into a semantics argument or something.

No, Catholicism teaches that works in addition to faith are required for salvation. Scripture says that our faith in Jesus Christ is required for salvation, and our faithfulness is then demonstrated by works.

There are a number of fatal errors in their argument including the belief that our works as an unsaved person would be acceptable to and merit favour with God. They are not.

Rom 8:7-9
8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
NKJV

[N0help4u]

Yeah I see.
As far as Akoue's reply I think we are (most of us) are agreeing with that though.

[Tj3]

Yeah I see.
As far as Akoue's reply I think we are (most of us) are agreeing with that though.

I sure don't agree with it, for instance:

Akoue said:
"Works are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for salvation"

That is in contradiction to the gospel.

[Akoue]

"I note that those who quote this fail to deal with either the Greek or the context. Keep in mind that in the original Greek of the NT, the word use for faith is the same as faithfulness, so if one has faith, then the natural consequence is that one will act on that faith. For example, if you have a child and you love that child, you will provide for that child and do what you can to make the child healthy and happy - but it is not to prove to others that you love the child, but it is a natural consequence of the love that you have for the child. It is the evidence of that love. The same is true with faith and faithfulness. Thus if you were a person who was reading this in Koine Greek, it would read to you like:

"Faithfulness without works is dead"

This means that having been saved, having faith, having received grace, the expectation is that your faithfulness is evidenced by works."



If it's the same word in Greek, then where are you getting the distinction in English? Sounds like you're foisting onto Scripture a distinction that it doesn't make (otherwise, it would use *two* words instead of one, yes?).

[Akoue]

I sure don't agree with it, for instance:

Akoue said:
"Works are a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for salvation"

That is in contradiction to the gospel.

What could this even mean? A contradiction is asserting p and not-p.