Faith Vs Works

[cmotherofpirl]

She was definitely not like us in one important way. She did not have the stain of orignal sin on her, like the rest of us.

Otherwise how could she have carried God in her womb for 9 months. If nothing unclean can stand before God, how could something stained carry God?

[dUSt]

Why do Catholic tend to overemphasize works? Good question. Maybe it's because Protestants tend to deny that it has anything to do with one's salvation.

Catholic doctrine states, simply:

We are saved by Grace alone, because of our faith, shown through our works.

Who disagrees with this? I have a feeling that a lot of Protestants are arguing against assumptions that don't even exist. I hope that's not the case here, as it doesn't seem very productive.

God bless.

[Joolye]

She was definitely not like us in one important way. She did not have the stain of orignal sin on her, like the rest of us.

Where in the Bible does it say that?

Otherwise how could she have carried God in her womb for 9 months. If nothing unclean can stand before God, how could something stained carry God?

By God's grace.

[mustbenothing]

Many earlier quotes confuse the doctrines of justification and judgment. Justification is being reconciled or made right with God -- to the Protestant, having Christ's righteousness counted as your own, and your sin counted as Christ's. Every Protestant systematic theology I own affirms that judgment is according to deeds (although, I'm trying to purchase one which will probably not, because its author is not very bright). Works are the doorway to eternal life, yes. However, they only have meaning because our freedom from judgment has been secured by faith alone. That is why Paul says that Abraham was justified by faith, not works, even after his original conversion. He does not, with Roman Catholicism, say that Abraham was justified by originally his faith, but later his faith and works.

(dUSt) Catholic doctrine states, simply:

We are saved by Grace alone, because of our faith, shown through our works.

(Me) Could you please provide a quote showing that Roman Catholic doctrine teaches that works play a purely evidential part in justification, as you imply here? And, if so, I would be very curious as to why the Council of Trent condemned the Reformers for teaching such doctrines!

[dUSt]

Many earlier quotes confuse the doctrines of justification and judgment.  Justification is being reconciled or made right with God -- to the Protestant, having Christ's righteousness counted as your own, and your sin counted as Christ's.  Every Protestant systematic theology I own affirms that judgment is according to deeds (although, I'm trying to purchase one which will probably not, because its author is not very bright).  Works are the doorway to eternal life, yes.  However, they only have meaning because our freedom from judgment has been secured by faith alone.  That is why Paul says that Abraham was justified by faith, not works, even after his original conversion.  He does not, with Roman Catholicism, say that Abraham was justified by originally his faith, but later his faith and works.

(dUSt) Catholic doctrine states, simply:

We are saved by Grace alone, because of our faith, shown through our works.

(Me) Could you please provide a quote showing that Roman Catholic doctrine teaches that works play a purely evidential part in justification, as you imply here?  And, if so, I would be very curious as to why the Council of Trent condemned the Reformers for teaching such doctrines!

http://www.nccbuscc.org/catechism/text/pt3...t1chpt3art2.htm

[Dave]

Where in the Bible does it say that?

An implicit reference can be found in the angel’s greeting to Mary. The angel Gabriel said, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you" (Luke 1:28). The phrase "full of grace" is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. This word represents the proper name of the person being addressed by the angel, and it therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.

The traditional translation, "full of grace," is more accurate than the one found in many recent versions of the New Testament, which give something along the lines of "highly favored daughter." Mary was inDouche a highly favored daughter of God, but the Greek implies more than that (and it never mentions the word for "daughter"). The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning "to fill or endow with grace." Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates a perfection of grace that is both intensive and extensive. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit, and was only as "full" or strong or complete as possible at any given time, but it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence to have been called "full of grace."

By God's grace.

Yes, it was because of God's grace that Our Lady was conceived without original sin and was thus able to carry God in her womb. Mary is the new Ark of the Covenant for this reason. The old Ark of the Covenant had to be of highest quality, so why not the new Ark of the Covenant as well?

[Dave]

As for the topic of faith vs. works, consider the following biblical passages:

I. Faith Justifies Initially, but Works Perfect and Complete Justification

James 2:24 - the phrase "faith alone" (the Greek "pisteos monon") only occurs once in the Bible. "Man is justified by works and NOT faith alone." Unlike what many Protestant churches teach, no where in Scripture does it say that man is justified or saved by "faith alone."

Heb. 11:6 - faith is the minimum requirement without which we cannot please God. But this is just the beginning of justification.

Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38, 3:19, 17:30 - moreover, the faith we need is a repentant faith, not just an intellectual faith that believes in God.

Psalm 51:17 - we also need a broken and contrite heart, not just an intellectual assent of faith. Faith in God is only the beginning.

Eph. 2:8 - this verse refers to this initial justification by faith. But justification is an ongoing process which, as we later see, includes our good works. Moreover, works outside of sanctifying grace do not justify us. Works in sanctifying grace do justify us.

Gal. 5:6 - the faith that justifies us is faith working through love, not faith alone.

James 1:22-25 - it's the "doers" who are justified, not the hearers. Justification is based on works. We need "fides formata."

James 2:17 - James clearly teaches that faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead. Works is a cause, not just an effect, of our justification.

James 2:19 - even the demons believe that Jesus is Lord. But they tremble. Faith is not enough. It is only the beginning.

James 2:20 - do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren? Good works in God's grace are required for justification.

James 2:22 - faith is active with works and is completed by works. It does not stand alone. Faith needs works to be completed and perfected.

James 4:17 - in fact, the failure to do works is a sin! So works are absolutely necessary for our justification.

James 2:15-17 - here are the examples of the "works" to which James is referring - corporal works of mercy (giving food and shelter to those in need).

James 1:27 - another example of "works" is visiting orphans and widows in their affliction. Otherwise, their religion is in vain.

James 2:25 - another example of "works" is when Rahab assisted the spies in their escape. Good works increase our justification and perfect our faith.

Joshua 2:9-11 - Rahab's fellow citizens had faith in God, but Joshua 6:22-25 - Rahab alone acted and was saved. This is faith in action.

James 2:18 - to avoid the truth of the Catholic position that we are justified by both faith and works, Protestants argue the justification that James is referring to in James 2 is "before men" and not "before God." Scripture disproves their claim.

James 2:14 - James asks, "Can faith save him?" Salvation comes from God. This proves the justification James is referring to is before God, not men.

James 2:19 - also, James reminds us that even the demons believe and tremble. This refers to our relationship with God. Thus, our justification that requires works and not faith alone relates to our status before God, not men.

James 2:21 - James also appeals to the example of Abraham. Abraham's justification refers to his position before God, not men. This proves justification is before God, not men.

Rom. 2:7,10 - to those who by patience and good works will be granted glory and honor and peace from the Lord.

Rom. 6:16 - obedience leads to righteousness. Obedience is a good "work," an act of the will, which leads to righteousness before God.

2 Cor. 9:8 - Paul teaches that God will bless us so that we may provide in abundance for "every good work." Good works are encouraged to complete our faith.

Eph. 6:8 - whatever good anyone does will receive the same again from the Lord. God rewards good works done in grace.

Titus 3:8 - good deeds are excellent and profitable to men. Good deeds further justify us before God.

1 Peter 2:7-8; John 3:36 - shows that belief in Jesus means obeying Jesus. Having faith means being faithful, which requires works as well. Hence, obeying Jesus means doing works of love, not just having faith alone.

II. Works of Law versus Good Works

Rom. 3; Gal. 2,3; Eph. 2 - many Protestants err in their understanding of what Paul meant by "works" and "works of the law," in these teachings on justification. Paul's teaching that we are not justified by "works of law" refers to the Mosaic law of rigid ritualism, not good works. This makes sense when we remember that Paul's mission was to teach that salvation was also for the Gentiles who were not subject to the "law" or the "works of the law."

Rom. 3:20,28 - Paul's phrase "works of the law" in the Greek is "ergon nomou" which means the Mosaic law or Torah and refers primarily to the ceremonial works gave the Jews the knowledge of sin, but not an escape from sin. We have further proof of this from the Dead Sea Scrolls which provide the Hebrew equivalent ("hrvt ysm") meaning "deeds of the law," or Mosaic law. James in James 2 does not use "ergon nomou." He uses "ergois agathois." Therefore, Pauls "works of the law" and James' "works" are entirely different types of works. They, of course, could never contradict each other because the Scriptures are the inspired word of God.

Rom. 3:29 - Paul confirms that works of the law refers to the Mosaic law by rhetorically asking "Or is God the God of the Jews only?" It does not mean "good works."

Rom. 4:9-17 - Paul provides further discussion that righteousness God seeks in us does not come from Mosaic law, but through faith. But Paul never says faith alone.

Rom. 9:31-32 - righteousness is pursued through faith, not works of the law. Again, "works of law" does not mean "good works."

Rom. 11:6,11 - justification is no longer based on "works" of the law. Why? Because salvation is also for the Gentiles.

Rom. 15:9-12 - Paul explains that Christ also saves the Gentiles. Therefore, "works of law" are no longer required.

Acts 13:39 - Luke also confirms this by providing that we have been freed from the law of Moses (circumcision, animal sacrifice, etc.)

Rom. 3:28 - in addition to the Mosaic law, "works of the law" can also refer to anything that makes God a debtor to us. This is because law requires payment, but grace is a free gift from God.

Rom. 4:3-4 - Paul refers to works apart from God's grace. We do not obligate God to give us grace (wages) like an employee.

Rom. 11:35 - it is impossible to obligate God for payment, and sinful to think we can. We cannot do "works of the law" to obligate God. We are not in a debtor/creditor relationship with God. He owes us nothing. Instead, we are in a Father/child relationship with Him, and He will reward us for being faithful.

Rom. 6:23 - in fact, Paul says the "wages" of sin is death. Eternal life is a free gift from God. We cannot earn it.

Gal. 6:8-9 - the earnings referred to here are from God's grace. It is a free gift, not an obligation. This underscores that our relationship with God is Father/son and daughter, not employer/employee.

Rom. 8:14-17; Heb. 12:5-11 - these texts further emphasize our father/son relationship with God. Our relationship is familial, not legal.

Rom. 7:6 - we are now discharged from the "law," that is "works of the law." We now serve God in faith working in love.

Rom. 10:4 - Christ is the end of the "law." We are now justified by personal faith, not impersonal ceremonial rituals.

Rom. 13:8,10 - loving one another is fulfilling the new law of Christ. This is internal and personal, not external and impersonal.

Gal. 2:16 - again, man is not justified by "works of the law." Paul is referring to the Mosaic law and specifically circumcision.

Gal. 2:19,21 - justification "through the law" means justification through the impersonal Jewish ceremonials.

Gal. 3:10 - proves "works of the law" refers to the "book of the law" which was the strict and impersonal Mosaic law of the Old Testament.

Gal. 3:17 - this "law" came 430 years after Abraham. So "works of law" clearly refer to the Mosaic law, not "good works."

Gal. 3:13; 4:4-5 - in fact, the "works of the law" (not good works in God's grace) is a curse from which Christ freed us.

Gal. 3:19 - these "works of law" were only good for showing us our sinfulness, but not teaching us how to live.

Gal. 5:4,14; 6:2 - the "law" is of no use. The new law is the law of Christ, which is faith working through love.

Eph. 2:8-9 - we have been saved by grace through faith, not because of "works." This much-quoted verse by Protestants refers to the "works" of the Mosaic law. Paul's point with reference to "works" is to show that uncircumcised Gentiles are also saved through faith. Further, these "works" may also refer to works outside of God's grace, where we view God as a debtor to us, and not as our heavenly Father.

Eph. 2:10 - in quoting Ephesians 2:8-9, Protestants invariably ignore the very next verse. Right after Paul's teaching on "works" referring to Mosaic law, Paul says we are created in Christ for "good works" - a clear distinction between "works of law" and "good works."

Eph. 2:11-16 - this section further explains Paul's reference to "works" which relates to following the Jewish legal ordinances.

Eph. 3:17 - Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith, but we also must be rooted and grounded in love.

III. Justification = Inner Change of Person (Infusion); Not Just a Declaration by God (Imputation)

Psalm 51:1-2 - O God, blot out my transgressions, wash me thoroughly from my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin. This cleansing requires an inner change of heart.

Psalm 51:7-9 - purge me and I shall be clean, wash me whiter than snow, fill me with joy, blot out my iniquities. We are purged and filled up internally, not just covered up externally.

Psalm 51:10 - create in me a clean heart, oh God, and put a new and right spirit within me (not "cover" me). God is so powerful that He brings about a real metamorphosis in ourselves.

Isaiah 1:18 - though my sins are like scarlet, they shall be white as snow; though red like crimson, they shall be like wool.

Isaiah 43:25 - I am He who blots out your transgressions and forgets your sins. While many Protestants believe that we are so depraved that God can only cover our sins up, Catholics, as the Scriptures teach, believe that God is actually powerful enough to blot out our sins and remove them.

Isaiah 44:22 - I have swept away your transgressions like a cloud, and your sin like mist. This is a real elimination of sin, not a covering up of sin.

Ezek. 36:26-27 - a new heart I will give you and a new spirit I will put within you. These are interior changes effected by God.

Matt. 5:3,5,8 - blessed are the poor in spirit, the meek, and the pure of heart. These are internal dispositions, not just an external reality.

Matt. 5:6; Lk 6:21 - those who hunger for righteousness "may be filled." It is an inner change, not snow covering up a dunghill.

Matt. 5:20; Luke 1:6; Acts 10:35 - here are more examples of "doing" righteousness, not just being "imputed" external righteousness. We are not just defendants in a courtroom who have been exonerated. We are children of God endowed with the power of the Holy Spirit by whose grace we can become righteous.

Matt. 5:28 - Jesus teachs that just looking lustfully at a woman is adultery. But avoiding this involves an inner change, a response to God's grace.

Matt. 6:1 - beware of practicing righteousness before men. We are not just declared righteous; we can practice righteousness as well.

Matt. 15:18; Mark 7:15 -Jesus teaches the interior disposition is what defiles man. Thus, God's infusion of grace changes us interiorly.

Matt. 23:25-28 - the Pharisees appeared outwardly righteous to men, but inside they were filled with hypocrisy. God desires and helps us effect an inner change of heart. He doesn't just declare that we are righteous.

Luke 11:39-40 - the Pharisees cleansed the outside of the cup but inside they were full of wickedness. God demands an internal change and gives us the grace to make that change.

John 1:29 - Jesus the Lamb of God literally takes away the sin of the world. He does not just cover up the sins of the world.

Acts 3:19 - repent, that your sins may be "blotted" out. The word blotted comes from the Greek word "exalipho" which means an actual wiping away or removal, not a covering up.

Acts 22:16; 1 Cor. 6:11 - again, the phrase "wash away" is from the word "apolouo" which mean a literal removal or an infusion of cleansing, not an imputation or covering.

Rom. 4:3 - it was "credited" to him as righteousness. The word "credited" comes from the Greek word "elogisthe" which means a book entry. God records what there actually is; He does not make an phony entry on the books.

Rom. 5:17 - we do not receive Christ's personal level of righteousness (which is impossible), but we are made righteous on His account by God's mercy and the Lord's work on the cross.

Rom. 5:19 - through "Adam/Christ" we were made "sinners/righteous." This means that there is not just a relational change in status, but an objective change in nature. We are not just declared righteous, but are actually made righteous. God does not declare something without making it so.

Gen. 1:3 - God declares that there is light, and there is light. The declaration is followed by the reality.

2 Cor. 5:17 - Paul says that if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. He is not just the old creation that is covered up.

Eph. 4:22-24 - putting off the old nature for the new nature involves an internal change. Our lives are actually transformed.

Phil. 2:13 - God is at work "in you." God is so powerful, he can actually transform us by working in us, not just covering us up.

Titus 3:5 - justification is a generation of supernatural life in a former sinner. This means a real inner change or infusion, not just donning an outer cloak.

1 John 1:7,9 - "cleansing" from sin and unrighteousness. The word cleanse comes from the Greek word "katharizo" which means a literal "infused" cleansing, not an "imputed" cleansing.

1 John 3:7,10 - righteousness may be obtained by "doing." One who practices righteousness is righteous. It is not just a declaration of righteousness.

Rev. 19:8 - when we are clothed in fine linen in heaven, the fine linen is "our righteous acts." It is our own righteousness, from the work and mercy of Jesus Christ.

2 Peter 1:4 - we are actually made righteous because God is the eternal family, and we partake of this divine nature as children. The Catholic position thus gives Jesus the most glory. His grace is powerful enough to change us interiorly.

1 Cor. 3:9 - this is because we are His fellow workers. God is not threatened by the grace and glory He gives His children!

IV. Some Examples of Justification as Ongoing (not a one-time event)

2 Cor. 4:16 - though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed "every day." This not only proves that justification is internal (not legal and external), but that it is also ongoing (it's not a one-time event of accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior).

John 3:16 - justification is ongoing, not a one-time event. God so loved (past) the world, that He gave (past) His only Son, that whoever believes (ongoing) in Him may have eternal life.

Gen. 15:6 - Abraham was justified by faith in God. Many Protestants say this was Abraham's initial and one time justification.

Gen. 12:1-4 - however, this verse proves this Protestant position wrong because Abraham is also justified here, 25 years earlier than Gen.15:6.

Heb. 11:8-10 - this confirms Abraham's justification before Gen. 15:6 by referring to Gen. 12, not Gen. 15. Abraham's justification increased over time because justification is not a one-time event, but an ongoing process of growing in holiness.

Gen. 14:19, 22-23 - moreover, Abraham is further justified here. Melchizedek calls Abraham blessed and Abraham responds to God's grace.

James 2:21 - Abraham is further justified by works in Gen. 22:1-18 when he offered Isaac as a sacrifice to God. Again, our justification before God is ongoing.

1 Sam. 13:14 - David is justified here, as he is described as a man after God's own heart. No one in Scripture is described like this.

1 Sam. 17; 2 Sam. 6:14 - David could not respond to God and defeat Goliath and dance for God if he were not justified before God.

2 Sam. 12:7-15 - however, after these events, David falls out of justification by committing adultery with Bathsheba and slaying Uriah.

Psalm 32:1, Rom. 4:7 - then, later on, David is rejustified after repenting to God. This proves that justification is not one time event. It is ongoing.

Luke 15:24 - the prodigal son was dead, and now is alive again; he was lost and now is found. He was re-justified.

John 18:17, 25-27 / John 21:15-17 - Peter is justified before God, denies Christ and loses his justification, then repents and is rejustified.

Acts 9:1-9 - Protestants would say Paul would be instantly justified here, his sins covered up and righteousness imputed to him.

Acts 22:16 - then why does Ananias command Paul to be baptized and "wash away" his sins? Because justification, as the Church has taught for more than 2,000 years, is ongoing.

V. Jesus and Apostles Teach that Works are Necessary for Justification

Matt. 5:2-11 - Jesus' teaching of the beatitudes goes beyond faith - being pure, merciful, and peacemakers are all good works. They are acts of the will that are necessary for a right relationship with God.

Matt. 5:16 - Jesus confirms this by teaching, "let your light shine before men that they may see your 'good works' and give glory to God." Good works glorify God and increase our justification before the Father.

Matt. 5:39-42 - give your striker the other cheek, give away your cloak, and go with him two miles. This faith in action, not faith alone.

Matt. 5:44-47 - this means even loving our enemies and praying for those who persecute us. Love is a good work, an act of the will.

Matt. 6:12 - forgive us our sins, not by how much faith we have, but as we forgive those who trespass against us.

Matt. 7:19-23 - just saying "Lord, Lord" and accepting Jesus as personal Savior is not enough. We must also bear the fruit of good works.

Matt. 19:16-22 - Jesus teaches the man to sell all he has and give it to the poor. It is not just about accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior. We also need good works by keeping Jesus' commandments.

Matt. 22:39; Mark 12:31 - Jesus says You shall love your neighbor as yourself. Love is a good work - an act of the intellect and will.

Mark 9:39 - Jesus said no one who does good works in His name will be able to soon after speak evil of Him. Good works justify us before God.

Luke 6:46-47 - the Lord asks us to do what he tells us, and that is to keep His commandments, not just "accept" Him as personal Lord and Savior.

Luke 6:20-38 - again, beatitudes, the love of enemies, giving to the needy, forgiving, bearing fruit - all these good works justify a man before God.

Luke 8:21 - Jesus says that His mother and brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it.

John 5:24 - note that "eternal life" here means sanctifying grace (the life of God within us). We can choose to fall from this grace.

John 5:36, 10:37-38 - Jesus emphasizes that His works testify to who He is. We must imitate Christ's works to be more fully united with Him.

John 5:39-42 - knowing the Scriptures is not enough if you do not have love in your heart.

John 8:31-36 - Jesus requires works even from those who believe in Him. Mere belief is not enough.

John 13:34-35 - Jesus gives us a new commandment, that we love one another as He loves us. He commands love which is an act of our will.

John 14:15 - Jesus says, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments." This requires works, not just faith (and not faith alone).

John 14:21 - he who hears my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. This is doing good works for others.

John 15:10 - if you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, as I have kept the Father's commandments.

John 15:12 - this is My commandment that you love one another as I have loved you. Love is both a cause and the fruit of our justification.

Rom. 12:10 - Paul commands us to love one another. Love is a good work, an act of the intellect and will, not just a feeling.

1 Cor. 13:2 - because if our faith moves mountains, but we have not the works of love, we are nothing inDouche.

1 Cor. 13:13 - abide in faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. Love is the greatest work which justifies us (not faith, and most importantly, not faith alone!)

1 Tim. 6:18-19 - we are to do good and be rich in good works thus laying up a good foundation for a chance at eternal life.

Titus 1:16 - people claim to know God, but their deeds deny Him. Like Jesus, it is our works that testify to our faith in Christ.

1 John 2:3-4 - and by this we may be sure that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. This requires good works, not faith alone.

1 John 3:23 - God's commandment is to believe in His Son Jesus and love one another. Belief is not enough, but good works to perfect that belief.

1 John 4:20-21 - and this commandment we have from Him, that he who loves God should love his brother also.

1 John 5:2-3 - we know we love God and God's children when we keep His commandments. We need good works and not faith alone.

2 John 6 - we must love one another and keep Jesus' commandments. We must cooperate with Christ's grace.

[mustbenothing]

The very first entry proves that works are seen as instrumental, not merely evidential, in justification:

1987

The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us, that is, to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us "the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ" and through Baptism:34

[dUSt]

The very first entry proves that works are seen as instrumental, not merely evidential, in justification:

1987

The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us, that is, to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us "the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ" and through Baptism:34

And?

[mustbenothing]

Did you actually write this, or just cut 'n' paste it? If the latter, please don't do it again.

(Dave) James 2:24 - the phrase "faith alone" (the Greek "pisteos monon") only occurs once in the Bible. "Man is justified by works and NOT faith alone." Unlike what many Protestant churches teach, no where in Scripture does it say that man is justified or saved by "faith alone."

(Me) We should continue this discussion on the Sola Fide thread, in which I argue for justification by faith alone, covering the relevant passages in Romans and James.

(Dave) Heb. 11:6 - faith is the minimum requirement without which we cannot please God. But this is just the beginning of justification.

(Me) This is an assertion not shown by the text. I would also wonder why Paul's proof-text of Abraham's justification by faith (see esp. Romans 4) is far after he first had faith -- in other words, he was still justified by faith longer after justification's beginning.

Hebrews 11:6

And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

(Dave) Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38, 3:19, 17:30 - moreover, the faith we need is a repentant faith, not just an intellectual faith that believes in God.

(Me) Yes.

(Dave) Psalm 51:17 - we also need a broken and contrite heart, not just an intellectual assent of faith. Faith in God is only the beginning.

(Me) The fact that God loves repentance does not mean that man is justified by that repentance.

(Dave) Eph. 2:8 - this verse refers to this initial justification by faith. But justification is an ongoing process which, as we later see, includes our good works. Moreover, works outside of sanctifying grace do not justify us. Works in sanctifying grace do justify us.

(Me) This is just a statement of the Roman Catholic doctrine, and is not taught by the text.

Ephes. 2:8

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

(Dave) Gal. 5:6 - the faith that justifies us is faith working through love, not faith alone.

(Me) Yes, this is a good description of saving faith. How on Earth does it follow from the fact that faith is not mere intellectual assent, as the demons have, that we are justified by works at all?

(Dave) James 1:22-25 - it's the "doers" who are justified, not the hearers. Justification is based on works. We need "fides formata."

(Me) Nowhere does this text mention justification by works. It is an exhortation unto good works.

James 1:22-25

22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.

23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror.

24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like.

25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.

(Dave) James 2:17 - James clearly teaches that faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead. Works is a cause, not just an effect, of our justification.

James 2:19 - even the demons believe that Jesus is Lord. But they tremble. Faith is not enough. It is only the beginning.

James 2:20 - do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren? Good works in God's grace are required for justification.

James 2:22 - faith is active with works and is completed by works. It does not stand alone. Faith needs works to be completed and perfected.

(Me) Funnel this discussion into my exegesis of James 2 on the Sola Fide thread.

(Dave) James 4:17 - in fact, the failure to do works is a sin! So works are absolutely necessary for our justification.

(Me) Non-sequitur; it does not follow from "the failure to do works is a sin" that "we are justified by works."

(Dave) James 2:15-17 - here are the examples of the "works" to which James is referring - corporal works of mercy (giving food and shelter to those in need).

(Me) Yes.

(Dave) James 1:27 - another example of "works" is visiting orphans and widows in their affliction. Otherwise, their religion is in vain.

(Me) Yes.

(Dave) James 2:25 - another example of "works" is when Rahab assisted the spies in their escape. Good works increase our justification and perfect our faith.

(Me) Where does this text say that soteriological justification is increased by good works?

James 2:25

And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?

(Dave) Joshua 2:9-11 - Rahab's fellow citizens had faith in God, but Joshua 6:22-25 - Rahab alone acted and was saved. This is faith in action.

(Me) Yes.

(Dave) James 2:18 - to avoid the truth of the Catholic position that we are justified by both faith and works, Protestants argue the justification that James is referring to in James 2 is "before men" and not "before God." Scripture disproves their claim.

(Me) I will assume that this is supposed to be followed by the next quote, because otherwise it doesn't entail anything useful. Although, this is a straw man (as the rest of these passages appear to be). We claim that James' justification is epistemological (related to knowing or having evidence of being made right with God by having true faith), while Paul's justification is ontological/metaphysical (related to the state of being or fact of having been made right with God by having true faith).

(Dave) James 2:14 - James asks, "Can faith save him?" Salvation comes from God. This proves the justification James is referring to is before God, not men.

(Me) James actually says, "Can that faith save him" -- that is, the kind of faith that is not accompanied by works. There is a definite article preceding pistis (faith) -- the feminine form of ho. That is why you'll scarcely find a non-Catholic translation with does not include the pronoun -- because the existence of the pronoun, if translated as demonstrative, would destroy the Catholic exegesis.

(Dave) James 2:19 - also, James reminds us that even the demons believe and tremble. This refers to our relationship with God. Thus, our justification that requires works and not faith alone relates to our status before God, not men.

(Me) James asked his objector to "show me your faith" -- clearly this is a request for evidence to a person.

(Dave) James 2:21 - James also appeals to the example of Abraham. Abraham's justification refers to his position before God, not men. This proves justification is before God, not men.

(Me) Unless the justification in view here is simply the proving true of his supposed salvation!

(Dave) Rom. 2:7,10 - to those who by patience and good works will be granted glory and honor and peace from the Lord.

(Me) Yes, judgment is according to deeds. And?

(Dave) Rom. 6:16 - obedience leads to righteousness. Obedience is a good "work," an act of the will, which leads to righteousness before God.

(Me) Sanctification, yes. However chapter 6 is not talking about justification -- being made right with God. The question is over justification, not sanctification.

(Dave) 2 Cor. 9:8 - Paul teaches that God will bless us so that we may provide in abundance for "every good work." Good works are encouraged to complete our faith.

(Me) Okay...

(Dave) Eph. 6:8 - whatever good anyone does will receive the same again from the Lord. God rewards good works done in grace.

(Me) Which requires justification by works because..?

(Dave) Titus 3:8 - good deeds are excellent and profitable to men. Good deeds further justify us before God.

(Me) Titus 3:8

The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people.

The fact that they are excellent and profitable does not mean that they justify us.

(Dave) 1 Peter 2:7-8; John 3:36 - shows that belief in Jesus means obeying Jesus. Having faith means being faithful, which requires works as well. Hence, obeying Jesus means doing works of love, not just having faith alone.

(Me) Both passages say that those who do not believe are disobedient, and those who are disobedient experience the wrath of God. In no way does this remove the wedge between faith and works laid by Paul.

(Dave) II. Works of Law versus Good Works

Rom. 3; Gal. 2,3; Eph. 2 - many Protestants err in their understanding of what Paul meant by "works" and "works of the law," in these teachings on justification. Paul's teaching that we are not justified by "works of law" refers to the Mosaic law of rigid ritualism, not good works. This makes sense when we remember that Paul's mission was to teach that salvation was also for the Gentiles who were not subject to the "law" or the "works of the law."

(Me) See the Sola Fide thread for my arguments against this claim. They appear in the last post of the first page. There are six, although none are precisely formulated.

(Dave) III. Justification = Inner Change of Person (Infusion); Not Just a Declaration by God (Imputation)

(Me) Going through these is going to be mostly worthless. Generally, the author of this article needs to realize that Protestants believe that we are regenerated, meaning that there is an immediate change in our hearts, we are sanctified, meaning that we become righteous over time, and we will ultimately be glorified, meaning that we will be perfected in our resurrected bodies. However, the question is whether we are declared righteous by God by being legally credited with Christ's righteousness, or if we are made right with God (justified) by actually becoming righteous. Very few of these texts even deal with that question. If you think any seriously deal with the Protestant position, pick two or three and we'll discuss them. For a short defense, see Paul's proof-text from Abraham:

Romans 4:3

For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness."

The Old Testament conception of counting is not of infusing or imparting, but rather of regarding or considering. For instance:

Genesis 31:14-15

14 Then Rachel and Leah answered and said to him, "Is there any portion or inheritance left to us in our father's house?

15 Are we not regarded by him as foreigners? For he has sold us, and he has inDouche devoured our money.

Leviticus 25:31

31 But the houses of the villages that have no wall around them shall be classified with the fields of the land. They may be redeemed, and they shall be released in the jubilee.

(Dave) IV. Some Examples of Justification as Ongoing (not a one-time event)

2 Cor. 4:16 - though our outer nature is wasting away, our inner nature is being renewed "every day." This not only proves that justification is internal (not legal and external), but that it is also ongoing (it's not a one-time event of accepting Jesus as personal Lord and Savior).

(Me) The word justification is not used.

(Dave) John 3:16 - justification is ongoing, not a one-time event. God so loved (past) the world, that He gave (past) His only Son, that whoever believes (ongoing) in Him may have eternal life.

(Me) Okay, and?

(Dave) Gen. 15:6 - Abraham was justified by faith in God. Many Protestants say this was Abraham's initial and one time justification.

Gen. 12:1-4 - however, this verse proves this Protestant position wrong because Abraham is also justified here, 25 years earlier than Gen.15:6.

(Me) Rather, Genesis 15:6 proves that Abraham was still justified by faith 25 years after his initial justification. He was not initially justified by faith, then justified by works later, as Roman Catholics claim!

(Dave) Heb. 11:8-10 - this confirms Abraham's justification before Gen. 15:6 by referring to Gen. 12, not Gen. 15. Abraham's justification increased over time because justification is not a one-time event, but an ongoing process of growing in holiness.

(Me) This is just a statement of the Catholic position.

(Dave) Gen. 14:19, 22-23 - moreover, Abraham is further justified here. Melchizedek calls Abraham blessed and Abraham responds to God's grace.

(Me) No mention is made of justification.

Genesis 14:19, 22-23

19 And he blessed him and said,

"Blessed be Abram by God Most High,

Possessor of heaven and earth;

22 But Abram said to the king of Sodom, "I have lifted my hand to the Lord, God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth,

23 that I would not take a thread or a sandal strap or anything that is yours, lest you should say, 'I have made Abram rich.'

(Dave) James 2:21 - Abraham is further justified by works in Gen. 22:1-18 when he offered Isaac as a sacrifice to God. Again, our justification before God is ongoing.

(Me) As I argued before, this is not soteriological justification, but justification of the claim of soteriological justification.

(Dave) 1 Sam. 13:14 - David is justified here, as he is described as a man after God's own heart. No one in Scripture is described like this.

(Me) How does this refer to justification, again?

1 Samuel 13:14

But now your kingdom shall not continue. The Lord has sought out a man after his own heart, and the Lord has commanded him to be prince over his people, because you have not kept what the Lord commanded you."

(Dave) 1 Sam. 17; 2 Sam. 6:14 - David could not respond to God and defeat Goliath and dance for God if he were not justified before God.

(Me) Ummm... okay. And?

(Dave) 2 Sam. 12:7-15 - however, after these events, David falls out of justification by committing adultery with Bathsheba and slaying Uriah.

(Me) That's the Catholic position, yes. Where does this text teach that?

2 Samuel 12:7-15

7 Nathan said to David, "You are the man! Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, 'I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul.

8 And I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more.

9 Why have you despised the word of the Lord, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites.

10 Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.'

11 Thus says the Lord, 'Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house. And I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun.

12 For you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel and before the sun.' "

13 David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." And Nathan said to David, "The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die.

14 Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child who is born to you shall die."

15 Then Nathan went to his house.

And the Lord afflicted the child that Uriah's wife bore to David, and he became sick.

(Dave) Psalm 32:1, Rom. 4:7 - then, later on, David is rejustified after repenting to God. This proves that justification is not one time event. It is ongoing.

(Me) This only proves that David relied on justification to be made right with God in light of his sins, whether past, present, or future -- not mention is made of becoming unjustified, then rejustified. I would also point out that he speaks of justification by faith alone (6) and justification by counting one righteous, not becoming righteous (8).

Romans 4:6-8

6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:

7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,

and whose sins are covered;

8 blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin."

(Dave) Luke 15:24 - the prodigal son was dead, and now is alive again; he was lost and now is found. He was re-justified.

(Me) That's the Catholic position, yes. How does the text teach this?

(Dave) John 18:17, 25-27 / John 21:15-17 - Peter is justified before God, denies Christ and loses his justification, then repents and is rejustified.

(Me) Yes, that's what Catholics believe. Where does the text teach this?

(Dave) Acts 9:1-9 - Protestants would say Paul would be instantly justified here, his sins covered up and righteousness imputed to him.

Acts 22:16 - then why does Ananias command Paul to be baptized and "wash away" his sins? Because justification, as the Church has taught for more than 2,000 years, is ongoing.

(Me) Because Ananias is looking at the entire conversion process, part of which is baptism.

(Dave) V. Jesus and Apostles Teach that Works are Necessary for Justification

(Me) It's getting a little tedious to deal with each of these, so I'm just going to ignore most of these, because they're altogether irrelevant. I wish the author of this article actually understood the Protestant position. Point to me any of these passages that actually uses the word 'justification.'

[mustbenothing]

(Previous) The very first entry proves that works are seen as instrumental, not merely evidential, in justification:

1987

The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us, that is, to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us "the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ" and through Baptism:34

(dUSt) And?

(Me) I had asked for the following:

Could you please provide a quote showing that Roman Catholic doctrine teaches that works play a purely evidential part in justification, as you imply here?

[Nancella]

The Lord Jesus Christ, during His time walking among us, showed Himself to be one of great compassion and love, who spent most of His life, that which was documented, in the service of others. Those who followed him, naturally, sought to emulate him as best they could, preaching and healing as He had, because in this way they could truly honor Him, and be His legacy. Now i don't have my bible handy, and i can't provide and scriptural references offhand, for which i apologize. however i know this, Jesus told His people to bear up their crosses and follow Him, and i cannot believe He meant for or desired any half-measures in this. even if it is not by works that we are saved, even if faith alone will bear us into heaven, we are still bound to serve, as Jesus did, if we mean to honor His sacrifice completely.

[Dave]

Did you actually write this, or just cut 'n' paste it? If the latter, please don't do it again.

There are no rules against cut and paste jobs on the phorum. You have no authority to come on here and tell us how to run our board.

(Dave) Heb. 11:6 - faith is the minimum requirement without which we cannot please God. But this is just the beginning of justification.

(Me) This is an assertion not shown by the text. I would also wonder why Paul's proof-text of Abraham's justification by faith (see esp. Romans 4) is far after he first had faith -- in other words, he was still justified by faith longer after justification's beginning.

Hebrews 11:6

And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

Wrong. What it says is that we must first have faith. Then we must seek Him. How do we do this? By doing good works! I'll deal with Abraham later . . .

(Dave) Psalm 51:17 - we also need a broken and contrite heart, not just an intellectual assent of faith. Faith in God is only the beginning.

(Me) The fact that God loves repentance does not mean that man is justified by that repentance.

Excuse me? That's just absurd. Without repentance, there can be no justification. Without justification, there's no salvation.

(Dave) Eph. 2:8 - this verse refers to this initial justification by faith. But justification is an ongoing process which, as we later see, includes our good works. Moreover, works outside of sanctifying grace do not justify us. Works in sanctifying grace do justify us.

(Me) This is just a statement of the Roman Catholic doctrine, and is not taught by the text.

Ephes. 2:8

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

It says "as we LATER see." But to say that the text says that works have absolutely no part in our justification is to ignore the mountain of scriptural evidence that shows otherwise. You've got to consider scripture in light of other scripture, not alone! I keep saying that for a reason!

(Dave) Gal. 5:6 - the faith that justifies us is faith working through love, not faith alone.

(Me) Yes, this is a good description of saving faith. How on Earth does it follow from the fact that faith is not mere intellectual assent, as the demons have, that we are justified by works at all?

It's quite simple, actually. We have to live that faith by doing good works.

(Dave) James 1:22-25 - it's the "doers" who are justified, not the hearers. Justification is based on works. We need "fides formata."

(Me) Nowhere does this text mention justification by works. It is an exhortation unto good works.

James 1:22-25

22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.

23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror.

24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like.

25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.

Why would we be exhorted to do good works if they don't play a role in our salvation? It would be pointless to do so if our works automatically sprang from our faith.

(Dave) James 2:17 - James clearly teaches that faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead. Works is a cause, not just an effect, of our justification.

James 2:19 - even the demons believe that Jesus is Lord. But they tremble. Faith is not enough. It is only the beginning.

James 2:20 - do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren? Good works in God's grace are required for justification.

James 2:22 - faith is active with works and is completed by works. It does not stand alone. Faith needs works to be completed and perfected.

(Me) Funnel this discussion into my exegesis of James 2 on the Sola Fide thread.

OK, I'll deal with it there.

(Dave) James 4:17 - in fact, the failure to do works is a sin! So works are absolutely necessary for our justification.

(Me) Non-sequitur; it does not follow from "the failure to do works is a sin" that "we are justified by works."

If we persist in sinning, we won't go to heaven. If we consistently fail to do good works, we won't go there. If we don't go to heaven, it means we weren't justified.

(Dave) James 2:25 - another example of "works" is when Rahab assisted the spies in their escape. Good works increase our justification and perfect our faith.

(Me) Where does this text say that soteriological justification is increased by good works?

James 2:25

And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?

What you just quoted gives the evidence!

(Dave) James 2:18 - to avoid the truth of the Catholic position that we are justified by both faith and works, Protestants argue the justification that James is referring to in James 2 is "before men" and not "before God." Scripture disproves their claim.

(Me) I will assume that this is supposed to be followed by the next quote, because otherwise it doesn't entail anything useful. Although, this is a straw man (as the rest of these passages appear to be). We claim that James' justification is epistemological (related to knowing or having evidence of being made right with God by having true faith), while Paul's justification is ontological/metaphysical (related to the state of being or fact of having been made right with God by having true faith).

Nope, they're not straw men; just more rhetoric on your part. The passage I provided is clear.

(Dave) James 2:14 - James asks, "Can faith save him?" Salvation comes from God. This proves the justification James is referring to is before God, not men.

(Me) James actually says, "Can that faith save him" -- that is, the kind of faith that is not accompanied by works. There is a definite article preceding pistis (faith) -- the feminine form of ho. That is why you'll scarcely find a non-Catholic translation with does not include the pronoun -- because the existence of the pronoun, if translated as demonstrative, would destroy the Catholic exegesis.

Now that statement about translations is just plain goofy! In my Catholic Bible, it uses the pronoun too. The presence of the article changes nothing, and you haven't proved that it does.

(Dave) James 2:19 - also, James reminds us that even the demons believe and tremble. This refers to our relationship with God. Thus, our justification that requires works and not faith alone relates to our status before God, not men.

(Me) James asked his objector to "show me your faith" -- clearly this is a request for evidence to a person.

So what? Your point?

(Dave) James 2:21 - James also appeals to the example of Abraham. Abraham's justification refers to his position before God, not men. This proves justification is before God, not men.

(Me) Unless the justification in view here is simply the proving true of his supposed salvation!

More conjecture.

(Dave) Rom. 2:7,10 - to those who by patience and good works will be granted glory and honor and peace from the Lord.

(Me) Yes, judgment is according to deeds. And?

Which means that they play a role in our justification!

(Dave) Rom. 6:16 - obedience leads to righteousness. Obedience is a good "work," an act of the will, which leads to righteousness before God.

(Me) Sanctification, yes. However chapter 6 is not talking about justification -- being made right with God. The question is over justification, not sanctification.

There's very little difference between the two.

(Dave) Eph. 6:8 - whatever good anyone does will receive the same again from the Lord. God rewards good works done in grace.

(Me) Which requires justification by works because..?

If we were justified by faith alone, God would ignore our good works!

(Dave) Titus 3:8 - good deeds are excellent and profitable to men. Good deeds further justify us before God.

(Me) Titus 3:8

The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people.

The fact that they are excellent and profitable does not mean that they justify us.

I'm not going to respond to the rest of your silly charges. More than enough biblical proof for my position was given. The fact is, you stubbornly insist on looking at the Bible with biased eyes. You can't do that. You have to do it through the eyes of the Church Jesus Christ founded -- the CATHOLIC CHURCH! It has always taught the same thing for 2000 years and HAS NEVER ERRED.

Besides, "seeking" Christ is a work, "believing" is a work, having faith is a work...

we work at our faith... we nourish it with Scripture!

Edited September 5, 2003 by Dave

[ironmonk]

Did you actually write this, or just cut 'n' paste it? If the latter, please don't do it again.

I don't quite think you fully grasp what it is to be Catholic...

You're going to encounter many people posting the same replies to your statements...

We are One Faith...

There is One Faith that has been handed down for 2000 years, we all drink from that same cup of Faith.

The Catholic faith is not going to change... It will grow, but never change.

The Pillar and Foundation of Truth... guided in all Truth by the Holy Spirit... lead by Christ Himself until the end of time... A city on a mountain which cannot be hidden... The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it....

Tu Es Petras - The Pope... Holds the keys....

Just as in Jewish time...

Matt. 16:19 - only Peter receives the keys, which mandate leadership over the Church and dynastic succession.

Isaiah 22:19 I will thrust you from your office and pull you down from your station.

20 5 On that day I will summon my servant Eliakim, son of Hilkiah;

21 I will clothe him with your robe, and gird him with your sash, and give over to him your authority. He shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and to the house of Judah.

22 6 I will place the key of the House of David on his shoulder; when he opens, no one shall shut, when he shuts, no one shall open.

23 I will fix him like a peg in a sure spot, to be a place of honor for his family;

24 7 On him shall hang all the glory of his family: descendants and offspring, all the little dishes, from bowls to jugs.

25 On that day, says the LORD of hosts, the peg fixed in a sure spot shall give way, break off and fall, and the weight that hung on it shall be done away with; for the LORD has spoken.

- Is 22:19 / 25 - The Jewish leaders are going to loose their authority.

- Is 22:21-24 - Authority is given to the Pope.

Scripture is deep... much deeper than most realize.

2 Peter 1:20 - Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

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

You've asked many times "what's your point?" - "And?" - etc... Draw the conclusion, stop a minute, ponder the verses, draw a conclusion... Obviously if your interpretations were so sound, you would see the point.

God Bless,

ironmonk

[mustbenothing]

(ironmonk) You're going to encounter many people posting the same replies to your statements...

(Me) Yes, just like I've already received (and rebutted) your references to Matthew and Isaiah. Just like my statements keep getting ignored, so I have to keep correcting people on my position. I'm really getting tired of this.

(ironmonk) The Catholic faith is not going to change... It will grow, but never change.

(Me) What of the shift away from Augustinian views on nature and grace between the Pelagian controversies and Trent? What of the shift from Tradition I to Tradition II, and now Tradition III? What of the ever-changing definition of "Tradition" -- agreement of the Fathers, partim-partim, material sufficiency, or development of doctrine?

(ironmonk) You've asked many times "what's your point?" - "And?" - etc... Draw the conclusion, stop a minute, ponder the verses, draw a conclusion... Obviously if your interpretations were so sound, you would see the point.

(Me) This would follow only if your arguments were cogent. I may simply be demonstrating the fact that either your argument was not explained sufficiently (thus not cogent) or did not follow (thus not cogent).

(Previous) Did you actually write this, or just cut 'n' paste it? If the latter, please don't do it again.

(Dave) There are no rules against cut and paste jobs on the phorum. You have no authority to come on here and tell us how to run our board.

(Me) Of course not. But, a debate is only intended to persuade the undecided reader. And, of course, the undecided reader is going to see that, if you keep posting articles by Roman Catholic apologists, and I keep tearing them down, that, no only are you unable to argue your own case, but even formal apologists cannot. For, if a college student who has been studying theology for a year and a half, without having read a single anti-Catholic book, is able to refute these articles at a moments notice, how weak is the Roman Catholic position?

(Previous) This is an assertion not shown by the text. I would also wonder why Paul's proof-text of Abraham's justification by faith (see esp. Romans 4) is far after he first had faith -- in other words, he was still justified by faith longer after justification's beginning.

Hebrews 11:6

And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

(Dave) Wrong. What it says is that we must first have faith. Then we must seek Him. How do we do this? By doing good works! I'll deal with Abraham later . . .

(Me) Yes, then we must seek Him. But the text does not tell us that faith is simply the beginning of justification, and works go on to justify us.

(Previous) The fact that God loves repentance does not mean that man is justified by that repentance.

(Dave) Excuse me? That's just absurd. Without repentance, there can be no justification. Without justification, there's no salvation.

(Me) Without manure, there are no cows. However, that does not entail that manure creates milk. Likewise, the fact that there is no justification apart from repentance does not imply that repentance justifies us.

(Previous) This is just a statement of the Roman Catholic doctrine, and is not taught by the text.

Ephes. 2:8

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

(Dave) It says "as we LATER see." But to say that the text says that works have absolutely no part in our justification is to ignore the mountain of scriptural evidence that shows otherwise. You've got to consider scripture in light of other scripture, not alone! I keep saying that for a reason!

(Me) I don't consider one passage a mountain. If so, I could claim to argue from half a dozen mountains, found in Romans, Ephesians, and Galatians.

(Previous) Yes, this is a good description of saving faith. How on Earth does it follow from the fact that faith is not mere intellectual assent, as the demons have, that we are justified by works at all?

(Dave) It's quite simple, actually. We have to live that faith by doing good works.

(Me) In order to rightly claim to have faith? Yes. But, the evidentiary justificatory status of works in no way entails soteriological causation.

(Previous) Nowhere does this text mention justification by works. It is an exhortation unto good works.

James 1:22-25

22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.

23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror.

24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like.

25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.

(Dave) Why would we be exhorted to do good works if they don't play a role in our salvation? It would be pointless to do so if our works automatically sprang from our faith.

(Me) We're talking about justification here, not salvation generally.

And, inDouche, notice that James says those without works are "deceiving yourselves." By claiming to have faith but not having works, we are deceiving ourselves; for, if we do not have works, we do not really have faith. Our belief that we have faith is, then, self-deception. In other words, James presents works as evidence of faith. This is exactly the position I've maintained.

(Previous) Non-sequitur; it does not follow from "the failure to do works is a sin" that "we are justified by works."

(Dave) If we persist in sinning, we won't go to heaven. If we consistently fail to do good works, we won't go there. If we don't go to heaven, it means we weren't justified.

(Me) If we don't have manure, it means we're not raising cows. If we're not raising cows, we don't get dairy products. This does not mean that we get dairy products on the basis of having manure.

Likewise: if we don't have works, it means we don't have faith. If we don't have faith, we aren't justified. This does not mean that we are justified on the basis of works.

(Previous) Where does this text say that soteriological justification is increased by good works?

James 2:25

And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?

(Dave) What you just quoted gives the evidence!

(Me) That is, unless works justify (prove right) faith (or a man). In such a case, soteriological justification is not increased or caused, but evidenced or proved. After all, this argument comes as a response to the imperative "show me your faith." The justification in view is evidencing -- showing me your faith.

(Previous) I will assume that this is supposed to be followed by the next quote, because otherwise it doesn't entail anything useful. Although, this is a straw man (as the rest of these passages appear to be). We claim that James' justification is epistemological (related to knowing or having evidence of being made right with God by having true faith), while Paul's justification is ontological/metaphysical (related to the state of being or fact of having been made right with God by having true faith).

(Dave) Nope, they're not straw men; just more rhetoric on your part. The passage I provided is clear.

(Me) Do you know what a straw man is? For our purposes, it is the misrepresentation of a position, whether purposely or not. I have provided a description of popular Protestant exegesis of this passage, which is not simply useless rhetoric, for it is the statement of a position, not the argument for that position. Few of your arguments appear to understand our position, whether on this passage or on justification, faith, and works.

(Previous) James actually says, "Can that faith save him" -- that is, the kind of faith that is not accompanied by works. There is a definite article preceding pistis (faith) -- the feminine form of ho. That is why you'll scarcely find a non-Catholic translation with does not include the pronoun -- because the existence of the pronoun, if translated as demonstrative, would destroy the Catholic exegesis.

(Dave) Now that statement about translations is just plain goofy! In my Catholic Bible, it uses the pronoun too. The presence of the article changes nothing, and you haven't proved that it does.

(Me) Your argument hinged upon the fact that it said "Can faith save him?" However, if it says, "Can that faith save him?" it seems that James is talking about real faith versus fake faith. And, Protestant exegesis is based on such a position -- namely, that James is pitting fake, "demonic" faith ("God is one") against real faith, that is justified (proven right) by works.

(Previous) James asked his objector to "show me your faith" -- clearly this is a request for evidence to a person.

(Dave) So what? Your point?

(Me) The Roman Catholic view takes the justification in this passage to be soteriological, the Protestant epistemological (evidential). "Show me" demonstrates that James is concerned with the evidence of faith, not that the soteriological justification by faith be increased by soteriological justification by works.

(Dave) James 2:21 - James also appeals to the example of Abraham. Abraham's justification refers to his position before God, not men. This proves justification is before God, not men.

(Previous) Unless the justification in view here is simply the proving true of his supposed salvation!

(Dave) More conjecture.

(Me) The point I made is simply a point of logic, an unaccounted hermeneutical possibility that you had not given reason to reject. And, inDouche, "show me" is not conjecture. My discussion up through this point has all pointed to this conclusion, and you have not dealt with it.

(Previous) Yes, judgment is according to deeds. And?

(Dave) Which means that they play a role in our justification!

(Me) I have no idea how that follows. I could quote half a dozen Protestant systematics affirming that consummational judgment is according to deeds, but justification is by faith alone. Justification brings the eschatological judgment forward in time to the present, and a "righteous" verdict legally pronounced. This reconciliation is the basis for the consummational verdict, coming through the doorway of deeds. I see no actual contradiction between judgment according to deeds and justification by faith alone. I would also maintain that Paul did not (Romans 2:12 and Romans 4:1-5).

(Previous) Sanctification, yes. However chapter 6 is not talking about justification -- being made right with God. The question is over justification, not sanctification.

(Dave) There's very little difference between the two.

(Me) How not?? Justification is being made right with God, the legal declaration of righteousness, the once-for-all judicial reconciliation. Sanctification is the temporal increase of holiness, the temporal redemption of the soul unto actual righteousness.

(Previous) Which requires justification by works because..?

(Dave) If we were justified by faith alone, God would ignore our good works!

(Me) I don't see why. Sure, you are right to say that the "already" reconciliation is not based on works. But, this does not exclude the reward of covenantal faithfulness in toto! It simply means that we in no way earn our right standing with God.

(Previous) Titus 3:8

The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people.

The fact that they are excellent and profitable does not mean that they justify us.

(Dave) I'm not going to respond to the rest of your silly charges. More than enough biblical proof for my position was given. The fact is, you stubbornly insist on looking at the Bible with biased eyes. You can't do that. You have to do it through the eyes of the Church Jesus Christ founded -- the CATHOLIC CHURCH! It has always taught the same thing for 2000 years and HAS NEVER ERRED.

(Me) I'm a little shocked here. You present a grand total of one passages that can be construed to directly associate actual justification with the instrument of works. I respond to such a claim, but you do not understand my response. Moreover, you do not even understand my position. Then, on the basis of you presenting only one crucially relevant passage, misunderstanding my position, and not seeing my argument, you expect me to be convinced?

I'm sorry, but I would suggest that you stop looking at things with biased eyes. If you do not accurately understand my position, how is it not biased to claim it wrong? If you do not accurately understand my arguments, how is it not biased to claim them wrong? If you do not accurately understand the nature of the debate at hand, how is it not biased to claim it wrong?

(Dave) Besides, "seeking" Christ is a work, "believing" is a work, having faith is a work...

(Me) Faith is labeled as distinct from works in Romans, Ephesians, Galatians, and James. Making such a claim, then, is to argue with Scripture. Yet, I suppose the Magisterium could just "reinterpret" (change) the meaning of these passages, if such a position needed to be maintained.

(Dave) we work at our faith... we nourish it with Scripture!

(Me) Yes, of course.

Edited September 25, 2003 by mustbenothing

[Dave]

(Previous) Did you actually write this, or just cut 'n' paste it? If the latter, please don't do it again.

(Dave) There are no rules against cut and paste jobs on the phorum. You have no authority to come on here and tell us how to run our board.

(Me) Of course not.  But, a debate is only intended to persuade the undecided reader.  And, of course, the undecided reader is going to see that, if you keep posting articles by Roman Catholic apologists, and I keep tearing them down, that, no only are you unable to argue your own case, but even formal apologists cannot.  For, if a college student who has been studying theology for a year and a half, without having read a single anti-Catholic book, is able to refute these articles at a moments notice, how weak is the Roman Catholic position?

You've torn nothing down, buddy. We've shown you time and time again how your arguments don't stand up, but you refuse to admit defeat. Well I think it's high time you conceded the argument.

(Previous) This is an assertion not shown by the text. I would also wonder why Paul's proof-text of Abraham's justification by faith (see esp. Romans 4) is far after he first had faith -- in other words, he was still justified by faith longer after justification's beginning.

Hebrews 11:6

And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

(Dave) Wrong. What it says is that we must first have faith. Then we must seek Him. How do we do this? By doing good works! I'll deal with Abraham later . . .

(Me) Yes, then we must seek Him. But the text does not tell us that faith is simply the beginning of justification, and works go on to justify us.

(Previous) The fact that God loves repentance does not mean that man is justified by that repentance.

(Dave) Excuse me? That's just absurd. Without repentance, there can be no justification. Without justification, there's no salvation.

(Me) Without manure, there are no cows. However, that does not entail that manure creates milk. Likewise, the fact that there is no justification apart from repentance does not imply that repentance justifies us.

(Previous) This is just a statement of the Roman Catholic doctrine, and is not taught by the text.

Ephes. 2:8

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,

(Dave) It says "as we LATER see." But to say that the text says that works have absolutely no part in our justification is to ignore the mountain of scriptural evidence that shows otherwise. You've got to consider scripture in light of other scripture, not alone! I keep saying that for a reason!

(Me) I don't consider one passage a mountain. If so, I could claim to argue from half a dozen mountains, found in Romans, Ephesians, and Galatians.

(Previous) Yes, this is a good description of saving faith. How on Earth does it follow from the fact that faith is not mere intellectual assent, as the demons have, that we are justified by works at all?

(Dave) It's quite simple, actually. We have to live that faith by doing good works.

(Me) In order to rightly claim to have faith? Yes. But, the evidentiary justificatory status of works in no way entails soteriological causation.

(Previous) Nowhere does this text mention justification by works. It is an exhortation unto good works.

James 1:22-25

22 But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.

23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks intently at his natural face in a mirror.

24 For he looks at himself and goes away and at once forgets what he was like.

25 But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing.

(Dave) Why would we be exhorted to do good works if they don't play a role in our salvation? It would be pointless to do so if our works automatically sprang from our faith.

(Me) We're talking about justification here, not salvation generally.

And, inDouche, notice that James says those without works are "deceiving yourselves." By claiming to have faith but not having works, we are deceiving ourselves; for, if we do not have works, we do not really have faith. Our belief that we have faith is, then, self-deception. In other words, James presents works as evidence of faith. This is exactly the position I've maintained.

(Previous) Non-sequitur; it does not follow from "the failure to do works is a sin" that "we are justified by works."

(Dave) If we persist in sinning, we won't go to heaven. If we consistently fail to do good works, we won't go there. If we don't go to heaven, it means we weren't justified.

(Me) If we don't have manure, it means we're not raising cows. If we're not raising cows, we don't get dairy products. This does not mean that we get dairy products on the basis of having manure.

Likewise: if we don't have works, it means we don't have faith. If we don't have faith, we aren't justified. This does not mean that we are justified on the basis of works.

(Previous) Where does this text say that soteriological justification is increased by good works?

James 2:25

And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?

(Dave) What you just quoted gives the evidence!

(Me) That is, unless works justify (prove right) faith (or a man). In such a case, soteriological justification is not increased or caused, but evidenced or proved. After all, this argument comes as a response to the imperative "show me your faith." The justification in view is evidencing -- showing me your faith.

(Previous) I will assume that this is supposed to be followed by the next quote, because otherwise it doesn't entail anything useful. Although, this is a straw man (as the rest of these passages appear to be). We claim that James' justification is epistemological (related to knowing or having evidence of being made right with God by having true faith), while Paul's justification is ontological/metaphysical (related to the state of being or fact of having been made right with God by having true faith).

(Dave) Nope, they're not straw men; just more rhetoric on your part. The passage I provided is clear.

(Me) Do you know what a straw man is? For our purposes, it is the misrepresentation of a position, whether purposely or not. I have provided a description of popular Protestant exegesis of this passage, which is not simply useless rhetoric, for it is the statement of a position, not the argument for that position. Few of your arguments appear to understand our position, whether on this passage or on justification, faith, and works.

(Previous) James actually says, "Can that faith save him" -- that is, the kind of faith that is not accompanied by works. There is a definite article preceding pistis (faith) -- the feminine form of ho. That is why you'll scarcely find a non-Catholic translation with does not include the pronoun -- because the existence of the pronoun, if translated as demonstrative, would destroy the Catholic exegesis.

(Dave) Now that statement about translations is just plain goofy! In my Catholic Bible, it uses the pronoun too. The presence of the article changes nothing, and you haven't proved that it does.

(Me) Your argument hinged upon the fact that it said "Can faith save him?" However, if it says, "Can that faith save him?" it seems that James is talking about real faith versus fake faith. And, Protestant exegesis is based on such a position -- namely, that James is pitting fake, "demonic" faith ("God is one") against real faith, that is justified (proven right) by works.

(Previous) James asked his objector to "show me your faith" -- clearly this is a request for evidence to a person.

(Dave) So what? Your point?

(Me) The Roman Catholic view takes the justification in this passage to be soteriological, the Protestant epistemological (evidential). "Show me" demonstrates that James is concerned with the evidence of faith, not that the soteriological justification by faith be increased by soteriological justification by works.

(Dave) James 2:21 - James also appeals to the example of Abraham. Abraham's justification refers to his position before God, not men. This proves justification is before God, not men.

(Previous) Unless the justification in view here is simply the proving true of his supposed salvation!

(Dave) More conjecture.

(Me) The point I made is simply a point of logic, an unaccounted hermeneutical possibility that you had not given reason to reject. And, inDouche, "show me" is not conjecture. My discussion up through this point has all pointed to this conclusion, and you have not dealt with it.

(Previous) Yes, judgment is according to deeds. And?

(Dave) Which means that they play a role in our justification!

(Me) I have no idea how that follows. I could quote half a dozen Protestant systematics affirming that consummational judgment is according to deeds, but justification is by faith alone. Justification brings the eschatological judgment forward in time to the present, and a "righteous" verdict legally pronounced. This reconciliation is the basis for the consummational verdict, coming through the doorway of deeds. I see no actual contradiction between judgment according to deeds and justification by faith alone. I would also maintain that Paul did not (Romans 2:12 and Romans 4:1-5).

(Previous) Sanctification, yes. However chapter 6 is not talking about justification -- being made right with God. The question is over justification, not sanctification.

(Dave) There's very little difference between the two.

(Me) How not?? Justification is being made right with God, the legal declaration of righteousness, the once-for-all judicial reconciliation. Sanctification is the temporal increase of holiness, the temporal redemption of the soul unto actual righteousness.

(Previous) Which requires justification by works because..?

(Dave) If we were justified by faith alone, God would ignore our good works!

(Me) I don't see why. Sure, you are right to say that the "already" reconciliation is not based on works. But, this does not exclude the reward of covenantal faithfulness in toto! It simply means that we in no way earn our right standing with God.

(Previous) Titus 3:8

The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people.

The fact that they are excellent and profitable does not mean that they justify us.

(Dave) I'm not going to respond to the rest of your silly charges. More than enough biblical proof for my position was given. The fact is, you stubbornly insist on looking at the Bible with biased eyes. You can't do that. You have to do it through the eyes of the Church Jesus Christ founded -- the CATHOLIC CHURCH! It has always taught the same thing for 2000 years and HAS NEVER ERRED.

(Me) I'm a little shocked here. You present a grand total of one passages that can be construed to directly associate actual justification with the instrument of works. I respond to such a claim, but you do not understand my response. Moreover, you do not even understand my position. Then, on the basis of you presenting only one crucially relevant passage, misunderstanding my position, and not seeing my argument, you expect me to be convinced?

I'm sorry, but I would suggest that you stop looking at things with biased eyes. If you do not accurately understand my position, how is it not biased to claim it wrong? If you do not accurately understand my arguments, how is it not biased to claim them wrong? If you do not accurately understand the nature of the debate at hand, how is it not biased to claim it wrong?

(Dave) Besides, "seeking" Christ is a work, "believing" is a work, having faith is a work...

(Me) Faith is labeled as distinct from works in Romans, Ephesians, Galatians, and James. Making such a claim, then, is to argue with Scripture. Yet, I suppose the Magisterium could just "reinterpret" (change) the meaning of these passages, if such a position needed to be maintained.

I don't need to explain anything further. I've given you mountains of evidence, and you ignore it or try and weakly explain it away. Say what you want, but it's YOU who are looking at things with biased eyes. You refuse to stop reading your interpretation into these Bible passages. Isn't the Church, which Jesus endowed with infallibility, more sure of being right than a fallible individual such as yourself? All your counter-arguments have done is show that you're grasping at straws to salvage your position. You asked earlier how I could expect you to be convinced if I supposedly don't give you enough evidence. The fact is, buddy, you don't want to be convinced! You came here to try and convert others to your way of thinking! You'll never succeed, so it's time for you to give up.

[cmotherofpirl]

Guys its very basic really.

Faith without works is dead.We are justified when we are baptised and we "work our our salvation in fear and trembling."

Notice the word "work"?