"Grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone"

[thessalonian]

I got this off a LMCS website from a friend at work.

"Lutherans believe that a person is saved by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. The Roman Catholic Church, while at times using similar language, still officially holds that faith, in order to save, must be accompanied by (or "infused with") some "work" or "love" active within a Christian. "


Here is the deal. If one is saved by grace alone through FAITH ALONE that implies that one always has faith on the path of salvation. Yet before the point of salvation, we know that God's grace must be acting to bring us to faith. Otherwise the point at which we attain faith was not reached by grace. Most certainly before that point God must be credited with bring about our salvatoin even though we did not have faith, so how can one say we were saved by faith alone? On the other hand there seems to be a denial of the effects of grace AFTER one comes to faith. The grace through faith brings about the work. Anyway, just my thoughts. If anyone would like to add or subtract anything mucho gracious.

[Laudate_Dominum]

"holds that faith, in order to save, must be accompanied by (or "infused with") some "work" or "love" active within a Christian."

Ok, so faith without works is dead. And faith, hope and love.. etc. but the greatest of these is love.. without love I am nothing, etc..

Whose being Biblical here?

[thessalonian]

LD,

Your point is a good one. Thank you for it. Do you understand my point? Salvation MUST begin before we have faith. We MUST credit God and his grace for bringing about that part of our salvation. Therefore faith is not a part of that part of our salvation equation and so we cannot say that faith alone is true. Make sense?

It may be a matter of perspective or a language issue because we cannot really say we are "saved" at that point. I do however consider the example of cornelius. Peter was said to have brought salvation to his house, yet quite obviously God was working in his life before this moment.

Edited May 10, 2006 by thessalonian

[Laudate_Dominum]

I think I follow what you're saying. And its true that grace precedes faith because faith itself is a supernatural virtue which transcends our natural capacities. I've encountered people with an extreme view which tends to reduce faith to just some kind of assent to a proposition. But if you deny that faith itself is a grace, and that attaining true faith is a cooperation with grace (the catholic perspective) then you're pretty much saying that the locus of grace and salvation is your own mind and will. In other words you are in a certain sense a Pelagian because the foundation of supernatural life becomes a work which you do apart from grace (namely this act of assent). I suppose generally this is a crude charicature of the typical protestant view on the subject, but I have encountered it in this form and its quite ironic.

[thessalonian]

Yes. It is very ironic. They end up with the same problem they are trying to resolve in the back end of the equation. Faith vs. works. Thanks for expounding. That helped by point.

There was a guy on prot radio here that stopped talking about faith as a part of salvation for the very reason you site.

Edited May 10, 2006 by thessalonian

[Andreas E.]

[quote name='thessalonian' post='977341' date='May 10 2006, 06:59 AM']
Yes. It is very ironic. They end up with the same problem they are trying to resolve in the back end of the equation. Faith vs. works. Thanks for expounding. That helped by point.

There was a guy on prot radio here that stopped talking about faith as a part of salvation for the very reason you site.
[/quote]

Sorry to budge in here. I believe that you cannot be saved by works, but by grace through faith alone. That faith, as you correctly said is God's grace as well. I cannot produce it. How works play into the equation is that they are an outward sign of your being saved through faith, as faith without works is dead. Your works are a result of faith. "Consider their fruits." If works were part of salvation, it would discredit and nullify Christ's sacrifice in shedding his blood for our sins at the cross.

[N/A Gone]

***directs everyone to the Joint declaration between Luth and Catholic on this subject....good stuff

[Andreas E.]

I googled and read it. I'm not Lutheran, and I must say I agree neither with the Catholic nor Lutheran "version" of justification.

Since I received most of my knowledge through the Baptist Church I attended, I am seeing it from that perspective. Baptism does not save you. It is an outward expression in front of the congregation of your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. It is also a step of faith, as Jesus commands us to be baptized.

What justifies you is the blood of Jesus Christ shed for our sins. By grace through (God-given) faith you become a new creation. The old has passed away, including original sin. You start with a clean slate. It's not just a covering, as the Lutherans believe. However, since we still have the human sin nature in us, (which over time the Holy Spirit will help you work on in through conviction in the process of sanctification), we do sin. Upon conviction, all we have to do is ask the Lord for forgiveness, and he will do so, as he promised he would. The life of a Christian is falling and getting up, falling, and getting up, falling, and getting up, all the way into heaven.

[MC IMaGiNaZUN]

[quote name='Andreas E.' post='978139' date='May 11 2006, 07:01 AM']
I googled and read it. I'm not Lutheran, and I must say I agree neither with the Catholic nor Lutheran "version" of justification.

Since I received most of my knowledge through the Baptist Church I attended, I am seeing it from that perspective. Baptism does not save you. It is an outward expression in front of the congregation of your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. It is also a step of faith, as Jesus commands us to be baptized.

What justifies you is the blood of Jesus Christ shed for our sins. By grace through (God-given) faith you become a new creation. The old has passed away, including original sin. You start with a clean slate. It's not just a covering, as the Lutherans believe. However, since we still have the human sin nature in us, (which over time the Holy Spirit will help you work on in through conviction in the process of sanctification), we do sin. Upon conviction, all we have to do is ask the Lord for forgiveness, and he will do so, as he promised he would. The life of a Christian is falling and getting up, falling, and getting up, falling, and getting up, all the way into heaven.
[/quote]

Well, first of all, let me start off by saying in general, i am convinced by my personal experience that faith is IMPOSSIBLE as a natural human thing. FAITH must be a supernatural gift. However, Faith, just as all Grace, must be accepted and cooperated with.

BTW, Jesus says in the Gospel of John: "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven." (John 3: 5) That is pretty clear it doesnt need any explanation.

Thanks for your discussion. We, as Catholics do accept that necessity of Baptism as it has been since the foundation of the Church. We do recognize that Baptism does depend upon Christ's salvific work upon the Cross. But, since we as Catholics have such an emphasis on Grace (which if i am not mistaken your Baptist Church probably does not), that Grace is still transmitted and recieved sacramentally, regardless of whether one wants it willingly. This is an act of mercy, clearly understood.

SHALOM

[thessalonian]

[quote name='Andreas E.' date='May 11 2006, 07:01 AM' post='978139']
I googled and read it. I'm not Lutheran, and I must say I agree neither with the Catholic nor Lutheran "version" of justification.[/quote]

Neither do the Armenians. So who's right in all of this?

[quote]Since I received most of my knowledge through the Baptist Church I attended, I am seeing it from that perspective. [b] Baptism doesn't save you.[/b] It is an outward expression in front of the congregation of your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. It is also a step of faith, as Jesus commands us to be baptized.[/quote]

1Pet.3
[21] Baptism, which corresponds to this,[b] NOW SAVES YOU[/b] not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,



Mark.16
[16] He who believes [b]and is baptized will be saved[/b]; but he who does not believe will be condemned.



[quote]What justifies you is the blood of Jesus Christ shed for our sins. By grace through (God-given) faith you become a new creation.[/quote]


Did you ever think that grace might have to be applied to our lives and that is what happens at baptism. You don't understand grace. It isn't just God being nice and forgetting about our sins. But actually removing sin.

1 John
[8] If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
[9] If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will [b]forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness[/b].

Is 1
though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red like crimson,
they shall become like wool.

Ez 35
[24] For I will take you from the nations, and gather you from all the countries, and bring you into your own land.
[25] I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
[26] A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.
[27] And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances.





[/quote] The old has passed away, including original sin. You start with a clean slate. It's not just a covering, as the Lutherans believe. However, since we still have the human sin nature in us, (which over time the Holy Spirit will help you work on in through conviction in the process of sanctification), we do sin. Upon conviction, all we have to do is ask the Lord for forgiveness, and he will do so, as he promised he would. The life of a Christian is falling and getting up, falling, and getting up, falling, and getting up, all the way into heaven.
[/quote]

Works are a part of sanctification? Is sanctification by grace as well?

[rkwright]

good to see a real debate going on here! welcome Andreas!

[Jnorm888]

[url="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385233175/sr=8-1/qid=1147629068/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-0622972-0534469?%5Fencoding=UTF8"]Romans (Anchor Bible) (Hardcover) He teaches at Catholic University of America[/url]


[url="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0814624545/sr=8-2/qid=1147628783/ref=sr_1_2/002-0622972-0534469?%5Fencoding=UTF8"]The International Bible Commentary: A Catholic and Ecumenical Commentary for the Twenty-First Century[/url]


good point.



I noticed the problem myself some years ago when I found out that the Western Church through Saint Augustine believed that regeneration preceeds faith.


Well if Regeneration preceeds faith which both Luther, Calvin, and Anglicans believe then what is that regeneration(grace)?


If mankind is unable to have faith in God because of the Fall of Adam and Eve then it takes some kind of grace to enable man to have faith in God.


So the question is what is this grace? Is it imputation or infusion?



I think this kind of grace is infusion because it changes something on the inside which allows us to respond in a possitive way towards God.


I think what Luther and Calvin had in mind was a grace after the gift of Faith.

So imputed righteousness was not referring to the regeneration that preceeds faith.


Instead I think their focus was talking about that which comes after the gift of faith.





Andrea, Baptist do believe in the Lutherian view of the blood of Jesus only covering our sins. Baptist tend to believe in once saved always saved. If you believed that His blood sinks into a person then you couldn't really hold on to O.S.A.S ....... instead you would be more of a Weslyian Arminian....Methodist, Holiness, Old school Pentacostal and word of faither who believe more in line with Rome.......when it comes to this topic.


INLOVE Jnorm


P.S. "Now this doesn't mean that Faith alone isn't true. It just means how does one understand the meaning of faith alone after knowing that grace preceeds faith and Love making it active"

Joseph A. Fitzmyer

seems to believe in some form of "faith alone" in his commentary of the book of Romans.

Edited May 14, 2006 by jnorm888

[Andreas E.]

[quote name='jnorm888' post='980920' date='May 14 2006, 09:11 AM']
[url=http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385233175/sr=8-1/qid=1147629068/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-0622972-0534469?%5Fencoding=UTF8]
Andrea, Baptist do believe in the Lutherian view of the blood of Jesus only covering our sins. Baptist tend to believe in once saved always saved. If you believed that His blood sinks into a person then you couldn't really hold on to O.S.A.S ....... instead you would be more of a Weslyian Arminian....Methodist, Holiness, Old school Pentacostal and word of faither who believe more in line with Rome.......when it comes to this topic.
INLOVE Jnorm

[/quote]


thessalonian, you said I did not understand grace. I do believe it comes before faith, as I believe faith is a "concept" given by grace. (I hope this makes sense.) Both are from God. If this is incorrect, please tell me what grace is. I am here to learn.

Jnorm, I do believe that once you're saved you're always saved. I believe that my sins are GONE, not just covered (how else would I be able to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven?) Plus, scripture says that they will be removed as far as the east is from the west, essentially infinitely far away. Honestly, the German Baptist Church I went to did not have anything on their doctrine. Just the evangelical basics. Perhaps this may be why I am first a Christian then a Baptist, and the latter "by name only." I once went to a Congress of the European Baptist Federation. Honestly, I did not like it one bit, as it was mostly about "how great we Baptists are." Not a whole lot of humility. I guess I am not a Baptist after all. I was just looking for a "label," if you will.

BTW, my name is Andreas. I'm a guy. As is Andreas, the disciple of Jesus. Or the San Andreas fault (but it's not mine...)

[Andreas E.]

To quote thessalonian:

Works are a part of sanctification? Is sanctification by grace as well?

Works are "merely" an outward sign that you are saved. They are not necessary for salvation but without them, your faith is doubtful to the human eye. The reason I say that they are not necessary for salvation is because if we could boast even the tiniest bit that we had anything to do with our salvation, Jesus' blood would have been shed for nothing. It's his gift. We can't add anything to it. It would make him less of a Savior than he truly is. All Glory belongs to Him!

I guess in a sense works are part of sanctification. The Holy Spirit convicts of sin, the sinner repents, meaning that he tells the Lord that he is sorry for his sin and strives not to sin again. Since all humans still have the sin nature until they are in their glorified state with the Lord in Heaven, most likely they will sin again. But every time you listen to that still, small voice of the Holy Spirit, and act on it (i.e. works for good or the prevention of sin), you get more in tune with His will. Does this make sense?

[thessalonian]

Andrea,

Thanks for your question. I would be glad to clarify. As I recall this is the statement that caused me to say that you do not understand grace.

"Baptism does not save you. It is an outward expression in front of the congregation of your faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. It is also a step of faith, as Jesus commands us to be baptized.

What justifies you is the blood of Jesus Christ shed for our sins."

If you believe that Baptism does not save you then you do not understand baptism (for that matter) or grace. Peter in 1 Pet 3:20 says "BAPTISM NOW SAVES YOU". This is in direct conflict with what you have said. The reason is because you do not understand that baptism confers the Holy Spirit. Jesus passion allowed for grace to become internal to us. Prior to this grace was external to man, calling out to him in nature and in God's word. But when Christ rose from the dead grace could become infused.

Now the question is when does this happen? Does it happen when we come to faith or when we are baptized? Peter once again tells us "repent and be baptized (they already expressed a certain level of faith, WHAT MUST WE DO" ) for the forgiveness of sins AND YOU SHALL RECIEVE THE HOLY SPIRIT". This is the clean conscience that Peter talks about in 1 Pet 3:20-21. Grace comes in, the grace Jesus Christ earned on the cross through the shedding of his blood. His work on the cross must be applied to our lives and it is through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in us. This begins at baptism. Not at faith as if we can conjure it up ourselves. Baptism is a passive act by which we assent in faith but the minister of baptism does the baptizing. We recieve God's grace. We don't get it for ourselves through our act of faith. It is not our work but his. Jesus died 2000 years ago but his grace must be brought forward and appplied to our lives. This is done through the sacraments. The Eucharist is our food for the journey through the desert of life. Food for our souls. It is grace applied as well. "Unless you eat the flesh of the son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life within you". "my flesh is true food, my blood is true drink". You will find these words and much more in John 6. The sacrements are grace for our lives as a gift from God to us to justify and sanctify us. We are saved by grace alone. Faith is a response to grace, not a saving event in itself. Works as well do not save per sey, but they are excercise for a healthy body, filled with grace, that make it strong against vice. All flows from grace.

As for once saved always saved I think Sunday's reading in Mass answers it quite well.

"I am the vine, and My Father is the
vinedresser. [2] Every branch of mine that bears no fruit, He takes
away, and every branch that does bear fruit He prunes that it may bear
more fruit. [3] You are already made clean by the word which I have
spoken to you. [4] Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot
bear fruit by itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you,
unless you abide in Me. [5] I am the vine, you are the branches. He
who abides in Me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for
apart from Me you can do nothing. [6] If a man does not abide in Me,
he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are
gathered, thrown into the fire and burned. [7] If you abide in Me, and
My words abide in you, ask whatever you will, and it shall be done for
you. [8] By this My Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit, and
so prove to be My disciples."


So he is speaking to people who "have been made clean". He is not speaking of those who are not "saved'. He is warning that they MUST abide in him or they cannot bear fruit. Now what sense would it make for him to say "abide in me" if they were never in him. How could they be cut from the vine and BURNED if they were never attached to it? Of course the works that we do are him working in us, producing "thirty, sixty, or 100 fold".


Eph 3
[20]
Now to him who by the power at work within us is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think,
[21] to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, for ever and ever. Amen.

There are of course many other passages that cast great doudt on the OSAS point of view, such as:

Cor.15
[1]
Now I would remind you, brethren, in what terms I preached to you the gospel, which you received, in which you stand,
[2] by which you are saved, if you hold it fast -- unless you believed in vain.

Saved if? Conditional I do believe.

Any questions?

[Andreas E.]

thessalonian, your argument makes perfect sense, (and wheels are starting to turn) but still then how come Jesus can make seemingly contradictory statements? The following reflects my belief of the assurance of salvation. As I feel like Moses when it comes to phrasing my argument, I will let this speak for me. The author is Hank Hanegraaf, a well known apologetic. He heads the Christian Research Institute.

CHRISTIANS AND THE ASSURANCE OF SALVATION

Can Christians lose their salvation? Now that's an important question. Can I be sure that I'm really saved?

Most Christians have probably had moments of doubt about their salvation. After all, we've all entertained thoughts and have committed acts that we knew were displeasing to God. We've all experienced that sense of remorse and sometimes questioned the reality of our salvation afterwards. Backsliding can no doubt cause such feelings to arise, and should hopefully move us to repentance (1 John 1:9).

However, when it comes to the issue of eternal security, the Bible makes it absolutely clear that those who have been saved will never be lost. Jesus emphatically pointed this out in the Gospel of John when, in reference to believers, He said, "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand..." (John 10:28). In this passage, Christ explicitly declared that no one who has received eternal life will ever lose it.

Furthermore, in such passages as 2 Corinthians 1:22, and Ephesians 1:13, the apostle Paul indicated that the Holy Spirit acts as the very seal of God's ownership of the believer; He serves as the guarantee of our inheritance to come - namely, eternal life (John 5:24; 1 John 5:13). In describing our inheritance the apostle Peter used some very powerful words - words like "imperishable," "undefiled," and "unfading" (1 Pet. 1:5). With these words He underscored the everlasting assurance believers have with respect to God's gift of salvation.

Now I know what you're asking: "What about the Christians who have completely abandoned their faith?" Well, judging by what we're told in Scripture we can only conclude that they were never saved from the start. You see, while "once saved, always saved" is true from God's perspective, man only looks at the outward appearance and thus cannot always accurately assess who is really saved in the first place. The question therefore is not whether someone lost their salvation, but whether they had ever had it at all. As Romans chapter eight says, "there is nothing that can separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (v. 38-29). He is the very source of our salvation.

And remember, eternal life that comes to the believer through faith in Christ is not life for two weeks, two months, or even two years; eternal life is everlasting life. It begins at the moment of conversion and stretches on through the eons of time.

[thessalonian]

I am familiar with Hank. I listen to him sometimes. I have to say his "research" on Catholicism isn't very good.

I would say in the context of loss of salvation, it is true that one cannot loose a salvation that God knows he will attain. But the verses I quoted above clearly show from our perspective that the scriptures WARN us that we can fall from grace. In fact Paul says it himself.

Gal.5
[4] You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.

Once again you can't be severed from what you were not attached to. You cannot have fallen from a tree you were never in. Neither can you fall from grace if you were not in it.

Hank quotes:

"I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand..." (John 10:28).

The fact of the matter is that over and over we are told we must abide in Christ. We must continue to follow him. It is not a one time deal. The question that divides us is can one be in grace and then fall from it. Be in Christ and then fall away. The scriptures are clear on this matter. Such a person did have eternal life. But fell away as we are told that some will do. No one snatched them away as Hank's verse says. They have free will and chose to turn away. Grace is not irresistable. God does not force us to persevere, though he gives us the grace to if we are called to grace. God knows who will be saved from his perspective but from our perspective we must persevere in grace. There is no passage that says men cannot come to grace and fall from it. Once again, hank also misunderstands the catholic view of grace as well. Grace is not just God being nice and forgetting our past. God is alive in us and that brings grace that guides us about.

Now are there some who "were never really one of us". Most certainly from God's perspective there are some who will not attain salvation. Hank puts them all in to one category. Never were in grace. But the passage does not say that. Judas is said to be "my trusted friend" in the Psalms. This to me indicates that at some point he was in grace, though I cannot say for sure. But it is possible also there are those who are in grace and fall from grace and also those who are never really in it in the first place. At any rate bottom line is Hank does not take a global approach to scripture.

Blessings

[Andreas E.]

Thanks everyone who answered and discussed my questions with me over the last few days. I am seriously thinking about converting. One last question, though: since all local parishes are centered around the same faith, are they essentially the same? This may be an odd question, but as some reformed converts will attest, you have to go "church shopping" before you may find one where you agree with the teaching. Since Roman Catholic teaching is the same, I would think that this should not be an issue. However, it appears that Scott Hahn had some issues with priests and had to go higher up to get concrete answers.

[Franimus]

[quote name='Andreas E.' post='987996' date='May 22 2006, 11:44 PM']
Thanks everyone who answered and discussed my questions with me over the last few days. I am seriously thinking about converting. One last question, though: since all local parishes are centered around the same faith, are they essentially the same? This may be an odd question, but as some reformed converts will attest, you have to go "church shopping" before you may find one where you agree with the teaching. Since Roman Catholic teaching is the same, I would think that this should not be an issue. However, it appears that Scott Hahn had some issues with priests and had to go higher up to get concrete answers.
[/quote]

There are no differences in beliefs. There may be slight differences in customs (such as not leaving before the recessional hymn ends, or singing alelulia again after the gospel, or regularly distributing the Eucharist in the form of wine additionally, or regularly using inscence, etc), the music style might differ, obviously the building itself will differ, the congregation will differ (some are loud, some outgoing, some quiet, some old, some young, some rich, some poor), and the style of the individual priest will differ (some priests are loud, some quiet, some in-your-face, some laid back, some strict, some boring, some funny). If there are any doctrinal differences, something is wrong (i.e. if a priest is teaching that the Eucharist is not the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus, that priest is "not in communion with the Church," that priest basically deserves one of those "hello, i do not rep the church" signs). You shouldn't have to worry about that, though.

Typically, various churches (or parishes, to make it easier to distinguish from the Catholic Church) within a diocese (like a county) are pretty similar since they're close to each other and may have many common customs.

[Andreas E.]

Thanks, that makes sense.

Wish me all the best in "sliding!" :