The Catholics and my conclusion

[epostle]

Genuine belief is enough ...message truncated... good works argument is a deception that is keeping Roman Catholics in bondage to WORKS SALVATION, which is NO SALVATION AT ALL! Paul NOWHERE says that we are justified by faith AND WORKS or that we are saved through faith AND WORKS. Catholicism confuses ongoing sanctification with justification and has replaced IMPUTED righteousness (Romans 4:6) with "infused" righteousness and the word "infused" is nowhere found in the Bible. What a mess! Catholicism is a satanic deceptive nightmare! Thank God I escaped from that nightmare and found freedom in Christ! Praise God!!!

Scripture does not separate good works from faith. They are intricately connected.

Francis Beckwith resigned on May 5 as president of the Evangelical Theological Society. One week earlier the Baylor University philosophy professor rejoined the Roman Catholic Church, his home until age 14. He spoke with Christianity Today editor David Neff about the reaction to his decision, theological misconceptions, and evangelical strengths and weaknesses.

What good things from the evangelical community will you take back with you to Roman Catholicism?
A number of things. First, I think of the evangelical emphasis on the importance of Scripture. Much of what I see in the Catholic Church is formed by my evangelical experience. When I recite, for instance, the Apostles' Creed, I think it's more of a cognitive experience for me than with people who have been Catholic for some time. Emphasis on the written word comes from my evangelical background—that is, when I read these things, I'm really interested in what the text is saying, not just the mystical part, which is certainly also appropriate. For instance, after reading the Apostles' Creed, I turned to my wife and I said, "You know, there are only two proper names in the creed—Pontius Pilate and Virgin Mary. I don't know if anyone's ever noticed that."

I still consider myself an evangelical, but no longer a Protestant. I do think I have a better understanding of what sometimes the Catholic Church is trying to convey. Protestants often misunderstand. The issue of justification was key for me. The Catholic Church frames the Christian life as one in which you must exercise virtue—not because virtue saves you, but because that's the way God's grace gets manifested. As an evangelical, even when I talked about sanctification and wanted to practice it, it seemed as if I didn't have a good enough incentive to do so.

Now there's a kind of theological framework, and it doesn't say my salvation depends on me, but it says my virtue counts for something. It's important to allow the grace of God to be exercised through your actions. The evangelical emphasis on the moral life forms my Catholic practice with an added incentive. That was liberating to me.

Some of the people who have been critical say, "You've gone into the oppressive works system of Catholicism." That's not the way I look at it at all. I look at it as a chance to do good. My own work apart from God's grace doesn't matter for my salvation; what matters is the sort of person I become by allowing God's grace to work through my obeying his commandments and taking the sacraments. Unfortunately, the view of justification is sometimes presented clumsily by some Catholic laypeople.
Q&A: Francis Beckwith | Christianity Today

Do you still think the grace of God exercised through our actions is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"? Please educate yourself on what Catholics actually believe about faith and works, instead of making things up.

"...The term pistis is used in the Bible in a number of different senses, ranging from intellectual belief (Romans 14:22

, 23

, James 2:19

), to assurance (Acts 17:31

), and even to trustworthiness or reliability (Romans 3:3

, Titus 2:10

). Of key importance is Galatians 5:6

, which refers to “faith working by charity.” In Catholic theology, this is what is known as fides formata or “faith formed by charity.” The alternative to formed faith is fides informis or “faith unformed by charity.” This is the kind of faith described in James 2:19

, for example.

Whether a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone depends on what sense the term “faith” is being used in. If it is being used to refer to unformed faith then a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone (which is the point James is making in James 2:19

, as every non-antinomian Evangelical agrees; one is not justified by intellectual belief alone)...

"...However, if the term “faith” is being used to refer to faith formed by charity then the Catholic does not have to condemn the idea of justification by faith alone. In fact, in traditional works of Catholic theology, one regularly encounters the statement that formed faith is justifying faith. If one has formed faith, one is justified. Period.

A Catholic would thus reject the idea of justification sola fide informi but wholeheartedly embrace the idea of justification sola fide formata. Adding the word “formed” to clarify the nature of the faith in “sola fide” renders the doctrine completely acceptable to a Catholic.

Why, then, do Catholics not use the term in this regard, we would have to say, “Jesus is not God.” Obviously, the Church could not have people running around saying “Jesus is God” and “Jesus is not God,” though both would be perfectly consistent with the Trinity depending on how the term “God” is being used (i.e., as a noun or a proper name for the Father). Hopeless confusion (and charges of heresy, and bloodbaths) would have resulted in the early centuries if the Church did not specify the meaning of the term “God” when used in this context.

Of course, the Bible uses the term “God” in both senses, but to avoid confusion (and heretical misunderstandings on the part of the faithful, who could incline to either Arianism or Modalism if they misread the word “God” in the above statements) it later became necessary to adopt one usage over the other when discussing the identity of Jesus.

​

A similar phenomenon occurs in connection with the word “faith.” Evangelical leaders know this by personal experience since they have to continually fight against antinomian understandings of the term “faith” (and the corresponding antinomian evangelistic practices and false conversions that result). Because “faith” is such a key term, it is necessary that each theological school have a fixed usage of it in practice, even though there is more than one use of the term in the Bible. Evangelical leaders, in response to the antinomianism that has washed over the American church scene in the last hundred and fifty years, are attempting to impose a uniform usage to the term “faith” in their community to prevent these problems. (And may they have good luck in this, by the way.)

This leads me to why Catholics do not use the formula “faith alone.” Given the different usages of the term “faith” in the Bible, the early Church had to decide which meaning would be treated as normative. Would it be the Galatians 5 sense or the Romans 14/James 2 sense? The Church opted for the latter for several reasons:

First, the Romans 14 sense of the term pistis is frankly the more common in the New Testament. It is much harder to think of passages which demand that pistis mean “faith formed by charity” than it is to think of passages which demand that pistis mean “intellectual belief.” In fact, even inGalatians 5:6

itself, Paul has to specify that it is faith formed by charity that he is talking about, suggesting that this is not the normal use of the term in his day.

Second, the New Testament regularly (forty-two times in the KJV) speaks of “the faith,” meaning a body of theological beliefs (e.g. Jude 3

). The connection between pistis and intellectual belief is clearly very strong in this usage.

Third, Catholic theology has focused on the triad of faith, hope, and charity, which Paul lays great stress on and which is found throughout his writings, not just in 1 Corinthians 13:13

(though that is the locus classicus for it), including places where it is not obvious because of the English translation or the division of verses. If in this triad “faith” is taken to mean “formed faith” then hope and charity are collapsed into faith and the triad is flattened. To preserve the distinctiveness of each member of the triad, the Church chose to use the term “faith” in a way that did not include within it the ideas of hope (trust) and charity (love). Only by doing this could the members of the triad be kept from collapsing into one another.

Thus the Catholic Church normally expresses the core essences of these virtues like this:

• Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that he has said and revealed to us . . . because he is truth itself. (CCC 1814)
• Hope is the theological virtue by which we desire the kingdom of heaven and eternal life as our happiness, placing our trust in Christ’s promises and relying not on our own strength, but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit. (CCC 1817)
• Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for his own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God. (CCC 1822)
  

mailmandan, Do you still think this is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"?

In common Catholic usage, faith is thus unconditional belief in what God says, hope is unconditional trust in God, and charity is unconditional love for God. When we are justified, God places all three of these virtues in our hearts. These virtues are given to each of the justified, even though our outward actions do not always reflect them because of the fallen nature we still possess. Thus a person may still have the virtue of faith even if momentarily tempted by doubt, a person may still have the virtue of trust even if scared or tempted by despair, and a person may still have the virtue of charity even if he is often selfish. Only a direct, grave violation (mortal sin against) of one of the virtues destroys the virtue.

As our sanctification progresses, these virtues within us are strengthened by God and we are able to more easily exercise faith, more easily exercise trust, and more easily exercise love. Performing acts of faith, hope, and charity becomes easier as we grow in the Christian life (note the great difficulty new converts often experience in these areas compared to those who have attained a measure of spiritual maturity).
mailmandan, Do you still think this is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"?

However, so long as one has any measure of faith, hope, and charity, one is in a state of justification. Thus Catholics often use the soteriological slogan that we are “saved by faith, hope, and charity.” This does not disagree with the Protestant soteriological slogan that we are “saved by faith alone” if the term “faith” is understood in the latter to be faith formed by charity or Galatians 5 faith.
mailmandan, is there any hope of flexibility in your rigid preconceived notions or do you prefer remaining in spiritual infancy??

I've met plenty of good Protestants who are justified by faith, hope and charity, they just think it's faith alone. Itdoesn't have to be a divisive issue.

 

[KenAllan]

Again epostle you have misinterpreted the Scriptures.

John 8:31-32
31 Jesus therefore was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, " If you abide in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine;
32 and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."

If you look closely at this verse John 8:31, Jesus was talking to those who has Faith. He was not talking to those who had no Faith.

Abiding in his Word is not Works because we abide in His Word by Faith!

You are correct when you say mere belief is not enough.

Its BY Faith we believe that Jesus is God. Its BY Faith we accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior. Its BY Faith we receive salvation. Its BY Faith we become Righteous. Its BY Faith we become Justified. Its BY Faith we become Sanctified.

We do not believe Jesus is God by our Works. We do not accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior by Works. We do not receive Salvation by Works. We do not become Righteous by our Works. We do not become Justified by our Works. We do not become Sanctified by our Works.

Everything that come by Works and NOT by Faith IS a sin epostle!

Romans 14:23
[SUP]23 [/SUP]whatever is not from Faith is sin.

The Faith God is talking about is the Faith we receive from God. The Faith we have comes from God. Its by Faith we receive anything from God. Its by Faith that we do Works. We DO NOT do Works to receive Faith because by doing Works to receive Faith you are sinning!

If you believe you work off the Stain of your sins in Purgatory, you are sinning!

If you believe we do Works to receive Faith, you are sinning!

Everything that involves Works IS A SIN epostle!

Everything you do epostle without Faith from God IS A SIN!

Everything we do is by Faith ONLY epostle, not by Works.

This is what you need to understand because without Faith you cannot enter into Heaven. You cannot work your way into Heaven epostle.

 

[epostle]

You can see that Catholicism does not teach "salvation by works". She never has. In fact, it was a heresy condemned by the Church in the 6th century, 1000 years before the first Protestant was born. Yet the myth won't go away.

 

[epostle]

Smooth words, Latria, dulia, hyperduli. These words are used to deceive the hearts of the simple people.

You can google them. Simple people can look them up. You refuse to because simple definitions demolish your hateful insults.

 

[Mec99]

I did look them up epostle. These words are NOT in the Scriptures. You will not find these words in the Scriptures.

Like i said epostle these words were created BY the Catholic Church to justify the Worshiping of Mary.

The definitions of these words come from the Catholic Church. If you look in the Dictionary these words are listed as from Roman Catholic Theology.

These words are used by the Catholic Church to deceive people into accepting the Worship of Mary as being from God.

Luke 4:8
[SUP]8 [/SUP] For it is written, 'You shall worship the LORD your God, and Him only you shall serve.'

The Catholic Church has deceived you epostle into thinking there is nothing wrong with worshiping Mary. You need to understand epostle its God and God only we go to for everything we want or need.

Mary can do nothing for us, only God can. Mary cannot hear our prayers to her. Mary cannot answer our prayers to her. Mary is dead and in the grave just like everyone else.

Pray only to God. Only God can hear our prayers and only God can answer our prayers.

 

[Magenta]

You can google them. Simple people can look them up. You refuse to because simple definitions demolish your hateful insults.

Why do you find the simple Truth of God's Word insulting?
Why must you add all manner of beliefs to it?

 

[mailmandan]

Scripture does not separate good works from faith. They are intricately connected.

Faith is the ROOT and good works are the FRUIT of salvation. No fruit would demonstrate that there is no root. Good works are the fruit, by product and demonstrative evidence of faith, but not the essence of faith and not the means of our salvation. In essence, faith is not good works, yet genuine faith produces good works. So good works are separated from faith as the root of salvation, but not as the fruit of salvation.

Francis Beckwith resigned on May 5 as president of the Evangelical Theological Society. One week earlier the Baylor University philosophy professor rejoined the Roman Catholic Church, his home until age 14. He spoke with Christianity Today editor David Neff about the reaction to his decision, theological misconceptions, and evangelical strengths and weaknesses.

What good things from the evangelical community will you take back with you to Roman Catholicism?
A number of things. First, I think of the evangelical emphasis on the importance of Scripture. Much of what I see in the Catholic Church is formed by my evangelical experience. When I recite, for instance, the Apostles' Creed, I think it's more of a cognitive experience for me than with people who have been Catholic for some time. Emphasis on the written word comes from my evangelical background—that is, when I read these things, I'm really interested in what the text is saying, not just the mystical part, which is certainly also appropriate. For instance, after reading the Apostles' Creed, I turned to my wife and I said, "You know, there are only two proper names in the creed—Pontius Pilate and Virgin Mary. I don't know if anyone's ever noticed that."

I still consider myself an evangelical, but no longer a Protestant. I do think I have a better understanding of what sometimes the Catholic Church is trying to convey. Protestants often misunderstand. The issue of justification was key for me. The Catholic Church frames the Christian life as one in which you must exercise virtue—not because virtue saves you, but because that's the way God's grace gets manifested. As an evangelical, even when I talked about sanctification and wanted to practice it, it seemed as if I didn't have a good enough incentive to do so.

Now there's a kind of theological framework, and it doesn't say my salvation depends on me, but it says my virtue counts for something. It's important to allow the grace of God to be exercised through your actions. The evangelical emphasis on the moral life forms my Catholic practice with an added incentive. That was liberating to me.

Some of the people who have been critical say, "You've gone into the oppressive works system of Catholicism." That's not the way I look at it at all. I look at it as a chance to do good. My own work apart from God's grace doesn't matter for my salvation; what matters is the sort of person I become by allowing God's grace to work through my obeying his commandments and taking the sacraments. Unfortunately, the view of justification is sometimes presented clumsily by some Catholic laypeople.
Q&A: Francis Beckwith | Christianity Today

I already read this in a different post. You are repeating yourself.

Do you still think the grace of God exercised through our actions is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"? Please educate yourself on what Catholics actually believe about faith and works, instead of making things up.

I already know what they believe. I've heard what they believe over and over again when I attended the Roman Catholic church and from you in your posts. No one denies that the Roman Catholic church officially rejects salvation "solely by works." You already mentioned it condemned Pelagianism etc.. etc.. But that is not the issue. The problem is two-fold. First, Rome may have officially condemned salvation by "works alone," but it has also officially endorsed salvation through faith and works. Whether by works alone or by faith and works, it's still salvation by works if it's not salvation through faith IN CHRIST ALONE. The grace of God exercised through our actions in order to produce good works that merit for us eternal life is a satanic deceptive nightmare, along with replacing imputed righteousness with infused righteousness and confusing justification with ongoing sanctification. In the end, Catholicism teaches people to trust in works for salvation and NOT CHRIST ALONE and satan knows that as long as he can keep you from TRUSTING IN CHRIST ALONE FOR SALVATION he has you right where he wants you!

"...The term pistis is used in the Bible in a number of different senses, ranging from intellectual belief (Romans 14:22, 23, James 2:19), to assurance (Acts 17:31), and even to trustworthiness or reliability (Romans 3:3, Titus 2:10). Of key importance is Galatians 5:6, which refers to “faith working by charity.” In Catholic theology, this is what is known as fides formata or “faith formed by charity.” The alternative to formed faith is fides informis or “faith unformed by charity.” This is the kind of faith described in James 2:19, for example.

The word "believe" can describe mere mental assent belief, as in (James 2:19), or also include "trust and reliance in Christ for salvation," as in (Acts 16:31). In James 2:19, nobody is questioning the fact that the demons believe "mental assent" that "there is one God" but they do not believe/entrust their spiritual well being to Christ; have faith/reliance upon Christ for salvation. Their trust and reliance is in Satan, as demonstrated by their rebellion in heaven and continuous evil works. I believe "mental assent" that George Washington existed and I also believe in the historical facts about George Washington, but I am not trusting in Him/anything that he accomplished to save my soul. See the difference?

Whether a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone depends on what sense the term “faith” is being used in. If it is being used to refer to unformed faith then a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone (which is the point James is making in James 2:19, as every non-antinomian Evangelical agrees; one is not justified by intellectual belief alone)...

I agree that we are not justified by the kind of faith that remains alone (barren of works) because this is not genuine faith but an empty profession of faith, a dead faith (James 2:14-20). The problem is that the Catholic definition and function of "justification" and "grace" are different than what the Bible teaches. For example, the Catholic Church teaches that justification is the infusion of sanctifying grace or supernatural ability which actually works to make a person objectively righteous and pleasing in the eyes of God. If sustained until death, this grace permits one to merit entrance into heaven because of the righteous life he lived: One actually deserves heaven because one’s own goodness, in part, has earned it. This explains why the basis for justification in Catholic theology is not the fact of Christ’s righteousness being reckoned (imputed) to a believer solely by faith. Rather, it is the fact that—through the sacraments—Christ’s righteousness is infused into our very being so that we progressively become more and more righteous. And on that basis—the fact we have actual righteousness now—we are declared "righteous." Thus, in Catholicism justification occurs primarily by means of the sacraments and good works and not exclusively by personal faith in Jesus Christ. HUGE difference!

"...However, if the term “faith” is being used to refer to faith formed by charity then the Catholic does not have to condemn the idea of justification by faith alone. In fact, in traditional works of Catholic theology, one regularly encounters the statement that formed faith is justifying faith. If one has formed faith, one is justified. Period.

If one has faith that trusts in Christ alone for salvation (and does not trust in works for salvation) then his faith is accounted for righteousness (Romans 4:5-6). The works that follow and are produced out of genuine faith and are the fruit of salvation, not the means of salvation.

A Catholic would thus reject the idea of justification sola fide informi but wholeheartedly embrace the idea of justification sola fide formata. Adding the word “formed” to clarify the nature of the faith in “sola fide” renders the doctrine completely acceptable to a Catholic.

In other words, after Catholics "shoe horn" works into faith, then they would agree that we are saved through faith, even though it's really saved through faith AND WORKS.

Why, then, do Catholics not use the term in this regard, we would have to say, “Jesus is not God.” Obviously, the Church could not have people running around saying “Jesus is God” and “Jesus is not God,” though both would be perfectly consistent with the Trinity depending on how the term “God” is being used (i.e., as a noun or a proper name for the Father). Hopeless confusion (and charges of heresy, and bloodbaths) would have resulted in the early centuries if the Church did not specify the meaning of the term “God” when used in this context.

Of course, the Bible uses the term “God” in both senses, but to avoid confusion (and heretical misunderstandings on the part of the faithful, who could incline to either Arianism or Modalism if they misread the word “God” in the above statements) it later became necessary to adopt one usage over the other when discussing the identity of Jesus.

A similar phenomenon occurs in connection with the word “faith.” Evangelical leaders know this by personal experience since they have to continually fight against antinomian understandings of the term “faith” (and the corresponding antinomian evangelistic practices and false conversions that result). Because “faith” is such a key term, it is necessary that each theological school have a fixed usage of it in practice, even though there is more than one use of the term in the Bible. Evangelical leaders, in response to the antinomianism that has washed over the American church scene in the last hundred and fifty years, are attempting to impose a uniform usage to the term “faith” in their community to prevent these problems. (And may they have good luck in this, by the way.)

Jesus is God and we are saved through faith based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption alone and not on the merits of our works. Simple as that. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Faith is faith and works are works.

 

[mailmandan]

This leads me to why Catholics do not use the formula “faith alone.” Given the different usages of the term “faith” in the Bible, the early Church had to decide which meaning would be treated as normative. Would it be the Galatians 5 sense or the Romans 14/James 2 sense? The Church opted for the latter for several reasons:

Those who opt for salvation based on works (whether works alone or faith and works, even if it's only works in part) do it for this reason in 2 Corinthians 4:3,4.

First, the Romans 14 sense of the term pistis is frankly the more common in the New Testament. It is much harder to think of passages which demand that pistis mean “faith formed by charity” than it is to think of passages which demand that pistis mean “intellectual belief.” In fact, even inGalatians 5:6 itself, Paul has to specify that it is faith formed by charity that he is talking about, suggesting that this is not the normal use of the term in his day.

Faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Christ goes beyond mere intellectual belief in the existence and historical facts about Christ. There is a difference between - I simply believe that the death, burial and resurrection of Christ "happened" and I trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the all-sufficient means of my salvation. Many religious people have "intellectual belief" in Jesus but then their trust and reliance is in works for salvation and is not in Christ alone. *That's the problem.

Second, the New Testament regularly (forty-two times in the KJV) speaks of “the faith,” meaning a body of theological beliefs (e.g. Jude 3). The connection between pistis and intellectual belief is clearly very strong in this usage.

Third, Catholic theology has focused on the triad of faith, hope, and charity, which Paul lays great stress on and which is found throughout his writings, not just in 1 Corinthians 13:13 (though that is the locus classicus for it), including places where it is not obvious because of the English translation or the division of verses. If in this triad “faith” is taken to mean “formed faith” then hope and charity are collapsed into faith and the triad is flattened. To preserve the distinctiveness of each member of the triad, the Church chose to use the term “faith” in a way that did not include within it the ideas of hope (trust) and charity (love). Only by doing this could the members of the triad be kept from collapsing into one another.

If we have faith then we have hope. Faith is the substance of things hoped for.. (Hebrews 11:1). The character of faith is love (faith works through love), but we are not saved by accomplishing acts of love/good works etc.. but through faith in Christ.

Thus the Catholic Church normally expresses the core essences of these virtues like this:

At it's core, the Roman Catholic church teaches salvation by works, even though it's not works alone, it's still works are part of the equation as the basis/means of receiving eternal life. Christ then becomes an insufficient Savior.

Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that he has said and revealed to us . . . because he is truth itself. (CCC 1814)
Hope is the theological virtue by which we desire the kingdom of heaven and eternal life as our happiness, placing our trust in Christ’s promises and relying not on our own strength, but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit. (CCC 1817)
Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for his own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God. (CCC 1822)
mailmandan, Do you still think this is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"?

Your sugar coated version of salvation by works (saved by good works, just not works of the law) nonsense, along with imputed righteousness replaced with infused righteousness and justification confused with ongoing sanctification is a satanic deceptive nightmare. Some truth may still get mixed in but it's not enough truth to reverse perverting the gospel. Even 90% pure water and 10% cyanide can still kill you and Catholicism doesn't even teach 90% truth.

In common Catholic usage, faith is thus unconditional belief in what God says, hope is unconditional trust in God, and charity is unconditional love for God. When we are justified, God places all three of these virtues in our hearts.

Trusting in works for salvation does not reflect faith, hope or love for God, but for your church and it's system of works. These virtues are given to each of the justified, even though our outward actions do not always reflect them because of the fallen nature we still possess. Thus a person may still have the virtue of faith even if momentarily tempted by doubt, a person may still have the virtue of trust even if scared or tempted by despair, and a person may still have the virtue of charity even if he is often selfish. Only a direct, grave violation (mortal sin against) of one of the virtues destroys the virtue.[/QUOTE] The word translated faith is found in the Greek lexicon of the Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance and is defined as follows: #4102; pistis; persuasion, i.e. credence; moral conviction (of religious truth, or the truthfulness of God or a religious teacher), *especially reliance upon Christ for salvation*; abstractly, constancy in such profession; by extension, the system of religious (Gospel) truth itself:--assurance, belief, believe, faith, fidelity. The word translated believe is from the greek word pisteuō which means "to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing), that is, credit; by implication to entrust (especially one’s spiritual well being to Christ). The Greek words for "pistis" and "pisteuo" are two forms of the same word. "Pistis" is the noun form, "pisteuo" is the verb form. Nothing in the root meaning of either word carries any concept of works. If you believe/have faith in Christ for salvation, then you are trusting in Him alone to save you. This belief/faith (will to one degree or the other) result in actions appropriate to the belief (all Christians are fruitful, but not all are equally fruitful) - but the actions are NOT INHERENT in the belief/faith.

As our sanctification progresses, these virtues within us are strengthened by God and we are able to more easily exercise faith, more easily exercise trust, and more easily exercise love. Performing acts of faith, hope, and charity becomes easier as we grow in the Christian life (note the great difficulty new converts often experience in these areas compared to those who have attained a measure of spiritual maturity).
mailmandan, Do you still think this is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"?

I never said that our sanctification process and progress is a satanic deceptive nightmare, but your works based false gospel certainly is. I understand that new believers start out as babes in Christ then progress to maturity in Christ. That's not the main issue here.

However, so long as one has any measure of faith, hope, and charity, one is in a state of justification. Thus Catholics often use the soteriological slogan that we are “saved by faith, hope, and charity.” This does not disagree with the Protestant soteriological slogan that we are “saved by faith alone” if the term “faith” is understood in the latter to be faith formed by charity or Galatians 5 faith.

Did Paul say saved through faith and acts of charity/good works in Ephesians 2:8,9? If we have faith, then we have hope because faith is the substance of things hoped for. If we have faith then the character of faith is love. Faith works through love. The moment that we place our faith (belief, trust, reliance) exclusively in Christ for salvation, before we perform any acts of charity/good works, we are saved based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption ALONE​ and not on the merits of our works. We are not saved through faith in Christ plus our works.

mailmandan, is there any hope of flexibility in your rigid preconceived notions or do you prefer remaining in spiritual infancy??

You are not qualified to make that judgment call. The Lord knows my heart and where I stand in regards to infancy or maturity, you don't. Is there any hope of flexibility in your rigid preconceived notions or do you prefer remaining in unbelief? Trusting in works for salvation (even if it's only in part) and NOT IN CHRIST ALONE = unbelief. Faith that falls short of trusting 100% in Christ for salvation = unbelief.

I've met plenty of good Protestants who are justified by faith, hope and charity, they just think it's faith alone. It doesn't have to be a divisive issue.

You just can't accept that Christ saves us through faith based on the merits of His finished work of redemption ALONE and not based on the merits of our works. You are determined to "add" your works, whether it be the sacraments or works of charity to the cross. I've already explained to you numerous times what a genuine believer means by salvation through faith (rightly understood) IN CHRIST ALONE. Martin Luther was right when he said, "We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is never alone." Allow me to clarify. - We are saved by faith (THAT TRUSTS IN CHRIST) alone (FOR SALVATION), but the faith that saves is never alone (SOLITARY, UNFRUITFUL, BARREN) IF IT IS GENUINE. Not hard to understand, just hard for Roman Catholics to ACCEPT.

 

[MikeHenderson]

Most people here are missing the point. Its God who calls us, its God who chooses us, and its God who gives us the Faith to accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior. There is nothing we can do by our self to receive the Faith needed to accept God.

Not everyone is chosen by God to enter into Heaven. God see's in the future who will and will not accept Him as their Lord and Savior, and based on this He gives to those who chose Him the Faith needed to chose Him.

There is a very high probability that epostle was not chosen by God to receive the Faith needed to chose God as his Lord and Savior.

We by our self do not seek out God. Its God who comes looking for us.

I believe this is why most Catholics reject the Scriptures to follow Catholicism instead.

 

[KenAllan]

I find what you have said Mike interesting because the Scriptures do say what you are saying.

Romans 3:11-12
[SUP]11 [/SUP] There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God.
[SUP]12 [/SUP] They have all turned aside; They have together become unprofitable; There is none who does good, no, not one."

Its interesting that God does say there is NONE who seeks Him and i do believe He is talking about the Catholics here in this verse.

This does explain a lot about what epostle and other Catholics believe in and why they believe in them.

 

[epostle]

Faith is the ROOT and good works are the FRUIT of salvation. No fruit would demonstrate that there is no root. Good works are the fruit, by product and demonstrative evidence of faith, but not the essence of faith and not the means of our salvation. In essence, faith is not good works, yet genuine faith produces good works. So good works are separated from faith as the root of salvation, but not as the fruit of salvation.

I am not confusing justification with salvation.

I already read this in a different post. You are repeating yourself.

You may have read it, but you can't seem to comprehend it. I had to repeat myself. You still can't comprehend it.

I already know what they believe. I've heard what they believe over and over again when I attended the Roman Catholic church and from you in your posts. No one denies that the Roman Catholic church officially rejects salvation "solely by works." You already mentioned it condemned Pelagianism etc.. etc.. But that is not the issue. The problem is two-fold. First, Rome may have officially condemned salvation by "works alone," but it has also officially endorsed salvation through faith and works.

What's wrong with that? It's called Christianity. There are many passages in Scripture where Jesus and the sacred writers teach that works are required for salvation. For example, in the parable of the talents, Jesus teaches that those who increased their talents with good works were saved. Those who buried their talents by not doing good works were condemned (Matt 25:14-30).

When Jesus comes at the end of the world, He grants salvation based upon what we have actually done, not how much faith we had (Matt 25:31-46; 16:27). Jesus determines our eternal destiny based upon what we have done with our lives.

In Rev 2:5, Jesus warns the faithful to do the good works they did at first, otherwise he will remove their place in heaven. This proves that good works are necessary for salvation. Our deeds follow us, and determine our eternal destiny (Rev 14:13; 20:12; 22:12). That is why Jesus says "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt 10:22). "endure" does not mean sit on your butt and have faith alone.

Paul echoes Jesus' teaching about good and bad works and how they determine our salvation (see Rom 2:5-8; Rom 14:10,12; 2 Cor 5:10). Romans 2:5-8 is especially clear. There is a polarity between bad works which lead to hell, and good works which lead to heaven, not just more rewards. Paul also explains this in 1 Cor 3:15 where he describes how a person must pass through fire based on the works he performed during his life. If the works are bad enough, the person is condemned. If the works are mixed good and bad, the bad works retard but not prevent his salvation. (thus, your faith system cannot reconcile God's mercy with His justice.)

See also James 2. James is speaking about salvific justification when He says "Can his faith save him?" (v.14). James' answer is an unqualified NO. If the Christian does not perform good works, he cannot be saved. "A man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24). James points out a unity of the two. What part of "not by faith alone" do you not understand?

Whether by works alone or by faith and works, it's still salvation by works if it's not salvation through faith IN CHRIST ALONE.

One does not exclude the other, mailmandan. This statement is redundant and unbiblical. The Bible tells us we must have faith in order to be saved (Hebrews 11:6). Yet is faith nothing more than believing and trusting? Searching the Scriptures, we see faith -also involves assent to God's truth (1 Thessalonians 2:13),
-obedience to Him (Romans 1:5, 16:26), and
-it must be working in love (Galatians 5:6).

These points appeared to be missed by the reformers, yet they are just as crucial as believing and trusting. (1 Corinthians 13:1-3) should be heeded by all it's certainly an attention grabber. Paul tells us our faith is living and can go through many stages. It never stays permanently fixed after a single conversion experience no matter how genuine or sincere. Our faith can be
-shipwrecked (1 Timothy 1:19),
-departed from (1 Timothy 4:1),
-disowned (1 Timothy 5:8)
-wandered from (1 Timothy 6:10),
-and missed (1 Timothy 6:21).
Christians do not have a "waiver" that exempts them from these verses. Do our works mean anything? According to Jesus they do (Matthew 25:31-46). The people rewarded and punished are done so by their actions. And our thoughts (Matthew 15:18-20) and words (James 3:6-12) are accountable as well. These verses are just as much part of the Bible as Romans 10:8-13 and John 3:3-5. read more here

The grace of God exercised through our actions in order to produce good works that merit for us eternal life is a satanic deceptive nightmare, along with replacing imputed righteousness with infused righteousness and confusing justification with ongoing sanctification. In the end, Catholicism teaches people to trust in works for salvation and NOT CHRIST ALONE and satan knows that as long as he can keep you from TRUSTING IN CHRIST ALONE FOR SALVATION he has you right where he wants you!

I would like to know the name of the wacko cult that taught you this. You couldn't have dreamed it up yourself, you can't even comprehend my posts. You may have been a ethnic Catholic or a Catholic by default, but generally, practicing Catholics don't fall for this kind of blah blah blah.

The word "believe" can describe mere mental assent belief, as in (James 2:19), or also include "trust and reliance in Christ for salvation," as in (Acts 16:31). In James 2:19, nobody is questioning the fact that the demons believe "mental assent" that "there is one God" but they do not believe/entrust their spiritual well being to Christ; have faith/reliance upon Christ for salvation. Their trust and reliance is in Satan, as demonstrated by their rebellion in heaven and continuous evil works. I believe "mental assent" that George Washington existed and I also believe in the historical facts about George Washington, but I am not trusting in Him/anything that he accomplished to save my soul. See the difference?

You refuse, or are incapable, of seeing the 2 different usages of "faith". See post #281, the first underlined sentence.

I agree that we are not justified by the kind of faith that remains alone (barren of works) because this is not genuine faith but an empty profession of faith, a dead faith (James 2:14-20). The problem is that the Catholic definition and function of "justification" and "grace" are different than what the Bible teaches.

No, it is not what the Bible teaches. The Bible came from the Church, we know what it means. Your "church" if you have one, came from the Bible, you make it mean whatever you want. (Principle of Private Judgement)

For example, the Catholic Church teaches that justification is the infusion of sanctifying grace or supernatural ability which actually works to make a person objectively righteous and pleasing in the eyes of God. If sustained until death, this grace permits one to merit entrance into heaven because of the righteous life he lived: One actually deserves heaven because one’s own goodness, in part, has earned it. This explains why the basis for justification in Catholic theology is not the fact of Christ’s righteousness being reckoned (imputed) to a believer solely by faith. Rather, it is the fact that—through the sacraments—Christ’s righteousness is infused into our very being so that we progressively become more and more righteous. And on that basis—the fact we have actual righteousness now—we are declared "righteous."

Declared righteousness is a reformist invention. Thus, in Catholicism justification occurs primarily by means of the sacraments and good works and not exclusively by personal faith in Jesus Christ. HUGE difference!

First, you're being ridiculous. Second, it's a non-sequitur argument. Third, even the demons have faith. Forth, personal faith in Jesus Christ is not a ticket. Fifth, no one can be absolutely 100% certain of their salvation until after they are dead. Your man-made formulas for determining salvation are full of holes.
[/QUOTE]

If one has faith that trusts in Christ alone for salvation (and does not trust in works for salvation) then his faith is accounted for righteousness (Romans 4:5-6). The works that follow and are produced out of genuine faith and are the fruit of salvation, not the means of salvation.

In other words, after Catholics "shoe horn" works into faith, then they would agree that we are saved through faith, even though it's really saved through faith AND WORKS. [/QUOTE]
Because, as I have indicated with numerous verses, faith and works + love + hope are inseparable. That is the scriptural usage of faith that is acceptable to Catholicism.

Whether a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone depends on what sense the term “faith” is being used in. If it is being used to refer to unformed faith then a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone (which is the point James is making in James 2:19

, as every non-antinomian Evangelical agrees; one is not justified by intellectual belief alone).

​

However, if the term “faith” is being used to refer to faith formed by charity then the Catholic does not have to condemn the idea of justification by faith alone. In fact, in traditional works of Catholic theology, one regularly encounters the statement that formed faith is justifying faith. If one has formed faith, one is justified. Period.
A Catholic would thus reject the idea of justification sola fide informi but wholeheartedly embrace the idea of justification sola fide formata. Adding the word “formed” to clarify the nature of the faith in “sola fide” renders the doctrine completely acceptable to a Catholic. Justification by Faith Alone​

Jesus is God and we are saved through faith based on the merits of Christ's finished work of redemption alone and not on the merits of our works. Simple as that.

​

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Faith is faith and works are works.[/quote] You are juggling the different senses of the word "faith" to support an agenda, not biblical truth. You accept the erroneous sense of the word "faith" that was mixed in at the right places by the reformers. What a mess. You sold your heritage for a pot of soup.

What did the Church do to you that would make you so angry? Don't tell me its just about doctrines you don't like. If that were true, why have so many Protestant scholars converted?

​

 

[epostle]

Matthew 25
31 “When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate them one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, 33 and he will place the sheep at his right hand, but the goats at the left. 34 Then the King will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; (salvation) 35 for I was hungry and you gave me food, (works) I was thirsty and you gave me drink, (works) I was a stranger and you welcomed me, (works) 36 I was naked and you clothed me, (works) I was sick and you visited me, (works) I was in prison and you came to me.’ (works)

Luke 10
29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion,34 and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.35 And the next day he took out two denarii[e] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?”

What's the answer given in verse 37, mailmandan? The one with faith alone? Then what did Jesus say? Go do nothing, just have faith???

 

[mailmandan]

I am not confusing justification with salvation.

You are confusing justification with ongoing sanctification.

You may have read it, but you can't seem to comprehend it. I had to repeat myself. You still can't comprehend it.

I was able to comprehend what he was saying just fine.

What's wrong with that? It's called Christianity.

Salvation by faith AND WORKS is not Christianity. Saved through faith, NOT WORKS, but FOR GOOD WORKS is Christianity (Ephesians 2:8-10). You still cannot accept the truth.

When Jesus comes at the end of the world, He grants salvation based upon what we have actually done, not how much faith we had (Matt 25:31-46; 16:27). Jesus determines our eternal destiny based upon what we have done with our lives.

Typical misinterpretation by works salvationists. Is that what Paul said in Ephesians 2:8,9? Saved based on what we have done? See what you are trusting in for salvation? - WORKS. After a casual reading of the sheep and goats (Matthew 25:31-46), these verses "on the surface" seem to suggest that salvation is the result of good works. All Scripture proves itself right and non-contradictory when compared with the totality of Scripture. This passage has to be taken alongside the whole of Scripture. Jesus was not advocating salvation by works. That would be contrary to Romans 4:4-6; Ephesians 2:8,9; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 3:5 etc... One's works are an effect of (and therefore indication of) one's salvation status, rather than being a cause of one's salvation. This is not performance based salvation, but salvation based performance. The good deeds mentioned in Matthew 25:35-36 are merely the fruit that will be manifest in the lives of the redeemed. Those who are placed at Christ's right hand are not there based on the merits of their good deeds, but because Christ imputed His righteousness to them (Romans 4:2-6; Philippians 3:9). When works are mentioned in connection with salvation, the works are always the result of, not the condition of, receiving salvation. The stress is on works as a manifestation of one's faith (or lack thereof), not simply on the faith from which these works follow. So it is understandable that in this context, Matthew would stress the works that are a manifestation of "faith by which one receives eternal life." Notice how love for other Christians is an indication of one's salvation status: 1 John 3:10 - In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother. He who practices righteousness and loves his brother does this BECAUSE he is "of God" not to become of God. 1 John 3:14 - We know that we have (past tense) passed from death to life, because we love our brothers (present tense). Loving our brothers is the result of, not the condition of passing from death to life. In Matthew 16:27 - For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. Notice that Jesus said "reward" each person according to what he has not, not grant eternal life based on the merits of what he has done. There is a difference between salvation and rewards. 1 Corinthians 3:13 - each one's work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one's work, of what sort it is. 14 If anyone's work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; (of reward) but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.

In Rev 2:5, Jesus warns the faithful to do the good works they did at first, otherwise he will remove their place in heaven.

Show me the words "remove their place in heaven" in Revelation 2:5? You are reading your own preconceived theology into this verse. This is part of the first of the seven letters in Revelation 2-3. These were letters from the Lord to seven local churches in Asia Minor. Clearly the Lord wanted the members of the church at Ephesus to repent--to change their attitudes regarding their works. "You have left your first love" (v 4b). "Repent and do the first works" (v 5b). Works of love no longer characterized the church at Ephesus. The preceding (vs. 2-3) and following (v 6) verses make it clear that this church was not totally displeasing to the Lord. He commended the Ephesian church for maintaining doctrinal purity in the face of false teachers in the Ephesian church. However, "doctrinal purity and loyalty cannot be a substitute for your first love." The question in the verse before us is the identification of the warning which follows the Lord's command to repent. What did the Lord mean when He spoke of removing the church's lampstand if it did not repent? The removal of the lampstand is clearly figurative language. This does not mean that individuals will lose their place in heaven, but the church can forfeit its place of light-bearing and witness. Ephesus is a city now wrapped in the mantle of Islam. The light of the church has indeed been removed there.

This proves that good works are necessary for salvation. Our deeds follow us, and determine our eternal destiny (Rev 14:13; 20:12; 22:12).

And you still think that you don't teach salvation by works? Good works are not the necessary means of our salvation, but they are the necessary fruit that SHOWS we have salvation. Faith is the ROOT and good works are the FRUIT of salvation. No fruit demonstrates that there is no root. Plain and simple. Good works are not the basis or means of receiving salvation, but good works determine whether our heart was saved. Our eternal destiny is determined on the basis of whether or not we BELIEVE IN HIM (John 3:18; Acts 10:43; 13;39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5 etc..). Not just simply believe that He exists but believe/trust in Him as the all sufficient means of our salvation.

That is why Jesus says "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt 10:22). "endure" does not mean sit on your butt and have faith alone.

The same one's who endure to the end are the same one's who have been saved through faith. 1 John 2:19 - They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us. Sit on your butt and do nothing - "faith that remains alone" (barren of works - James 2:14-24) is not saving faith in the first place.

One does not exclude the other, mailmandan. This statement is redundant and unbiblical. The Bible tells us we must have faith in order to be saved (Hebrews 11:6). Yet is faith nothing more than believing and trusting?

Works are not excluded from faith as the FRUIT of salvation but they are excluded as the root of salvation. You can't seem to grasp this distinction and there is a reason for that. My statement was not redundant and is Biblical.

Searching the Scriptures, we see faith -also involves assent to God's truth (1 Thessalonians 2:13),
-obedience to Him (Romans 1:5, 16:26), and
-it must be working in love (Galatians 5:6).

Salvation is through FAITH IN CHRIST ALONE and is not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9). Yes, we must have faith in order to be saved...then comes the BUT from Catholics. Faith that saves is belief, trust, reliance in Christ alone for salvation. Faith in works does not save. Faith is the ROOT and obedience to Him which follows is the FRUIT of salvation. *You still have not figured that out. Prior to my conversion, before I placed my faith in Christ alone for salvation, I could not figure it out either. In Romans 1:5, Paul's mission, as he perceived it, was to bring people to faith in Christ, which faith, in turn, would express and evidence that faith in appropriate fashion. This obedience flows from faith in Christ BECAUSE we are saved, not to become saved. Although Paul can speak of people’s initial response of coming to faith in Christ as an act of obedience, in which he describes it as "obeying the gospel" (Romans 10:16), the purpose of Paul’s apostleship was not merely to bring people to conversion but also to bring about transformed lives that resulted in obedience to God. Notice that Paul said they HAVE (already) received grace and apostleship FOR or UNTO obedience to the faith. Just as in Ephesians 2:10, Paul said that we are created in Christ Jesus FOR or UNTO good works. We are clearly saved FOR good works, NOT by good works (Ephesians 2:8-10). In Romans 1:5, Paul did not say that they did not receive grace and apostleship until they produced "enough" obedience/good works. We have access by FAITH into GRACE… (Romans 5:2) not faith "and obedience." We are saved through faith first, then "for/unto" obedience (good works). Faith works through love. Love is the character of faith.

Paul echoes Jesus' teaching about good and bad works and how they determine our salvation (see Rom 2:5-8; Rom 14:10,12; 2 Cor 5:10). Romans 2:5-8 is especially clear.

More misinterpretation. You continue to read the Bible through the lens of salvation by works. If one reads Romans 2:5-10 in isolation from the rest of the book of Romans, one might conclude that Paul was teaching salvation by works. However, as you read and study these passages, it is imperative to keep in mind that these verses do not describe how one becomes saved, but the way the saved conduct their lives. These deeds done are the result of, not the means or basis of receiving salvation. So patient continuance in well doing, seeking for glory, honor, and immortality; (vs. 7) is not at all set forth as the means of their procuring eternal life, but as a description of those to whom God does render life eternal. Notice that ALL who receive eternal life are described as such, everyone who does good (vs. 10). Good deeds flow from a heart that is saved and evil deeds flow from a heart that is unsaved. Verse 8 - but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness--indignation and wrath. Notice that ALL who do not receive eternal life are described as such, everyone who does evil (vs. 9). What those passages convey is that though our deeds are judged by God, it's not the good deeds themselves which are the basis or means of our salvation, but the type of deeds expose whether our heart was saved, or not. These deeds done out of faith are the fruit, not the root of our salvation. If Paul wanted to teach that we are saved by works, then he would have clearly stated that we are saved through faith "and works/deeds" in Ephesians 2:8 and that we are justified by faith "and works/deeds" in Romans 5:1 but that is clearly NOT what Paul said. Good deeds are produced out of faith, thus "everyone who does good." Deeds produced without faith are tainted with sin, thus "everyone who does evil." Without faith it is impossible to please God.

​

 

[mailmandan]

There is a polarity between bad works which lead to hell, and good works which lead to heaven, not just more rewards.

What did Jesus say the basis for receiving eternal life and receiving condemnation are in John 3:18? He who believes in Him is not condemned, but he who does not believe is condemned already.. "Believes in Him" leads to heaven and good works follow as the fruit of salvation. "Does not believe" leads to hell and evil works follow as the bad fruit of condemnation.

Paul also explains this in 1 Cor 3:15 where he describes how a person must pass through fire based on the works he performed during his life. If the works are bad enough, the person is condemned. If the works are mixed good and bad, the bad works retard but not prevent his salvation. (thus, your faith system cannot reconcile God's mercy with His justice.)

That is not what Paul is saying here. 1 Corinthians 3:13 - each one's work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one's work, of what sort it is. 14 If anyone's work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; (of reward) but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. Nothing here about the person's works being bad enough and that person being condemned. You continue to "add" to Scripture.

See also James 2. James is speaking about salvific justification when He says "Can his faith save him?" (v.14). James' answer is an unqualified NO. If the Christian does not perform good works, he cannot be saved.

If the person does not perform good works, he demonstrates that he has an empty profession of faith/dead faith - says/claims to have faith but has no works and that is the reason he cannot be saved. Dead empty profession of faith is the CAUSE and a lack of good works is the EFFECT. You have it backwards. Genuine faith is alive in Christ and is unto good works (Ephesians 2:5-10).

"A man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24). James points out a unity of the two. What part of "not by faith alone" do you not understand?

What a genuine believer means by salvation through faith IN CHRIST ALONE (saved through faith, not works) and what James means by faith (that remains) alone "barren of works" is not the same message. Don't let the word "alone" fool you. Once again, James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is "shown to be righteous." James is discussing the proof of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18), not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God (Romans 4:2-3). Faith "alone" in the context of James 2:24 = dead faith that is void of works. It's "alone" in the sense that it produces no works, not "alone" in the sense that it trusts in Christ alone for salvation (Ephesians 2:8,9). It's alone in regards to works because it's an empty profession of faith and not genuine faith. What part of saved through faith, not works do you not understand?

These points appeared to be missed by the reformers, yet they are just as crucial as believing and trusting. (1 Corinthians 13:1-3) should be heeded by all it's certainly an attention grabber.

You continue to confuse the essence of faith with the evidence of faith. Typical error by works salvationists.

Paul tells us our faith is living and can go through many stages. It never stays permanently fixed after a single conversion experience no matter how genuine or sincere. Our faith can be
-shipwrecked (1 Timothy 1:19),
-departed from (1 Timothy 4:1),
-disowned (1 Timothy 5:8)
-wandered from (1 Timothy 6:10),
-and missed (1 Timothy 6:21).
Christians do not have a "waiver" that exempts them from these verses. Do our works mean anything? According to Jesus they do (Matthew 25:31-46). The people rewarded and punished are done so by their actions. And our thoughts (Matthew 15:18-20) and words (James 3:6-12) are accountable as well.

Shallow faith that is not firmly rooted and established in Christ may fail. Only genuine faith endures to the end. Proverbs 24:16 - For a righteous man may fall seven times And rise again, But the wicked shall fall by calamity. Our works do mean something. Good works are the fruit, by product and demonstrative evidence of genuine faith, but they are not the essence of faith and not the means of our salvation. Works will also determine rewards and loss of rewards for believers (1 Corinthians 3:13-15) and degrees of punishment in hell for unbelievers (Matthew 23:14; Revelation 20:12).

These verses are just as much part of the Bible as Romans 10:8-13 and John 3:3-5.

Notice in Romans 10:8 - But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (together) that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, (notice the reverse order from verse 9 to verse 10) - that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart one believes unto righteousness and with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation. Confess/believe; believe/confess. Confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation but are chronologically together. It's not believe today (but still lost today) then confess next week and are finally saved next week. In John 3:5, Jesus said, "born of water and the Spirit" He did not say born of baptism and the Spirit. To automatically read baptism into this verse simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted. Scripture interprets itself. Notice in John 7:38, "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of LIVING WATER. 39 But this He spoke concerning the SPIRIT.. *Did you see that? If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or means of becoming born again. In John 4:10, Jesus said, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, 'Give Me a drink,' you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water." In John 4:14, Jesus said, "but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life. Jesus connects this living water here with everlasting life. Living water is not water baptism. *Notice in In 1 Corinthians 12:13, we also read - ..drink into one Spirit.

I would like to know the name of the wacko cult that taught you this. You couldn't have dreamed it up yourself, you can't even comprehend my posts. You may have been a ethnic Catholic or a Catholic by default, but generally, practicing Catholics don't fall for this kind of blah blah blah.

Wacko cult? Can't even comprehend your posts? Ethnic Catholic...blah blah blah? LOL! The sword of the Spirit hurts when it cuts! I can comprehend your nonsense but you can't even comprehend justification and if you are wrong about that then it really does not matter what else you believe.

 

[mailmandan]

You refuse, or are incapable, of seeing the 2 different usages of "faith". See post #281, the first underlined sentence.

I understand the 2 different usages of faith and it's not faith vs. faith infused with works. It's mere mental assent belief, as in James 2:19 (that you cited in post #281) and faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Christ for salvation, as in Acts 16:31. Faith formed by charity is just your way of saying we are saved through faith + acts of love/good works which equates to Christ is an insufficient Savior and we must "add" our works of charity to His finished work of redemption in order to help Him save us. That's not saving faith in Christ. That's faith in works.

No, it is not what the Bible teaches. The Bible came from the Church, we know what it means. Your "church" if you have one, came from the Bible, you make it mean whatever you want. (Principle of Private Judgement)

Yes, it's what the Bible teaches. You just cannot accept the truth. We are not justified by the kind of faith that remains alone (barren of works) because this is not genuine faith but an empty profession of faith, a dead faith (James 2:14-20). The problem is that the Catholic definition and function of "justification" and "grace" are different than what the Bible teaches. The Roman Catholic institution is not the author of the Bible. My church, if I have one? Cheap shot. Don't fall for that Roman Catholic sales pitch about only the magisterium of the Roman Catholic church can interpret the Bible for us.

First, you're being ridiculous. Second, it's a non-sequitur argument. Third, even the demons have faith.

The demons may believe "mental assent" that "there is one God" but the demons do not believe/entrust their spiritual well being to Christ; have faith/reliance upon Christ for salvation. HUGE DIFFERENCE! The demons do not believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and are not saved. Their trust and reliance is in Satan, as demonstrated by their rebellion in heaven and continuous evil works.

Forth, personal faith in Jesus Christ is not a ticket.

Faith in Christ is our ticket to heaven (Ephesians 2:8,9). Jesus is the door (John 10:9). Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father EXCEPT BY JESUS (John 14:6). Neither your church or your works is the ticket.

Fifth, no one can be absolutely 100% certain of their salvation until after they are dead. Your man-made formulas for determining salvation are full of holes.

Works salvationists cannot be absolutely 100% certain of their salvation because they could never be certain if they accomplished "enough" and that is the whole deception. Genuine believers can be absolutely 100% certain of their salvation. 1 John 5:11 And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. 13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may KNOW that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God. What part of "you may know that you have eternal life" don't understand? Your "works based" false gospel is full of holes.

Because, as I have indicated with numerous verses, faith and works + love + hope are inseparable.

Inseparable, meaning works are the very "essence" of faith to Catholics and Catholics cannot make a distinction between the root of salvation (faith) and the fruit of salvation (works). Faith is faith and works are works. Love is the character of faith and faith is the substance of things hoped for. You make this out to be a lot more complicated than it really is. The moment that we place our faith in Christ alone for salvation, we are saved (Ephesians 2:8.9). We then receive the love of God in our heart because we receive the Holy Spirit (Romans 5:5) and works are produced from faith BECAUSE WE ARE SAVED and are created in Christ Jesus unto good works (Ephesians 2:10), but we are not saved by these works but FOR these works.

That is the scriptural usage of faith that is acceptable to Catholicism.
Whether a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone depends on what sense the term “faith” is being used in. If it is being used to refer to unformed faith then a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone (which is the point James is making in James 2:19, as every non-antinomian Evangelical agrees; one is not justified by intellectual belief alone).

However, if the term “faith” is being used to refer to faith formed by charity then the Catholic does not have to condemn the idea of justification by faith alone. In fact, in traditional works of Catholic theology, one regularly encounters the statement that formed faith is justifying faith. If one has formed faith, one is justified. Period.
A Catholic would thus reject the idea of justification sola fide informi but wholeheartedly embrace the idea of justification sola fide formata. Adding the word “formed” to clarify the nature of the faith in “sola fide” renders the doctrine completely acceptable to a Catholic. Justification by Faith Alone

I already read this article by Jimmy Akin and have previously responded to it. When it comes down to it, basically what you are saying here is that we are saved through faith AND WORKS, just as you have been saying in error all along.

You are juggling the different senses of the word "faith" to support an agenda, not biblical truth. You accept the erroneous sense of the word "faith" that was mixed in at the right places by the reformers. What a mess. You sold your heritage for a pot of soup.

I am explaining to you the difference between the kind of faith that saves and the kind of faith that does not save. I have no agenda here (pot calling the kettle black) just Biblical truth. Faith that saves trusts in Jesus Christ alone for salvation and not in works (Ephesians 2:8,9) and genuine faith does not remain in the sense that it is barren of works (James 2:14-24). Simple as that. I traded in legalistic religious bondage to a church (The Roman Catholic church) for a personal relationship with Jesus Christ when I received Him through faith. Praise God!

What did the Church do to you that would make you so angry? Don't tell me its just about doctrines you don't like. If that were true, why have so many Protestant scholars converted?

I'm not as angry as you might think but I don't like false doctrine. Especially doctrine that leads to condemnation, namely, salvation by works. There have been plenty of Roman Catholic priests converted to Biblical Christianity, so the so called Protestant scholars converted to Catholicism were obviously not genuine believers in the first place or else they would not have embraced the false gospel of Catholicism.

 

[valiant]

Scripture does not separate good works from faith. They are intricately connected.

Francis Beckwith resigned on May 5 as president of the Evangelical Theological Society. One week earlier the Baylor University philosophy professor rejoined the Roman Catholic Church, his home until age 14. He spoke with Christianity Today editor David Neff about the reaction to his decision, theological misconceptions, and evangelical strengths and weaknesses.

What good things from the evangelical community will you take back with you to Roman Catholicism?
A number of things. First, I think of the evangelical emphasis on the importance of Scripture. Much of what I see in the Catholic Church is formed by my evangelical experience. When I recite, for instance, the Apostles' Creed, I think it's more of a cognitive experience for me than with people who have been Catholic for some time. Emphasis on the written word comes from my evangelical background—that is, when I read these things, I'm really interested in what the text is saying, not just the mystical part, which is certainly also appropriate. For instance, after reading the Apostles' Creed, I turned to my wife and I said, "You know, there are only two proper names in the creed—Pontius Pilate and Virgin Mary. I don't know if anyone's ever noticed that."

I still consider myself an evangelical, but no longer a Protestant. I do think I have a better understanding of what sometimes the Catholic Church is trying to convey. Protestants often misunderstand. The issue of justification was key for me. The Catholic Church frames the Christian life as one in which you must exercise virtue—not because virtue saves you, but because that's the way God's grace gets manifested. As an evangelical, even when I talked about sanctification and wanted to practice it, it seemed as if I didn't have a good enough incentive to do so.

Now there's a kind of theological framework, and it doesn't say my salvation depends on me, but it says my virtue counts for something. It's important to allow the grace of God to be exercised through your actions. The evangelical emphasis on the moral life forms my Catholic practice with an added incentive. That was liberating to me.

Some of the people who have been critical say, "You've gone into the oppressive works system of Catholicism." That's not the way I look at it at all. I look at it as a chance to do good. My own work apart from God's grace doesn't matter for my salvation; what matters is the sort of person I become by allowing God's grace to work through my obeying his commandments and taking the sacraments. Unfortunately, the view of justification is sometimes presented clumsily by some Catholic laypeople.
Q&A: Francis Beckwith | Christianity Today

Do you still think the grace of God exercised through our actions is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"? Please educate yourself on what Catholics actually believe about faith and works, instead of making things up.

"...The term pistis is used in the Bible in a number of different senses, ranging from intellectual belief (Romans 14:22

, 23

, James 2:19

), to assurance (Acts 17:31

), and even to trustworthiness or reliability (Romans 3:3

, Titus 2:10

). Of key importance is Galatians 5:6

, which refers to “faith working by charity.” In Catholic theology, this is what is known as fides formata or “faith formed by charity.” The alternative to formed faith is fides informis or “faith unformed by charity.” This is the kind of faith described in James 2:19

, for example.

Whether a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone depends on what sense the term “faith” is being used in. If it is being used to refer to unformed faith then a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone (which is the point James is making in James 2:19

, as every non-antinomian Evangelical agrees; one is not justified by intellectual belief alone)...

"...However, if the term “faith” is being used to refer to faith formed by charity then the Catholic does not have to condemn the idea of justification by faith alone. In fact, in traditional works of Catholic theology, one regularly encounters the statement that formed faith is justifying faith. If one has formed faith, one is justified. Period.

A Catholic would thus reject the idea of justification sola fide informi but wholeheartedly embrace the idea of justification sola fide formata. Adding the word “formed” to clarify the nature of the faith in “sola fide” renders the doctrine completely acceptable to a Catholic.

Why, then, do Catholics not use the term in this regard, we would have to say, “Jesus is not God.” Obviously, the Church could not have people running around saying “Jesus is God” and “Jesus is not God,” though both would be perfectly consistent with the Trinity depending on how the term “God” is being used (i.e., as a noun or a proper name for the Father). Hopeless confusion (and charges of heresy, and bloodbaths) would have resulted in the early centuries if the Church did not specify the meaning of the term “God” when used in this context.

Of course, the Bible uses the term “God” in both senses, but to avoid confusion (and heretical misunderstandings on the part of the faithful, who could incline to either Arianism or Modalism if they misread the word “God” in the above statements) it later became necessary to adopt one usage over the other when discussing the identity of Jesus.

View attachment 138862
​

A similar phenomenon occurs in connection with the word “faith.” Evangelical leaders know this by personal experience since they have to continually fight against antinomian understandings of the term “faith” (and the corresponding antinomian evangelistic practices and false conversions that result). Because “faith” is such a key term, it is necessary that each theological school have a fixed usage of it in practice, even though there is more than one use of the term in the Bible. Evangelical leaders, in response to the antinomianism that has washed over the American church scene in the last hundred and fifty years, are attempting to impose a uniform usage to the term “faith” in their community to prevent these problems. (And may they have good luck in this, by the way.)

This leads me to why Catholics do not use the formula “faith alone.” Given the different usages of the term “faith” in the Bible, the early Church had to decide which meaning would be treated as normative. Would it be the Galatians 5 sense or the Romans 14/James 2 sense? The Church opted for the latter for several reasons:

First, the Romans 14 sense of the term pistis is frankly the more common in the New Testament. It is much harder to think of passages which demand that pistis mean “faith formed by charity” than it is to think of passages which demand that pistis mean “intellectual belief.” In fact, even inGalatians 5:6

itself, Paul has to specify that it is faith formed by charity that he is talking about, suggesting that this is not the normal use of the term in his day.

Second, the New Testament regularly (forty-two times in the KJV) speaks of “the faith,” meaning a body of theological beliefs (e.g. Jude 3

). The connection between pistis and intellectual belief is clearly very strong in this usage.

Third, Catholic theology has focused on the triad of faith, hope, and charity, which Paul lays great stress on and which is found throughout his writings, not just in 1 Corinthians 13:13

(though that is the locus classicus for it), including places where it is not obvious because of the English translation or the division of verses. If in this triad “faith” is taken to mean “formed faith” then hope and charity are collapsed into faith and the triad is flattened. To preserve the distinctiveness of each member of the triad, the Church chose to use the term “faith” in a way that did not include within it the ideas of hope (trust) and charity (love). Only by doing this could the members of the triad be kept from collapsing into one another.

Thus the Catholic Church normally expresses the core essences of these virtues like this:

• Faith is the theological virtue by which we believe in God and believe all that he has said and revealed to us . . . because he is truth itself. (CCC 1814)
• Hope is the theological virtue by which we desire the kingdom of heaven and eternal life as our happiness, placing our trust in Christ’s promises and relying not on our own strength, but on the help of the grace of the Holy Spirit. (CCC 1817)
• Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for his own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God. (CCC 1822)
  

mailmandan, Do you still think this is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"?

In common Catholic usage, faith is thus unconditional belief in what God says, hope is unconditional trust in God, and charity is unconditional love for God. When we are justified, God places all three of these virtues in our hearts. These virtues are given to each of the justified, even though our outward actions do not always reflect them because of the fallen nature we still possess. Thus a person may still have the virtue of faith even if momentarily tempted by doubt, a person may still have the virtue of trust even if scared or tempted by despair, and a person may still have the virtue of charity even if he is often selfish. Only a direct, grave violation (mortal sin against) of one of the virtues destroys the virtue.

As our sanctification progresses, these virtues within us are strengthened by God and we are able to more easily exercise faith, more easily exercise trust, and more easily exercise love. Performing acts of faith, hope, and charity becomes easier as we grow in the Christian life (note the great difficulty new converts often experience in these areas compared to those who have attained a measure of spiritual maturity).
mailmandan, Do you still think this is a "satanic deceptive nightmare"?

However, so long as one has any measure of faith, hope, and charity, one is in a state of justification. Thus Catholics often use the soteriological slogan that we are “saved by faith, hope, and charity.” This does not disagree with the Protestant soteriological slogan that we are “saved by faith alone” if the term “faith” is understood in the latter to be faith formed by charity or Galatians 5 faith.
mailmandan, is there any hope of flexibility in your rigid preconceived notions or do you prefer remaining in spiritual infancy??

I've met plenty of good Protestants who are justified by faith, hope and charity, they just think it's faith alone. Itdoesn't have to be a divisive issue.

lol what you are talking about is not faith, it is walking religiously described as faith, the very thing for which the Pharisees were condemned.

True faith is a true trust in God to be our Saviour without the influence of church, ritual, good works or any other factor. It is personal trust in the Saviour ALONE.

Introducing pseudo evangelicals does not alter the fact.

 

[KenAllan]

Faith and Works are two different things epostle. We are saved by Faith. We are not saved by Works like the Catholic Church teaches. Working for your Salvation IS a Mortal sin that epostle that will keep you from Inheriting the Kingdom of God.

The only other place you can go to is the Lake of Fire, which is interesting because this is the place that the Catholics call Purgatory.

Purgatory and the Lake of Fire are the same thing.

 

[Utah]

View attachment 138992
​

​

Along with your heretical teachings, simony, indulgences, child molestation, cover-ups, etc . . .

 

[Kiss73]

Epostle, brother, there is a gang here and they've descended on this thread. Truth does not matter to them. They will try to get you banned and they are ruthless with no scruples

 

[tourist]

Epostle, brother, there is a gang here and they've descended on this thread. Truth does not matter to them. They will try to get you banned and they are ruthless with no scruples

You've been a member less than a day and already you are making false assumptions.