What's the use of faith alone?

[Xeno.of.athens]

If you have faith and it is alone what is the use of it?

 

[Hoping2]

If you have faith and it is alone what is the use of it?

It is a convenient false doctrine for those not interested in obeying any of the other Christian doctrines.

 

[St_Worm2]

If you have faith and it is alone what is the use of it?

Actually, it can be quite useful, because if you have the kind of faith that results in nothing, the kind of faith that unbelievers and demons have, that is (no changes in one's nature and desires, little to no contrition/penitence over sin, no obedience, no good works, no desire to love, honor, praise and glorify God, etc.), then you can be sure that you do ~not~ possess the kind of faith that saves.

The Reformers, who first coined the phrase, sola fide, meant something a bit different by it however, that our salvation is wholly by Grace* alone/by Christ alone/solus Christus (God's UN-merited favor* towards us, that is), through faith alone/sola fide, and not by anything that 'we' do.

Of course, that's actually a bit of a misnomer because our salvation/justification is hardly UN-merited ... it's simply not merited, by us

​

Romans 5​

8 God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. ​

9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. ​

10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. ​

​

Ephesians 2​

8 By grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; ​

9 ~not~ as a result of works, so that no one may boast. ​

10 For we are His masterpiece, created in Christ Jesus for/unto good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.​

​

Hebrews 9​

22 All things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. ​

God bless you!!

--David
p.s. - here's an interesting quote of Calvin's (and Luther's, as well, who said the very same thing with slightly different words).

"We are justified by faith alone,
but the faith that justifies is never alone."
John Calvin ​

 

[Tom8907]

We are justified by our faith alone. However, faith will always produce fruit in it's season.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

We are justified by our faith alone. However, faith will always produce fruit in it's season.

What use is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?
Jas 2:14 LSB

 

[Tuur]

What use is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?
Jas 2:14 LSB

What is works though without faith? And what is this faith? Faith in who or what?

Let's cut through it: Faith is faith in Jesus Christ. It seems many a person has faith that they are "good," but that's faith in their works and is a misplaced faith. If I have faith in Jesus Christ, that means I believe He is the only way to the Father, that what He did on the cross is sufficient for my sins, and God the Father, by raising Him from the dead, have His stamp of approval.

What can wash away my sins?
Nothing but the Blood of Jesus.
What can make me whole again?
Nothing but the Blood of Jesus.

Oh, precious is that flow,
That makes me white as snow,
No other fount I know,
Nothing but the Blood of Jesus.

- Robert Lowry, Nothing But the Blood of Jesus.

Now, if I believe Jesus, then I'm going to believe what He says about sin and turn from it. Something rattling is the realization that if we know Jesus and willfully sin, we are saying that sin is worth Jesus suffering and dying on the cross. If I believe Jesus has saved me by His sacrifice for me on the cross, how I can I treat Him so cruelly? If He is my Lord, will I not do as He says?

Abram believed God, acted on that belief, and became Abraham. If Abram had not believed, he would never have acted on it.

Now let someone hear of salvation and do the works expected of a believer. He attends church. He tithes. He has compassion on the poor. But in his heart he thinks "It is well with me: I go to church; I tithe. I help the poor." That person has faith only in his works and righteousness, not in Jesus, and that is terribly misplaced. As Paul pointed out, our own righteousness is as filthy rags before God.

What I think James is saying is that if one says they believe in Jesus but has nothing to show for it, he questions whether they really believe at all.

 

[The Liturgist]

If you have faith and it is alone what is the use of it?

None according to St. James. That said, most Sola Fide Christians have an exegetical model that works here, specifically, that a living faith will produce good works as St. James has. But obviously someone with a living faith has produced good works, whereas if someone has faith but not works, their faith is dead, according to St. James the Just.

Martin Luther objected to this, but fortunately the Evangelical Catholic Lutherans including his friend Philip Melancthon persuaded to keep it and the rest of the Antilegomenna in the Bible, which is good, and so while Luther made some unfortunate remarks related to this epistle, these remarks are not reflective of Lutheranism.

Indeed I have seen very eloquent expositions on hamartiology from my pious and excellent Lutheran friends @MarkRohfrietsch @ViaCrucis and @Ain't Zwinglian , who represent Lutheran orthodoxy and evangelical Catholicism in the grand tradition of the Church of Saxony and the Church of Sweden, which at present is being carried on by the International Lutheran Council and its members such as the LCMS, the LCC, and the AALC.

Unfortunately the Augustana Synod, which was formed by Swedish American Lutherans, got sucked into the ELCA / ELCIC, and its beautiful distinctive liturgy has disappeared, but fortunately in Sweden there is a Mission Province of the Church of Sweden, which is not formally a part of the Church of Sweden but is rather a confessional church which rejects gay marriage and other unscriptural doctrines, and is analogous to the Norwegian Catholic Church (an Old Catholic member of the Union of Utrecht) and similar movements in the Church of Norway.

I think the future for Christianity in Sweden depends on an alliance between the Mission Province of the Church of Sweden and the persecuted Syriac Orthodox refugees, who, driven out of their ancestral homelands in Turkey, Syria and Iraq, have migrated to Sweden, and unlike the Islamic population, are integrating into Swedish society while preserving traditional family values; likewise in Germany the large Syriac Orthodox population there is quite remarkable; I think they are to some extent intermarrying with the local Germans, because their children look German in terms of how their hair is styled and other aspects of their appearance. So a fusion of Oriental Orthodoxy and Lutheranism could help revitalize Christianity in Sweden and Germany, the two countries whose ethnicity I inherited.

Also, there are theological synergies to be happy about in this case, that being that Martin Luther realized he did not need to be in communion with Rome while studying the Oriental Orthodox (if I recall, it was the Ethiopian Orthodox church), and additionally, Lutherans and Oriental Orthodox share an important value, which is an extremely strong emphasis on Communicatio Idiomatum with regards to Christology. And both churches have been falsely accused of Monophysitism - in the case of the Oriental Orthodox, by Chalcedonians who conflated them with the Eutychians, which was the result of what appears to have been intentional misinformation spread by Ibas, who is known to have been a crypto-Nestorian, and related factors. In the case of the Lutherans, they were falsely accused of Monophysitism by the Calvinists and Zwinglians.

Now, I do wish the Roman Catholics could play a larger role in the revitalization of Christianity in these countries, but unfortunately in the case of Germany, Germany is the epicenter of the liberal movement in Roman Catholicism that was campaigning for “Synodality” and essentially was trying to get Pope Francis to grant them permission to allow gay marriage et cetera within their dioceses. Very early days yet, notwithstanding, there is some reason to hope that Pope Leo XIV will continue to hold the line on this vital issue, and I am praying for him, from several of his initial statements. At the same time he has not yet announced the kind of large scale reform and replacement of liberal bishops with the German church urgently requires, in order to eliminate any bishops whose views on human sexuality are contrary to scripture and the shared tradition of Catholic and Orthodox Christians and our Confessional Lutheran friends.

At any rate, the issue of the Church of Sweden and the Church of Germany is important because it underscores the importance of good works as an indicator of a living faith, whether one believes in sola fide or not (we Orthodox do not believe in sola fide, but on the other hand the confessional doctrines are very close to us in this regard, as they have not interpreted Sola Fide in a anomial or anti-sacramental way, in contrast to the liberal ELCA which is anomial, or certain Restorationist chuches and Radical Reformation churches which are anti-sacramental).

 

[Hawkins]

Its meaning is covenantal. It means the judgment standard of the New Covenant is faith-based. It also means that only faith can tell the difference between a saved and an unsaved.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

What is works though without faith? And what is this faith? Faith in who or what?

Let's cut through it: Faith is faith in Jesus Christ. It seems many a person has faith that they are "good," but that's faith in their works and is a misplaced faith. If I have faith in Jesus Christ, that means I believe He is the only way to the Father, that what He did on the cross is sufficient for my sins, and God the Father, by raising Him from the dead, have His stamp of approval.

What can wash away my sins?
Nothing but the Blood of Jesus.
What can make me whole again?
Nothing but the Blood of Jesus.

Oh, precious is that flow,
That makes me white as snow,
No other fount I know,
Nothing but the Blood of Jesus.

- Robert Lowry, Nothing But the Blood of Jesus.

Now, if I believe Jesus, then I'm going to believe what He says about sin and turn from it. Something rattling is the realization that if we know Jesus and willfully sin, we are saying that sin is worth Jesus suffering and dying on the cross. If I believe Jesus has saved me by His sacrifice for me on the cross, how I can I treat Him so cruelly? If He is my Lord, will I not do as He says?

Abram believed God, acted on that belief, and became Abraham. If Abram had not believed, he would never have acted on it.

Now let someone hear of salvation and do the works expected of a believer. He attends church. He tithes. He has compassion on the poor. But in his heart he thinks "It is well with me: I go to church; I tithe. I help the poor." That person has faith only in his works and righteousness, not in Jesus, and that is terribly misplaced. As Paul pointed out, our own righteousness is as filthy rags before God.

What I think James is saying is that if one says they believe in Jesus but has nothing to show for it, he questions whether they really believe at all.

So many words to avoid an answer.

 

[John G.]

If you have faith and it is alone what is the use of it?

Define "faith". "Faith" in what?
What Paul calls "faith" and what James calls "faith" are two different things.
Paul obvioulsy refers to faith in Jesus' atoning sacrifice on the cross as payment for our sins.
James, in chapter 2, verse 19, is referring to faith in God's existence: "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.” That faith of course falls short of saving faith.

As for Martin Luther wanting to bin the book of James, maybe he should've done so as it is erroneously taken by some to contradict Paul.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Define "faith"

no.

 

[John G.]

no.

Let me define it then.
The word in the NT is "pistis" (πίστις)
It is rendered as "faith" throughout the NT and that is indeed what it means in modern Greek.
However, in older Greek of the Classical period (four centuries B.C.) its meaning was "trust".
Somewhere between the Classical and modern period, the meaning shifted. It could be at some point it had a dual meaning i.e. believe and trust.
If we put our trust in Jesus and His all-suffient finished work, we are saved. Trusting our own works will get up nowhere.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Let me define it then.
The word in the NT is "pistis" (πίστις)
It is rendered as "faith" throughout the NT and that is indeed what it means in modern Greek.
However, in older Greek of the Classical period (four centuries B.C.) its meaning was "trust".
Somewhere between the Classical and modern period, the meaning shifted. It could be at some point it had a dual meaning i.e. believe and trust.
If we put our trust in Jesus and His all-suffient finished work, we are saved. Trusting our own works will get up nowhere.

Well, thanks for the Lexical information - all of which is readily available online.

Copilot says:
In common Greek of the first century AD, the word πίστις (pistis) carried a range of meanings, including:

• Trust or reliability in others.
• Faith or belief in a higher power.
• Confidence or assurance in something.
• Fidelity or faithfulness in relationships.
• Proof or persuasion in rhetoric.

In Greek rhetoric, pistis was used to refer to proof—the means by which an argument could persuade an audience. In Christianity, pistis was commonly translated as faith, though some scholars argue that it carried a broader meaning, including trust or even allegiance.

 

[Clare73]

If you have faith and it is alone what is the use of it?

Do you believe Eph 2:8-9, or not?

One more time. . .

Faith is a gift (Php 1:29, Act 13:48, 18:29, 2 Pe 1:1, Ro 12:3).

True faith is not alone, it obeys.

But salvation is not by true faith's obedience, it is by the true faith alone (Eph 2:8-9).

 

[Yarddog]

If you have faith and it is alone what is the use of it?

Faith is never alone

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Faith is never alone

Saint James did not think that was so.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Do you believe Eph 2:8-9, or not?

One more time. . .

True faith is not alone, it obeys.

But salvation is not by true faith's obedience, it is by true faith alone (Eph 2:8-9).

Now your post is just belabouring a very tiresome Protestant trope.

 

[Yarddog]

Saint James did not think that was so.

First one must answer, "What is faith"?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

First one must answer, "What is faith"?

No, one need not answer that. Saint James answers it and that ought to be enough.

What use is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead by itself.
James 2:14-17 LSB

 

[Clare73]

Now your post is just belabouring a very tiresome Protestant trope.

So sorry you feel the word of God in Eph 2:8-9 is a trope.

However, the real "trope" is the unbelief of that word of God.

Feel free to Biblically demonstrate the error of Eph 2:8-9:

"You have been saved through faith. . . ---it is the gift of God--- not by works, so that no one can boast."