The Forefathers of the Salvation by Works Christians

GodsGrace101 said:

First of all, it's not a protestant belief.
The catholic church believes this also,,,you can ask your priest or anyone that would know doctrine.

Also, not all protestants believe in faith alone in the sense that THEY mean it. Faith alone saves us...
Ephesians 2:8-9, which the catholic church also believes...but then we get to Ephesians 2:10 and yes, God does require our cooperation to stay saved,,and most protestants and catholics believe this.

You know how the bible says that God's ways are not our ways. When I first became born again I also thought this was very unfair...but our salvation does not depend on our actions UNTIL we are saved.

God will forgive anything up till our dying day.
Catechism of the Catholic Church:
1021 Death puts an end to human life as the time open to either accepting or rejecting the divine grace manifested in Christ.592 The New Testament speaks of judgment primarily in its aspect of the final encounter with Christ in his second coming, but also repeatedly affirms that each will be rewarded immediately after death in accordance with his works and faith. The parable of the poor man Lazarus and the words of Christ on the cross to the good thief, as well as other New Testament texts speak of a final destiny of the soul--a destiny which can be different for some and for others.593

The thief on the cross was saved as he was dying.
Luke 23:43

It doesn't have to do with the vanity of a god.
It has to do with the condition of our spirit upon death and when we will be judged right afterward.

The ONLY sin that cannot be forgiven is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. This can be understood in 2 different ways:

1. It's when we give credit to satan for doing something that the Holy Spirit did.

2. We reach our point of death and have always rejected the Holy Spirit (or God, or Jesus).

What you're talking about is number 2.
You might be a new Christian or you may just not like this teaching...but nonetheless, it's true.

Click to expand...

- Catholics believe in faith and works, we also believe in Purgatory in where people will "pay the last penny".

- The thief isn't a good example, that man's sin wasn't the same as Dahmer. Jeff Dahmer eventually "turned to Jesus" prior to his execution. You are telling me that his raping/murder/eating/necrophilia of young kids is all swept under the rug over believing in God while a hindu kid who died young is more likely going to hell? By this logic, how can you be so comfortable in talking about the existence of morality?

Sin against the Holy Spirit is IMO what people like Hitler, Dahmer, Ted Bundy, Pol Pot, etc did. The Holy Spirit is the source of our lives, as to what the Creed states. For someone to stop someone from having his/her life in such a violent way is clear rejection to the Holy Spirit because their souls have now been corrupted into something that isn't of God's likeness

MDC said:

I stand perfectly righteous before God for the sake of Christ alone. The work of sanctification by Gods Spirit makes me desire holiness and righteousness. Believers are set apart for holiness and created in Christ Jesus unto good works. Ephesians 2:10. But the work of justification is solely the work of God in Christ and outside my sanctification in Christ. My works and desire of righteousness plays no part towards my justification before God. Sanctification follows justification. And has no bearing on my justification before God. Christ is my justification

Click to expand...

You wrote so much without actually answering the question. That was quite impressive, actually.

GodsGrace101 said:

NOBODY promotes WORKS as a means to justification.

Click to expand...

Alas. How many times must Sacred Scripture be ignored? Once again for your reading pleasure:

Let me guess once again. When James wrote "Justified" he did not actually mean "justified".

Danthemailman said:

It saves time to cut and paste from a post that I already previously posted.

Click to expand...

Why mess with perfection?

Danthemailman said:

Actually, my argument does not fail and don't miss the fact that James said "says-claims" to have faith in verse 14. James did not say that this hypothetical person actually had authentic faith.

Also, the NASB says in verse 14 - Can that faith save him? The NIV says Can such faith save him. The Amplified Bible reads - Can that [kind of] faith save him? So what kind of faith is that? -- Empty profession of faith, dead faith. The KJV does not negate "says-claims" to have faith in verse 14.

In James 2:20, "faith without works is dead" does not mean that faith is dead until it produces works and then it becomes a living faith (which is like saying that a tree is dead until it produces fruit and then it becomes a living tree) or that works are the source of life in faith or that we are saved by works. James' point is this: faith that is not accompanied by evidential works is dead. If someone says-claims he has faith but lacks resulting evidential works, then he has an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith.

Click to expand...

Well I guess there is no point in us having a discussion about it if we cannot actually agree upon what the text states, or which translation to use.

MDC said:

So you believe the same as Catholicism on justification? You’ve never seen anyone argue salvation by works? Really? Infused righteousness and imputed righteousness are not the same. Although many will not come out and say that salvation is by works they definitely imply it by doctrines they hold to

Click to expand...

What I'm saying is they don't argue it's by works, infused righteousness is their approach to how grace is applied. Catholicism puts great emphasis on the sacraments, there are actually 7. That was actually Martin Luther's key challenge with the priesthood of all believers. Rome considers itsefl to be an agent of salvation, thinking grace is communicated effectively through their ministries. The fact remans in all Christian tradition it is by grace thrpough faith, no one is telling new converts go do good works and you will be saved.

mark kennedy said:

What I'm saying is they don't argue it's by works, infused righteousness is their approach to how grace is applied. Catholicism puts great emphasis on the sacraments, there are actually 7. That was actually Martin Luther's key challenge with the priesthood of all believers. Rome considers itsefl to be an agent of salvation, thinking grace is communicated effectively through their ministries. The fact remans in all Christian tradition it is by grace thrpough faith, no one is telling new converts go do good works and you will be saved.

Click to expand...

Do you not think that grace is communicated through your church’s ministries? I am not sure why any Church should exist if it did not consider itself to be an agent of salvation. If a church is not leading people to Christ or communicating God’s grace for what purpose does it exist? Just a friendly get together?

Perhaps I am not understanding you here.

Shimokita said:

Do you not think that grace is communicated through your church’s ministries? I am not sure why any Church should exist if it did not consider itself to be an agent of salvation. If a church is not leading people to Christ or communicating God’s grace for what purpose does it exist? Just a friendly get together?

Perhaps I am not understanding you here.

Click to expand...

My main point is that it's all by grace and virtually all Christian theism reflects that. All Christian ministry is by grace, the 'gifts' in 1 Corinthians 12 are literally 'charisma' (gifts of grace). We are talking about the grace that justifies the sinner at conversion, how that individual goes from being a child of disobedience to being 'in Christ'. Typically this is thought to have happened at baptism, at least in Catholic theology. That's what I meant when I said through the sacraments, one has to wonder, do they feel their sacraments are the sole means of obtaining saving grace. The Protestant Reformed position is uniformly that it is by the hearing of the gospel and receiving the Holy Spirit.

There is more then one issue here, my point is there is no real difference here with regards to grace being the means of salvation, just how that grace is communicated.

Cis.jd said:

- Catholics believe in faith and works, we also believe in Purgatory in where people will "pay the last penny".

Click to expand...

Please show me an official declaration of the catholic church showing that faith AND works is how one is justified.

No wonder posters like @Danthemailman tell me catholics require works to GET SAVED...because of catholics like you that don't know their doctrine.

As to purgatory---I'm not interested in your beliefs regarding purgatory: You can believe what you will, it has nothing to do with salvation.

- The thief isn't a good example, that man's sin wasn't the same as Dahmer. Jeff Dahmer eventually "turned to Jesus" prior to his execution. You are telling me that his raping/murder/eating/necrophilia of young kids is all swept under the rug over believing in God while a hindu kid who died young is more likely going to hell? By this logic, how can you be so comfortable in talking about the existence of morality?

Click to expand...

I never mentioned a Hindu kid,,,YOU just did.
I'm referring to persons that have heard the gospel of the N.T. and reject it and Jesus. THEY will be lost since they will not be born again...
John 3:3,5

And our discussion has to do with JUSTICE not with MORALITY. I believe we're discussing the justice of God here?

Sin against the Holy Spirit is IMO what people like Hitler, Dahmer, Ted Bundy, Pol Pot, etc did. The Holy Spirit is the source of our lives, as to what the Creed states. For someone to stop someone from having his/her life in such a violent way is clear rejection to the Holy Spirit because their souls have now been corrupted into something that isn't of God's likeness

Click to expand...

Yes, I'd say that murdering someone is rejection of the Holy Spirit.

Does that mean that one cannot repent later on in life and that person will be lost forever?

Doesn't the bible teach us that God can forgive any sin?
1 John 1:8-10
8If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
9If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

mark kennedy said:

My main point is that it's all by grace and virtually all Christian theism reflects that. All Christian ministry is by grace, the 'gifts' in 1 Corinthians 12 are literally 'charisma' (gifts of grace). We are talking about the grace that justifies the sinner at conversion, how that individual goes from being a child of disobedience to being 'in Christ'. Typically this is thought to have happened at baptism, at least in Catholic theology. That's what I meant when I said through the sacraments, one has to wonder, do they feel their sacraments are the sole means of obtaining saving grace. The Protestant Reformed position is uniformly that it is by the hearing of the gospel and receiving the Holy Spirit.

There is more then one issue here, my point is there is no real difference here with regards to grace being the means of salvation, just how that grace is communicated.

Click to expand...

Good post.

I'd like to say that Catholics do believe that the Holy Spirit is received at Baptism but they DO NOT believe that baptism saves a person.

They believe Ephesians 2:8-10 just like we do.
What they will tell you is that the baby being baptized will, at some point, accept that baptism personally and willingly or it will be of no salvific value.

Shimokita said:

Do you not think that grace is communicated through your church’s ministries? I am not sure why any Church should exist if it did not consider itself to be an agent of salvation. If a church is not leading people to Christ or communicating God’s grace for what purpose does it exist? Just a friendly get together?

Perhaps I am not understanding you here.

Click to expand...

Grace is given in the sacraments of the catholic church.
But it is not the only way grace if given.

How was it done in the O.T. when the church did not exist?

If grace is distributed ONLY with the sacraments, what happens to infants that are not baptized, children that never make thier first communion or their confirmation. What about an 8 year old child that has never gone to confession?

Not only is God's grace given freely to all, but it's even given to the unsaved --- otherwise how would they ever come to know God.

MDC said:

Wow what a twist on justification and sanctification. You are actually in agreement with Catholicism. I agree with the beginning but then you speak of losing ones standing as far as justification is concerned. You’ve actually turned the sanctification process into how ones ultimately justified in the end. Therefore nullifying Christ and His merits of righteousness as the basis for justification by faith alone. Catholicism teaches infused righteousness is a sanctifying grace whereby man merits justification through sacraments and good works. You are the same. You do not believe Christ alone merits justification for the believer. Yet you believe like Catholicism, cooperative effort is needed to be justified and saved in the end. You have compounded ones sanctification as the means to be justified. This is false

Click to expand...

Do we lose our free will at the point of justification? Are we incapable of turning away from God at this point? Are you saying we don’t need to abide in Christ to be saved?

“I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.”
‭‭JOHN‬ ‭15:5-6‬ ‭NASB‬‬

Jesus didn’t say he who abides in Me might bear fruit or may bear a little fruit. He said he WILL bear MUCH FRUIT. So your saying that we don’t have to bear fruit to be saved and contradicting what Jesus said here. Now if you say that someone who is saved will automatically bear fruit then Jesus’ entire message in John 15:1-10 is useless because He’s speaking to His 11 faithful apostles who were undoubtedly saved and justified at this time. What’s the point of even giving this message if they are incapable of failing to abide? Also if you say that a person who is justified will bear fruit then you have said bearing fruit is necessary for salvation. Who cares about what Martin Luther taught? No one for the first 1500 years of Christianity ever taught salvation by faith without works or eternal security.

Shimokita said:

Alas. How many times must Sacred Scripture be ignored? Once again for your reading pleasure:

22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”—and he was called a friend of God. 24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
​

Let me guess once again. When James wrote "Justified" he did not actually mean "justified".

Click to expand...

Right.
When James wrote Justified he did not mean justified.
This is because the doctrine of justification and sanctification had to be delineated by church fathers at the beginning of Christianity. The terms had not been decided upon yet...
Clement of Rome said this:

And we, therefore…are not justified of ourselves or by our wisdom or insight or religious devotion or the holy deeds we have done from the heart, but by that faith by which almighty God has justified all men from the very beginning (ch. 32:4).

But then he goes on to say how our good deeds are necessary.

To distinguish between these two doctrine, we've come to call one J and the other S,,or the catholic church calls it progressive justification.

This sanctification or progressive justification comes immediate after we have been made right with God through believing and having faith in Him...and does have to do with what we do with that faith we have attained.

BNR32FAN said:

Do we lose our free will at the point of justification? Are we incapable of turning away from God at this point? Are you saying we don’t need to abide in Christ to be saved?

“I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing. If anyone does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.”
‭‭JOHN‬ ‭15:5-6‬ ‭NASB‬‬

Jesus didn’t say he who abides in Me might bear fruit or may bear a little fruit. He said he WILL bear MUCH FRUIT. So your saying that we don’t have to bear fruit to be saved and contradicting what Jesus said here. Now if you say that someone who is saved will automatically bear fruit then Jesus’ entire message in John 15:1-10 is useless because He’s speaking to His 11 faithful apostles who were undoubtedly saved and justified at this time. What’s the point of even giving this message if they are incapable of failing to abide? Also if you say that a person who is justified will bear fruit then you have said bearing fruit is necessary for salvation. Who cares about what Martin Luther taught? No one for the first 1500 years of Christianity ever taught salvation by faith without works or eternal security.

Click to expand...

You know...we've come to hear FAITH ALONE so much that we forget that only God can save with no effort from us.

In 1999 Catholics and Lutherans came to a decision to sign a joint document which states that they both believe in faith alone for salvation. I could look for it if you wish.

The problem, as I see it, is that immediately after we are saved, or justified, THEN works, good deeds, come into play and herein lies the problem.

Are we required to do good deeds or not?
YES. We are and all churches understand this except those that believe in FAITH ONLY and have given Justification by faith only (which is correct) a bad reputation.

GodsGrace101 said:

You know...we've come to hear FAITH ALONE so much that we forget that only God can save with no effort from us.

In 1999 Catholics and Lutherans came to a decision to sign a joint document which states that they both believe in faith alone for salvation. I could look for it if you wish.

The problem, as I see it, is that immediately after we are saved, or justified, THEN works, good deeds, come into play and herein lies the problem.

Are we required to do good deeds or not?
YES. We are and all churches understand this except those that believe in FAITH ONLY and have given Justification by faith only (which is correct) a bad reputation.

Click to expand...

Yes I have always agreed with faith alone just not the version where works are completely absent, provided that the individual had the ability and opportunity to do works. Saying works are necessary for salvation is not saying we are saved by works. It just means if we are saved we will do good works. We cannot abide in Christ without doing them.

BNR32FAN said:

Yes I have always agreed with faith alone just not the version where works are completely absent, provided that the individual had the ability and opportunity to do works. Saying works are necessary for salvation is not saying we are saved by works. It just means if we are saved we will do good works. We cannot abide in Christ without doing them.

Click to expand...

I like to say that works keep us saved.
This is where James 2 would come in...
And Jesus
And Paul
And Peter
etc.

GodsGrace101 said:

I like to say that works keep us saved.
This is where James 2 would come in...
And Jesus
And Paul
And Peter
etc.

Click to expand...

I get what your saying but I would go even further to say that it is the heart that desires to do what pleases God that keeps us saved. The heart that truly loves God and loves others. Love will impel is to do good works.

GodsGrace101 said:

Grace is given in the sacraments of the catholic church.
But it is not the only way grace if given.

How was it done in the O.T. when the church did not exist?

If grace is distributed ONLY with the sacraments, what happens to infants that are not baptized, children that never make thier first communion or their confirmation. What about an 8 year old child that has never gone to confession?

Not only is God's grace given freely to all, but it's even given to the unsaved --- otherwise how would they ever come to know God.

Click to expand...

Abraham believed and it was credited to him for righteousness. (Rom. 4:3, Gen. 15:6)

mark kennedy said:

Abraham believed and it was credited to him for righteousness. (Rom. 4:3, Gen. 15:6)

Click to expand...

Yes he was justified (made right with God) by his faith and his works were evidence that his faith was genuine. James 2:14-26.

GodsGrace101 said:

Please show me an official declaration of the catholic church showing that faith AND works is how one is justified.

Click to expand...

You really need something from the Catholic Church on Faith and Works? I can assume you can just go to the catholic boards here and just ask about what our doctrine is, if we are faith alone or faith+works.

I never mentioned a Hindu kid,,,YOU just did.
I'm referring to persons that have heard the gospel of the N.T. and reject it and Jesus. THEY will be lost since they will not be born again...
John 3:3,5

Click to expand...

Right, this is an example. This is supposed to make you think on the notion of faith alone, because according to how many protestants have talked about this and have admitted themselves that even murderers like the Nazi's can go to heaven over any of the non-Jesus believing jewish kids they killed that forces you to make sense of the existence of morality if this is how the Christian God is as you claim.

And our discussion has to do with JUSTICE not with MORALITY. I believe we're discussing the justice of God here?

Click to expand...

Justice and morality is connected. We believe God is just and is the actual law giver. Our morality is proof of his existence. However if we go by the protestant notion of faith alone (and I can pull up quotes from other protestants just to show you how they say that even people with mental disabilities are going to hell because being incapable to comprehend accepting jesus isn't an excuse) then there isn't a such thing as good because the only good is believing in Jesus. You can be someone like Dahmer and get a way with it in a snap, but if you are some ignorant 10 year old who grew up Hindu or whatever, you are going to hell. There is no justice and no morality at all here.

Yes, I'd say that murdering someone is rejection of the Holy Spirit. Does that mean that one cannot repent later on in life and that person will be lost forever?

Click to expand...

It depends on the circumstances and the level of the murder i suppose, I'm not sure how God would see it though, I just assume so because even our judicial system has levels of murders that deserve the death penalty. However there are murderers who are by no longer human. The reason why their actions are sins of the Holy Spirit is because their soul has become something that the Holy Spirit never created. The HS never created beings in his image to do things like Hitler, Pol Pot, Ted Bundy, etc did. At the end, how can a Christian believe/argue that any of these men can just go to heaven over the person they tortured to death just by believing in a deity -- and then go talk about God is good?