Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
If you have faith and it is alone what is the use of it?
I have the faith of The Son of GOD, but I'm not sure how it would be alone.
True, James indicated Faith cannot be alone. But the Protestant formula "Faith Alone" always intended to have a context, and not be taken insensibly and without context.I have the faith of The Son of GOD, but I'm not sure how it would be alone.
Very good and quite funny reply. Thanks, it makes me feel better.I wouldn't know, but I'll inform you when I bump into someone who does.![]()
God is a covenant God. When we walk with God in a covenant relationship we have a partnership and we have an agreement. Independent Initiative means there is no partnership and no agreement. No covenant relationship.Define please
One of the issues is that slogans remove all context and tend to take on a life of their own. So while sola fide when understood in its proper context, and with appropriate nuance, would likely be acceptable to all mainstream Christians, it has led to a great deal of confusion and the rise of antinomian heresy among mainline Protestants. This has been especially problematic because of the polemical nature of the discussion, as Catholics have gotten a lot of mileage out of ignoring the nuance and context and Protestants have leaned into more extreme presentations of the doctrine in a sort of purity test in separating themselves from Catholics.True, James indicated Faith cannot be alone. But the Protestant formula "Faith Alone" always intended to have a context, and not be taken insensibly and without context.
In context, "Faith Alone" is speaking of the means of Justification. We have faith in Christ who alone did the work of our Justification.
Our own works did not justify us. Hence, "Faith Alone" is the basis of our Justification--not our own works of Self-Justification. It is our faith in Christ that enables our Justification because his works alone was able to justify us.
There are works we do that contribute to our being justified, but these works are not the basis of our Justification. One of our "works" is to simply believe that Christ is our means of Justification.
Another "work" that we do, in our approach to "being justified," is repenting. We repent in order to give Christ the place in our life where otherwise there is only independent initiative.
So, we must believe in Christ and we must repent, making him the primary inspiration in our life. These works do not justify us but they approach Christ who alone did the work of justifying us.
brilliant! I think that is so right on! I couldn't characterize it any better. The meaning is lost in the slogan.One of the issues is that slogans remove all context and tend to take on a life of their own. So while sola fide when understood in its proper context, and with appropriate nuance, would likely be acceptable to all mainstream Christians, it has led to a great deal of confusion and the rise of antinomian heresy among mainline Protestants. This has been especially problematic because of the polemical nature of the discussion, as Catholics have gotten a lot of mileage out of ignoring the nuance and context and Protestants have leaned into more extreme presentations of the doctrine in a sort of purity test in separating themselves from Catholics.
Thanks, I suppose.brilliant! I think that is so right on! I couldn't characterize it any better. The meaning is lost in the slogan
Yes, there's little attempt to understand the ins and outs especially as the views became tied with politics. Though I more had in mind the sort of believers who actively push back about any sort of sense of conscience by insisting that justification by faith exhausts salvation..
And when people engage in prideful back and forths, the meaning is lost even further. The extreme Right would say we need do nothing. Christ will do it for us. It's a matter of predestination.
A great point, and speaks to why the doctrine was important in the first place. There was little appreciation for the true grace of God in the offering as rather than emphasizing the transformative nature of faith; the burden was inordinately placed on the penitent to maintain their salvation. And it was largely done because the nature of the gospel as the conference of unmerited favor doesn't fill the coffers the same way that illicitely selling indulgences does. And I don't mean that to be a criticism of indulgences writ large, merely how they functioned in the 16th century church to conceal the gospel message.The extreme Left would say we have to follow all of the Catholic Sacraments, along with good deeds done in the name of the Faith. But there is little appreciation for the importance of God's Word being contained within our efforts in order to make our nominallly good deeds truly good.
Glad you found it worthwhile.Thank you!
left? right? what do they mean in theology or is it politics you're discussing in a religious context?brilliant! I think that is so right on! I couldn't characterize it any better. The meaning is lost in the slogan.
And when people engage in prideful back and forths, the meaning is lost even further. The extreme Right would say we need do nothing. Christ will do it for us. It's a matter of predestination.
The extreme Left would say we have to follow all of the Catholic Sacraments, along with good deeds done in the name of the Faith. But there is little appreciation for the importance of God's Word being contained within our efforts in order to make our nominallly good deeds truly good.
Thank you!
I did. I founded your added comments worthwhile, as well.Thanks, I suppose.
Yes, there's little attempt to understand the ins and outs especially as the views became tied with politics. Though I more had in mind the sort of believers who actively push back about any sort of sense of conscience by insisting that justification by faith exhausts salvation.
A great point, and speaks to why the doctrine was important in the first place. There was little appreciation for the true grace of God in the offering as rather than emphasizing the transformative nature of faith; the burden was inordinately placed on the penitent to maintain their salvation. And it was largely done because the nature of the gospel as the conference of unmerited favor doesn't fill the coffers the same way that illicitely selling indulgences does. And I don't mean that to be a criticism of indulgences writ large, merely how they functioned in the 16th century church to conceal the gospel message.
Glad you found it worthwhile.
Of course. It's the Lord's word that matters most of all, because not only is it perfect, but it is internal and spiritual, producing with us the needed results. But I was looking out how "Faith Alone" has been traditionally looked at, properly or not. Thanks.And the Father would say my Kingdom is neither of these so how about what I say
Exactly. Him through us, rather than how we think He would want.True Grace requires that we act in concert with God's Word, which is preciselly why it is so important to hear straight from God