• 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.

Salvation Wars

caffeinated.hermit

Active Member
Jun 25, 2025
98
89
Mid-West
✟120.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Has anyone read Matthew W. Bates' "Beyond The Salvation Wars"?

It's getting some attention (negative and positive, but plenty positive), and I'm thinking about buying a copy. His basic thesis is that "faith" was never meant to mean "belief" but more like "active loyalty", (as to a King). The book also seems to examine and split apart the differences in how Catholics and Protestants think about and understand salvation, and what each might learn from the other.

This, to an extent, perhaps ties into the "New Perspective on Paul" and other recent works by Protestant scholars that question what Sola Fide means, or perhaps question it all together. Anyway... looks good, might buy it. :seedling:
 
Last edited:
  • Useful
Reactions: St_Worm2

d taylor

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2018
13,761
5,827
60
Mississippi
✟323,439.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Has anyone read Matthew W. Bates' "Beyond The Salvation Wars"?

It's getting some attention (negative and positive, but plenty positive), and I'm thinking about buying a copy. His basic thesis is that "faith" was never meant to mean "belief" but more like "active loyalty", (as to a King). The book also seems to examine and split apart the differences in how Catholics and Protestants think about and understand salvation, and what each might learn from the other.

This, to an extent, perhaps ties into the "New Perspective on Paul" and other recent works by Protestant scholars that question what Sola Fide means, or perhaps question it all together. Anyway... looks good, might buy it. :seedling:
-

Never read it and never will, but he is a little late to the game. People have been redefining belief to include works (commitment, obedience, etc..) for a very long time.
 
Upvote 0

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2002
28,150
45,805
69
✟3,142,316.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Hello @caffeinated.hermit, there is a pretty positive review of the book in Christianity Today from earlier this year. Are you a subscriber to CT by any chance?

It's online too (here: What Must We Do to Agree on Salvation? - Christianity Today), but you need to be a CT subscriber to read it online, I believe (I would be willing to copy it and PM it to you if you'd like me to? .. if you are unable to read it online).

The "positive" reviews of the book all seem to come from liberal Christian sources (like CT), and what Bates espouses as a way to bridge Catholic and Protestant salvation models is really nothing new, just FYI (one of his other books is called Salvation by Allegiance Alone, just FYI). To begin with, the basis for his teaching seems to require the belief that πίστις (pistis) means FAR more than its traditional meaning ("faith"/"belief"/"trust"), rather, that it should be rightly translated as "loyalty" or allegiance" to Christ instead.

BTW, he is a Protestant theologian who I believe both graduated from a Catholic seminary and is now a professor at a Catholic University (Notre Dame).
edit: Well, I certainly got most of that wrong :sigh: For a far better Bates' bio, go here: Matthew W. Bates | Northern Seminary

This book seems to start with what Protestants refer to as Lordship Salvation, but his idea of "salvation by allegiance" seems to go MUCH further than that (Lordship Salvation teaches that we are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, APART from anything that "we" do, but allegiance salvation appears to include some of our works as a necessary part of our salvation, rather than as one of the many things that results from justification/salvation in the life of a true believer). IOW, Lordship Salvation teaches Ephesians 2:8-9 ~PLUS~ Ephesians 2:10 is true (that our salvation is by grace/faith alone, but that our salvation is always accompanied by/results in changes in what we desire/what we do/what and how we think/how we live our lives before God .. things that we will choose to do because we ARE believers, not things that we are ~required~ to do to BECOME or remain believers).

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 workmanship, created in Christ Jesus ~for/unto~ good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

I'm looking for a negative review to hear from the other side (so to speak), which would be a conservative Protestant or Catholic article on the book, but I haven't found one yet (if I do, I'll pass it alone).

God bless you!!

--David
p.s. - though it looks to be an interesting read, at $17 for the Kindle edition/$18 for the paperback, I think that I going to wait and buy a used paperback when they become available (because again, I don't think that Bates is going to make any new or significant points about soteriology in this book, nor will he be able to bridge the divide that he is hoping to between Catholics and Protestants with his "allegiance salvation" model.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

caffeinated.hermit

Active Member
Jun 25, 2025
98
89
Mid-West
✟120.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks for the feedback, @St_Worm2! I got through the CT article by using the "Read Only" setting on my browser, but thank you!

I think, next month, I may order it. I've been noticing a few books out lately by folks who are (technically) Protestant, kind of questioning Sola Fide, or, at least, questioning what it means. There was a book out by Paul A. Rainbow a while on the same topic. I might need to get that one, too.

I do see that Lordship Salvation models can be a bridge. Perhaps, in some ways, many of us are saying the same things in different ways. Perhaps this can be described as justification and sanctification being seen as part of a whole, instead of separate, or one springing from the other.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: St_Worm2
Upvote 0

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2002
28,150
45,805
69
✟3,142,316.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
If you have the time to read it, here's a short, sort of fun article about the 5 Solas of the Reformation (or at least a somewhat humorous way of looking at them) which I believe can actually be helpful in understanding what the Reformers really meant when they used them (it is to the Reformers that we should be looking to correctly define the terms that they coined, like sola fide, sola gratia, and solus Christus, rather than inventing our own definitions for them, which so many do today instead).
The Sole Soul of the Solas
It puzzles me deeply that so few are puzzled deeply by the paradox. We are so used to the befuddling language that we miss its befuddling nature. It ought to stop us in our tracks, arrest our attention, like those signs I see for Fifth Third Bank. Fifth Bank I could understand. Third Bank I could understand. I could understand them merging to become Fourth Bank. But Fifth Third Bank? What does that even mean?
In like manner, how is that our spiritual ancestors, our theological heroes, when they set about to tell us the one thing, ended up telling us five things? If I had lived in a cave for the last five hundred years and someone wanted to get me up to speed on the Reformation, and what it is I should believe and they said, “There are five things. The first one is sola–“ I would have to say, “Stop right there. If there are five, how can even one be called sola?”
It does, of course, in the end make perfect sense. The alones are not alone because they are talking, in a manner of speaking, on different axes. An infinite line is really infinite, but it doesn’t cover everything. An infinite plane is, in a manner of speaking, even more infinite that an infinite line, but it doesn’t cover everything. What sola Scriptura is seeking to keep out isn’t grace, or faith, or Christ or God’s glory. It’s trying to keep out tradition. Grace alone doesn’t exclude the Bible, or faith, or Christ or the glory of God.
In a very real sense, though they operate on different axes, these five are one. The Bible alone is God’s full revelation of His glory, in manifesting His grace in Christ, which becomes ours through the gift of faith. God’s grace is uniquely revealed in His Word, which manifests the work of Christ which becomes our by faith, all redounding to His glory. The solas are precise and potent affirmations of this truth, that it’s all about God. They remind us not just how we might have peace with God, but that peace with God is not the full and final end of all things. They remind us that the story of the Bible isn’t simply how we who are in dire straits can make it to safety, and how nice God is to play such an important role in making that happen. Instead they remind us that He is the end, and we are the means. The story is about Him and His glory more than us and our comfort.
Jesus makes much the same point in the Sermon on the Mount. He recognizes our weaknesses. We are self-centered, concerned with ourselves, and what we perceive our needs to be. So we worry about what we will eat and what we will wear. We fret about our provision and our status. What Jesus doesn’t tell us however, is, “Now, look, you have no need to worry about these things because you have someone on your side. Other people might need to worry but you don’t, because my Father in heaven is for you. You can pursue these things with confidence, knowing that you have the supreme advantage of having the supreme being on your side.”
What He told us instead was surprising. He told us to set aside our petty concerns and to set our minds on, well, depending on how you look at it, one, or two things. He said, “Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness.” Do we now have seven solas? Ought we to add the kingdom and His righteousness to the alones? By no means. These are all still together the one thing. There is an organic unity not only between the kingdom and the righteousness, but among these two and the five of the Reformation. We are not failing to pursue the kingdom of God when we are seeking after His righteousness. We are not failing to pursue His righteousness when we are seeking after His kingdom. We are pursuing one thing, one way, to honor and serve our Maker and Redeemer by affirming our dependence on Him and His preeminence in all things.
The God we serve is one. As such He calls us to follow one path. His commands are never and can never be pitted against each other. His wisdom is never and can never be pitted against itself. His grace is never and can never be pitted against His character. When we find ourselves torn, confused, pulled in different directions it isn’t because we are faithfully following Him, but because we are not. It isn’t because we are faithfully heeding His voice, but because we are not.
The two, His kingdom and His righteousness are one, as the five, the solas of the Reformation are one, as the Three, Father, Son and Holy Spirit are One. And these three groups are one as well. For in the end, they are all about the beginning. From the beginning they have always been about the end. For our lives are and always will be bound up together in the Alpha and the Omega. ~The Sole Soul of the Solas | RC Sproul Jr
--David
 
Upvote 0

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2002
28,150
45,805
69
✟3,142,316.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Hello again @caffeinated.hermit, I haven't found a contrasting review of Bates' book, but I did find one that seems to do so (take a look from a more conservative POV, or at least a more balanced one) about an earlier, but very similar book of his,

1753600019092.png

If you'd care to take a look, go here: Saved by ‘Allegiance’ Alone? On a New Attempt to Revise the Reformation

Thanks for the feedback, @St_Worm2! I got through the CT article by using the "Read Only" setting on my browser, but thank you!
Thank you for letting me know how to do that so I can let others know :oldthumbsup:

I think, next month, I may order it. I've been noticing a few books out lately by folks who are (technically) Protestant, kind of questioning Sola Fide, or, at least, questioning what it means. There was a book out by Paul A. Rainbow a while on the same topic. I might need to get that one, too.
If you find something interesting, perhaps you would consider coming back and telling us what you discover? (or perhaps you could start a thread about it so that we can discuss it?)

I do see that Lordship Salvation models can be a bridge. Perhaps, in some ways, many of us are saying the same things in different ways.
That's possible, of course, depending on how the two (or more) parties define the terminology that they are using (so each case would have to be considered individually).

Perhaps this can be described as justification and sanctification being seen as part of a whole, instead of separate, or one springing from the other.
That's what the Roman Catholics do. They refer to what Protestants call 1. "justification" and 2. "progressive sanctification" by simply calling all of it (the combination of the two, that is) "justification" (with 3. glorification thrown into the "justification" mix, as well). I believe that this is just one of the many reasons that our soteriological conversations leave us talking around, instead of to one another about this critical topic.

In the end however, I do not believe that there is a bridge that can be built between the two theologies, because our choosing to do good works and to live a holy life because we are ALREADY saved will always be at (unbridgeable) odds with our choosing to do good works and to live a holy life IN ORDER to be saved.

Gotta go. Talk to you later (Dv)

--David
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

NewLifeInChristJesus

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2011
1,547
455
Georgia
✟101,424.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Thanks for the feedback, @St_Worm2! I got through the CT article by using the "Read Only" setting on my browser, but thank you!

I think, next month, I may order it. I've been noticing a few books out lately by folks who are (technically) Protestant, kind of questioning Sola Fide, or, at least, questioning what it means. There was a book out by Paul A. Rainbow a while on the same topic. I might need to get that one, too.

I do see that Lordship Salvation models can be a bridge. Perhaps, in some ways, many of us are saying the same things in different ways. Perhaps this can be described as justification and sanctification being seen as part of a whole, instead of separate, or one springing from the other.
It's a slippery slope... No, not really. You're walking off a cliff when you take salvation away from Jesus and make it something you earn and deserve.
 
Upvote 0

caffeinated.hermit

Active Member
Jun 25, 2025
98
89
Mid-West
✟120.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It's a slippery slope... No, not really. You're walking off a cliff when you take salvation away from Jesus and make it something you earn and deserve.
Not really... and a growing number of Protestant scholars are leaning towards something more similar to theosis. Even Lutheran scholar Jordan Cooper has developed a concept of Lutheran Christification which bears a resemblance to theosis. It's a journey, it involves faith as well as discipleship, and we are asked to respond to God's grace.

There are *many* ways one could take that information and re-assemble it into a model or theory, some of which may be congruent with Sola Fide, others not. I am still hopeful that, within our lifetimes, we will see Soteriological differences finally broken down and resolved.
 
Upvote 0

NewLifeInChristJesus

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2011
1,547
455
Georgia
✟101,424.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Never read it and never will, but he is a little late to the game. People have been redefining belief to include works (commitment, obedience, etc..) for a very long time.​
Yeah, see Galatians 3:12 ("Yet the law is not of faith") and Romans 4:4 ("Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt").
 
Upvote 0

NewLifeInChristJesus

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2011
1,547
455
Georgia
✟101,424.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Not really... and a growing number of Protestant scholars are leaning towards something more similar to theosis. Even Lutheran scholar Jordan Cooper has developed a concept of Lutheran Christification which bears a resemblance to theosis. It's a journey, it involves faith as well as discipleship, and we are asked to respond to God's grace.

There are *many* ways one could take that information and re-assemble it into a model or theory, some of which may be congruent with Sola Fide, others not. I am still hopeful that, within our lifetimes, we will see Soteriological differences finally broken down and resolved.
The difficulty, of course, in reaching ecumenical unity on Soteriology is that our views on what it takes to be saved are infinitely separated. There is no possibility that I would ever give up on the idea that my deliverance "from the power of darkness" and my conveyance "into the kingdom of the Son of His love" (Col 1:13) was gained and is maintained by Him who reconciled "all things to Himself..., having made peace through the blood of His cross" (Col 1:20).

I do not understand why people want to make their own salvation dependent on their own faithfulness to God. Don't misunderstand me. I do understand that they point to certain verses that tell them their point of view is correct. I just do not understand why they do not think their sins and sinfulness disqualifies them. Yes, they admit they "stumble" and need to be forgiven. But then, they look past forgiveness as the reason for their reconciliation, and point to their works ("I repented", "I was sorry", "it was not habitual", or "I didn't continue in it"). So, I guess we could come to some agreement if everyone agreed to drop the works requirement and proclaim that the forgiveness Christ won for us on the cross bridges every gap for those who are right with God.
 
Upvote 0

caffeinated.hermit

Active Member
Jun 25, 2025
98
89
Mid-West
✟120.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I just do not understand why they do not think their sins and sinfulness disqualifies them. Yes, they admit they "stumble" and need to be forgiven. But then, they look past forgiveness as the reason for their reconciliation, and point to their works ("I repented", "I was sorry", "it was not habitual", or "I didn't continue in it"). So, I guess we could come to some agreement if everyone agreed to drop the works requirement and proclaim that the forgiveness Christ won for us on the cross bridges every gap for those who are right with God.

I think a major sticking point is in how we understand what many call "Sanctification". Is it something that naturally springs from faith, is it distinct from faith, or does it work with faith? Growing more like Christ and living for Him definitely involves how we live, what we do, how we treat others, and how we spend our time on this earth.

The only ones who don't affirm anything like this hold to (what I would describe as) a very extreme "free grace" view.
 
Upvote 0

NewLifeInChristJesus

Well-Known Member
Sep 4, 2011
1,547
455
Georgia
✟101,424.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
I think a major sticking point is in how we understand what many call "Sanctification". Is it something that naturally springs from faith, is it distinct from faith, or does it work with faith? Growing more like Christ and living for Him definitely involves how we live, what we do, how we treat others, and how we spend our time on this earth.
I see that you don't want to address what I think is the main sticking point in reaching an agreement on salvation. Maybe you could address it in your next post.

To answer your question, God calls on us to see ourselves as who we are in Christ (alive to God and dead to sin) and to act accordingly (to walk in the newness of life). The first instance (who we are in Christ) came about when God set us apart to Himself and came to live in our hearts (i.e., when He sanctified us). The second instance is us making an identical choice every day (and many times each day) to turn ourselves away from the lusts of the flesh and towards the desires of the Spirit who lives in us (i.e., self-sanctification). There is no Bible verse that teaches us that we become more like Jesus as we live for Him. That would be silly... like we're all standing on the shore trying to throw a rock from the US to England and one person braggs that his rock went further. There's no comparrison between His holiness and ours.
The only ones who don't affirm anything like this hold to (what I would describe as) a very extreme "free grace" view.
I'm not sure I understand the connection you are trying to make.
 
Upvote 0

caffeinated.hermit

Active Member
Jun 25, 2025
98
89
Mid-West
✟120.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
@NewLifeInChristJesus

It's the "walking in newness of life" that might be closest to what I am trying to describe here. It is still a walk, and does require some degree of effort, submission, and choice on our part, as you mentioned.

We are also told that we "put on Christ" through baptism, can "abide in Him", can allow that which He has given to "abide in us", and we are asked to "keep His words". How is all of that not, in many senses, becoming more like Him? Not in Deity, of course, but in our outlooks, love, humility, and a spiritual (instead of carnal) mindset.

My last point was simply, as far as I know, all Christians accept that a true Christian bears fruit and reflects his Savior to some extent. Except for, perhaps, some extreme "free grace" proponents who assert that one can be truly saved and yet bear no discernable fruit over time.
 
Upvote 0