How much good works is required to pass the test of saving faith?

[Ribosome]

Since saving faith must produce good works, yet we all remain imperfect, what is the bare minimum of good works required to constitute a saving faith?

 

[mickyd1961]

Define what you mean by a good work.

 

[hedrick]

I think this is a question that can’t be answered. You’re asking Calvinists specifically. Calvinists think we’re saved because God has decided to save us, and not because of works or even faith. Clearly both faith and works play an important part. Saving us means regenerating us and changes our lives. But that’s a result, not a cause.

However maybe you’re not thinking of good works as a requirement for salvation, but as a way to see whether someone is one of Jesus’ followers or not. I agree that this should be visible in our lives. But no one that I know of has come up with a way to rate people’s lives. You don’t know what challenges the person is dealing with, and you don’t know whether they’re in a temporary bad place that will change. We can certainly see things in both ourselves and others that are inconsistent with being a follower of Jesus. And we can reasonable warn someone when we see that. But I don’t think that’s an answer to your original question.

At times Calvinists have tried to come up with ways to see “evidence of election.” I think those have all been dead ends. While it’s not technically justification by works, it seems to produce a similar kind of legalism as a result. As you may know, “how do I know I’ve saved” is one of the most common questions in Christian Advice. Smart answers always point people to God, not to themselves. That is, if you’re not sure you’re saved, it’s best to look at what Christ has done for you, and God’s promises not to abandon anyone who trusts in him. You can trust him. You can’t trust yourself.

Of course we definitely should look at our lives. That should be part of our regular prayer life. If you have disciplinary responsibility, are a mentor, etc, you may need to look at others’ lives. But that’s not what we should look at when we need reassurance that God accepts us.

 

[Ribosome]

There is no assurance of salvation is Calvinism it sounds like to me. If there is no way to see evidence of election, then no one can know he is elect while here on earth. Isn't that a miserable way to live a Christian life? Not knowing if you'll end up in heaven despite all the faith and good works you do?

Looking to Christ ain't enough... gotta have works to prove it, and how much works is enough to prove it, no one knows.

What standard does a Calvinist compare his or another's obedience to anyway? From my experience, Calvinists just make up their own human standards of obedience that they compare themselves or others to see if they are in the faith or not. To me, it makes sense for the standard to be God's moral perfection, but everyone would fail that test, so they make up their own human ones like "do you read the Bible every day, do you pray 2 times per day, do you love the Lord enough, did you abandon 99% of your sins, etc". How would one even measure love for God or the sincerity of the heart in doing good deeds? Again, man-made standards.

 

[mickyd1961]

There is no assurance of salvation is Calvinism it sounds like to me. If there is no way to see evidence of election, then no one can know he is elect while here on earth. Isn't that a miserable way to live a Christian life? Not knowing if you'll end up in heaven despite all the faith and good works you do?

Looking to Christ ain't enough... gotta have works to prove it, and how much works is enough to prove it, no one knows.

What standard does a Calvinist compare his or another's obedience to anyway? From my experience, Calvinists just make up their own human standards of obedience that they compare themselves or others to see if they are in the faith or not. To me, it makes sense for the standard to be God's moral perfection, but everyone would fail that test, so they make up their own human ones like "do you read the Bible every day, do you pray 2 times per day, do you love the Lord enough, did you abandon 99% of your sins, etc". How would one even measure love for God or the sincerity of the heart in doing good deeds? Again, man-made standards.

If what you are saying is the case then Calvinists are just as guilty as any other denomination of legalism. I'm Catholic and I believe in predestination. The Christian life isn't a dog and pony show. In Romans St Paul says that the Spirit bears witness to our spirit that we are the children of God. Then comes in the final analogy the perseverance of the saints. God saves whom he wills. Our wills react to that irresistible grace. Rattling off rosary beads or quoting scripture till you're blue in the face isn't going to save your soul only God's unconditional election will.

 

[Ribosome]

If what you are saying is the case then Calvinists are just as guilty as any other denomination of legalism. I'm Catholic and I believe in predestination. The Christian life isn't a dog and pony show. In Romans St Paul says that the Spirit bears witness to our spirit that we are the children of God. Then comes in the final analogy the perseverance of the saints. God saves whom he wills. Our wills react to that irresistible grace. Rattling off rosary beads or quoting scripture till you're blue in the face isn't going to save your soul only God's unconditional election will.

Yes, I do believe all of religion is works salvation except for universalism.

Yes, Paul does say spririt bears witness to our spirit that we are children of God. Except no one can know if it's really God's spirit or an imitation telling us that. Some leave the faith never to return, no one is safe, and no one can know he is elect apart from universal salvation.

It is surprising to me that anyone wants to live a life trying to get into heaven and never knowing if they'll make it there in the end.

 

[hedrick]

It’s very strange that you are making these comments in a Reformed group, since of all Christians, Reformed (Calvinists) are most adamant that justification is not based on works, not even faith conceived as something we do. (For Calvin, faith is passive, something created in us by God.)

For a detailed treatment of assurance in Calvin, see http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/vox/vol11/calvin_lane.pdf (This paper is a fairly detailed academic work, of somewhat higher quality than one normally finds on the web. The author is a well-known Calvin scholar.)

My understanding is that for Calvin, assurance comes from our relationship with God. It’s not something separate. Consider the situation with people. Why are we confident that someone else loves us? It comes from knowing them. It’s not something separate. When someone looks for objective evidence that their husband or wife loves them, the relationship has most likely already broken down.

Similarly with God, assurance comes out of knowing God. For the Reformers, faith is, to a large extent, trust in God, which for Calvin means confidence in his love for me. The moment you look for proof outside the relationship itself, you run into impossible paradoxes. The recommendation for people who are having trouble trusting God is the same as the recommendation in the case of human relationships. It is spend more time with God, looking at what he has done for us and his promises to us.

There is an obvious problem with this: some people who are not God’s people may nonetheless have a false confidence. But the fact that someone may be delusional and think my parents are actually his doesn’t change my very real relationship with them. There is no possible test for our status before God that can be so objective that it will give the right answer no matter who applies the test. After all, one major problem with being sinners is that we don’t assess our own condition accurately. So there can be false assurance. But anyone with real faith should have real assurance.

I note that Calvin came very close to saying that everyone with saving faith had assurance. However he did recognize that practically some people at some times in their lives had an incomplete faith, even though they were actually God's people. See the paper for more discussion of this topic.

 

[BryanW92]

There is no assurance of salvation is Calvinism it sounds like to me. If there is no way to see evidence of election, then no one can know he is elect while here on earth. Isn't that a miserable way to live a Christian life? Not knowing if you'll end up in heaven despite all the faith and good works you do?

Looking to Christ ain't enough... gotta have works to prove it, and how much works is enough to prove it, no one knows.

So, you are saying that since you think Calvinists have no assurance of salvation, then we are miserable. But, then you say that in your works-based soteriology, "no one knows" how many works you need.

Then, you launch into our alleged "man-made standards".

We believe that Jesus died on the cross as the punishment for our sins and that he lived a perfect life to redeem our sinful lives. We believe that we could NEVER earn salvation on our own. So, our level of assurance is pretty high.

I was a Methodist before I was a Calvinist. When I had Arminian theology, I was never sure of anything. My lack of security was not found in the free will vs predestination debate or the works vs faith debate. Those are secondary. For me, the security of Calvinism is found in one thing: an admission of God's total sovereignty. If you believe that God is in charge, then you are assured. If you believe that God is nominally in charge, but eagerly awaiting your final answer on accepting Christ and then tallying your "good" works, then he's really just a manager.

 

[Ribosome]

hendrix, why are you now saying a person can be assured of his salvation when earlier you said there is no way to test election? How can one have assurance of salvation without knowing he is elect?

Bryan, you got my soteriology wrong. I believe everyone is going to heaven, so no faith nor works are required.

Are you convinced you are one of the elect? If you are, then how did you find that out?

 

[mickyd1961]

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Romans 10:13

 

[mickyd1961]

NOT EVERY ONE WILL BE SAVED.

John 3:15-20English Standard Version (ESV)

15 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

For God So Loved the World
16 “For God so loved the world,that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. 19 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. 20 For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.

 

[BryanW92]

Are you convinced you are one of the elect? If you are, then how did you find that out?

I was an atheist for 30 years. One day, without any human interaction, I suddenly believed in God and had a full measure of faith given to me.

If I had been asked, I would have declined. But, I was called with such force that I had to respond. God grants us the faith to believe.

 

[Hentenza]

Since saving faith must produce good works, yet we all remain imperfect, what is the bare minimum of good works required to constitute a saving faith?

There is no set number because a person is not saved by works. Our production of good works is the result of saving faith not the other way around. In other words, we do good works FROM salvation not FOR salvation.

Mark 4
8 Other seeds fell into the good soil, and as they grew up and increased, they yielded a crop and produced thirty, sixty, and a hundredfold.”

 

[hedrick]

hendrix, why are you now saying a person can be assured of his salvation when earlier you said there is no way to test election? How can one have assurance of salvation without knowing he is elect?

Bryan, you got my soteriology wrong. I believe everyone is going to heaven, so no faith nor works are required.

Are you convinced you are one of the elect? If you are, then how did you find that out?

You can't test election directly. Election is a decision by God. We can't read his mind. However we can see the results. Please read my last posting. There's a long history of people trying to come up with objective tests for whether someone is elect. I think that's a dead end. However you can still be confident that God loves you.

The distinction I'm making is between the kind of trust that develops in a relationship with God, and a test that's separate from that. Generally when people tried to develop tests for election they were looking for some kind of quota on good deeds, or some list of sins that disqualify you. That is, they were looking for a test that is separate from faith.

This is a summary. The paper by Lane gives a lot more detail.

 

[mickyd1961]

hendrix, why are you now saying a person can be assured of his salvation when earlier you said there is no way to test election? How can one have assurance of salvation without knowing he is elect?

Bryan, you got my soteriology wrong. I believe everyone is going to heaven, so no faith nor works are required.

Are you convinced you are one of the elect? If you are, then how did you find that out?

Ribosome could you give us a few examples that God loves and is going to save EVERYONE from the 31,173 verses of the bible?

 

[Skala]

There is no assurance of salvation is Calvinism it sounds like to me. If there is no way to see evidence of election, then no one can know he is elect while here on earth.

Can't the same be true of non-Calvinism? (It's not just Calvinists that believe in election. All Christians believe in election. Calvinists simply believe that election was unconditional. Arminians, for example, believe election was conditional. They both believe in election.)

In other words, Ribosome, surely you believe in (conditional) election, right?

Since you, too, believe in election, then your statement/argument works equally against your own view. Let me remind you what you said:

If there is no way to see evidence of election, then no one can know he is elect while here on earth.

So the question for you, Ribosome, is this: "In Arminianism (or whatever your soteriology is), is there a way to see evidence of election?"

 

[Skala]

Since saving faith must produce good works, yet we all remain imperfect, what is the bare minimum of good works required to constitute a saving faith?

I'm confused as to why you think this question is exclusive to Calvinism.

All Christian soteriological views believe faith produces good works, don't they? For example, probably even your own soteriology, right Ribosome?

 

[Ribosome]

I'm confused as to why you think this question is exclusive to Calvinism.

All Christian soteriological views believe faith produces good works, don't they? For example, probably even your own soteriology, right Ribosome?

Not all Christian soteriological views believe saving faith results in good works. Free Grace (easy-believeism, as its known to Calvinists) being one of them.

 

[Ribosome]

Can't the same be true of non-Calvinism? (It's not just Calvinists that believe in election. All Christians believe in election. Calvinists simply believe that election was unconditional. Arminians, for example, believe election was conditional. They both believe in election.)

In other words, Ribosome, surely you believe in (conditional) election, right?

Since you, too, believe in election, then your statement/argument works equally against your own view. Let me remind you what you said:



So the question for you, Ribosome, is this: "In Arminianism (or whatever your soteriology is), is there a way to see evidence of election?"

Sounds like you are saying assurance of salvation is impossible for everyone... am I right? That is a sad view in my opinion... doesn't that make you uncomfortable... the flames of eternal hell?

I have left Calvinism for universal salvation... everyone goes to heaven in my soteriology.

 

[Ribosome]

You can't test election directly. Election is a decision by God. We can't read his mind. However we can see the results. Please read my last posting. There's a long history of people trying to come up with objective tests for whether someone is elect. I think that's a dead end. However you can still be confident that God loves you.

The distinction I'm making is between the kind of trust that develops in a relationship with God, and a test that's separate from that. Generally when people tried to develop tests for election they were looking for some kind of quota on good deeds, or some list of sins that disqualify you. That is, they were looking for a test that is separate from faith.

This is a summary. The paper by Lane gives a lot more detail.

Your link is too long... however, this test you bring up, does it have anything to do with self-analysis of changed heart / good works? I'd really like to know where Calvinists find their assurance of salvation... so far it sounds to me like there is none in this soteriology. However, I've heard so many Calvinist sermons about assurance of salvation, that I'm paranoid I'm missing something. Assurance of salvation in Calvinism, to me, rests completely on whether one is elect or not, so in order to have assurance, how does one discover if he is elect or not?