This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
Locked on 03/31/2004 9:13:43 PM PST by Jim Robinson, reason:
I think perhaps you should all walk away from it for awhile before a bunch of you get suspended or banned. |
Posted on 02/24/2004 1:51:43 PM PST by Gamecock
My parents were Calvinists, and still are. In high school, I rejected Calvinism as a distortion of the free offer of the Gospel. I found teachers who agreed with me, and hardened me in my position. I was convinced that Romans 9-11 spoke to God's dispensational dealings with Israel.
In college, a cascade of factors changed my mind. Freshman year, a song off a CD I bought knocked around in my head, causing me to think -- Can God plan the ends, and not plan the means? That summer, I started a word-for-word study of Romans. Enter stage right, Free Republic.
I saw a thread titled about the Trinity. It turned out to be the middle of a debate between the Calvinists and Arminians. I plunged in, and laid it all on the line: here's why Calvinism is in error. The posters rebutted every single argument I had, and posed ones to me I couldn't answer.
In September 2001, I became a four-point Calvinist. In October, the 5th point fell into place (although my Arminian buddy claims I'm only a 4.5 pointer...), and I became a full-fledged Calvinist. Never looked back, it all makes sense.
Okay... Define the Calvinist meaning of the word "Faith", as in "Faith Alone", as it relates to "Faith" and "Works".
This should be an easy one for you, no?
17 posted on 02/24/2004 4:38:19 PM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
No answer?
I remember specifically trying to witness to an atheist friend of mine. I was laying out the general scope of redemptive history and trying to explain the gospel to him. I had composed a lengthy email to send to him and wanted to run it by my mother first since I knew she had been to seminary (I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything). After she read a particular part about it, specifically the part having to do with "love and free will" she said I might want to take a look at Romans 8 in light of what I said. Now, mind you, I had not studied a lot of theology. I had read through most of the New Testament and had a basic understanding of the Gospel. I read Rom 8 and was confused. I thought "this can't be right...how is it fair for us to be predestined as to what we believe?" I firmly believed that the Bible was the inerrant Word of God, so I knew that what was written had to be the truth. So, I set my mind to work and came back to my mother. I had it all figured out. You see, God could see ahead of time who would choose Him, and so just by the very act of creating them (and thus setting into motion the cosmic chain of events leading up to that choice) He was predestining them. I was rather proud of myself for being able to grasp such a difficult concept. Mom told me to read Romans 9.
I felt like Paul was speaking directly to me, answering each of my objections as I brought them up. I tried very hard to come up with a way to reconcile Romans 9 with my preconceived view, but I couldn't find one. I spent a great deal of time reading through the New Testament, particularly the Epistles, trying to find something that would "explain away" these passages, but all I found were more passages along the same lines. Acts 13:48 hit me very hard. So did John 6.
I finally realized how futile and vain my efforts were, and came to the conclusion that I had no choice but to embrace what I read...that God is sovereign over men and ultimately decides who is saved and who is not.
This experience lead me to spend more time in the Word and more time reading other works. Eventually I found out that the term commonly used for the doctrines I was discovering was "Calvinism." I continue to this day to find more and more in the pages of Scripture as I discover and explore the holiness of God as revealed in His Word.
However, I was "indoctrinated" with the Heidleburg confession during my stint with the 5 pointers. While I didn't remember the correct answer, I knew exactly where to find it.
From the confession:
Why do you say that you are righteous only by faith? A. Not that I am acceptable to God on account of the worthiness of my faith, but because only the satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ is my righteousness before God, and I can receive the same and make it my own in no other way than by faith only.
FAITH ONLY? FAITH ALONE? James Repudiates that doctrine! We could go all night into the reasons Calvinism's spinning of how works play into salvation, but we don't need to. James, contrary to the claims of this confession, solved this issue 1900 years or so ago.
Calvinism shares with Lutheranism, the "downgrading" of the book of James. While still considered scripture, James is twisted, spun, and explained away by giving other passages more promenance and importance. Like I said, scripture does not support justification by
faith alone. That's a man made doctrine. But.. I'd take it you don't accept the evidence of James. So, unless you can say "you have a very good point", let's not go round and round about this all nigh.
I see this as a what came first, the chicken or the egg type question. The answer, in light of the book of Genesis is the chicken. What saves us? Faith. What are works? The outward manifestation of our faith. Their works are a pretty good indication if the faith is real. (not perfect, but pretty good) One must read the totality of James 2 to understand that. Why works? Because God wants me to feed the poor, visist and pray with the ill, etc...
You just told me what Faith accomplishes. You haven't told me what Faith is, specifically as in "faith alone", as it relates to "faith" and "works".
So, let's try again: What is "Faith", specifically as in "faith alone", as it relates to "faith" and "works"?
FAITH ONLY? FAITH ALONE? James Repudiates that doctrine! We could go all night into the reasons Calvinism's spinning of how works play into salvation, but we don't need to. James, contrary to the claims of this confession, solved this issue 1900 years or so ago. Calvinism shares with Lutheranism, the "downgrading" of the book of James. While still considered scripture, James is twisted, spun, and explained away by giving other passages more promenance and importance. Like I said, scripture does not support justification by faith alone. That's a man made doctrine. But.. I'd take it you don't accept the evidence of James. So, unless you can say "you have a very good point", let's not go round and round about this all nigh.
I do accept the evidence of James. If you understood the Calvinist meaning of Faith (or even the Lutheran, though Calvinism has been IMO more clear in it's presentation), you would understand that.
Let me ask you this: No offense meant. Honestly. Would the following statement be true?
If that is False, then you are (again) cordially invited to provide a proper definition of what, to the Calvinist, Faith is; But if the statement is True, then just say so, and I'll explain what a Calvinist means by the word, "Faith"; as it attends to "faith alone", or "faith" and "works".
What do you say?
The "alongside" is what mars your definition of Calvinism -- and Rome's understanding of Salvation.
One little word -- but what a big impact. I'll compose a full response.
Do I belive this verions of works? No. It's just an attempt to whittle down works while focusing on faith. Calvanism seems to argue that if you are faithful, then you must be obedient. Christ taught love more than obedience. Works out done out of obedience may still be pleasing to God, but not as pleasing as works from the heart. An "active" obedience is required from a Christian, but IMO, it's part of faith. It *is* true that we need to actively obey God. That's not the issue. Works, when done from the heart and out of love and charity, are not works of "active obedience." I can get my kid to do things he dosn't want to, and he's not doing it out of faith or love. He does it "actively" because he doesn't want a time out or he want's something from me. That's not love. See the difference? I'd go on but I'm tired. I'll resume in the morning.
In order to keep our terms matched, I'll use the term "obedience" as regards Faith in my response... but I'm not really understanding this dichotomy between "love" and "obedience" you're drawing, there's no real corollary in Calvinistic understanding.
I understand that outward obedience can be compelled without a matching inward love... but if someone Obeys out of a humble, desperate awe and appreciation of the salvation which has been wrought for him, how is that not a Loving Obedience? Which is Calvinism's view of the matter.
As I said, I'll put together a proper response for your consideration on the morrow. Sleep well.
best, OP
So, I'm going to go ahead and tell you what Protestants mean by "Faith Alone Saves" -- particularly Calvinists, who maintain the Reformers' doctrines most closely of the various Protestant traditions. Let's have at it.
Is Salvation through Faith and Works? First, lets examine the Roman Catholic teachings on the subject:
So, we see that the Roman Catholic teaching is quite clear: faith is the beginning of human salvation through the observance of the commandments of God and of the Church, faith cooperating with good works, increase in that justice received through the grace of Christ and are further justified.
Now, then, what is the Calvinist teaching? Is Salvation through Faith Alone?
The Calvinist Presbyterian Dr. D. James Kennedy defines Saving Faith thusly: "What is saving faith? I think we can say that it is the response of the whole soul to the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. That means it involves our mind, our heart, and our will. Our intellect, our emotions, and our volition are all involved in our soul, and it is the yielding of that soul to Christ."
So we see that, to the Calvinist, Faith by definition incorporates three crucial facets:
And of this Faith, the Westminster Shorter Catechism declares: Justification is an act of God's free grace, wherein he pardons all our sins, and accepts us as righteous in his sight, only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and receive by faith alone.
Thus, while the Calvinist would say that Saving Faith is a Vital Faith; no mere intellectual assent to Christs Lordship but a loving submission of Heart thereto. Good Works are the inevitable outworking of this Saving Faith (for a Faith which includes a Reverently Obedient Volitio is demonstrated in its performance of Good Works), but we are Saved through this Faith Alone a depraved thief, who truly possesses this Saving Faith for even single moment at the point of death, is immediately and completely Justified without the outworking of a single Good Work of his obedient Volitio.
It is important to note, at this point, that the Calvinist view is specifically anathematized by the Council of Trent:
This is unfortunate for Rome -- in fact, it is devastating. For as the Apostle Paul declares, we are Justified by Saving Faith itself apart from Good Works.
And this is the Calvinist definition of Saving Faith, the definition of the Bible the Knowing, Assenting, Submissive Faith which Justifies a Man, in and of itself, apart from Good Works.
But in clear contradiction to the Epistle to the Galatians, the Roman Catholics have said that Faith begins salvation but must cooperate with Good Works in order to Justify. Thus, they reveal their definition of Faith as being a faith to which Good Works must be added in order to Justify.
In doing so, they have brought down the Condemnation of James not upon Protestants but upon the Lords of the Roman Catholic Church. For if the Roman Catholic Definition of the Faith which begins salvation according to the Decrees of Trent, is a faith to which Good Works must be added in order to Justify, then their faith is by definition the very same Dead Faith which James condemned!
They claim that their faith does alone begin Salvation, and that to it Good Works must be added in order to Justify. But if theirs is a faith which begins alone, and to it Good Works must be added - then how can such a faith even "begin" salvation as they claim, when being alone at the beginning of salvation and requiring "cooperation" with Good Works in order to Justify, it is a Dead Faith from the beginning?
Instead, James gives us a ringing endorsement of the Calvinist Definition of Faith a vital, Saving Faith which Justifies apart from Good Works (Galatians 2:16) and is shown in its outworking of Good Works (James 2:18), the very same Biblical Definition of Faith which Rome anathematized in Canon 24 of the Council of Trent.
By promulgating a False and Un-Salvific definition of faith which begins salvation alone (being Alone, it is a Dead Faith and can begin no salvation, James 2:17) and which must cooperate with Good Works in order to Justify (even though true Saving Faith does Justify apart from Good Works, Galatians 2:16), and by anathematizing the True and Biblical definition of Saving Faith which Justifies apart from Good Works (Galatians 2:16) and is shown in its outworking of Good Works (James 2:18), Rome has led BILLIONS astray. And she has persecuted and killed the Reformers and preachers of righteousness whom God sent to the vineyard to warn her of her sins.
Rome must Repent of her sins immediately. She must rescind the false teachings of Chapters 8 & 10 of Trent and recant the false anathemas of Canons 24 and 32 of Trent. She must repent of her false teachings and false anathemas and proclaim publicly to all the True and Biblical definition of Faith as taught by Christ and Paul and James and the Reformers and the Faithful Remnant of God throughout the ages, a Saving Faith which Justifies apart from Good Works (Galatians 2:16) and is shown in its outworking of Good Works (James 2:18), and repent her persecutions of the Reformers and preachers of righteousness whom God sent to warn her of her sins.
The Sins of Rome in this matter are grievous. They are damning.
She must not continue in them for a moment.
best, OP
I was of the free-will bent for many years, but during a spiritual crisis (I wonder where that came from, hmm?) I actually started reading the scripture and discovered that God was not the "doting father" that I had imagined Him to be, but was presently in absolute, unwavering control of the entire universe-even of the salvation of men. I grappled with God over this for about a year (and gave my Arminian pastor fits), but then the Lord reached down and touched my wife with unexpected, unasked-for salvation and healing (it was like a lightning bolt in our lives that changed everything-I'm not even sure I can explain it). Looking for a name for this new kind of unsought grace, I called an old friend of mine who had once told me about something called "Calvinism". During that chat, I realized that I was "Reformed".
So, I'm going to go ahead and tell you what Protestants mean by "Faith Alone Saves" -- particularly Calvinists, who maintain the Reformers' doctrines most closely of the various Protestant traditions.OP, having read your post, I see what is seemingly a good foundation for a debate. It may very well gain for you what you'd like to get out of it, and I hope it will. For me, a Catholic, I feel compelled to point out that my church, that is, the CHURCH of THE APOSTLES (the authors of TRADITION with the Holy Spirit's guidance -- you know keys, Peter), The Bride of Our Lord Jesus Christ, is where literally billions¹ have placed their trust as to having the right answers to the questions which we ask in order to lead us to Him.
Yes, the hounds of heaven were after me even before I knew Him. I hated God and the Church so badly, but had an inexplainable desire to understand the scriptures. I puzzled over them for two year with no luck until I heard that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. It took a year before I understood the basics of His Blood and Atonement. It took 25 more years before I understood some of the Totality of my depravity and desperate situation in need of Christ. Our Lord Jesus was right when he said to the rich young ruler "Why do you call me good, no one is good but God alone". The rich young ruler did not know He was addressing God.
I have no goodness. Goodness comes from God alone, there would be no goodness on this earth if it were not for God's intervention. God is so good he even planned answers to my prayers before the foundation of the earth. The things God must have to do to get a prayer through me!
After 30 years of looking at the scripture, I see it ever truer than I ever imagined, I cannot exhaust it. It is inerrant as Christ Himself. It had to beat on me too until it broke through that this life is nothing in comparison to an Eternity with the Love of Christ.
Friends, Take in and eat the Word of God. It is bread indeed, you cannot exhaust it, bury it, chisel it, sing it, do whatever you have to get it into your heart and mind. The benefits are limitless.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.