Yesterday I ran across a post wherein one of our Christian friends claimed, quote: "Salvation is through faith alone" Some of you may immediately recognize this as the doctrine of sola fide, i.e., justification by faith alone. Apparently, this doctrine was introduced by Martin Luther during the Reformation and there's been a running debate over its legitimacy since Luther and Erasmus argued about it and the freedom vs. the bondage of the will in 1524-25: Erasmus and Luther, Free vs. Unfree Will http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/erasmus-and-luther-free-vs-unfree-will.593173/ For those less familiar with the doctrine of sola fide, here's a Wiki blurb about it and the doctrine of Total Depravity that is often associated with it: Sola fide https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sola_fide Total Depravity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_depravity Given the importance of this argument during the Reformation and the fact it remains unsettled I find it to be one of the more interesting of the outstanding theological disputes within the Christian faith, and I guess it could be expanded to include other religions where there are questions surrounding salvation and free will. I'd like to hear what others think of this doctrine, the freedom/bondage of the will and the issues surrounding both. To get the discussion/debate started I'll state that I personally don't subscribe to the doctrine of sola fide, total depravity and the bondage of the will, and if I had lived in the early 16th Century I would have backed Erasmus in his debate with Luther (although I don't believe that human beings are perfectible). I've always believed that justification/salvation requires more than faith alone, and I believe there is scripture supporting the position that salvation requires both faith and the good works. What do you think?
I do find it odd that the only time the words "faith alone" appear together in the scriptures is when they explicitly state that man is NOT saved by faith alone.
Am I missing something, or did Luther and Calvin miss something? Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought those two were ALL about Scripture, so how could they arrive at the doctrine of sola fide if there is no scriptural basis for it?
They definitely saw themselves as being all about scripture, but that doesn't mean that they were, and even they had their disagreements. I'll explain the logic here as best I can based on my Baptist upbringing: the way I was taught that sola fide worked was that faith was the, I guess you would say, mechanism through which you were saved. Saved by grace alone, by faith alone, in Christ alone, as my pastor put it. The book of James is the only book of the Bible that uses the phrase "faith alone," and it specifically says that "a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone." This goes against Luther's teaching that NO act is ever good enough and that NO human act is truly righteous. It also goes against Calvin's doctrine of total depravity. The explanation I was given is that the faith is the important part, BUT if you have the right faith then you will also engage in good works. The faith is the cause and the works are just a symptom. The works themselves, according to my upbringing (which I rejected) emphatically DO NOT matter in and of themselves. Personally, I don't think this is right and I don't think it is scripturally sound, but I want to be as objective as I can here.
I grew up agnostic although, as the country song says, my Lutheran mama certainly tried. When I grew up, got married, and started to have kids the wife and I got involved with the more Pentacostal end of the Missouri Synod Lutheran church (yes, I do understand how strange that sounds). We're both semi-pro musicians (wife's also the best singer I've ever known) and that got us into all the praise and worship stuff. We eventually heard about all the sola fide stuff and the other twin tenet, sola scriptura. As an engineer by trade and temperament, sola scriptura (basically salvation come through reliance on scripture as the final authority) was the first to really gnaw on my brain. I mean there were something like 18,000 protestant denominations that couldn't agree on what scripture actually says or even which modern version of the Bible was the "best" and most authoritative. Seemed to vary depending on who was in the pulpit. And then sola fide (salvation by faith alone) began to bug me. The alter calls in every service with people walking out after "accepting Christ" seemed a bit lacking. You mean that's it? Do that at 12 years old and never visit a church again and your salvation's secure as long as you maintain some kind of nebulous "faith". Just didn't make sense to me. Eventually I stumbled onto some Catholic radio shows, etc. and heard what the Catholic versions were. Can't quite remember the Latin versions, but the 2 pillars are salvation is by God alone and not based on scripture, but based on holy tradition through the Church which sorts scripture into a religious and consistent whole. So what does all that mean? Simply God's done all the work for all of humanity no matter what faith you adhere to or don't. When Jonah went to Nineveh he wasn't talking to only Jews and he didn't say everyone has to be a Jew. He said repent. That's it. Salvation is for everyone, even some tribesman who's never heard anything about it. Buddhists, Hindus, atheists, and agnostics. Christ died and was raised from the dead for all of us, not just the ones who claim a Christian faith. And what do you have to do to get salvation? Be afraid and live like you mean it. Catholicism believes that when you die you will go directly to God and you will have to stand, naked, weak, broken, and quite likely terrified and have to account for your life. What have you done to help others and fight for real justice? At that point God alone will decide your salvation. Life is scary business. Earn it. So I'm a Catholic, as back slid and unworthy as anyone else. And for years I wrestled with the question of what do I say to God when he asks. I mean, that's a pretty crappy definition of what's required specifically. Things would be so much easier if I just had to answer an alter call. And then about a year ago that answer finally hit me. When God asks me to atone for my life the answer is simple: "I tried."
"Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." (sermon on the mount) He is telling us to do essentially what he did because he wants us to be like him to the honor and glory of the Father. And where we fall short, he will make up the difference. So if all work is finished in Jesus life, and it is but for us to only have faith. Then why would he command us to the same path as he. The entire plan of salvation is about works. Heck, everything in life is work. Granted it begins with faith. But without works, faith is dead.
No he's not ?? Jesus is not telling us to sacrifice ourselves on the cross in the SOM ?? he is saying .. Do Good works - part of which is lack of doing bad things. What ?? .. what are you talking about .. you are making things up .. like above .. Jesus is not telling us to go out and get nailed to a cross .. nor is he saying that if we don't follow any of his teachings .. its all good - we still get through to the pearly gates. SOM = Do the will of the Father = the will of the Father is the teachings of Jesus in that sermon .. summarized by the Golden Rule .. but not just the hearing of the word .. but the doing .. .. practicing those teachings. So it is written - So it shall be done ! Thus sayeth The Lord - From the Giftedone har har har ..
Well said. And while I'm going out on a limb here, I presume Jesus' works were intended to set an example for all of us (or at least his followers). If faith was all that was required of us all he had to do was show up and say "Here I am!" and then hail a sunbeam to Heaven. All of that hard Lamb of God and humanist stuff that got him nailed to a cross would have been entirely unnecessary...
Holy Strawman, Batman! Injeun never claimed that Jesus told anyone to go out and sacrifice themselves on the cross. Jesus purposely made that his mission so it wouldn't have to be ours.
Then again, his Apostles and followers were also crucified and put to death. So if in practicing the gospel principles, it should come to that, then what is there to do but to die. Fortunately for Americans, our religious liberty allows us to practice and speak his gospel freely, without fear of crucifixion. There is only one Jesus Christ.
No, salvation by faith alone did not start with Martin Luther. It was explicitly mentioned in early church writings, including the earliest document of church letters Clements First Letter (AD 96, possibly as early as AD 70). (Clement 32:4) And so we, having been called through His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or understanding or piety or works which we wrought in holiness of heart, but through faith, whereby the Almighty God justified all men that have been from the beginning; to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.
I know, right? There's no improvement of ourselves or refinement of our fidelity and our godly attributes thru our free agency and our weaknesses in the magical notion of sola fide. We'd just remain dumb clucks, an exercise in vanity.
And @Injeun Jesus did say "Here I am!". He performed miracles - he healed the sick, the lame, turned water into wine, cast out demons, and raised 3 people from the dead. Raising Lazarus was such a visible act that it attracted the attention of the Jewish leaders in nearby Jerusalem. Jesus basically said He was the Son of God, told people His message, and gave His credentials by performing miracles. And many people still did not believe. <> Its salvation through faith, salvation changes the persons attitude and that change is reflected in their activities. Their priorities become “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind", and since the saved person loves God then " ‘Love your neighbor as yourself" also becomes a priority (Matthew 22:36-40). Salvation through faith, salvation demonstrated through works. Thats what James is all about.
Jesus stated that the "works" part IS a requirement in Matthew 25:31-end. Even his followers will be damned to hell should they fail the works part. I don't believe there is any indication in the Bible that salvation is permanent.
Thank you for that out, Battle3. However, I am left to wonder where Clement came up with this idea. The early Church Fathers were famous for formulating their own interpretations and ideas that were either scripturally suspect (or debatable) or had no sound basis in scripture at all.
Thanks, Will - that was probably the scripture I've read concerning works but I was unable to cite/quote it in the OP. Now, where does the doctrine of sola fide fit in with this (if at all)?
Yet my point remains that Jesus did more than just show up (as you just pointed out). Which makes sense, as does the part concerning God's grace, for while one may earn that grace it is still God's to give.
I can't cite that. My own Baptist (not Southern Baptist) upbringing mostly focused on sola fide being an absolute requirement, but not permanent. From there, it got somewhat hazy.
Exactly, and the part about free agency is where I come down on the side of Erasmus and those before him going all the way back to Jesus. This was central to overthrowing the Ancient assumptions and acceptance of natural inequality - that we as individuals were defined by our social and economic status, family, sex, citizenship, freedom or enslavement, etc., and this was all part of the order of the cosmos. Jesus said no, we were defined by our own individual agency - what we thought, spoke and did - not the superficial or exterior places and roles I mentioned earlier. It is here where many have traced the origins of Western Individualism and Liberalism, as well, and on a purely secular/material level it can be considered the most revolutionary and liberating of Jesus' accomplishments.
That's taking it too far. The sacrifice of his life for that of human kind is not something that anyone could possibly suggest is something some other human could possibly do. On the other hand, Jesus did live a life on Earth that matches what he demanded of his followers.
That is not what Jesus teaches in the SOM -- does not tell folks they need to get crucified in order to achieve salvation - this is made up gibberish that you are trying to supplant on the teachings of Jesus .that one is saved through works.. not "Faith" as the decepticons would have you believe
Agreed .. why Injun would suggest such a thing .. I do not know. Practiced what he preached .. he did .. gonna be judging at the end of days .. your deeds WRM
Some have argued that there is no indication in the Gospels that damnation is permanent, either - that it was all invented by the likes of Tertullian and Augustine: How & When The Idea of Eternal Torment Invaded Church Doctrine https://medium.com/@BrazenChurch/ho...-torment-invaded-church-doctrine-7610e6b70815
No, he did not, nor can you quote where he did. I suggest you read Injeun's post more carefully and try not to put words in his mouth.
