Reply to a Protestant on “Faith Alone”

This is my reply to a lengthy comment by “ThornyCrown” underneath the video by my friend, Kenny Burchard, “Why ‘Sola Fidei’ is 100% unbiblical!! [30+ Verses to Highlight!!]” (10-6-24; utilizing my biblical research). His words — and I cite all of them — will be in blue. I use RSV for biblical citations.

*****

As a die-hard Protestant who left the Roman church 35 years ago,

I’m a die-hard Catholic, who left Protestantism 34 years ago. But I continue to have great respect for evangelical Protestantism and am ecumenical. I simply have some honest disagreements with my esteemed brothers and sisters in Christ, with whom I continue to have a great deal in common. And I’m sure Kenny feels the same way.

I find GREAT fault with this video by what Mr. B does NOT say.

That’s fine; it can be discussed (and I will be doing that), but it would be nice — and I think more sensible — if you responded to what he actually argued. To not do so is, bottom line, simply the old tired tactic of topic-switching and evading the responsibility of interaction with an opposing argument. If the Bible passages we produce (most from myself) are inadequate in your opinion, then by all means, show us (and everyone reading) how and why they are. If you have the superior biblical case, that should be a piece of cake for you; easy as pie (to use two culinary analogies). We’ll have that dialogue with you, but it takes two to dialogue.

It’s quite easy to lecture without the opposing view there to object,

Exactly my point! Since you yourself say you are responding to what Kenny didn’t say, rather than to what he did contend for, you are guilty of the very same thing you now condemn. There is not yet an opposing view because you set off into completely new territory. But I am now replying to you, providing the opposing view to your current off-topic argument, and giving you the courtesy of direct interaction. I respectfully ask that you extend to us the same courtesy.

so kindly allow these next two comboxes to be my objection.

You’re free to talk, as long as you remain civil. But in the future, again, we ask that you please stay on-topic. Otherwise, your comment veers too close to trolling.

First, I have before me a list of 30 people from antiquity who used the phrase “faith alone” or its derivative.

That’s clearly off-topic, since the video is about 30+ Bible passages, not the Church fathers. Secondly, did you do that research yourself or did you simply copy it from someone else? Thirdly, context is all-important in such discussions, so you need to provide documentation as much as possible: preferably to online sources, so context can be examined. Fourth, I did do my own research, in many posts on the same topic, in addition to my three books of patristic citations:

Catholic Church Fathers: Patristic and Scholarly Proofs (Nov. 2007 / rev. Aug. 2013, 284p)

The Quotable Augustine: Distinctively Catholic Elements in His Theology (Sep. 2012, 245p)

The Quotable Eastern Church Fathers: Distinctively Catholic Elements in Their Theology (July 2013, 303p)

I won’t list them all, but suffice to say, they would obviously disagree with you.

Maybe in some very few cases; someone who simply got it wrong. I suspect, however, that in almost all cases, they do not, when their overall thought is considered. Again, I can prove that because I have done the work. I have time to do such work, as a full-time Catholic apologist, these past 23 years. Here’s what I have collected along these lines:

Marius Victorinus:  For faith itself alone gives justification and sanctification (“Ipsa enim fides sola iustificationem dat-et sanctificationem” ).

You provide no documentation. I will do so. This quotation is from his Commentary on Galatians, which can be accessed online (with a little work!). It was published by Oxford University Press in 2005, translated with notes by Stephen Andrew Cooper. Here is the citation in context:

We, says Paul, we have believed in Christ, and we do believe in order that we might be justified based on faith, not works of the Law, seeing that no flesh—that is, the human being who is in flesh—is justified based on works of the Law. So knowing this, if we have believed that justification comes about through faith, we are surely going astray if we now return to Judaism, from which we passed over to be justified based not on works but faith, and faith in Christ. For faith itself alone grants justification and sanctification. Thus any flesh whatsoever—Jews or those from the Gentiles—is justified on the basis of faith, not works or observance of the Jewish Law. (Cooper, 152-153; italics not included, because I doubt that they were in the original)

Catholics agree that initially we are justified by faith alone (and of course, grace alone), contra Pelagianism. We have no beef with that at all. It’s “monergistic” at first.  What we are saying is that after initial justification, we are then required to cooperate with God and do good works, if we are to be saved in the end, because “faith without works is dead.” Now, it may be that Marius Victorinus was simply wrong and held to a proto-Protestant view of justification, unlike virtually all other Church fathers (according to the Protestant scholars McGrath and Geisler). Translator Cooper notes that “it is perhaps the earliest Latin formulation of Paul’s theology in those terms [i.e., “faith alone”]” (p. 153).

Isn’t that interesting?  Marius Victorinus lived from 290 to 364, so this means — if Cooper is correct — that no Latin Church father used the term “faith alone” for at least 260 years after the death of Christ. The fact that Protestants can find one man is no proof that the Church fathers en masse or as a consensus believed in “faith alone.” One can always find one or a few Church fathers who simply got things wrong. They’re not infallible, in Catholic teaching. But they usually agreed overwhelmingly on orthodox Catholic doctrine. This issue is no exception, as even my own articles alone prove.

St. Paul — over against Marius Victorinus — teaches over and over that good works play a crucial and necessary role in the attainment of salvation (i.e., in anyone who lives after they have been regenerated at baptism):

“As it is written, ‘He who through faith is righteous shall live.’” (Romans 1:17); “To those who by patience in well-doing seek for … immortality, he will give eternal life … glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good” (Romans 2:7, 10); “the doers of the law … will be justified” (Romans 2:13). The “end” of “sanctification” is “eternal life” (Romans 6:22), and indeed we are “saved, through sanctification” (2 Thessalonians 2:13); we’re “fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him” (Romans 8:17; cf. 1 Peter 4:13). He taught that we must do many good things and be fruitful in order to be saved:

• Galatians 5:14, 19, 21-23. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” … Now the works of the flesh are plain … those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such there is no law.
• 2 Thessalonians 1:8, 11. … inflicting vengeance … upon those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. … To this end we always pray for you, that our God may make you worthy of his call, and may fulfill every good resolve and work of faith by his power …
• 1 Timothy 4:12, 15-16. … set the believers an example in speech and conduct, in love, in faith, in purity. … Practice these duties, … Take heed to yourself and to your teaching; hold to that, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers.

Paul frequently makes many similar points in his letters: “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure” (Philippians 2:12-13); “work heartily, … knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward” (Colossians 3:23-24); “woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness” (1 Timothy 2:15); “aim at righteousness, godliness, faith, love, steadfastness, gentleness. Fight the good fight of the faith; take hold of the eternal life to which you were called” (1 Timothy 6:11-12); “keep the commandment … do good … be rich in good deeds … so that they may take hold of the life which is life indeed” (1 Timothy 6:14, 18-19).

Chrysostom…  For he makes a wide distinction between commandments and ordinances. He either then means faith, calling that an ordinance, (for by faith alone he saved us) or he means precept, such as…  (NPNF1: Vol. XIII, Homilies on Ephesians, Homily 5, Ephesians 2:11-12).

St. John Chrysostom’s overall thought needs to be taken into account. He did not believe in Protestant “faith alone” soteriology. For he also wrote:

Ver. 7. “To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life.” Here also he awakens those who had drawn back during the trials, and shows that it is not right to trust in faith only. For it is deeds also into which that tribunal will enquire. (Homily V on Romans 1:28: v. 2:7; NPNF1-11)

For “each of us shall give account of himself to God.” In order therefore that we may render up this account with a good defence, let us well order our own lives and stretch out a liberal hand to the needy, knowing that this only is our defence, the showing ourselves to have rightly done the things commanded; there is no other whatever. And if we be able to produce this, we shall escape those intolerable pains of hell, and obtain the good things to come; . . . (Homily XXI on 1 Corinthians 9:1, 11, v. 9:12;  NPNF1-12)

As often as you enter in to pray, first deposit your alms, and then send up your prayer; . . . since not even the Gospel hanging by our bed is more important than that alms should be laid up for you; for if you hang up the Gospel and do nothing, it will do you no such great good. (Homily XLIII on 1 Corinthians 16:1, 7, v. 16:9;  NPNF1-12)

For to believe is not all that is required, but also to abide in love. (Commentary on Galatians, v. 5:6;  NPNF1-13)

“It is the gift,” said he, “of God,” it is “not of works.” Was faith then, you will say, enough to save us? No; but God, saith he, hath required this, lest He should save us, barren and without work at all. His expression is, that faith saveth, but it is because God so willeth, that faith saveth. Since, how, tell me, doth faith save, without works? This itself is the gift of God. . . . He did not reject us as having works, but as abandoned of works He hath saved us by grace; so that no man henceforth may have whereof to boast. And then, lest when thou hearest that the whole work is accomplished not of works but by faith, thou shouldest become idle, observe how he continues, Ver. 10. “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in them.” (Homily IV on Ephesians, v. 2:8-10;  NPNF1-13)

If faith without a good life is unavailing, much more is the converse true. (Homily V on 1 Timothy, v. 1:20;  NPNF1-13)

Let not us either expect that faith is sufficient to us for salvation; for if we do not show forth a pure life, but come clothed with garments unworthy of this blessed calling, nothing hinders us from suffering the same as that wretched one. (Homily X on John, v. 1:13;  NPNF1-14)

“Is it then enough,” saith one, “to believe on the Son, that one may have eternal life?” By no means. And hear Christ Himself declaring this, and saying, “Not every one that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven” ( Matt. vii. 21 ); and the blasphemy against the Spirit is enough of itself to cast a man into hell. But why speak I of a portion of doctrine? Though a man believe rightly on the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, yet if he lead not a right life, his faith will avail nothing towards his salvation. Therefore when He saith, “This is life eternal, that they may know Thee the only true God” ( c. xvii. 3 ), let us not suppose that the (knowledge) spoken of is sufficient for our salvation; we need besides this a most exact life and conversation. (Homily XXXI on John, v. 3:35-36;  NPNF1-14)

. . . because He had said above, “He that heareth My words and believeth on Him that sent Me,” “is not judged,” lest any one should imagine that this alone is sufficient for salvation, He addeth also the result of man’s life, declaring that “they which have done good shall come forth unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of judgment.” (Homily XXXIX on John, v. 5:28-29;  NPNF1-14)

How long shall we neglect our own salvation? Let us bear in mind of what things Christ has deemed us worthy, let us give thanks, let us glorify Him, not by our faith alone, but also by our very works, that we may obtain the good things that are to come . . . (Homily XLVI on John, v. 6:52;  NPNF1-14)

. . . a right faith availeth nothing if the life be corrupt, both Christ and Paul declare . . . (Homily LXIII on John, v. 11:40;  NPNF1-14)

Faith is indeed great and bringeth salvation, and without it, it is not possible ever to be saved. It suffices not however of itself to accomplish this, . . . on this account Paul also exhorts those who had already been counted worthy of the mysteries; saying, “Let us labor to enter into that rest.” “Let us labor” (he says), Faith not sufficing, the life also ought to be added thereto, and our earnestness to be great; for truly there is need of much earnestness too, in order to go up into Heaven. (Homily VII on Hebrews, v. 4:11-13;  NPNF1-14)

See much more along these lines in my article about St. John Chrysostom, linked above.

Basil of Caesarea:… Let him who boasts boast in the Lord, that Christ has been made by God for us righteousness, wisdom, justification, redemption. This is perfect and pure boasting in God… justified solely by faith in Christ (Chemnitz, Examination of the Council of Trent, Part 1, p. 505)

Again, we are given no primary documentation. But I know that St. Basil rejected faith alone, based on research that I did way back in 2007:

Mere renouncement of sin is not sufficient for the salvation of penitents, but fruits worthy of penance are also required of them. (The Morals, 1, 3)

He who would obey the gospel must first be purged of all defilement of the flesh and the spirit that so he may be acceptable to God in the good works of holiness. (The Morals, 2, 1).

“Turn to your rest; for the Lord has been kind to you.” Eternal rest awaits those who have struggled through the present life observant of the laws, not as payment owed for their works, but bestowed as a gift of the munificent God on those who have hoped in him. (On Psalm 114, no. 5)

They, then, that were sealed by the Spirit unto the day of redemption, and preserve pure and undiminished the first fruits which they received of the Spirit, are they that shall hear the words “well done thou good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things.” In like manner they which have grieved the Holy Spirit by the wickedness of their ways, or have not wrought for Him that gave to them, shall be deprived of what they have received, their grace being transferred to others; or, according to one of the evangelists, they shall even be wholly cut asunder, —the cutting asunder meaning complete separation from the Spirit.  (De Spiritu Sancto, chapter 15; NPNF 2, Vol. VIII)

Truly blessed is the soul, which by night and by day has no other anxiety than how, when the great day comes wherein all creation shall stand before the Judge and shall give an account for its deeds, she too may be able easily to get quit of the reckoning of life. For he who keeps that day and that hour ever before him, and is ever meditating upon the defence to be made before the tribunal where no excuses will avail, will sin not at all, or not seriously, for we begin to sin when there is a lack of the fear of God in us. When men have a clear apprehension of what is threatened them, the awe inherent in them will never allow them to fall into inconsiderate action or thought. (Letter 174: To a Widow; NPNF 2, Vol. VIII)

Ignatius of Antioch… His cross, and his death, and his resurrection, and the faith which is through him, are my unpolluted muniments [legal titles] and in these, through your prayers, I am willing to be justified (Epistle to Philadelphians)

Now we have a work but no specific section. It’s in ch. 8 of the standard Schaff translation:

But to me Jesus Christ is in the place of all that is ancient: His cross, and death, and resurrection, and the faith which is by Him, are undefiled monuments of antiquity; by which I desire, through your prayers, to be justified.

We are indeed justified by faith, but not by faith alone. St. Ignatius proves that he rejects the latter false doctrine in other statements:

None of these things is hid from you, if you perfectly possess that faith and love towards Christ Jesus [1 Timothy 1:14] which are the beginning and the end of life. For the beginning is faith, and the end is love. [1 Timothy 1:5] Now these two, being inseparably connected together, are of God, while all other things which are requisite for a holy life follow after them. No man [truly] making a profession of faith sins; [1 John 3:7] nor does he that possesses love hate any one. The tree is made manifest by its fruit; [Matthew 12:33] so those that profess themselves to be Christians shall be recognised by their conduct. For there is not now a demand for mere profession, but that a man be found continuing in the power of faith to the end. (Epistle to the Ephesians, ch. 14)

In his Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Ignatius couples “faith and love” three times (Greeting, chapters 6, 13), and he writes:

Let no man deceive himself. Both the things which are in heaven, and the glorious angels, and rulers, both visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it. Matthew 19:12 Let not [high] place puff any one up: for that which is worth all is faith and love, to which nothing is to be preferred. But consider those who are of a different opinion with respect to the grace of Christ which has come unto us, how opposed they are to the will of God. They have no regard for love; no care for the widow, or the orphan, or the oppressed; of the bond, or of the free; of the hungry, or of the thirsty. (6)

He places faith and works together; directly reflecting the words of Jesus at the Last Judgment in Matthew 25:31-46, and when he is commenting on grace he immediately brings up various good works. He refers to grace, faith, love, and good works, all in the same context, which is what St. Paul habitually does. Again, in his Epistle to the Trallians, he makes similar connections: “Wherefore, clothing yourselves with meekness, be renewed in faith, that is the flesh of the Lord, and in love, that is the blood of Jesus Christ” (ch. 8). In his Epistle to the Magnesians, he couples “faith and love” three times (chapters 1, 6, 13). In his Epistle to the Ephesians, he again uses the phrase “faith and love” twice (chapters 1, 14). And he associates faith and works:

. . . your name, much-beloved in God, which you have acquired by the habit of righteousness, according to the faith and love in Jesus Christ our Saviour. (ch. 1)

For it was needful for me to have been stirred up by you in faith, exhortation, patience, and long-suffering. (ch. 3)

. . . faith cannot do the works of unbelief, nor unbelief the works of faith. (ch. 8)

. . . making use of the Holy Spirit as a rope, while your faith was the means by which you ascended, and your love the way which led up to God. You, therefore, as well as all your fellow-travellers, are God-bearers, temple-bearers, Christ-bearers, bearers of holiness, adorned in all respects with the commandments of Jesus Christ, . . . (ch. 9)

This simply isn’t faith alone, folks; no way, no how.

Bernard of Clairvaux… “solam justificatur per fidem,” (i.e., is justified by faith alone)   (In Canticum serm. 22.8…PL 183.881):

I need a source in English, preferably with a link. Since St. Bernard isn’t one of the Church fathers, I’ll pass for the time being, since I am already devoting many hours of work to this response.

Obviously, the RCC arbitrarily picks and chooses which early teachers constitute “tradition” and choose only those which they feel are in conformity with the magisterium.

As I have shown in my own research (links above), the Church fathers en masse rejected “faith alone.”

This is dishonest, as was this video by not mentioning them.

The video was about biblical arguments. But charges of dishonesty of this sort aren’t allowed in this channel. Please cease and desist with the insults. “A word to the wise is sufficient.” We can discuss competing theologies without making such insinuations. The Catholic Church and Catholics honestly, sincerely believe what they do, and so do Protestants. The thing is to determine who is right. We do that by making rational, historical, theological, biblical arguments, not making sweeping charges of supposed heart-reading and sin. The great Protestant historian Philip Schaff observed:

If any one expects to find in this period [100-325], or in any of the church fathers, Augustin himself not excepted, the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone, . . . he will be greatly disappointed . . . (History of the Christian Church, Vol. 2, 588-589)

Second, Since Mr. B agrees that works of the Mosaic law “definitely” do not justify us (20:30). How nice.  Why then are the Ten commandments  of the Mosaic law “necessary for salvation” per CCC 2068???????

One must distinguish between the technical phrase “works of the law” (which referred to specifically Jewish works of national identity, per the understanding of some Protestants’ belief in “new perspective on Paul”) and works in general, or commandments. The Ten Commandments are still binding upon Christians. Or do you disagree with that? I imagine that the Catechism states that the Ten Commandments were necessary for salvation because Jesus said the same thing to the rich young ruler, when He asked Him, “what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?” (Mt 19:16). Jesus’ answer was, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments” (Mt 19:17).

St. Paul mentioned four of the ten (Rom 13:9) and then in the same noted that commandments were “summed up in this sentence, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'” Then he teaches that “love is the fulfilling of the law” (13:10) and in context proclaims that “salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed” (13:11). Then in Revelation 14:12, “the saints” are described as “those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus”. Then it is said about the “Blessed . . . dead who die in the Lord henceforth” that “their deeds follow them!” (14:13). Also in the same book Jesus taught that those who did not keep the Ten Commandments, such as “sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters” (22:15) would not enter heaven. St. John also states, “All who keep his commandments abide in him, and he in them” (1 Jn 3:24). It follows, then, that keeping those commandments are necessary to salvation and entrance into heaven (eschatological salvation).

Third, when we say (and the Bible concurs) that we are not saved by works, we mean ANY works, whether it be from the law, good works we do as a cheerful giver, or good works done in God’s grace. The distinction Mr. B tries to make between works of the law which don’t save — and faith and good works done with God’s grace which DOES save (CCC 1821) cannot stand biblical scrutiny.

Sure it can withstand biblical scrutiny. I’ve produced no less than 100 biblical passages that forbid faith alone. You have ignored them. Why is that: if you are so convinced we are wrong and you are right? You should have counter-explanations for every single one. Instead, you ignore and change the subject. This does not — to put it mildly — bespeak a confidence in your case or the courage of your convictions. Here are two of the clearest ones:

Romans 2:7 For he will render to every man according to his works: [7] to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;

James 2:14 What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?

Mr. B is advocating that anytime we hear we aren’t saved by works, to take that to mean the restriction of only those works emanating from the Pentateuch.

However, this cannot be so because Paul goes on record using the word “law” to designate the Scriptures as a WHOLE, which would mean he is NOT restricting good works of the law only to the Pentateuch, but ANY GOOD WORKS WHATSOEVER right up to this present day.

The Bible teaches that we aren’t saved by works in the sense of Pelagianism works-salvation (salvation by works alone), which the Catholic Church entirely rejects (e.g., Eph 2:8-9). But when Kenny is talking about the phrase “works of the law”, that has a specific meaning, applying to Jews who kept the Mosaic Law in its entirety (which no Christian does). “Works of the law” is a phrase that occurs  seven times in Paul’s epistles. Paul also refers to “the law of the Jews” (Acts 25:8) and “the law of Moses” (1 Cor 9:9).

Good works in a generic sense are good! (a = a), and related to salvation: so say at least a hundred biblical passages. Protestants, on the other hand, believe in several things that have no scriptural support at all. The canon of the New Testament is one of those that they will readily admit. I would also contend that sola Scriptura and sola fide are two more things that lack any biblical support at all. But we can produce a hundred biblical passages against faith alone (I did that, myself), and I wrote a book called 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura.

For instance, he appeals to the law in 1 Cor 14:21, but he quotes Isaiah 28:11-12, which of course is NOT part of the Pentateuch. In Romans 3:19, he describes his citations from the O.T. in verses 10-18 as “what the law says”.  However, these verses are derived from the Psalms (5:9, 10:7, 14:1-3, 36:1, 53:1-3, 140:3…as well as Proverbs 1:16, and Isa 59:7-8) all of which categorically proves that  good works done under the old law– “for salvation”– cannot be restricted to the Mosaic law as is commonly supposed.  Thus, we must not seek to qualify the kinds of works which are excluded for justification because the fact is, each and every kind of righteous work is prohibited; i.e., we are not to trust in them AT ALL, nor does God save us by ANY kind of righteousness on our part done with or without the grace of the Holy Spirit.

That’s simply not true, and I have a hundred Bible passages to prove it. So at this point the ball is in your court. In order to dissuade us, you have to produce counter-interpretations of all one hundred that are in line with “faith alone” and not in harmony with the Catholic and biblical soteriology of salvation by grace alone, by faith: to which works are organically connected and required. I dare say that you can’t do so, and that your refusal to even begin that necessary task is already pretty strong  evidence that you can’t. You’re welcome to start at any time! We’ll be glad to publish that effort on our video channel and in any blogs I write in reply. And we will always answer and refute any such attempt, that is, unless you convince us, in which case we would be duty-bound to change our minds and become Protestants again. But clearly, that won’t ever happen if you completely refuse to engage in; indeed, run away from, what you must do to refute what we have offered — as you have done in this reply.

Mr. B will agree that no one can be justified by the Mosaic law, explicitly stated in Acts 13:39. Fine. But the problem with Catholicism emerges when you  agree (for example) that if obeying one’s parent’s under the Mosaic law was not salvific, then how can you say that obeying your parents under the New Testament IZZZ salvific?

It is in conjunction with faith: all caused by God’s grace. It isn’t, in and of itself. We can say that it’s one thing that helps save one, because Jesus said so (Mt 19:17): honoring parents being one of the Ten Commandments. It’s one of dozens of works that the New Testament mentions as part of the overall equation of salvation. Jesus mentioned three works that helped cause salvation in one saying:

Matthew 25:34-35 Then the King will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; [35] for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, . . .

In another place, He mentioned five actions: the reward for each being eternal life:

Luke 18:29-30 And he said to them, “Truly, I say to you, there is no man who has left house or wife or brothers or parents or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, [30] who will not receive manifold more in this time, and in the age to come eternal life.”

Etc., etc., up to a hundred biblical passages. . . .

Yet that is exactly what they teach; i.e., God has created a new “system of grace” wherein the good works we do under the new covenant, now become the gateway to heaven. But by doing so, they have attached to their good deeds, a salvific EFFICACY on the same level as the blood of Christ. This is unacceptable and is “another gospel” per 2 For 11:4 which saves no one. 

That doesn’t follow. I think I’ve gone through this before with you. To say that “x work plays a role in salvation, alongside faith, caused by grace” is not the same as equating that work in value with the blood of Christ. That simply doesn’t follow, either logically or theologically. But it sounds nice as anti-Catholic rhetoric and polemics. The only problem is that it’s a fallacy and falsehood.

I will continue in one more combox quoting from the #1 RC apologetic book for the last 25 years, Not By Faith Aloneby R. Sungenis, endorsed by all the major Catholic luminaries of today on the inside cover pages.

I believe the #1 Catholic apologetics book is Surprised by Truth, which has sold some half a million copies. My own conversion story is one of the twelve included in it.

To verify what I just said about good deeds having the same blood-cleansing efficacy as Christ’s blood, we read, “Works become JUST AS MUCH a salvific part of the individual’s justification as his faith” (p. 172). There is your equivalency factor, clear as the light of day and it is “100% unbiblical”… to use Mr. B’s video title.

It’s not unbiblical at all. I produced 100 biblical proofs. Christ’s blood brings about the possibility of salvation for anyone who repents and accepts God’s mercy, and is 1000% sufficient for that purpose. But then we have to do our part, which is exercising faith and doing good works. It’s not established by you at all that our faith or whatever good works we do are equivalent to Christ’s blood. I don’t see how they ever could be. Whatever good is in us is ultimately caused by God’s grace. Now, if faith without works is dead, then it logically follows that authentic faith cannot exist without works. And if that is the case, it also follows that works are as important as faith, seeing that the former literally bring the latter “to life”: so to speak.

Before I give more disturbing quotes,

“Disturbing”? What you have given is not “disturbing” in the slightest. I’ve had no problem refuting all or any of it.

the bulk of Mr. B’s time was throwing out the verses that tell us we ought to be good. But no Protestant alive or dead has ever advocated that faith be “dislocated” from works, to use Mr. B’s word. All the “good” passages simply mean that the elect in heaven will have had a GENERAL TENOR of being good, not that their goodness got them there!

That’s untrue. It’s a falsehood. I specifically chose my prooftexts — and Kenny uses my work in his videos –, keeping in mind this very thing: that Protestants would claim that works simply accompany faith, while supposedly having nothing to do with salvation itself. That’s not what the Bible teaches at all. Again and again, it establishes a causal relationship of works and salvation, just as with faith and salvation (grace being the main cause behind both). Matthew 25 (the judgment) and the Jesus and the rich young ruler passage (Matthew 19) show this most clearly. Here are a few more of the clearest of my biblical proofs, in terms of demonstrating a direct causal relationship:

Matthew 7:19, 21 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. . . . [21] “Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

John 5:29 . . . those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, . . .

Romans 6:22 . . . the return you get is sanctification and its end, eternal life.

Colossians 3:23-24 Whatever your task, work heartily, as serving the Lord and not men, [24] knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward;

2 Thessalonians 2:13 . . . God chose you from the beginning to be saved, through sanctification . . .

1 Timothy 6:18-19 They are to do good, to be rich in good deeds, liberal and generous, [19] thus laying up for themselves a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of the life which is life indeed.

Revelation 20:12-13 . . . And the dead were judged by what was written in the books, by what they had done. [13] . . . and all were judged by what they had done.

The dire difference is that we don’t believe we are saved  or justified BYYYY  them in any way whatsoever, whereas Catholics DO, which is their fatal error.

We are following clear and relentlessly repeated Scripture in this respect. You are not.

We say, yes, do a million good works to the glory of God, but if you begin to base your hope for HEAVEN on them (explicitly stated in CCC 1821), you are lost.

See the above seven passages in particular for the answer to this. But there are 93 more answers, too.

The “damnable works-righteousness” Mr. B (rightly) says Protestants accuse Catholics of, may be seen in Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, p. 261.  Catholics seek to be, “supernaturally endowed to perform ordinary and extraordinary heroic acts FOR the salvation of the soul”.  This is precisely where and why we part company.

Yes, because you depart from Scripture, and we obediently follow it, since it’s God’s inspired revelation. We don’t deign to place our man-made unbiblical traditions above God’s written Word and in contradiction of that same Scripture.

Allegedly, as long as they admit their good works are done under the umbrella of God’s grace, all will be well, or so they think. Instead of a singular confidence in the doing and dying of Christ alone (Romans 5:10)  a clever trick is sneaked in through the back door.

Following biblical instructions and teachings isn’t “clever”; rather, it’s wise and spiritually fruitful and pleasing to God. I have nine passages from the letter to the Romans in my collection: proving that Paul rejects “faith alone.”

Specifically, when one has the intention of doing good works under the auspices of God’s grace, this mindset magically qualifies those deeds to become the hinge upon which the door into heaven swings (repeat, CCC 1821).   What Catholicism is stipulating is that the power of his grace invigorates them on a path of good deeds, all of which are then instrumental in the verdict of justification (i.e., our right standing before God).

Now to Mr. Sungenis:

 “Works are a primary criteria in [God] deciding whether or not the individual is saved” (p. 50).  

 “Works are the determining factor  in our salvation”  (p. 215; cf. p. 38 footnote). 

“Works are the ultimate  factor in the salvation of the individual”  (p. 145). 

“Salvation is either granted or denied  based on works”  (p. 159). 

“A person’s eternal destiny is dependent on God’s final evaluation of the person’s deeds” (p. 484). 

 “If done through grace, they [works] are graciously meritorious for salvation” 

 (p. 102).

 “The evaluation of our good works as noted in 1 Cor 3:13-17 and 2 Cor 5:10 will not result in personal rewards only, but “rather a judgment which will determine whether one will be saved” (p. 41).

That’s all biblical, per my 100 proofs. Matthew 25 is particularly clear in this respect.

In light of these audacious claims, there can be no doubt that Catholics have been rightly accused of working their way to eternal life, for that is exactly what they teach.  Rather than trust in the mercy of God alone in the face of Jesus Christ  (2 For 4:6) so that “no flesh should glory in his presence” (1 Cor 1:29)  heavy emphasis is placed on their dazzling “performance rituals”  to ensure a spot in heaven, and that being so, we shudder for the salvation of the Pope down to the pauper in the pew.

Contrary to the video’s thesis, “Faith Alone” is 100% biblical.  The book on my shelf, “Faith Alone in 100 verses” by Wilkin is a case in point.  I will NOT throw that book away after watching this presentation, for it did NOT have the power to persuade those of us aware of the facts Mr. B. OMITTED to say such as doing “heroic acts that save the soul” mentioned above which is downright preposterous.

Now why don’t you deal with my 100 passages, if you are so confident and sure of your belief? What stops you?

Hence,  Evangelicals use the logo, “Faith Alone”  merely as shorthand that guards against a tug-of-war.  That is, a tug-of-war between  trusting in our own “right conduct”  to open heaven’s gate (per CCC 16) and  the fatal error of giving equal trust to  the “right conduct” of Christ the Lord!  

“At the end of the day, “Faith Alone” brings perfect peace (Isa 26:3) to the one who trusts solely in the OBJECT of their faith, for “the one who believes in him will never be put to shame”  (Romans 9:33).

God could have chosen to make “faith alone” the sole criterion of salvation. But He didn’t (as we know from the Bible). He chose to have works directly involved, too, since they are organically connected to faith and can’t be arbitrarily separated from it. The works are derived from His grace just as faith is. God crowns His own gifts, as St. Augustine stated, in choosing to regard our good works as meritorious.