My doctoral dissertation . . . [was] on justification in Lutheran-Catholic dialogue, and found \u2014 with plenty of others who have gone before me \u2014 that many apparently theological disagreements between traditions boiled down to differing theological languages & thought-forms. In other words, there are instances in which things could have been cleared up simply if each side recognized that the other was using a term or concept in a manner different from their own usage.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\nSounds much like the\u00a0filioque\u00a0<\/em>controversy, doesn\u2019t it?<\/span><\/p>\nI am arguing that there is a true and fairly significant difference regarding \u201cfaith alone\u201d in its abstract sense but there is great commonality between Catholics and Lutherans in terms of\u00a0sola gratia<\/em>, non-Pelagianism, the necessity of works in the Christian life (however it is construed), the organic relationship of faith and works, per James, rejection of antinomianism and double predestination, etc. One of the sticking-points seems to be merit, but I believe that the Catholic doctrine is possibly being misunderstood by some, and I would like to see clarification on that, myself.<\/p>\nBut this is the Catholic position (a very eloquent statement of it, I might add)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Thank you for your kind words. My intent in the post I linked to was to acquit the Eastern Orthodox of teaching salvation by works; if it acquits the Roman Catholics of it into the bargain, so much the better.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\nBut I must confess that I doubt it. Nothing about Orthodox synergism implies that any of our cooperation with grace makes us\u00a0deserving<\/em>\u00a0of salvation; but the plain sense of canon 32 of Trent, which I cited above, says precisely that. Your simple equation of \u201cmerit\u201d and \u201ccooperation\u201d does not do justice to the substance of the points at issue. The Lutheran Confessions (FC SD II.65ff) speak of cooperation in terms similar to the canons of 2d Orange and the (Eastern Orthodox) Confession of Dositheos; but none of these teaches, as Trent does, that this cooperation\u00a0merits<\/em>\u00a0our salvation.<\/span><\/p>\nAlright; let\u2019s try this again. What is the difference between (any of) the following statements?:<\/p>\n
Chris<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cIn the end, it is all one: justification is sanctification is salvation. Salvation is accomplished by His all-sufficient sacrifice, and worked out in our lives with our cooperation with grace, by grace.\u201d<\/p>\nTrent: Decree on Justification, Chapter Five<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201c. . . without any merits existing on their parts, they are called; that so they, who by sins were alienated from God, may be disposed through His quickening and assisting grace, to convert themselves to their own justification, by freely assenting to and co-operating with that said grace: in such sort that, while God touches the heart of man by the illumination of the Holy Ghost, neither is man himself utterly without doing anything while he receives that inspiration, forasmuch as he is also able to reject it; yet is he not able, by his own free will, without the grace of God, to move himself unto justice in His sight. Whence, when it is said in the sacred writings: Turn ye to me, and I will turn to you, we are admonished of our liberty; and when we answer; Convert us, O Lord, to thee, and we shall be converted, we confess that we are prevented by the grace of God.\u201d<\/p>\nTrent: Canon I on Justification<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cIf any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.\u201d<\/p>\n2nd Orange, Canon 20<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cMan does no good except that which God brings about that man performs.\u201d<\/p>\n2nd Orange, Canon 9<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cAs often as we do good, God operates in us and with us, so that we may operate.\u201d<\/p>\nSt. Augustine<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cWhat merit of man is there before grace by which he can achieve grace, as only grace works every one of our good merits in us, and as God, when He crowns our merits, crowns nothing else but His own gifts?\u201d\u00a0(En. in Ps<\/em>.\u00a0102,7; cited in full agreement by the Catholic Catechism at the beginning of its section on \u201cMerit\u201d: #2005-2006: \u201cin crowning their merits you are crowning your own gifts\u201d)<\/p>\nCatholic Catechism<\/em>\u00a0(#2007)<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cWith regard to God, there is no strict right to any merit on the part of man.\u201d<\/p>\nCatholic Catechism<\/em>\u00a0(#2008)<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cThe merit of man before God in the Christian life arises from the fact that\u00a0God has freely chosen to associate man with the work of his grace<\/em>. The fatherly action of God is first on his own initiative, and then follows man\u2019s free acting through his collaboration, so that the merit of good works is to be attributed in the first place to the grace of God, then to the faithful. Man\u2019s merit, moreover, itself is due to God, for his good actions proceed in Christ, from the predispositions and assistance given by the Holy Spirit.\u201d<\/p>\nCatholic Catechism\u00a0<\/em>(#2009)<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cFilial adoption, in making us partakers by grace in the divine nature, can bestow\u00a0true merit<\/em>\u00a0on us as a result of God\u2019s gratuitous justice. This is our right by grace, the full right of love, making us \u2018co-heirs\u2019 with Christ and worthy of obtaining \u2018the promised inheritance of eternal life.\u2019 The merits of our good works are gifts of the divine goodness. \u2018Grace has gone before us; now we are given what is due. . . . Our merits are God\u2019s gifts.\u2019 [Augustine] \u201d<\/p>\nCatholic Catechism<\/em>\u00a0(#2011)<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cThe charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits <\/em>before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently their merit before God and before men. The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.\u201d<\/p>\nMartin Luther<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cWe must therefore certainly maintain that where there is no faith there also can be no good works; and conversely, that there is no faith where there are no good works. Therefore faith and good works should be so closely joined together that the essence of the entire Christian life consists in both.\u201d\u00a0(in Paul Althaus,\u00a0The Theology of Martin Luther<\/em>, 246)<\/p>\nMatthew 5:12<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cyour reward is great in heaven\u201d [when you are persecuted and lied about]<\/p>\nMatthew 19:21<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cgo, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven . . .\u201d<\/p>\nPhilippians 2:12-13<\/strong>:\u00a0\u201cWork 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.\u201d<\/p>\nNow, what is the difference between any of these statements (i.e., the biblical and Lutheran ones over against the supposedly different Catholic ones)? I don\u2019t see any. Perhaps you\u2019ll be so kind as to point out where it is. If you are determined to find Pelagianism under every \u201cCatholic rock,\u201d when in fact is isn\u2019t there, then you\u2019ll \u201cfind\u201d it by forcing it into the texts, I suppose, but nevertheless, it still isn\u2019t there. Yet the Lutheran confessions falsely accuse us of it.<\/p>\n
It is true, that despite seemingly miniscule differences, if any, here, Lutherans and Catholics find it difficult to totally agree on this. Hence, the\u00a0Lutheran-Catholic Joint Statement on Justification by Faith<\/em>\u00a0(my statement is from a 1985 book, which may be an earlier draft) acknowledges:<\/p>\nThus the essential intentions behind both the Catholic doctrine of merit\u00a0ex gratia<\/em> and the Lutheran doctrine of promise may be compatible, but the two sides have difficulty in finding a common language . . . Lutherans are primarily intent on stressing the saving character of the unconditional promises God addresses to human beings and on preventing Christians from being left to their own resources, whereas the Catholic preoccupation is to make sure that the full range of God\u2019s gifts, even the crowning gift of a merited destiny, is acknowledged. Both concerns reflect aspects of the gospel, but the tension nevertheless remains.\u00a0(section 112 of \u201cMerit\u201d)<\/p><\/blockquote>\nI don\u2019t think it is worth fighting over (yet here I am clarifying how I think there is little difference because I do think it is important to show that there is scarcely any difference here). Catholics are not Pelagians and Lutherans aren\u2019t antinomians. We meet in the sensible middle ground, with some difference in abstract nuance, terminology, and emphasis.<\/span><\/p>\nI have been very clear on where I part company with the Roman Catholic Church on this issue: canon 32 of the Tridentine decree on justification. The Catholic position, as I understand it, is that, apart from grace, we are unable to earn our salvation; but grace is given in order that we may be enabled to earn our salvation. When canon 32 says that \u201cthe justified, by the good works which he performs \u2026 truly merit[s] increase of grace, eternal life, and the attainment of that eternal life\u201d, that tells me that grace is given so that we may come to\u00a0deserve<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0eternal life, on account of the good works that grace enables us to do.<\/span><\/p>\nThat\u2019s the difference: one view is that we receive eternal life by grace, because we can\u00a0never<\/em> <\/strong>deserve it or earn it; the other view is that we receive grace so that we\u00a0can<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0and\u00a0do\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>earn, and deserve, eternal life. Canon 32 of Trent teaches the latter view. Orthodoxy does not teach that; 2d Orange does not teach that; and the Lutheran Confessions do not teach that. You may regard that as a \u201cminiscule difference\u201d; I do not.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\nIf the merit itself is entirely a gift of God and only possible because of God\u2019s grace, and all merit is, is God crowning His own gifts (Augustine, and echoed by the\u00a0Catechism), then where is the beef? I continue to not see any essential difference.<\/p>\n
Your problem is that you are unnecessarily and unbiblically dichotomizing. You insist on isolating man\u2019s merit so that it will appear to be a man\u2019s salvation: the dreaded salvation by works that the Lutheran confessions think they see in Trent and Catholicism, and not a free gift of God. But our theology takes the greatest pains to emphasize that this is not what the teaching means. If you say that Augustine was correct on this, and we specifically agree with him in our explication of merit, then we agree with you! It\u2019s simple logic:<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
1. Chris (A) agrees with St. Augustine\u2019s teaching (B) on merit.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
2. The Catholic Church (C) agrees with St. Augustine\u2019s teaching (B) on merit.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
3. Therefore, Chris (A) agrees with the Catholic Church (C) with regard to merit.<\/p>\n
A = B
\nB = C
\nA = C<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
You want to quibble over the terminology of \u201cdeserve\u201d and \u201cearn\u201d and \u201cmerit\u201d and \u201creward\u201d \u2013 as if those things are utterly foreign to a biblical worldview as concerns salvation? That won\u2019t fly, because Scripture is clear:<\/span><\/p>\n2 Timothy 4:8<\/strong>:\u00a0I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me the\u00a0crown of righteousness<\/em>, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award me on that Day . . .<\/p>\nMatthew 19:29<\/strong>:\u00a0And every one who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name\u2019s sake, will\u00a0receive a hundredfold<\/em>, and inherit eternal life.<\/p>\nLuke 6:38<\/strong>:\u00a0give, and it will be given to you; good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For the\u00a0measure you give<\/em>\u00a0will be the\u00a0measure you get back<\/em>.<\/p>\n1 Corinthians 3:6-9<\/strong>:\u00a0I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth. He who plants and he who waters are equal, and\u00a0each shall receive his wages according to his labor<\/em>. For we are God\u2019s fellow workers; you are God\u2019s field, God\u2019s building. (cf. 2 Cor. 9:6)<\/p>\n1 Corinthians 3:14<\/strong>:\u00a0If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will\u00a0receive a reward<\/em>. (cf. Mk 9:41)<\/p>\n1 Corinthians 9:24-27<\/strong>:\u00a0Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only one receives the\u00a0prize<\/em>? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to\u00a0receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable<\/em>. Well, I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be\u00a0disqualified<\/em>.<\/p>\nEphesians 6:8<\/strong>:\u00a0knowing that whatever good any one does, he will\u00a0receive the same again from the Lord<\/em>, whether he is a slave or free. (cf. Matt 16:27)<\/p>\nColossians 3:23-24:<\/strong>\u00a0Whatever your task, work heartily, as serving the Lord and not men, knowing that from the Lord you will\u00a0receive the inheritance as your reward<\/em>; you are serving the Lord Christ.<\/p>\nHebrews 6:10<\/strong>:\u00a0For God is not so unjust as to\u00a0overlook your work<\/em>\u00a0and the love which you showed for his sake in serving the saints, as you still do. (cf. Matt. 20:4)<\/p>\nHebrews 10:35<\/strong>:\u00a0Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a\u00a0great reward<\/em>.<\/p>\nHebrews 11:6<\/strong>:\u00a0And without faith it is impossible to please him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he\u00a0rewards\u00a0<\/em>those who seek him.<\/p>\nJames 1:12<\/strong>:\u00a0Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the\u00a0crown of life<\/em>\u00a0which God has promised to those who love him.<\/p>\n2 John 8<\/strong>:\u00a0Look to yourselves, that you may not lose what you have worked for, but may\u00a0win a full reward<\/em>.<\/p>\nRevelation 2:10<\/strong>:\u00a0Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the\u00a0crown of life<\/em>.<\/p>\nRevelation 3:11-12<\/strong>:\u00a0I am coming soon; hold fast what you have, so that no one may seize your crown<\/em>. He who conquers, I will make him a\u00a0pillar in the temple of my God<\/em>; never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name.<\/p>\nThe notion of merit is also taught by the Church fathers:<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
St. Justin Martyr\u00a0<\/strong>(d. c. 165)<\/p>\nWe have learned from the prophets and we hold it as true that punishments and chastisements and\u00a0good rewards are distributed according to the merit of each man\u2019s actions<\/em>. Were this not the case, and were all things to happen according to the decree of fate, there would be nothing at all in our power. If fate decrees that this man is to be good and that one wicked, then neither is the former to be praised nor the latter to be blamed.\u00a0(First Apology\u00a0<\/em>43 [A.D. 154])<\/p>\nSt. Theophilus of Antioch\u00a0<\/strong>(late 2nd cent.)<\/p>\nHe who gave the mouth for speech and formed the ears for hearing and made eyes for seeing will examine everything and will judge justly,\u00a0granting recompense to each according to merit<\/em>. To those who seek immortality by the patient exercise of good works [Rom. 2:7], he will give everlasting life, joy, peace, rest, and all good things, which neither eye has seen nor ear has heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man [1 Cor. 2:9]. For the unbelievers and the contemptuous and for those who do not submit to the truth but assent to iniquity . . . there will be wrath and indignation [Rom. 2:8].\u00a0(To Autolycus\u00a01:14 [181])<\/p>\nSt. Irenaeus\u00a0<\/strong>(d.c. 202)<\/p>\n[Paul], an able wrestler, urges us on in the struggle for immortality, so that we may receive a crown<\/em> and so that we may regard as\u00a0a precious crown that which we acquire by our own struggle<\/em>\u00a0and which does not grow upon us spontaneously. . . . Those things which come to us spontaneously are not loved as much as those which are obtained by anxious care.\u00a0(Against Heresies<\/em>\u00a04:37:7 [196])<\/p>\nSt. Cyprian<\/strong><\/p>\n[Y]ou who are a matron rich and wealthy, anoint not your eyes with the antimony of the devil, but with the collyrium of Christ, so that you may at last come to see God,\u00a0when you have merited before God both by your works and by your manner of living<\/em>.\u00a0(Works and Almsgivings<\/em>\u00a014 [253])<\/p>\nSt. Cyril of Jerusalem<\/strong><\/p>\nThe root of every good work is the hope of the resurrection, for the expectation of a reward nerves the soul to good work. Every laborer is prepared to endure the toils if he looks forward to the reward of these toils. (Catechetical Lectures<\/em>\u00a018:1 [350])<\/p>\nSt. Jerome<\/strong><\/p>\nIt is our task, according to our different virtues, to prepare for ourselves different rewards. . . . If we were all going to be equal in heaven it would be useless for us to humble ourselves here in order to have a greater place there. . . . Why should virgins persevere? Why should widows toil? Why should married women be content? Let us all sin, and after we repent we shall be the same as the apostles are!\u00a0(Against Jovinian<\/em>\u00a02:32 [393])<\/p>\nSt. Augustine<\/strong><\/p>\nHe bestowed forgiveness; the crown he will pay out. Of forgiveness he is the donor; of the crown, he is the debtor. Why debtor? Did he receive something? . . . The Lord made himself a debtor not by receiving something but by promising something. One does not say to him, \u201cPay for what you received,\u201d but \u201cPay what you promised\u201d<\/em>.\u00a0(Explanations of the Psalms<\/em>\u00a083:16 [405])<\/p>\nWe are commanded to live righteously, and the reward is set before us of our\u00a0meriting to live happily in eternity<\/em>. But who is able to live righteously and do good works unless he has been justified by faith?\u00a0(Various Questions to Simplician<\/em>\u00a01:2:21 [396])<\/p>\nWhat merits of his own has the saved to boast of when,\u00a0if he were dealt with according to his merits, he would be nothing if not damned? Have the just then no merits at all?<\/em>\u00a0Of course they do, for they are the just. But they had no merits by which they were made just.\u00a0(Letters 194:3:6 [418])<\/p>\nWhat merit, then, does a man have before grace, by which he might receive grace, when\u00a0our every good merit is produced in us only by grace and when God, crowning our merits, crowns nothing else but his own gifts to us?<\/em>\u00a0(Ibid<\/em>., 194:5:19)<\/p>\nSt. Prosper of Aquitaine<\/strong><\/p>\nIndeed, a man who has been justified, that is, who from impious has been made pious, since he had no antecedent good merit,\u00a0receives a gift, by which gift he may also acquire merit<\/em>. Thus, what was begun in him by Christ\u2019s grace can also be augmented by the industry of his free choice, but never in the absence of God\u2019s help, without which no one is able either to progress or to continue in doing good.\u00a0(Responses on Behalf of Augustine to the Articles of Objections Raised by his Calumniators in Gaul\u00a06 [431-432])<\/p>\nSecond Council of Orange<\/strong><\/p>\n[G]race is preceded by no merits. A reward is due to good works, if they are performed, but grace, which is not due, precedes, that they may be done.\u00a0(Canons on Grace 19 [529])<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Your problem, then, is not only with the Catholic Church, but also with the Bible and with the Church fathers. You disagree? Then I would be very curious to see how you would interpret the above Scripture and patristic citations.<\/span><\/p>\nHello. I am just getting caught up in this discussion. I like how much everyone around here thinks so much.<\/span><\/p>\nNo doubt, too much for our own good. LOL<\/p>\n
I think I understand these issues and perspectives pretty well and am looking to, as you say, really get a handle on the practical differences. Let me put forward what I think is the ultimate biggee, and which is the actual root of the whole faith vs \u201cfaith and good works\u201d debate: present assurance that one is in a state of grace.<\/span><\/p>\nNow that is a good way to put it: saying \u201cassurance that one is in a state of grace\u201d rather than \u201cassurance that one has achieved eschatological salvation.\u201d On this we can all agree.<\/p>\n
I realize that this is introducing what may seem to be a new topic here, but I doubt this is the case \u2013 I think everything in the Christian life really comes down to this.<\/span><\/p>\n. . . I submit the primary difference is that, for Luther, truly good works before God can only come about when a person is certain that in Christ he already has full salvation and is merely working it out.<\/p>\n
How can one \u201chave\u201d something yet still be working it out? If they have it, it makes no sense to keep working on obtaining it. And if they are working to obtain it, obviously they don\u2019t have it yet. If you\u2019re courting a woman in the hopes of winning her over, you don\u2019t have her yet, do you?! But if you \u201chave\u201d her (ring, wedding date, etc.), then you\u2019re not still courting; you are now planning. You\u2019re no longer \u201cdating to figure out\u201d; rather, you are \u201cfiguring out a date.\u201d :-) So the statement above is incoherent. Insofar as it truly represents Lutheran or Reformed thought, they are incoherent, too.<\/p>\n
In other words, this person has absolute confidence that because of the completed work of Christ on the cross, if they were to drop dead at that very moment, they would die in a state of grace \u2013 ie, they would at the very least make it to purgatory, which of course means that they would eventually make it to heaven. Only when a person has a trust or confidence in Christ in this way does He perform any work that is pleasing to God.<\/span><\/p>\nThis is a relatively better way to put it, because you are talking about \u201cright now\u201d rather than in the remote future. We simply don\u2019t know the future, but we can have a significant assurance in the present, and this is where Lutheranism and Catholicism converge \u2014 again in a practical sense. There will always be differences in abstraction surrounding these issues. People want to argue endlessly over those, whereas I am much more concerned about practical implications for living the Christian life and faithfully serving Jesus.<\/p>\n
Secondly, though Luther is wrong to say that no work can be good at all unless a person is \u201csaved,\u201d etc., it is a true that any good that can come from a work must be because the performer is in a state of grace. This is Catholic teaching, too. Hence, Matthias Premm, in his\u00a0Dogmatic Theology for the Laity<\/em>\u00a0(New York: Society of St. Paul \/ Alba House, 1967; reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers, 1977, 263-264):<\/p>\n\u00a0<\/p>\n
By sanctifying grace we are\u00a0children of God<\/em>. Only by sanctifying grace do we have a right to heaven as our heritage. By purely natural good acts, such as even the sinner can perform, heaven cannot be merited as a reward; we must be in the state of grace, a child of God. Only after human nature has been united to God by grace and raised above its own nature can good acts, which proceed from this supernaturally elevated nature, be directed towards the possession of God in the hereafter. Only in this way can we merit the vision of God in heaven, since it completely surpasses the powers of our pure human nature.<\/p>\nBy sanctifying grace we become\u00a0living members of the mystical body of Christ<\/em>, one with Christ our Head. Thus our acts become acts of Christ, who, in an incomprehensible way, is living and working in his members. Through this intimate union with Christ, our Mediator before the father, we merit the happiness of heaven.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n[this also ties into theosis, which I have written about:\u00a0Theosis and the Exalted Virgin Mary<\/a>]<\/p>\nFinally, sanctifying grace makes us\u00a0temples of the Holy Spirit<\/em>, who compels us to good works (Rom 8:14). St. Francis de Sales writes that the Holy Spirit performs good works in us with such consummate skill that the works belong more to him than to us. He works with us and we work with him . . .<\/p>\nFor our works to be meritorious, it is not enough that they proceed from the state of grace; they must also be done with a\u00a0good intention<\/em>\u00a0. . . good works must proceed from faith and love, and must be directed to the honor and glory of God . . . (1 Cor 10:31).<\/p><\/blockquote>\nTo clarify further: our works, which God has given to us to do in Christ in His grace, only merit imperishable heavenly rewards, not heaven (ie, the relationship with God \u2013 knowing God \u2013 see John 17:3) itself.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\nIn the sense that we are saved by grace through the cross, absolutely. As I have argued, merit is only comprehensible if it is understood to be itself a gift of God\u2019s grace: God crowning His own grace.<\/p>\n
So Chris in #74 is right on with his comments:<\/span>\u00a0\u201cthat tells me that grace is given so that we may come to deserve eternal life, on account of the good works that grace enables us to do.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>(note its \u201ceternal life\u201d that he\u2019s talking about). I also note that all of the Biblical and Patristic citations you note, only talk of rewards, but not eternal life (ie, the relationship with God itself, certain now and after death of course). Interesting\u2026<\/span><\/p>\nI still await Chris\u2019s reply to my many biblical citations and patristic evidences. But in any event: first of all, your generalization is simply not true. It\u2019s not possible to make a complete dichotomy between works and the rewards of heaven itself and of differential rewards in heaven. This must always be understood in the above sense, as elaborated upon by Premm (and as St. Augustine taught): works as the fruit of grace and good intentions: simultaneously God\u2019s and our own works.<\/p>\n
In the passages I cited, one notes that there is scarcely a word about faith alone, assurance, and other Lutheran\/Protestant distinctives. That\u2019s all you want to talk about as regards salvation, yet the Bible approaches the subject very differently. It is almost always tying works in somehow with salvation.<\/p>\n
To drive the point home, I see it is time to again make a\u00a0Revised Protestant Version\u00a0of the Bible<\/em> (RPV), to illustrate how St. Paul and other biblical writers got it wrong, and should have taken a crash course at a RPC or LCMS or Southern Baptist seminary, so that he would know how to present salvation in the appropriate terms. So how should the above passages read if Protestants are right on this matter?:<\/p>\n2 Timothy 4:8<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0I have striven to achieve faith alone, I have finished the race of gratefulness for faith alone, I have kept to the dogma of faith alone. Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award me on that Day . . .<\/p>\nMatthew 19:29<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0And every one who has believed in faith alone and absolute assurance of salvation, for my name\u2019s sake, will receive a hundredfold, and inherit eternal life.<\/p>\nLuke 6:38<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0believe, and salvation will be given to you; good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For the faith you believe will be the salvation you get back.<\/p>\n1 Corinthians 3:6-9<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0I believed, Apollos had faith, but God gave the salvation. So neither he who believes nor he who preaches the gospel is anything, but only God who gives salvation. He who believes and he who has faith are equal, and each shall receive salvation according to his acceptance of faith alone. For we are not God\u2019s fellow workers; you are a snow-covered dunghill.\u00a0(cf. 2 Cor. 9:6)<\/p>\n1 Corinthians 3:14<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0If the faith which any man has believed on the foundation survives, he will receive salvation.\u00a0(cf. Mk 9:41)<\/p>\n1 Corinthians 9:24-27<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0Do you not know that in life all men compete, but only the one who exercises faith alone receives salvation? So believe that you may obtain it. Every good Protestant exercises faith in faith and faith in absolute assurance of salvation. They do it to receive salvation. Well, I do not believe aimlessly, I do not believe as one beating the air; but I work only out of gratefulness to God for salvation already obtained, lest after failing to exercise faith alone I myself should be damned.<\/p>\nEphesians 6:8<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0knowing that however much faith alone one musters up, he will receive salvation from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free.\u00a0(cf. Matt 16:27)<\/p>\nColossians 3:23-24<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0Whatever your denomination, believe heartily, as believing in the Lord and not men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward; you are serving the Lord Christ.<\/p>\nHebrews 6:10<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0For God is not so unjust as to overlook your faith and the love which you showed for his sake in believing in him, as you still do.\u00a0(cf. Matt. 20:4)<\/p>\nHebrews 10:35<\/strong> (RPV):\u00a0Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which proves you are saved.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2018\/06\/BlueRibbon2.png\")
<\/div>\n