Friendly Exchange with Fallen-Away Catholic on Savation by Faith Alone

Fallen away Catholic:

It was most refreshing [talking with you]--I didn't do a complete look at faith versus works (according to what we discussed); however, I would like for you to consider Ephesians Chapter 2 starting at verses 4 through 10 with special emphasis on verse 8.  I am sending this not in the spirit of argument but for your consideration.

Again it was enjoyable talking to you.  Best regard

I replied:
Hi [his name]

I so appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with a fellow brother in Christ.  I really enjoyed talking with you as well and anticipate some good exchanges in these emails.

I have a pretty thick skin.  I will take whatever is said here on your part as someone who loves Christ and wants to share what he has found to me.  And so, don't worry about hurting my feelings or fear of insulting me or something.  Ok?

You recommended that I read Ephesians 2, verses 4 through 10 with an emphasis on verse 8.  Well, let's have a quick look at those verses shall we.  Here are those exact verses from the NIV (its a little easier to read then the KJV) I hope you don't mind.

Eph 2

⁴ But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, ⁵ made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions – it is by grace you have been saved. ⁶ And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, ⁷ in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. ⁸ For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – ⁹ not by works, so that no one can boast. ¹⁰ For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

And so we see that we are saved through faith, not by works.  Now, if you look closely Paul couldn't be talking about the uselessness of good works, ie works of God since he goes on in the very next verse on the idea the God Wills that we do certain works (verse 10).  Paul then, is referencing the works of the law (sacrificial law, circumcision and so on...) when he says that one is saved through faith and not by works of the law.

Look at verse 10, it says: "For we are God's handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God has prepared in advance for us to do."

Now, God has prepared in advance some good works that we are to do.  It is His Will that we do them.  What happens if we do not do the Will of God?  Answer: "‘Not everyone who says to me, “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."  (Mat 7:21)

Faith alone isn't enough, we must also do the will of God and if we knowingly refuse to do God's Will means that we will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

The verse that I believe best explains the role of faith and works is in Gal 5:6

"the only thing that counts is faith working through love."

God Bless
Nathan

Be Prepared

We are to be ready for those times that we will be in a position to defend the Truth. Here is an exchange I recently had online. His words in italics, mine in bold as well as interspersed within his response. It all started when my friend posted the picture you see at the top of this leaflet with the caption: “Homosexuality is unnatural? Not according to nature.” I commented that the underlying premise was false. That is, just because you see a certain behavior in nature doesn’t mean that the behavior is morally ok to engage in. For example we find that sometimes lions kill rival's lioncubs. He answers back this way…

Oh[ Nathan]! Loving another consenting adult who happens to be of the same sex is not morally wrong. What IS though is rape, murder, pedophilia, incest, child porn, human trafficking and other very criminal stuff, punishable by law. Homosexuality is NOT punishable by law. It is natural. So saying that it is morally wrong is promoting homophobic slurs and prejudice. It incites criminal activity against another person who is minding his own business, living his life in a most normal way... loving another person... body and mind, as long as it is with consent.

A 60-year-old man dating a 20-year-old woman... is it morally wrong? NO. Do I find it repulsive? Yes to some extent. Does it mean they shouldn't have the same rights as any other "normal" couple to get married, have/adopt children and have the exact same rights and privileges as any other married couple. ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!

This should also be applied to any same-sex couple wanting to marry and have/adopt children. No one should lose their jobs for their sexual orientation. No one should be banned from living anywhere for that either. No one should be discriminated for it in any way as long as it is with consenting adults.

Here’s my underlined answer interspersed within his original post. His words in italics:

Oh [Nathan]! Loving another consenting adult who happens to be of the same sex is not morally wrong.

Loving another is never wrong whether he is of the same sex as you ro not. But the behavior between two lovers of the same sex is always wrong and you simply saying the contrary doesn’t make it true.

What IS [morally wrong] though is rape, murder, pedophilia, incest, child porn, human trafficking and other very criminal stuff, punishable by law. Homosexuality is NOT punishable by law. It is natural.Whether some things are lawful does not determine what is moral. For example, is it morally ok to have extra marital affairs? Adultery is not punishable by law so by your standard it is morally ok. The laws of man can be moral laws but only when they are in line with natural law.
So saying that it is morally wrong is promoting homophobic slurs and prejudice. It incites criminal activity against another person who is minding his own business, living his life in a most normal way... loving another person... body and mind, as long as it is with consent.

Just because I don’t agree with the lifestyle and me saying so does not mean that I’m inciting criminal activity. One cannot logically go from me disagreeing with something to automatically mean that I’m inciting criminal activity. If that were the case then the government could prosecute me for disagreeing with anyone else on any given issue. That means that even defense attorneys could be prosecuted for inciting criminal activity because they are defending those who acted against the law. There is no logic in your statement, one does not follow the other.

If there is nothing wrong as long as it is with consent then what is wrong with a father and daughter being intimate with each other? Even if they are of legal age and both consent, is it still morally ok? By your standard it would be.

A 60-year-old man dating a 20-year-old woman... is it morally wrong? NO. Do I find it repulsive? Yes to some extent. Does it mean they shouldn't have the same rights as any other "normal" couple to get married, have/adopt children and have the exact same rights and privileges as any other married couple. ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!

Why are you bringing up all these different things? We were talking about the false premise that because you see a certain behavior in nature then it must be morally ok. And now you bring up the subject of marriage? For the record, I agree with the point you made in the above paragraph.

This should also be applied to any same-sex couple wanting to marry and have/adopt children. No one should lose their jobs for their sexual orientation. No one should be banned from living anywhere for that either. No one should be discriminated for it in any way as long as it is with consenting adults.

I agree that no one should be unjustly discriminated against. Why are you talking about marriage anyway? The subject was that just because you see a certain behavior in the animal world doesn't mean that it is ok to do.

To come back to my original point. Just because you see a certain behavior in the animal world does NOT mean that the behavior is morally acceptable.

God Bless
Nathan