Originally posted by George Blaisdell

Does the Augsburg confession even HAVE the category of the works of faith?

Did you miss my post where I quoted the section of the Augsburg Confession discussing the works of faith?

James says faith is brought to completion by works, 2:22. Whether that's the same as works perfecting faith is hard to judge, because I don't know quite what implications you get from works perfecting faith, but they are at least close.

He also says that works show faith.

Originally posted by George Blaisdell

We ALL DO WORKS... The ONLY question is, WHICH WORKS?

The godly do godly works, the ungodly do ungodly works.

James CLEARLY STATES that the works of Faith PERFECT one's Faith, and it is the MATURE in the Faith who are the REPOSITORY of the Faith...

Faith without works is dead, which means faith without works is incomplete, or, imperfect if you will. I assume you are addressing James 2:22, which states "You see that faith was active along with his (i.e. Abraham's) works, and faith was completed by his works..." What I see is that faith without works is dead, that works are necessary because without them faith is actually unfaith. I do not see that we are rewarded with justification for our good works, which is what the Augsburg Confession is addressing.

Unless you are prepared to argue that the immature babies in the Faith are "saved"... eg are HEALED from their infirmities and are no longer able to be sinning

We may speak of salvation as our final state at the escathon, but we may also speak of it in the present times, as Christ himself did in Luke 7:50, after scolding Simon he states to the woman "your faith has saved you". I would also point out Ephesians 2:8, which states "For by grace you have been saved through faith..." In both of these cases, salvation is something that just occurred or has occurred in the past. Now, as I stated above, this does not mean that "salvation" only means when our sins are forgiven at the present time, but it does mean that "salvation" does not only occur at the eschaton. Given that, it is legitimate to speak of salvation we have now, and that we are working out our salvation. It depends on what reference point we are using.

Does the Augsburg confession even HAVE the category of the works of faith?

I think so. I don't see why you do not see it though.

And again, BECAUSE works perfect faith, they are needed for the healing of the soul, which is the pathway to salvation, which is oneness with God...

Or, as Augsburg says, they are necessary.

I remember reading somewhere that the idea that good works create faith was anathema in the Evangelical context...I'll have to dig that up.

Originally posted by Anoetos

I remember reading somewhere that the idea that good works create faith was anathema in the Evangelical context...I'll have to dig that up.

Jesus sees good trees as producing good fruit, and not the reverse. However if you look at our development over time, doing good can help us grow in faith, if it's done in the right spirit. I would think all Christians would agree on that.

Originally posted by hedrick

Jesus sees good trees as producing good fruit, and not the reverse. However if you look at our development over time, doing good can help us grow in faith, if it's done in the right spirit. I would think all Christians would agree on that.

The "good trees--good fruit" analogy seems to be exactly what Augsburg is saying. I also say that as living things we will do things, and by ceasing our doing we run the risk of no longer being living things. I think we also agree that doing good works is something we do voluntarily once we are reborn. Not out of a sense of fear or a desire for reward, but because we willingly serve God and our neighbor.

Originally posted by Anoetos

Yes, he says no such thing. He says that works prove faith.

Well, here is the KJV:

James: 2:22
Seest thou how faith wrought with his works,
and by works was faith made perfect?

Here is the very wooden and literal, and revealing, translation:

You are seeing that Faith was synergizing with his works,
And from these works [his] Faith was made perfect.

There is no more plain a way of saying it. The Greek word is SYNERGIZE, which means "work together with", and describes the inter-dependence of Faith and works.

And it is not at all mysterious overall, even though the actual interplay is very mysterious, because all it is saying is that if you do not walk the talk, you are a hippocrite, and it is the walking of the Faith that matters, and this means works... By walking the Way of the Faith, we become perfected in the faith... And the same word for perfected in Greek is the basis for the word in English called TELEOLOGY...

Now it is true that Faith prescribes works, yet at every point, it is the human will that is called to choose the DOING of the Faith that is GIVEN... Works are but the DOING OF THE FAITH, and FAITH IS THE DOING OF THE FAITH... If you are not DOING THE FAITH, then you do not HAVE THE FAITH, yet if you BELIEVE, you can DO, the Faith, but only IF YOU ARE WILLING...

Following Christ is voluntary and willful... Christ's great call to discipleship BEGINS WITH:

"IF ANYONE IS WILLING..."

EOD

Arsenios

Originally posted by Maxentius

The godly do godly works, the ungodly do ungodly works.

Then we who do sin are ungodly...

Yet we are called to not sin...

Faith without works is dead, which means faith without works is incomplete, or, imperfect if you will.

It means that it is INERT, FALSE, and DEAD...

BECAUSE DEMONS BELIEVE, AND DO NOT DO THE WORKS OF FAITH.

I assume you are addressing James 2:22, which states "You see that faith was active along with his (i.e. Abraham's) works, and faith was completed by his works..." What I see is that faith without works is dead, that works are necessary because without them faith is actually unfaith. I do not see that we are rewarded with justification for our good works, which is what the Augsburg Confession is addressing.

See my post above on this passage... Faith and works live in a kind of symbiosis, which the Bible calls SYNERGY, in that they work together... Such that

BELIEF WITHOUT WORKS is NOT FAITH

And that means that BELIEF IS NOT FAITH...

It is but a necessary component of Faith...

So too are works not Faith...

But are a necessary component of Faith...

Neither belief nor works are sufficient by themselves separately to be Faith...

Both together are NECESSARY...

And WORKS PERFECT FAITH, just as

FAITH ENGENDERS WORKS...

The relationship of the two is called by the Bible:

SYNERGY

Arsenios

George,

I think you and James mean different things when you speak of works perfecting faith.

While you seem to mean that works build up, improve and even create or engender faith, what James means is that works complete faith; i.e. they are the proof and evidence of it. They complete it in the sense that they are its QED. Without works, faith is dead, indeed, it is just assent, but with works it is complete and requires nothing else.

Modern translations make this clear. The word is ἐτελειώθη, (eteleiothe, a cognate of τελειόω, teleioo) which means the end or accomplishment. When Jesus says "It is finished" just before His death, John renders this with a cognate Τετέλεσται (tetelestai).

Originally posted by George Blaisdell

Then we who do sin are ungodly...

Yet we are called to not sin...

Yet, we are still godly, too, unless we have driven out the Holy Spirit. AKA we are Simul justus et peccator. Otherwise, we become ungodly, i.e. drive out the Holy Spirit, with the most trivial sin.

BELIEF WITHOUT WORKS is NOT FAITH

And that means that BELIEF IS NOT FAITH...

No, it means belief alone is not faith. And I am using "belief" as some sort of intellectual assent, not trust in Christ and rebirth. It also means works are not faith, BTW. Given that, what do you believe faith is?

It is but a necessary component of Faith...

I don't think they are a component of faith. That seems to mix things up too much. As in the passages I cited, as well as the thief on the cross, it seems that faith saves, and there were not too many works involved in Jesus' proclamation of salvation in all those cases. He did admonish the woman to sin no more, but that is not faith but sanctification.

And WORKS PERFECT FAITH, just as

FAITH ENGENDERS WORKS...

What do you mean by "engenders" and "perrfect"?

If by "engender" you mean "give rise to, produce, cause" etc., that is exactly what Augsburg says.

I also think of "perfect" as "finished" or "complete". Since we both agree that faith without works is dead, we would also agree that faith without works is "incomplete" because it is mere assent, or, as St. James says, the faith of demons who "believe" facts about God--but because they don't have faith their belief bears no fruit, they are still "bad" trees.

In other words, it seems we are saying pretty much the same thing, though I am open to correction.

Until he tells us otherwise, his remarks in this thread seem clear. He sees a reciprocation between works and faith; faith doing works and works generating faith.

I believe the Bible supports a unidirectional model: faith does works, yes, but works don't necessarily generate faith.

At least, it cannot be shown from the Bible that they do. And like good Lutherans we dare not go beyond it.

Originally posted by Anoetos

Until he tells us otherwise, his remarks in this thread seem clear. He sees a reciprocation between works and faith; faith doing works and works generating faith.

I believe the Bible supports a unidirectional model: faith does works, yes, but works don't necessarily generate faith.

At least, it cannot be shown from the Bible that they do. And like good Lutherans we dare not go beyond it.

I agree the Bible gives us a unidirectional model. I just want to make sure I do not misunderstand George. From his last post, faith "engenders" works. That seems like the AC to me.

Originally posted by Maxentius

Yet, we are still godly, too, unless we have driven out the Holy Spirit. AKA we are Simul justus et peccator. Otherwise, we become ungodly, i.e. drive out the Holy Spirit, with the most trivial sin.



No, it means belief alone is not faith. And I am using "belief" as some sort of intellectual assent, not trust in Christ and rebirth. It also means works are not faith, BTW. Given that, what do you believe faith is?



I don't think they are a component of faith. That seems to mix things up too much. As in the passages I cited, as well as the thief on the cross, it seems that faith saves, and there were not too many works involved in Jesus' proclamation of salvation in all those cases. He did admonish the woman to sin no more, but that is not faith but sanctification.



What do you mean by "engenders" and "perrfect"?

If by "engender" you mean "give rise to, produce, cause" etc., that is exactly what Augsburg says.

I also think of "perfect" as "finished" or "complete". Since we both agree that faith without works is dead, we would also agree that faith without works is "incomplete" because it is mere assent, or, as St. James says, the faith of demons who "believe" facts about God--but because they don't have faith their belief bears no fruit, they are still "bad" trees.

In other words, it seems we are saying pretty much the same thing, though I am open to correction.

The perfecting of the Faith IS the healing of the soul via the narrow and straited way of askesis... Which is repentance from this world, and the embracing of one baptism into the DEATH of Christ...

Without trials, one's faith is untried [dah!], and therefore unperfected by fire - eg the fire of trials...

This is why works are essential to Faith, and indeed bring Faith to perfection, for it is by trials that the Faith is perfected...

This is not rocket science...

Arsenios

Originally posted by George Blaisdell

The perfecting of the Faith IS the healing of the soul via the narrow and straited way of askesis... Which is repentance from this world, and the embracing of one baptism into the DEATH of Christ...

Are you saying asceticism is the good works which perfect our faith?

This is why works are essential to Faith, and indeed bring Faith to perfection, for it is by trials that the Faith is perfected...

This is not rocket science...

Arsenios

It i snot rocket science, but you keep changing the terms you are using.

Perhaps a simple question or three will clear things up:

Do our works or "askesis" cause faith to arise within us, either before or after we are reborn in Baptism?

What are the good works the thief on the cross did?

What did Christ mean when he told the woman who washed his feet with her tears and dried his feet with her hair when he told her her faith has saved her?

Originally posted by Maxentius

Are you saying asceticism is the good works which perfect our faith?

Askesis is AMONG the good works which perfect our Faith, my Dear...

In addition to this, we have:

FASTING
PRAYER
ALMS-GIVING
OBEDIENCE
PARTICIPATION IN SERVICES
LOVING ONE'S ENEMIES [yes, that is a work...]
PROVIDING FOR ONE'S FAMILY
CONFESSION
REPENTANCE

It i snot rocket science, but you keep changing the terms you are using.

This is a classic case of the Christian phronema interacting with a western neo-scholastic phronema... You want a term and a definition, and I want an understanding of the reality we are addressing... Your terms and definitions will not help you in the age to come, but only the ontology of your soul regarding sin...

Perhaps a simple question or three will clear things up:

Do our works or "askesis" cause faith to arise within us, either before or after we are reborn in Baptism?

The WORKS OF FAITH we do are a necessary, yet not sufficient, cause of the perfecting of the measure of the deposit of Faith each of us has... God does the perfecting, but not, for instance, in the unrepentaant...

What are the good works the thief on the cross did?

He was in extreme askesis, indeed unto death...
He rebuked the blashpheming of the thief on the left...
He confessed Christ as his Lord...
He ASKED Christ to remember him in His Kingdom...
He CONFESSED his sins...
He LOVED Christ...

What did Christ mean when he told the woman who washed his feet with her tears and dried his feet with her hair when he told her her faith has saved her?

Could you identify the verse for me?

Arsenios

I think the two of you are showing one of the worst sides of Christianity: our tendency to use words for oneupsmanship. This started early in the Church, as Christianity moved from a Way to a narrowly defined set of beliefs, and believing the wrong thing became a crime. Jesus is a really odd master for such a religion, since he is notoriously hard to pin down with these kinds of precise formulations.

Jesus said lots of things involving both faith and works, although not always in those terms. I think his statements hang together, but I'm not so sure that they can be characterized by the kind of definitions you're arguing over. What did he say:

* When people asked him in one way or another how to be saved, he answered with faith, love, obedience and works, depending upon who he was talking to.

* He emphasized that it wasn't enough to believe; you had to do what he said.

* However he also emphasized the importance of motivation. His first principle is that if you love God and your neighbor, you'll do the right thing. Works had to follow from love for God or they are worthless.

So he demands both faith and works, but it must be faith that results in works and works that come from faith.

* While he set high ideals -- after all, he said we have to be perfect -- he also realized that in this life we wouldn't reach them. We can be forgiven of anything, as long as we are honest about ourselves (humble) and forgive others.

* His ideal for how we approach God was as a little child approaches their parents in trust and humility. We can never expect credit for anything we do. No matter how good it is, we're just slaves doing what our master has ordered us to do. He rejected any concept of humans being "holy" even when applied to himself.

The problem with trying to turn this into a single requirement like faith or works is that he opposed that kind of simplification. You can't say that we are justified by faith without action, when he was so clear on the status of people who call him Lord without doing
anything about it. But any requirements involving works have to be tempered by the reality of our imperfection, the need for repentance and forgiveness, and his emphasis on motivation. Works have to come from a heart that has been renewed.

This is why Christianity was originally a Way, and not a theological system.

I actually think that Maxentius and George are both within the bounds of acceptable Christianity and much of the discussion here is trying to show that only you have the right way of describing things. George says " You want a term and a definition, and I want an understanding of the reality we are addressing... Your terms and definitions will not help you in the age to come, but only the ontology of your soul regarding sin..." I agree with this completely, but the problem is that he's saying that while engaging in a vigorous game of trying to show that Maxentius is using unacceptable terms and definitions. EO negative theology would be a lot more convincing if it weren't so concerned about terms and definitions yourselves, and didn't demand that everyone adopt your exact way of saying things.

[I also find it odd that these debates are so often faith vs. works, when both Jesus and Paul would say that love is more important than either. In fact I think both of them would lump faith and love together as characterizing a heart that has been renewed by the Holy Spirit, Jesus' good tree that produces good fruit.]