By Will GreenChristians often talk about how grace means that we don't and can't 'earn' our way into heaven.
Eph 2:8-9: "Because by grace you have salvation through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is given by God: Not by works, so that no man may take glory to himself."
Rom 11:6: "But if it is of grace, then it is no longer of works: or grace would not be grace."
Think about it. What does it mean for salvation not to depend at all on works? Are 'works' involved in salvation if people who don't care about philosophy at all are more likely to go to heaven - because they experience fewer doubts?
Are 'works' involved in salvation if someone is more likely to go to heaven should they be an incredibly trusting person who accepts whatever religious texts say? And if someone who is very cynical is less likely to go to heaven because they automatically doubt religious authorities?
Are 'works' involved in salvation if someone who is very nice is more likely to accept Christ, because following Christ is more appealing to them? Whereas someone who is an arrogant jerk is less likely to accept Christ?
My answer to all these questions is 'Yes'. I've thought about it a lot and I think that if these situations really occur then salvation has to
partly involve works. Otherwise being philosophical, being cynical, and being a jerk makes it less likely you will get to heaven = salvation is partly of works.
So where does that lead us?
I think that if grace is completely grace, that this is the right definition of grace:
Grace: free will is involved, God wants everyone to go to heaven, and our personality and character traits don't put an obstacle in our way when it comes to getting into heaven, and don't give us an advantage over anyone else in that area, at any stage.And yet, I should add, some people don't make it into heaven.
I'd rather not take Calvin's explanation given passages like
Eze 33:11;
John 3:16;
Matt 23:37;
1 Tim 2:3-4;
2 Pet 3:9 and so on.
If you don't take Calvin's route then grace is hard, very hard, to understand from a philosophical point-of-view. I think this makes grace a lot like free will. Which makes sense if grace involves free will.
No one can get very far in explaining how 'can do otherwise' free will works. But we know that we have free will intuitively, we can act as though we have free will, and we could surely know how free will works through the Spirit, as a form of spiritual knowledge (
1 Cor 2:12-14).
Similarly, we can know what grace is intuitively (like free will), we can act on the basis that we are saved by grace, and we can know how grace works through the Spirit, as a form of spiritual knowledge. But I don't know exactly how the definition I gave above (plus some people don't make it to heaven) makes sense from the point-of-view of philosophy.
Comments (16)
I also believe in freewill but I believe God's grace is involved in our salvation. The bible says that God must first draw us to himself. That is God's grace. Without him drawing us, we would never choose to be saved. After he draws us, he does allow us to choose to either receive him or reject him.
Why would people who care about philosophy be less likely to go yo heaven? Why do people who don't care about philosophy experience fewer doubts? I do not see the connection.
If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright.
Martin Luther
Reformed traditions hold to the scriptures teaching that unless the Holy Spirit applies the divine act of regeneration to a person, they will never come to Christ of their own will. We are spiritually dead and it is the Spirit that gives life. In saying this we affirm that 1. the will is free to do whatever it wants, but 2. The nature of men is fallen and corrupt so that it will never on it's own "choose" to come to Christ.
The Holy Spirit is critical for salvation, so critical that without Him, no one would ever willingly submit to the humbling terms of the gospel, not one would come to Jesus Christ. Or do you believe the Scripture teaches that a man can come to faith apart from the Holy Spirit? So it is important to ask, can a person, without the intervention of the Holy Spirit, believe the gospel? Does the natural person have the capacity to understand spiritual things? How should we take verses like 'No one says “Jesus is Lord” apart from the Holy Spirit? 'This is no small matter! This is where the line is drawn between Rome and the Reformers. Grace (that is God's saving grace) is God's unmerited favor toward a sinner in changing their heart of stone into a hart of flesh. Bringing them from spiritual death to spiritual life.
In Christ by grace alone!
~Michael
You lose me with this early question: "Are 'works' involved in salvation if people who don't care about philosophy at all are more likely to go to heaven - because they experience fewer doubts?"
To run with you thoughts, which I'm willing to do, you first need to substantiate two presuppositions:
1) That people who care about philosophy experience more doubts than those who who don't care about philosophy.
2) That people who experience less doubts are more likely to go to heaven -or- people who experience more doubts are less likely to go to heaven.
Those are huge claims.
Sounds like you need to study the early church conversations between St. Augustine and Pelagius, especially with regard to human nature and grace.
@MC_Shann@xanga - This is where the line is drawn between Rome and the Reformers.
There is no line between Rome and the Reformers in this case. The Catholic Church has always held that human works cannot merit salvation.
Even though human beings may wish to labor towards a supernatural end, our powers are only natural. So it is impossible for a natural creature acting according to its natural design to attain a supernatural end.
Therefore, it is only by grace that a human being can be saved or even perform the works required by the Commandments.
This line of reasoning was stated by Saint Thomas Aquinas in his Summa Theologica, about three centuries before the Protestant Reformation.
If you don't take Calvin's route then grace is hard, very hard, to understand from a philosophical point-of-view. I think this makes grace a lot like free will. Which makes sense if grace involves free will.
Au contraire. Grace is very easy to understand from a philosophical point of view:
We know God to be the first cause or first mover. That means that creatures depend on God for their existence and also for the exercise of their ability to act. Therefore man's intellect needs God to know anything whatsoever.
But man's intellect needs God in a special way to know truths that lie beyond its natural range. To grasp such truths, the mind of man needs something supernatural.
That something supernatural is grace.
The above explanation comes from Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theological.
Grace is totally a gift from God, and does not involve our free will. Faith involves our response to God's grace, so it is within faith that it makes sense to talk about free will. There is an order here: God takes the initiative and gives us grace, then we respond with a yes (in faith), or with a no (and reject both faith and grace). Faith is a subject which philosophy can say something about, but if grace is from God I'm not sure what philosophy can say about it...
@gmx0@xanga - more Calvin and Hobbes! I Samuel(thats my name) 23:10 - 13 proves freewill. Look at the conversation, the Lord acknowledges possibilities, which is freewill!
You need to tell that to McShann. I believe in freewill. It is a function of the intellect. What I demonstrated was that human beings need grace in order to be saved.
I said nothing about free will.
You do have to be careful. Religious texts are obviously interpreted in all kinds of conflicting ways and wearing priestly robes does not make someone a religious authority. One does not have to look further than the clergies that control authoritarian governments or pedophile priests and those are only the more obvious examples reasons to not accept religious authority.
@LoBornlyte@xanga - Happy Thanksgiving!
@soy_esteban@xanga - "1) That people who care about philosophy
experience more doubtsthan those who who don't care about philosophy.
2)
That people who experience less doubts are more likely to go to heaven
-or- people who experience more doubts are less likely to go to heaven."
Sometimes when people leave Christianity they blame it on having a very philosophical mind which has a lot of trouble believing in unknowable mysteries like the trinity, 'can do otherwise' free will. So I personally don't believe that people who are philosophical are less likely to go to heaven. If doubt interferes with salvation it can't relate to works - our personality and character traits.
Another general point I didn't put in my post is that there are two kinds of Arminianism. Both acknowledge that it's only by the Holy Spirit that anyone can come to Christ. But one of them says that our works - like being arrogant or prideful - has a huge impact on whether we respond to God's offer of grace. This is an Arminianism that many believe but ultimately it contradicts grace in the end as well, because works help you accept God's grace and thus help you get into heaven.
24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples,
If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. 26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Matt 16:24-27 (KJV)
---
...and then he shall reward EVERY MAN according to his works.
AcesLucky