Let's Talk about Faith

The Reformation is known for its "five solas": sola gratia, sola fide, solus Christus, sola scriptura, and soli Deo gloria. They represented the Reformers notion of the five distinctives between what they were teaching and what the Roman Catholic Church taught. Today, they have returned to a largely misunderstood position.

One of them, sola fide, has fallen into particular disfavor. The Roman Catholic Church argued that faith and good works renders one just before God. The Reformers argued that justification -- being declared right before God -- is accomplished by faith apart from good works. Note, at the outset, one of the single most common points of confusion. Sola fide does not argue that "faith alone" is all there is. That would be nonsense. The "faith alone" is a reference to "faith apart from works", not faith apart from grace or Christ. The separation of faith is not from all other things, but from works. The Reformers as well as those of the Reformed faith obviously hold to the necessity of grace and the absolute necessity of Christ in salvation. Arguing otherwise is a strawman argument.

Having cleared up the easiest misconception, let's look again at "faith alone". Martin Luther called this "the doctrine on which the Church stands or falls." And it is a biblical concept:

² If Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. ³ For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness." ⁴ Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. ⁵ And to the one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness (Rom. 4:2-5).

For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law (Rom. 3:28).

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life" (John 5:24).

More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith (Phil. 3:8-9).

Nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified (Gal. 2:16).

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast (Eph. 2:8-9).

I put that last one last so it would be freshest in your mind. Note the intent: "So that no one may boast." That's important.

So it would appear that it's a done deal. Obviously we are saved "by faith apart from works". Indeed, our definition of grace has deviated from the Greek word because of Scripture. The Greek word, charis, means simply "favor", but we have come to define it as "unmerited favor" because of this concept of "faith apart from works" and verses like Rom. 11:6 that say, "If it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace." Christianity draws a distinction between salvation earned and salvation applied. It is one of the distinguishing differences between Christianity and every other religion. Everyone else knows that you have to be good to go to heaven. It doesn't matter if you're Jewish or Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu; you have to be good to go to heaven. Christianity, on the other hand, says, "Going to heaven is not a function of being good; it is a function of faith in Christ. (That faith and all of salvation is a matter of the grace of God ... linking the three together -- sola gratia, sola fide, and solus Christus.)

So why would there be such division among non-Catholics about this sola fide prescription for salvation? Well, first, I suspect it's a product of exactly the fact that everyone knows you have to be good to go to heaven. This "something for nothing" concept of "saved by faith apart from works" just doesn't sit right. Beyond that, there is the constant argument that is it not "apart from any work at all". "You have to believe. You have to repent. You have to be baptized. There are works involved." And, of course, there is the "top of the line" argument: Scripture says otherwise.

¹⁴What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? ²¹ Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? ²² You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; ²³ and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness," and he was called the friend of God. ²⁴ You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone (James 2:14, 21-24).

Really, I'm not sure how much more we need to look at. "A man is justified by works and not by faith alone." That's absolutely clear.

Well, it's not, as it turns out. If it is absolutely clear, it stands in stark opposition to all the other passages listed above, and we have a genuine contradiction. So is it possible to read these Scriptures without contradicting each other? I think so. Let's give it a whirl.

First, remember the intent of Eph. 2:8-9: "So that no one may boast." Now, there are some that would argue that since some of the passages above refer to "works of the Law", the references to "faith apart from works" are only references to "faith apart from works of the Law", not all works. However, if that is the case, then works of any type would be cause to boast, and the intent of Ephesians 2 would be lost. "No," they argue, "The works required for salvation don't merit anything and, as such, don't give room for boasting." Well, perhaps in someone's mind that's true, but I can't imagine it. Think of that glorious time in heaven. We're all standing around praising God. You're standing with a couple of angels. "Hey, look," they say, "We really loved that 'grace of God' thing. It was marvelous to watch. But we weren't actually there, so we didn't quite understand something, and you can explain it to us. When you were saved, a couple of people from the local church came to your door and gave you the Gospel. You received it with thanksgiving and were saved. Then they went next door and the guy there didn't and wasn't. What was the difference? Why did you receive it and he didn't?" You work out the answer. If it is anything except "faith apart from works of any type", I can't find a satisfactory answer that doesn't paint me in a better light than my neighbor. "I had the faith." "I was spiritually wiser." "I did what was required and he didn't." It doesn't work.

So, how can we re-read James or re-read all the other passages to make them align? I think the passage to look at again is the James passage. Our problem is that often we lump words together. "Saved", to us, often means "saved from the wrath of God", but it doesn't always mean that in the Bible. In 1 Tim. 2:15 it says, "She will be saved through childbearing ..." suggesting either that women must have children to be saved from the wrath of God, or that there is more than one meaning of "saved". The same is true for "justified". In Luke 7:35, Jesus says, "Wisdom is justified by all her children." Now, normally "justified" means "declared right in the eyes of God", but clearly in this case it means simply "declared right". Wisdom is shown to be right by the results of wisdom (her children). So is it possible that James is speaking of some different sense of "justification" than our normal "Christianese"? I think, if you examine it, he is clearly speaking of something else. In the James 2 passage, he speaks of two types of faith: Dead faith and live faith (implied). Dead faith is faith that has no results (works). Therefore, live faith -- faith that saves -- is faith that produces works. In the James 2:21-24 part, he references the same example of Abraham that Paul uses in Rom. 4:2-5 when he demonstrates justification apart from works. The difference is the time frame. Paul references Gen. 15:6 while James references Gen. 22. In other words, Paul says that Abraham was justified at the point of faith (Gen. 15:6), while the justification of which James speaks occurs at the end of Abraham's life. In fact, if you read James, you find that he explains what was "justified": "the Scripture was fulfilled." In James's use of the term "justified", he is referring to the other sense of the word, the simpler sense. Abraham was declared right by the work of faith that he performed. That doesn't mean that he was declared right before God at that point; he was demonstrated to already be right. To put it in the terms that Jesus used it, "Abraham's faith was justified by her children." He was shown to have right standing with God when he acted on the faith that, long ago, linked him to God's declaration that he was now righteous.

It looks as if James 2 does not actually support the notion that sola fide is a lie. It is a different use of the term "justified". If this is the case, we have managed to eliminate a paradox -- an apparent contradiction -- and allowed Scripture to align with Scripture without modifying anything at all. In this aspect we allow Christianity to retain its distinctive: salvation apart from works. In this approach we allow Scripture to remain God's Word rather than contradictory passages written by men. In this way we retain sola fide, the doctrine on which the Church stands or falls.