Faith & Works

[Guest]

Steve,

I found your recent discussion with Tom (Catholic) re faith and works most interesting. We believe we are saved by faith, from which our works are an expected result of our faith and thus evidentiary. The common view is that the Catholics believe in justification plus works.

I occasionally listen to Catholic Answers (beats listening to "two first names from Texas"!) and a Catholic theologian explained their position on faith and works. The gist of what he said was that works were necessary for salvation along with faith, but that the works we do are not our works but God working through us. There does not seem to be a dime's worth of difference between this position and the position commonly taken by many evangelicals. In practice, however, the Catholics seem to place much confidence in works.

The question I have is that in general, in scripture, where faith is weak or wavering, greater faith or holding onto faith seems to be urged. Where works are lacking, the message seems to be to strive harder, get your act together. (Paul's "beating his body into submission".) If we believe that works are only evidence of faith, then when the works are not what they should be, (Galatians 5:16-25 for example) why is the person not urged to have more faith and the works will naturally follow? (perhaps I'm sounding like "two first" - well, you know who.

I'm thinking the answer may be found in the ideas of the theologians studying cultural anthropology (John Pilch & Bruce Malina, et al) who argue that the understanding of the meaning of faith in Apostolic times was more akin to faithfulness rather than faith as an abstract concept. The greek word Pistis can be legitimately translated either way, as it must necessarily be in regard to the pistis of God, Romans 3:3.

In the Handbook of Biblical Social Values, Malina says "in sum, faith primarily means personal loyalty, personal commitment to another person, fidelity and the solidarity that comes from such faithfulness." He adds that the idea of giving credence or finding another to be believable is a secondary meaning.

I believe Pilch and Malina have a Catholic background but I'm not sure.

Would be most interested in hearing your thoughts (or those of any others interested in this subject)

In Christ, Homer

[_Steve]

Homer,

I am not sufficiently expert in Greek (or even literate in it!) to confirm that "faithfulness" was or was not the more widely-recognized meaning of pistis, in New Testament times. I have often heard that this is at least one of the meanings of the word, though I would not be in a position to say whether or not it was the primary one.

Gerhard Kittel, W.E. Vine and Joseph Thayer all give this as a secondary meaning (after the idea of "confidence"), and believe it to be its unmistakable meaning in Matt.23:23; Rom.3:3; Gal.5:22 and Titus 2:10. Bauer and Gingrich actually give "faithfulness" as the primary meaning of pistis.

In favor of this suggestion is the fact that the Hebrew text of Habakkuk 2:4 says, "the just will live by his faithfulness," whereas Paul always quotes this from the LXX, which reads, "the just shall live by faith (pistis)" (Rom.1:17/ Gal.3:11/ Heb.10:38). Paul seems to assume that the Greek translation is true to the original thought of Habakkuk, suggesting that he accepted "faithfulness" as an equivalent (or at least acceptable) meaning of pistis.

This last consideration indicates that, whether primary or secondary, generally, "faithfulness" as a meaning of pistis seems defensible in the most important Old Testament text (apart from Genesis 15:6) about the doctrine of justification. The obvious implication is that being righteous in God's sight is not just a matter of believing certain things, but of being inseparably bonded to God by a loyal and steadfast heart.

Whichever meaning of pistis is primary, I believe this doctrine to be true to the teaching of scripture in general.

Some thoughts from "Two-first names, from California"

[Guest]

The gist of what he said was that works were necessary for salvation along with faith, but that the works we do are not our works but God working through us. There does not seem to be a dime's worth of difference between this position and the position commonly taken by many evangelicals.

I agree with you Homer that this whole debate between Catholics and Protestants seems to be a splitting of hairs. It's almost like debating on how to structure a sentence that has the same meaning. Maybe it comes from a misunderstanding of Sola Fide. No true Christian I know thinks that their faith can be real without obedience (or works) as evidence of it (James 2). I think Catholics often assume that about Protestants. Likewise, Protestants often assume Catholics believe in salvation by works. Neither is true.

I heard Steve on the radio today making this very point, that we will be judged by our works (Rev 20:12-13). But that the works will judged on the basis of whether we did them sincerely through faith and obedience or insincerely by religious superstition (Matt 7:21-23).