Bands and rucking by the lakeshore this morning. #gm

Josh, I'm curious as to your thoughts on James 2:20-24. From what I can tell, the RCC separates initial justification from final. To me I see that the only place in the entire Bible that the phrase ‘faith alone’ appears, it is rejected. Especially the Abraham part: Paul quotes Genesis 15 as the moment Abraham was justified by faith, but James says the offering of Isaac decades later is when Abraham was ‘justified by works’ and when Genesis 15:6 was ‘fulfilled.’ This seems to me the Catholic initial-vs-final justification distinction in a nutshell;

"Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness” — and he was called a friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone."

---

or these other passages as well;

2 Peter 1:10 – “be all the more diligent to make your calling and election sure.”

Philippians 2:12 "Therefore, my beloved, fas you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,"

Matthew 25:31–46 – The final judgment is explicitly according to works.

Romans 2:6–13 – God “will render to each one according to his works … eternal life to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory …”

Revelation 20:12–13 – Judged “according to what they had done.”

---

All love brother!

I’m not a Catholic but this just isn’t true — and I don’t just mean in the ancient pre-schism catholic church, I mean even today in the latest Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), this isn’t true.

There’s much to complain about with the RC church, but one nice thing is that their “magisterium” systematically articulates every aspect of their theology with painstaking precision (dating back pre-schism, with later innovations that they refer to as “doctrinal development”).

The east may criticize that the west over intellectualizes the mysteries and misses the “phronema” (the heart), but from a western and especially reformed perspective RC provides an exact articulation and exegesis on these topics.

For example:

Salvation is initiated and completed through Jesus Christ’s passion, death, and resurrection, which provide infinite merit for the redemption of humanity (CCC 1992; Hebrews 7:25)

Justification begins with faith and baptism, infused by God’s grace (CCC 1987–1995; Romans 3:24). Good works are necessary as a response to grace, not as a prerequisite or independent contribution (James 2:14–26).

And where it aligns closer to Calvinist/reformed confessions goes back pre-schism, to Augustine. Catholicism explicitly rejects Pelagianism (and semi-pelagianism) and affirms there is no human effort towards salvation without grace, that God is 100% responsible for your salvation, and man is 100% responsible for sin and rebellion against God.

The seeming contradiction was resolved earlier in Chalcedon (5th century, pre schism), that the person of Christ, fully human and full God, has a divine will and human will — and a “synergoi” between the two, that is, man and God cooperating (from man’s perspective free will, from the divine perspective complete sovereignty).

The Catholic rebuttal to reformed confessions (and TULIP more generally) is similar to the eastern (e.g., confessions of Dositheus) — basically a series of anathemas that most reformed theologians actually agree with, such as explicitly stating that God is never the author of evil.

The concerns from EO and RC are about these edge cases where Calvinism leads to moral determinism, or deism (clockmaker God) — and it’s important to point out that this is exactly what happened, e.g., to the Puritans (the most hardcore Calvinists and Christian nationalists to ever exist — whose theology I love, but the bad fruits of Harvard and Yale are undeniable).

Similarly, I’d be careful about the “violating free will” line, even staunch Calvinists reject that way of thinking as it leads to the view that God is the author of evil. The reformed position on this is technically not that different from the EO and RC position (despite all the Internet strawman versions). I think best articulated in that Jonathan Edward’s quote.. which RC and EO fully agree with.

You are saying when a Satanist feeds the homeless it's not a good thing? That's flat on its face

Are you saying when Satanists do good things it is performed form justification?

I appreciate your perspective and input! And glad that we can have open discussion about this. All love Josh! Cheers brother! 🙏

nostr:nprofile1qqs25j24kwmq0xhre77xsvzpvfwlrs5aevl9qsrf253htdlua80efhsppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyt8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68yetvd96x2uewdaexwtcvxpwsq Thank you again for engaging. Just to build on this;

I went to your church’s site, opened the Baptist Faith & Message 2000, and read it slowly. (bfm.sbc.net/bfm2000) I didn’t find a rejection of works. But I found commands, duties, obligations, and progress — all flowing from grace.

We may be closer than you think. It says there;

IV. Salvation – C. Sanctification - “Sanctification is the experience, beginning in regeneration, by which the believer is set apart… and is enabled to progress toward moral and spiritual maturity through the presence and power of the Holy Spirit…”

That’s grace-enabled growth, not self-effort.

Same with:

XI. Evangelism – “It is the duty of every follower of Christ…”

XIII. Stewardship – “They are under obligation to serve Him with time, talents, and possessions…”

XV. Social Order – “All Christians are under obligation to seek to make the will of Christ supreme…”

XV. Family - "A husband is to love.. provide.. lead.. Parents are to teach, discipline, model.."

Progress. Duty. Obligation.

I guess I struggle to see how these aren't works as fruit of faith. We both reject salvation by self-effort. We both affirm works as necessary fruit. Right?

Faith through grace, reflected in works. Sola Gratia. 🙏

Hey thank nostr:nprofile1qqs25j24kwmq0xhre77xsvzpvfwlrs5aevl9qsrf253htdlua80efhsppemhxue69uhkummn9ekx7mp0qyt8wumn8ghj7mn0wd68yetvd96x2uewdaexwtcvxpwsq I'll look into it and add this to my list. I'm curious as which tradition you mention explicitly rejects the gospel? I've been reading more scripture and history surrounding it than I ever have in the past. I would hope anybody making a decision to publicly proclaim their faith does so on an informed basis, at least to the best of their ability. I'm not exactly rejecting everything I was taught in Evangelical congregations, I actually really appreciate a lot of what it taught and gave me as a young man.

I've found something beautiful in the Catholic Church.

Growing up in Protestant and evangelical congregations laid a lot of groundwork, but left me struggling to identify wholeheartedly with faith. There was something missing for me—especially in the most difficult questions; Good vs Evil, free will, humility. For a long time, I passively avoided engaging.

Recently something changed for us. We both felt a need for more in our spiritual lives. Something supernatural led us to our first Catholic Mass—and with it, a new feeling of finally being home. That something, I fully believe, is the Holy Spirit.

Over the past several months, I’ve moved through the stage of excitement and discovery—diving deep into reason, research, history, and tradition—only to enter the stage of terror. “Trapped by truth,” as I’ve heard it said.

I can no longer deny or neglect my calling to the faith. Tomorrow, my wife and I enroll, asking for full communion with the Church as we continue through OCIA together toward Confirmation.

God is good. Christ is King. 🙏⚔️