Roman Catholicism's False Gospel | Collision w/ Jeff Durbin

Salvation by Faith Alone and the Reformed Standard of Truth

What's up, everybody? Welcome back to another episode of Collision. I'm Pastor Jeff Durbin, and today we are interacting with Catholic answers and a video called Why Protestant Doctrine is Unbiblical.

Let's talk about salvation by faith and by faith alone. Here we go. Obviously, there's a lot of things that sort of are loaded in at the front in terms of the discussion between the Roman Catholic and the Protestant or the Reformed.

And as we start this, I think it's important to lay down a foundation in terms of how do we know something is true? How do we have certainty? That's a question we all have to answer. And for the Reformed person, they have epistemology, a theory of knowledge of how you know what you know that's based upon revelation.

God has spoken, and that's how I know. And so for the Reformed person, the reference point is always God and His revelation. And what Catholics and Protestants can all agree on is inspired revelation has ceased.

The canon is actually closed. And so what we know that is inspired is given to us in the scriptures. And so we can agree on that. And so for the Reformed epistemology, in terms of how do you know what you know, we believe that the reference point is always God.

The reference point is always God and His self-disclosure. It's His revelation that is the rule by which we are all to be tested. That's the Reformed person. They believe in sola scriptura. And sola scriptura, in essence, is that God has spoken.

And God's revelation is supreme. God's revelation is that thing by which you test everything else. Jesus said to the Father, sanctify them in your truth. Thy word is truth. And so Protestants have an epistemological foundation that looks like revelation as the standard.

For the Roman Catholic, when they engage these issues on how do you know what's true, where can certainty be found, the Roman Catholic has another sola. Their sola is sola ecclesia. Now they, of course, will say they believe that scripture is divine.

They believe that scripture is inspired revelation. But they have something running alongside scripture, and that is what they would call church tradition. They have the authority of the church. The church interprets.

The church can tell you what the scriptures actually say. So for the Catholic, there's actually about two standards running alongside one another. One's the Bible, and one's the authoritative teaching of the church and tradition.

And so you have those running alongside one another like two divine deposits. But what tends to happen, and this is what Reformed folks have been trying to communicate to our Roman Catholic friends for a long time, is that when you have two dueling epistemological standards, two ultimate authorities, one of those ultimates is going to end up eating the other one up.

In the case that we're describing today, we're talking about Roman Catholic dogma and teaching and the authority of the church eating up the Bible. And so for the Protestants, the Reformed who understand sola scriptura, the standard is the Word of God.

God's revelation is the rule by which everything else has to be tested. Because what we recognize is that though we have amazing giants of the faith behind us, we have amazing moments in history of essential unity, there is still diversity.

Because what you're dealing with after the time of the apostles, after the time of the closing of the canon, is you're dealing with fallible and uninspired men who contradict not only themselves and their writings, but they contradict one another, and ultimately at points, they will contradict the scriptures.

And you'd expect that because they're fallible and uninspired men. And so though we respect and love the giants of the faith that are behind us, we recognize that they're fallible and uninspired. But for the Roman Catholic, the pitch that they give to new converts is that they have this unity of the faith that they are carrying along the apostolic traditions, even if those traditions can't actually be found in the early church.

And so what's interesting is that when you're engaging with the Roman Catholic today, you have to sort of wade through the myths that the Roman Catholic apologists will give to you about history, whether it's actually dismissing or denying points of contact in the fathers that disagree with modern Roman Catholic teaching, or when you have to engage with the fact that Roman Catholics are not only having disputes over tradition and what is sacred tradition with the Reformed, they're having those disputes with Eastern Orthodox as well.

Sola Fide in Scripture and in the Early Church

So now to the video. So this particular video, we're going to play a portion of this video, and this is where he's engaging a bit with the doctrine of sola fide, that we are justified through faith alone in Christ alone.

And so sola fide is that doctrine that Paul taught, and of course Jesus taught, and the scriptures teach, that we are justified solely through the work of Christ, through faith in Him, and not by anything in ourselves.

And so let's listen to Tim.

Why should anyone who I think, you know, we're getting biblical teaching where I attend, I'm a Chicago resident, go to or be persuaded by Catholicism that has, at least in my personal view, so many man-made doctrines that, again, in my view, depart from what I can find in scripture?

Sure. Well, I'll tell you what, Andre, as one who used to believe as you, I will tell you why I did. Number one, I find that Protestantism that you just spoke of, like the non-denominational Protestantism, itself has absolutely no foundation in sacred scripture.

So the first thing I would.

Say is I also have a problem with the non-denominational. Non-denominational denomination essentially is Baptist, afraid to call themselves Baptist. And so I, of course, I would recognize immediately and grant that many people today who claim to be Protestants, who go to non-denominational churches or what have you, have no understanding of what they believe or why they believe it or even church history.

Now, to be fair, that's also true amongst many, many people in the world who profess to be Roman Catholic. They're ignorant as to why they believe what they believe. They're ignorant of church history.

So the problem really exists on both sides. But the caller is asking, I think, an important question, in principle, an important question, and that's related to there's man-made doctrines I see in Rome that seem to contradict the Word of God.

And so really what the caller is appealing to is the standard that exists throughout the entire Bible in terms of how do you know what you know and what's the measuring rod, what's the rule of faith. And so if you go back to the beginning of the Bible, just a quick look at this beginning of the Bible in Genesis, the story of humanity when it begins, that story, that great story of redemption is a very simple one in terms of, well, where's the failure?

And it's a failure in terms of God speaks. He says this, but not that. These are the words of God. You can do this, but not that. The day you do, you'll die. Another voice comes into the garden that day and says, you won't die.

Actually, you'll be like God, knowing good and evil. And so at the very beginning of humanity, this conflict, this epistemological conflict comes into play. And that's the question of how do you know what you know?

Where is your certainty to be found? And in the case of the beginning of humanity, what happens is God speaks. He has a self-attesting revelation. He has all authority and God as God, who is the truth, speaks to his creatures.

And he says this, but not that. And at the beginning of that story, what do you have is you have another voice come in that contradicts that previous revelation. God said this, but not that. The day you do, you'll die.

Another voice comes in and tests that claim and says, no, not that. It'll actually be this. And so the question is, what ought Adam and Eve to have done that day? What should they have done? Should they have reasoned through it?

Like, yeah, I wonder how God knows that. Or maybe God can be wrong. Or which voice should I listen to? The voice of the serpent or my own internal monologue and questions. The answer is, is they should have listened to God's own self-disclosure.

His revelation was self-attesting, and they should have obeyed it because God spoke it. And so that's the beginning is that all these other voices may come in. All these other experiences may come in.

But the reference point is God's revelation. And that thread runs through the entire Bible from front to back. You see it in Deuteronomy chapter 13, where God tells his people that one of the things they need to do to test the prophets is see even beyond the signs and wonders that they may have that's a part of their ministry.

It looks legit. Signs and wonders. It looks like God's in this. God says to his people, however, in his law, he says that even if they have signs and wonders, but they lead you after other gods, gods which you have not known, that's how you know there are false prophets.

So in other words, in the law of God for the people of God, the standard wasn't what they saw. It wasn't what they felt. It wasn't some other authority. It was what has God already disclosed about himself.

If that prophet is leading you after a different God, contradicting what God has already said about himself, that's how you know he's a false prophet. You see this thread again, running through the prophets in Isaiah 820.

The standard is to the law and to the testimony. If they do not agree according to this word, they have no light in them. And so the standard even in the prophets was that the law and the testimony, this is the standard.

If they don't speak according to this word, they're not from God. They're not speaking for God. And then you see that thread even running into the life of Jesus, where Jesus is God incarnate. He's the incarnate one.

And Jesus in Matthew chapter 15 is dealing with, in his day, what many saw as a tradition passed down all the way from Moses. It wasn't in the scriptures that had been, according to Paul, Romans 3, entrusted to the Jewish people.

They were entrusted with the oracles of God. This was a divine tradition running alongside the Bible. And the way that Jesus, the incarnate one, God in human flesh, confronts their divine tradition is interesting.

It goes to what the caller is getting at. He says, Jesus does, he says, you say this, and he quotes their tradition. And then he says, but Moses says this. So he's comparing their voice, their claim to tradition, their claim to divine tradition passed down outside of the holy scriptures.

And he's comparing it to the words of God given to us in the law of God with Moses. And Jesus says, when comparing their voice to Moses's voice, he says, thus you invalidate the word of God for the sake of your tradition.

And so Jesus taught us as the incarnate one, as the perfect image of God, as to how we're to handle conflicts when it comes to the voice of God and the claim to divine tradition. Jesus says, you say, but scripture says, thus you've invalidated the word of God for the sake of your tradition.

And that's what the caller is getting at. These seem to be man-made doctrines. They are not in the scriptures. And by the way, there are also many of the Roman Catholic dogmas are not in the early church at all.

But he is claiming, Tim is claiming here, that Protestantism has absolutely no foundation in sacred scripture. Now that's a bold claim, and that's a huge general.

Claim, but let's get to more. Idea, Andre, and as a matter of history, this is where Protestantism came from. Martin Luther taught a doctrine, justification by faith alone, that was never taught by a single Christian for 1 ,500 years.

In fact, another wildly bold claim there, and.

Unfortunately many Christians today are not rigorous in their study of scripture, nor of their study of church history, even to be able to debate that point, that wild claim when it's made. However, the real question is whether or not the inspired revelation of God teaches justification by faith alone, in Christ alone.

That's the real question. However, he makes the claim that no Christian for 1 ,500 years taught this. Now this is a short video, so we can't even begin to exhaust this, but let's just test that claim before we get to the scriptures in terms of whether or not God's people had been saying this, that we are justified by faith or saved by faith alone for 1 ,500 years.

Clement of Rome says, whosoever will candidly consider each particular will recognize the greatness of the gifts with which we were given by him. For from him have sprung the priests and all the Levites who minister at the altar of God.

From him also was descended our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. From him arose kings, princes, and rulers of the race of Judah. Nor are his other tribes in small glory inasmuch as God had promised, quote, thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven.

All these therefore were highly honored and made great not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of his will. And we too, being called by his will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart, but by that faith through which from the beginning Almighty God has justified all men to whom be glory forever and ever.

That was Clement of Rome. Again, we could do this for days, but John Chrysostom, the patriarch, he says, Abraham himself before receiving circumcision had been declared righteous on the score of faith alone.

Before circumcision, the text says, quote, Abraham believed God and credit for it brought him to righteousness. That's John Chrysostom. Some of the most amazing explanations based upon Romans and just tons of great work from John Chrysostom.

And this is John on his homilies on the epistle of Paul, the apostle to the Romans. He says, for even if before this, the circumcision was made uncircumcision, much rather was it now since it is cast out from both periods.

But after saying that, quote, it was excluded, he shows also how. How then does he say it was excluded? Quote, by what law of works? Nay, but by the law of faith. See, he calls the faith also a law delighting to keep to the names and so allay the seeming novelty.

But what is the law of faith? It is being saved by grace. Here he shows God's power in that he has not only saved, but has even justified and led them to boasting. And this too, without needing works, but looking for faith only.

So again, for the purpose of this video, we could do this for days. Quotes from bishops, pastors in the early church, teachers, the early fathers, who are very clear that we are justified by faith alone, apart from the works of the law.

And here's of course, the difficulty. The difficulty in dealing with fallible and uninspired men is that it points in the teachings of the fathers and, you know, giants of the faith. You'll see them saying things that are amazingly consistent with the Lord Jesus and Paul.

When John here is simply going through Romans, he's just giving it to you straight. He's telling you this is what Paul says. It is by faith alone. But at other times, you're going to see them as fallible and uninspired men, face planting, contradicting their own words, contradicting the words of others before them or around them and contradicting the text, such as the nature of fallible men.

The problem is, is that the claim is made that this is taught nowhere for 1500 years in church history. And that is an outright bald face lie. I believe this man is sharp enough to know some of these quotes from church history.

And he, I would assume knows they exist. And to claim that for 1500 years of church history, nobody taught this is an outright lie. You have a number of examples, amazing examples from church history, where you see in the fathers and pastors and teachers, you see the affirmation of the rule of faith being scripture and not the teachings of the fathers or councils or anything like that.

So I'll give you one example as just a reference point for the purposes of this video. A quote from Augustine or Augustine, however you want to say it. In his reply to Faustus, he says, as regards our writings, which are not a rule of faith or practice, but only a help to edification, we may suppose that they contain some things falling short of the truth in obscure and recondite matters.

And that these mistakes may or may not be corrected in subsequent treaties. For we are of those of whom the apostle says, quote, and if you be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you, Philippians 3 .15.

Such writings are read with the right of judgment and without any obligation to believe in order to leave room for such profitable discussions of difficult questions. There is a distinct boundary line separating all productions subsequent to apostolic times from the authoritative canonical books of the old and new testaments.

Now, more could be done on this point with Augustine and the rule of faith, but the point in this particular quote, just for reference for this video, is to demonstrate that Augustine sees a distinct difference between the productions subsequent to the apostolic writings and the canonical books of the old and new testaments.

This is the authoritative canonical book. This is the boundary line between all other things and teachings. These are the authoritative words of God. And you can see a number of examples in history where that is the rule impressed is what do the scriptures say?

See, for example, the reason we believe in the Trinity is not because a church council said so, like pulled rank and said, well, believe the Trinity because we say so. No, the Trinity is a biblical doctrine.

It comes from the Bible, from the exegesis of the text. It is through and through from old and new testament, the teaching of the Bible. And that's why Christians believe it and praise God. Glory to God.

The church, when it has been facing down heresy and false doctrine, has used the word of God to put down those heresies and of course express the confession of the triune God of Holy Scripture. But we don't believe in the Trinity because the church says so.

We believe the Trinity because that's how God's revealed himself in his word and praise God and all glory.

To God. The church has gathered around that truth and confessed it. It is as explicitly as I can imagine, contradicted by St. James in James 2, 24. In fact, Andre, what I found is the only place in the entire Bible where the words faith alone are found, the words not by are right in front.

Of them. So what's important to recognize here is this is a common Roman Catholic apologist argument. It's used often. It's a very, very poor argument for anybody who actually has read James chapter 2 and understands the context of James chapter 2.

I would love to see a Roman Catholic actually engage with the exegesis of the text in a fair way, in a just way, with a reformed person who's bringing it instead of using these honestly silly arguments of, well, James says not justified by faith alone.

The question is, well, what is James talking about and is James at war with Paul? In Romans chapter 3, the Apostle Paul makes it very clear that both Jew and Gentile are equally, both alike, under sin.

There is none good. There is none who seeks for God. There is none righteous. All have turned aside. Together they've gone astray. The poison of asps is under their lips. Their feet are swift to shed blood.

Destruction and misery are in their paths. The way of peace they have not known. There's no fear of God in their eyes, before their eyes. That's what Paul does to indict the entire human race. Jew and Gentile, you're all the same.

You're all under sin. Then Paul goes on in Romans 3 19. Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped and the whole world may be held accountable to God.

For by works of the law, no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes the knowledge of sin. The law cannot be used, according to the Apostle Paul, an inspired apostle. It cannot be used for the justification of anybody, because through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

The law exposes who you really are. It shows you your sin. Then Paul says, but now the righteousness of God has been manifested, apart from the law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ, for all who believe.

For there is no distinction for all of sin and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.

This was to show God's forbearance, because in his divine forbearance, he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

So the whole point there is the Apostle Paul is saying this is a gift of God. It is by grace. It's the redemption that's in Christ Jesus. It is through faith all have sinned. God puts forward Jesus as a propitiation.

He is the full exhaustion of the wrath of God, the penalty of our sin. The wrath of God is diverted away from the people of God. It is given to Jesus Christ. God does this so he would remain just, because he is punishing the sins of his people, and he's the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

But then Paul goes on and says this, then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded by what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold, and here it is, that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.

Do you hear that? The inspired apostle couldn't be clearer. Everyone's under sin. The law can justify nobody. It is through faith in Christ. It is a gracious gift of God through the redemption that's in Jesus.

And then he says, for we hold, we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. What is faith apart from the works of the law? It is faith over here by itself. It is faith alone.

Faith alone taught by the apostle Paul in Romans 3 .28. It's very important to recognize that the apostle Paul says, we hold. So it is the teaching of the apostles. It's the inspired revelation of God.

It is the teaching of the early Christians. We maintain. We hold that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law. So he does not say faith in tandem with the works of the law. It is faith apart from the works of the law.

It is faith by itself. And then he goes on to explicate that point in Romans chapter 4. It's very important to make sure that we see that James is not talking about what Paul is talking about. They're not even at the same point in Abraham's life.

And you're going to get this in just a moment. In Romans chapter 4, Paul says, verse 1, what then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather, according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.

He says, for what does the scripture say? And here he quotes Genesis 15 .6. Abraham believed God and it was credited to him, counted to him as righteousness. Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift, but as his due.

In other words, if you're working for this justification, then what you're getting is not a gift, but a wage. And that's not the salvation God gives. He just said in Romans 3, that this is a gift by his grace.

So his point is, as Abraham believed God, it was credited to him for righteousness. It wasn't by works because that would not be a gift. It would be a wage. That's a different kind of salvation. So then he says, and to the one who does not work, but believes in him who justifies the ungodly.

God justifies the wicked. God justifies the ungodly. God doesn't justify the righteous. There is none righteous. No, not one. And so Paul's clear teaching here is, how was father Abraham justified? He believed God and it was credited to him for righteousness.

So Paul's going to go on to argue here. If you're truly a descendant of, or if you're truly an heir according to the promise, if you're, if you're truly a child of Abraham, if you are the one who inherits this great salvation, if you are of that same line of father Abraham, then you need to be justified the same way Abraham was.

And Paul's argument in Romans 4 is very clear. It was, he believed God, it was credited to him for righteousness. And he goes on to argue it was before circumcision. It was before clearly Isaac on the altar.

And it was hundreds of years before the law of God was given. How was father Abraham justified with empty hands? What did he bring? Nothing. What was it before? Everything, circumcision, Isaac on the altar and the law of God.

It was through faith and faith apart from works. It was faith alone. That's Paul's entire argument on the justification by faith that we have that's connected to father Abraham. But there's some benefits that you need to hear that Rome just doesn't do.

Rome doesn't have this because they've abandoned the scriptures in terms of the gospel and justification. Here's what the text says. Just as David, verse six, also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works.

So God, according to Paul, counts people righteous apart from their works. It says, blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.

So according to Paul, justification, this whole story of salvation, father Abraham, this whole thing leads to God counting you righteous apart from your works and not counting your sins against you because of the propitiation that's in Christ Jesus, because of what was promised through the law and the prophets, because of this gracious salvation that is through faith apart from the works of the law.

We have a righteousness credited to us that is apart from our works and our sins not counted against us. And Paul's whole connection point there is that Abraham believed God and it was credited to him for righteousness.

And Paul's point here in Romans four is that happens before circumcision, before Isaac on the altar, and before the law was given. Now, James chapter two. He proof texts James chapter two, which is a common strategy of Roman Catholic apologists, is they do a lot of proof texting out of context.

And in James chapter two is a glaring example. In James chapter two, James is wisdom literature, and James is talking about the person who says they have faith, but they have no works. And the point is, is can that kind of faith save?

Can a person who's professes faith, but there is nothing, does that kind of faith save? The question for James is not whether faith saves, justifies alone, or if it's some combination of faith and works as is being suggested here with Tim, the question for James is what kind of faith saves?

And to demonstrate that, let's just read the text. So, the first thing is, is James 2 .10 creates a great difficulty for Roman Catholic apologists who are proof texting out of James. In James 2 .10, the text says, for whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it.

Now, that's going to create a great challenge to anyone who's trying to teach that scripture teaches faith plus works for justification, some combination, because James 2 actually says before the proof texting done by Tim, it says that whoever keeps the whole law and stumbles in one point, you're guilty of all of it.

So, bind that to the conscience of every person you're teaching faith plus works for justification. Bind it to their conscience that at any point when they violate the law of God, they're guilty of the entire thing.

You can't do it. And that's James 2 .10. He says in verse 11, for he who said do not commit adultery also said do not commit murder. If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.

So, speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty for judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment. Now, here's where he gets into the discussion.

What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? If someone says he has faith but does not have works, can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, go in peace, be warmed and filled without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?

So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. Reformed people all recognize that. They all recognize that because that's what the text says. The question is not whether it is faith alone or if it's faith plus works for James.

It's a question of what kind of faith saves. Dead faith or living faith? Fake faith, professions of faith, or living faith, real faith? That's the question. And so James brings in an example. If someone comes and you say go be warm, be well fed, but you do nothing for them, the point is you didn't mean it.

That's false. What came out of your mouth, you didn't really believe. It's not really true. And James's point in this section is, what is saving faith? Is it living faith or dead faith? Living faith has works.

Dead faith has none. And of course, we believe that it is only living faith that saves. In other words, real faith saves, not mere professions of faith. And so James goes on. James says, verse 19, you believe that God is one, you do well.

Even the demons believe and shudder. 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. So what's the context? James is pointing to living faith versus dead faith, real faith versus mere professions of faith. And he brings in Abraham as the example.

And this is the key point that Roman Catholic apologists often completely miss. He brings up the point of Abraham and Isaac on the altar. And he brings up the point that you see, you see, that Abraham believed because of what he did in obedience.

But note something, for the apostle Paul, the point of justification in Abraham's life is Genesis 15, 6. And that's faith in God, credited righteousness, before what? Circumcision? Way before Isaac on the altar and hundreds of years before the law was given.

And in James's letter, James is appealing to the fact that later on down the road in Abraham's life, you know that Abraham truly believed and had living faith because of what he did. Now, the key issue here is that word justification.

Now, this is very important. Just because a word is used in scripture one time, a certain way, doesn't mean that it's used that way in every other instance. Justification in the New Testament, this word, there's a number of different uses.

The context has so much to do with understanding how it's being used at that time. But clearly in this case, it's being used in the point of vindication. How do you know Abraham believed? Because of what he did.

Closing Appeal and Ministry Update

Therefore, he was vindicated by his works and not by faith alone, not by mere profession. That's what the text says. Let's go on to the next point. Hey, what's up guys? This is Pastor Jeff Durbin. Thank you for watching Collision.

We wanted to provide a solid resource to help you to respond to anything coming into collision with the Christian worldview. There's more as a response to this video and others at Apologia's All Access at ApologiaStudios .com.

When you partner with Apologia Studios, you make all of our content possible, and we give you all kinds of amazing other content to help equip you and to train you and your friends and families in the Christian faith.

Go to ApologiaStudios .com, sign up for All Access and get more from Collision.