[QUOTE=CapnPitt]
There’s been a lot of discussion recently on faith here in GD and it got me thinking about the old argument of faith versus works. I’m a former Catholic and the way I understood it was that one needed both faith and works to get into heaven. Protestants (I think) believe that faith is all you need for the eternal reward.
As a non-believer these days (I guess agnostic is most appropriate if regarded as weak by both sides IMO), it seems to me that works alone should be the important thing. Do good and you’ll get good in return. Seems simple enough and something a just and loving god could (would) be in favor of. Now I understand that it isn’t necessarily possible to understand the mind of god, but I can’t get my mind around the fact that if some random person devoted their life to caring for the sick, feeding the hungry, and clothing the poor but didn’t possess faith that this person wouldn’t be admitted to heaven.
So I guess what I’m asking here, is why would an all-powerful, loving god need us to have faith? Ego boost? I’m not asking y’all from god’s perspective, but more from a theological standpoint. Also, because if there is a heaven, it doesn’t look like I’m going to make it if I can’t do it on works alone (and I’m not a saint yet in that department either). 
Perhaps this was covered in the “What is the value of faith?” thread, but I didn’t pick it up in there.
[/QUOTE]
Christians haven’t come to much consensus about whether it’s faith or works, as the posts above suggest.
Having developed the notion that God’s grace extends beyond a specific population–the Jews-- they find themselves with a bit of a dilemma: Who else?
At the core of all Christian theology is the redemptive power of Jesus Christ in a broken world. But who gets redeemed? It’s no use quoting scripture; every line of thought can find a supporting reference and claim that all others have taken their references out of context…I will save the bother of the Biblical cites, but they are all there, and all “obvious” to the believers who argue them.
A minority say everyone is saved and the redemption of Christ extended to all mankind. This is seldom argued very publicly; I have the sense that many more Christians hope it’s true because it would make everything easier. I suspect the next few generations of Christians will come to embrace this. I’m OK; you’re OK. Whatever your religious tradition.
Some say you must have a specific conversion experience, similar to Saul of Tarsus. This specific profession of faith from those who have come of age gives them a new “spiritual” birth and they become redeemed. In some traditions, this redemption is completely independent of anything else you do and you cannot lose this salvation.
Some say that only certain human beings are pre-destined by God to become saved. These elect of God were known to him before their human existence came into being.
Very few Christians argue that deeds of any kind are either necessary or sufficient for salvation. Indeed, this central theme separates Christianity from the teachings of Gautama Siddhartha, for example. Frequently cited is the last-moment “conversion” of the thief on the cross next to Jesus, to whom Jesus made a promise of Paradise. However most Christians are equally uncomfortable with the idea that faith alone is sufficient (“even the devils believe…” James 2:19 ((Martin Luther did not like the book of James)). Most commonly, the theme is advanced that if you truly believe, it will be reflected in some way in how you live. Although you will not be perfect, neither will a true believer rape little girls cavalierly.
The real secret to a “gimme” for redemption (and little advertised), is the free ride almost all Christians give to babies and the mentally retarded. It just goes too much against a sense of fairness for them not to be redeemed by default. I’ve often argued that in a standard Christian tradition, abortionists do much better than preachers in preventing eternal damnation–their “save” rate for souls is 100%.
Of much more debate is what to do with those who are of age and mental capacity, but who have not heard the gospel. Not really a problem for Calvinists (those who believe in predestination) but sort of a cloudy issue for the rest. The typical response is to simply decide to proclaim the gospel and let God sort out who ends up redeemed. Equally problematic are the Jews, who are clearly labeled in the Bible by God as Chosen People, but who reject the divinty of the core figure of Christianity–Jesus Christ.
To your point about why God “needs” us to have faith: I think the typical argument would be that he doesn’t need it. However an outright rejection of God is a reasonable basis upon which to fail a redemption test.
Perhaps in the end the question is not whether we believe in God but whether he believes in us.