How do Protestants deal with James on faith and works?

[AugustTherese]

Not mine. It should grind the gears of every good Catholic that seeks to reach out ecumenicaly to develop good rapport and dialogue, instead of driving wedges.

Edited my post just for you!

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Not mine. It should grind the gears of every good Catholic that seeks to reach out ecumenicaly to develop good rapport and dialogue, instead of driving wedges.

Edited my post just for you!

Not for me. Do it for good will between Christians.

 

[Agathon]

That being said, I find it hilarious when a Roman Catholic who would uphold mistranslations in the Vulgate as legit (i.e., Do Pennance instead of Repent

Part of repenting is making amends. Zacchaeus did this.

 

[JonNC]

That being said, I find it hilarious when a Roman Catholic who would uphold mistranslations in the Vulgate as legit (i.e., Do Pennance instead of Repent, ascribing the one who will crush satan’s head as the mother of the seed to come, etc.), would then dare to try to nail Luther to the wall for that one.

As I said to @AugustTherese, I don’t think what Catholics do deserves “hilarious” as a description.

 

[JonNC]

Edited my post just for you!

And you think “dishonest “ is an improvement.

 

[Sean77]

I absolutely agree, faith and works should work hand-in-hand. However, we are justified by faith first, the works are the result. Again, Ephesians 1-10 clearly illustrates this.

 

[Sean77]

I would agree. Just pointing out the inconsistency.

 

[AugustTherese]

However, we are justified by faith first, the works are the result

You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works;
James 2:22

 

[Sean77]

Count how many times Paul states that we are saved by grace in the following passage:

1And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4Butc God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

By my count that would be twice, repetition being a common Jewish means of providing additional emphasis. Also, in the Greek in verse 8, Paul places the dependent clause For By Grace, up front, which is also commonly used in Koine Greek to emphasize a point (used also in John 1:1c for you Trinity defenders out there), practically screaming to us that we are saved by Grace. He tells us that we receive this grace through (dia which means the agent which performs an action) faith – NOT BY WORKS.

Paul uses similar repetition and language throughout the latter half of Romans 3. In other words, you keep quoting James out of context creating a contradiction between the two. Either you need to jettison Paul, or you need to rethink your view of James. We can go back to the example of Abraham whom James quotes who was reckoned by God as righteous some 20 years before he demonstrated his righteousness by offering Isaac as a sacrifice…We can also look at Paul’s fuller explanation of the example of Abraham where he demonstrates how Isaac is the child of promise who was brought about by God through faith, whereas Ishmael was the child of the law, whom Abraham brought about by works…

 

[AugustTherese]

you keep quoting James out of context creating a contradiction between the two

I posted a verse alone. You added a bunch of commentary. Whom do you think might be out of context?

 

[Sean77]

Still you. The Holy Spirit frequently inspires more than a single verse, and they should be read such that the entire Bible contributes to interpretation. Unless your argument is that James believed a different gospel than Paul.

 

[AugustTherese]

Unless your argument is that James believed a different gospel than Paul.

I don’t have to butcher Saint James’ words to fit what you think Saint Paul is saying. Saint Paul did not believe in ‘faith alone’ like you want him to.

 

[Sean77]

I don’t have to butcher Saint James’ words to fit what you think Saint Paul is saying. Saint Paul did not believe in ‘faith alone’ like you want him to.

You fail to recognize that Paul and James and others frequently reference other scripture passages that were familiar to their readers in order to communicate a point. Understanding James therefore, involves understanding the reference to which he is pointing. In other words, you are reading James with one eye closed in order to support a faulty doctrine.

With regard to the faith alone concept, this shows your complete misunderstanding of what Sola Fide event means. Sola Fide was a reaction to something. That something was that the church was preaching that we are saved by faith and works, which Paul flatly denies by saying that we are saved by FAITH, NOT works. Paul clearly shows that faith is the vehicle by which we are saved, and that because we are saved our works follow.

 

[Unnamed]

Guys I think we are wrong, Jesus must have said somewhere that all authority and power had been given to Sean77 and he has the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Whatever Sean77 binds on earth will be bound in heaven. Jesus has sent Sean77 to reveal the truth. I hope he will not execute us like John Calvin did to his people for not believing.

 

[Unnamed]

Sean77 said “which Paul flatly denies by saying that we are saved by FAITH, NOT works.” Paul is talking about works of the MOSAIC law. Read the context. The letter of the law in mosaic law cannot save us What saves us is baptism, repentance and having the love of God shed abroad in our hearts to make us actually righteous by an infusion of grace from God, which is a gift. By giving us grace God pours out his spirit on us which allows us to love God and love neighbor which is the fulfillment of the law.

 

[AugustTherese]

which Paul flatly denies by saying that we are saved by FAITH, NOT works.

For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.
Romans 2:13

The works Saint Paul mentions that you keep referring to are works of the Jewish Law, not the moral law.

 

[guanophore]

Gift’s aren’t conditional. Edit to add, The only condition of eternal life is to have a “living faith”.

Of course they are! Or can be. If I promise my son a car, but I want him to graduate from High School first, it is still a gift.

But that is the whole point. Saving faith (living faith) is faith that works. It has the quality of producing good works.

How do you lose something that is inside of you? That has been sealed with the Spirit?

A person cannot lose the seal of salvation. but a person can walk away from their inheritance.

18 This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare, 19 holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith, 20 among them Hymenae′us and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan
that they may learn not to blaspheme. I Tim. 1

Using James epistle of what it means to be “saved” given in the context of James 2 on salvation: was it an allusion to say that Rahab the harlot was saved eternally? … or was she saved literally and physically? What does the Genesis passage actually say?..

I think you lost me here. Allusion to what? I think you are making the point that Rahab was to be saved from the sack of the city, but that it had nothing to do with eternal life?

In Hebrews, though, she is held as an example of saving faith:

By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace. Hebrews 11:31 …

If this was only faith to be spared the temporal consequences, why include her in the list of role models?

“…and Salmon the father of Bo′az by Rahab…” Matt. 1 She is also found in the genealogy of Christ. Salmon is thought to be one of the spies sent by Joshua. If she did marry one of the spies, does that not seem to indicate she became a convert?

Please show me the allusion in the Genesis narrative showing how one is eternally saved.

First I will have to understand what you mean by the word “allusion” here.

allusion = an expression designed to call something to mind without mentioning it explicitly; an indirect or passing reference.

So what indirect reference to Rahab? And how does it relate to the other references to Rahab in Matthew and Hebrews?

 

[guanophore]

It is all about the “saving of the soul” 1:21 which was the premise for his epistle.

Yes, from the Apostolic point of view, there is no separation between these two concepts.

Was Abraham’s son saved eternally or literally? in the Genesis account?

Are you talking about Isaac? I am not aware that the Genesis account says anything about salvation in the context of the sacrifice, if that is what you mean.

Is there anything in that passage suggesting that his son was saved eternally? … I can’t find it.

There is a great deal about your narrow definition of “salvation” that one cannot find in the scriptures. But Isaac was part of a specific covenant with God, so I am not so sure it is useful to this discussion to use him as an example. Unless you want to support that God’s entire Abrahamic covenant is for this life only, which seems to be a bit far from the scope of the thread.

19 My brethren, if any one among you wanders from the truth and some one brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. James 5

Do you think this reference to saving a person’s soul from “death” refers only to this life? Can a soul be “dead” in this life, and alive eternally?

Is not doing good works a mortal sin?

An interesting question.

James 4:17 Whoever knows what is right to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.

Jesus tells us to love our neighbor as ourselves, then illustrates how the Good Samaritan was neighbor to the man who needed help.

Forgiveness is even more critical as a “good work”. 14 For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you; 15 but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. Matt 6

tgGodsway would have me believe that this only applies to temporal sins, but this is one place I cannot square with Calvin, and Reformed theology. If all sin has already been dealt with (past, present and future) on the cross, then what is Jesus referring to not being forgiven? I think we would all agree that no one will enter heaven with unforgiven sin.

 

[lanman87]

Of course they are! Or can be. If I promise my son a car, but I want him to graduate from High School first, it is still a gift.

But that is the whole point. Saving faith (living faith) is faith that works. It has the quality of producing good works.

I agree with the second line, not so much the first.

A few years ago I told my son that if he made straight A’s that semester I would get him a Macbook. The Macbook wasn’t a gift, it was conditional. It was a transactional agreement.

Sometimes we as parents say things like, If you do X I’ll give you Y. But in reality we aren’t giving anything. We are rewarding behavior. Now our reward may be much greater than the action calls for but it is still a reward because it is conditional.

Eternal Life isn’t a reward. It is a free Gift.

 

[guanophore]

“ Every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away , and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear more fruit.”
John 15:2

Not doing good works is a sin of omission and its severity as to whether it is mortal or not depends on the situation. But, generally speaking, not producing good works would be a grave matter.

I would add to this that it seems to indicate what James refers to as “dead” faith, which cannot save. Saving faith is faith that works. It is a quality of the faith.

I don’t know. Was the rich man a spirit filled adopted Child of God who had been saved by grace through faith? Or was he just your normal run of the mill rich guy who was selfish and greedy and had no, or at best a superficial, relationship with God?

He was obviously someone who believed in Father Abraham. Don’t you think he was a Jew? Do you think Jews were saved by grace through faith?

Do you think that 'saved" people cannot be selfish, greedy, and only have a superficial relationship with God?

Martin Luther overturned it and he’s like, what’s happenin’! His theology places virtually everything on God and very little on us and our response to God. Easy peasy! What’s not to like? Except that it is not true, of course. Humans are attracted to novelty like moths to a flame - with similar results.

I think that Luther retained some quite Catholic thinking on the role of good works.

I reply to the argument, then, that our obedience is necessary for salvation. It is, therefore, a partial cause of our justification. Many things are necessary which are not a cause and do not justify, as for instance the earth is necessary, and yet it does not justify. If man the sinner wants to be saved, he must necessarily be present, just as he asserts that I must also be present. What Augustine says is true, “He who has created you without you will not save you without you.”1 Works are necessary to salvation, but they do not cause salvation, because faith alone gives life. On account of the hypocrites we must say that good works are necessary to salvation. It is necessary to work. Nevertheless, it does not follow that works save on that account, unless we understand necessity very clearly as the necessity that there must be an inward and outward salvation or righteousness. Works save outwardly, that is, they show evidence that we are righteous and that there is faith in a man which saves inwardly, as Paul says, “Man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved” [Rom. 10:10]. Outward salvation shows faith to be present, just as fruit shows a tree to be good. (“The Disputation Concerning Justification,” LW, 165)

But he called James the epistle of straw for the exact reason opposite of what the Reformed position does. He believed that the references to salvation in that book were to eternal life, not temporal.