How would you reply to this?

[Randy_Carson]

this is a conversation I’m having with a protestant in yahoo answers.

Subject: Re: faith alone?

Message: Doesn’t bother me at all. I understand the proper context of James. Faith without works is dead in terms of getting rewards in heaven, not how to get into heaven.

Is James really talking about “dead faith” or “mere intellectual assent” in this passage?

Well, let’s plug those terms in and see what happens…

James 2:14-24

14 What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?
15 Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food.
16 If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?
17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.
19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
20 You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?
21 Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar?
22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.
23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend.
24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

(Dead) Faith
What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have (dead) faith but has no deeds? Can such (dead) faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, (dead) faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, “You have (dead) faith; I have deeds.” Show me your (dead) faith without deeds, and I will show you my (dead) faith by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. You foolish man, do you want evidence that (dead) faith without deeds is useless? Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his (dead) faith and his actions were working together, and his (dead) faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by (dead) faith alone.

Mere Intellectual Assent
What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have mere intellectual assent but has no deeds? Can such mere intellectual assent save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, mere intellectual assent by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, “You have mere intellectual assent; I have deeds.” Show me your mere intellectual assent without deeds, and I will show you my mere intellectual assent by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder. You foolish man, do you want evidence that mere intellectual assent without deeds is useless? Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his mere intellectual assent and his actions were working together, and his mere intellectual assent was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by mere intellectual assent alone.

Hmmm…I don’t think that substitution works.

James must not have been referring to “dead faith”…looks like he and Paul were talking about the same faith, after all.

 

[mmmcounts]

I wouldn’t choose any one of your options as they are stated fully.

Ok, let’s break down the elements that separate the options from one another. I’ll summarize in brief: Regarding sanctification. Salvation? Yes or no. If yes, compare to the salvation that comes by faith in Jesus. Same or different?

And now those questions in full.

Question one: Does the process of sanctification entail a process of salvation?

If you answer “No, salvation happens when you believe but not when you are sanctified,” you go to Option 2 from the list. You would view sanctification as spiritual growth and perseverance (continuing) in the faith as well as continuing to be saved, but you don’t receive any new salvation.

If you answer “Yes,” that leads us to question 2.

Question two: What is the nature of the salvation that comes by sanctification? We know that salvation comes by grace through faith in Jesus. This salvation must happen prior to the start of sanctification. Sanctification follows. If there is salvation that results from sanctification, is it the same as or different from the salvation that comes by grace through faith when you initially become a believer?

Question 2 (A): As sanctification progresses and you receive the “salvation” that comes through sanctification, is it more of the same salvation that you received when you believed? If this is the case, you should choose Option 1 from the list and deal with the difficulties that come with it. The first of these difficulties is represented in the question “If I died tonight…?” You must ask yourself this, because you understanding of salvation puts you in a position where you have received part of it but not all. (Unless you’re done being sanctified, which is doubtful). It also raises questions about the sufficiency of Jesus’ sacrifice, since your understanding of salvation has “more of the same” coming by human effort during the process of sanctification.

Question 2 (B): As sanctification progresses and you receive the “salvation” that comes through sanctification, is it a different kind of salvation? Should you understand the “belief” salvation as “Salvation A” of which you receive 100%, followed by “Salvation B” of which you gradually receive as much as you can earn? This option deals with some of the difficulties in Question 2 (A), but you might have a hard time supporting it with Catholic doctrine.

Yes or no? If yes, same or different? Based on these simple questions, you can know which option to choose: One, two, or three.

Get it done.

 

[srferdave]

Ok, let’s break down the elements that separate the options from one another. I’ll summarize in brief: Regarding sanctification. Salvation? Yes or no. If yes, compare to the salvation that comes by faith in Jesus. Same or different?

And now those questions in full.

Question one: Does the process of sanctification entail a process of salvation?

If you answer “No, salvation happens when you believe but not when you are sanctified,” you go to Option 2 from the list. You would view sanctification as spiritual growth and perseverance (continuing) in the faith as well as continuing to be saved, but you don’t receive any new salvation.

If you answer “Yes,” that leads us to question 2.

Question two: What is the nature of the salvation that comes by sanctification? We know that salvation comes by grace through faith in Jesus. This salvation must happen prior to the start of sanctification. Sanctification follows. If there is salvation that results from sanctification, is it the same as or different from the salvation that comes by grace through faith when you initially become a believer?

Question 2 (A): As sanctification progresses and you receive the “salvation” that comes through sanctification, is it more of the same salvation that you received when you believed? If this is the case, you should choose Option 1 from the list and deal with the difficulties that come with it. The first of these difficulties is represented in the question “If I died tonight…?” You must ask yourself this, because you understanding of salvation puts you in a position where you have received part of it but not all. (Unless you’re done being sanctified, which is doubtful). It also raises questions about the sufficiency of Jesus’ sacrifice, since your understanding of salvation has “more of the same” coming by human effort during the process of sanctification.

Question 2 (B): As sanctification progresses and you receive the “salvation” that comes through sanctification, is it a different kind of salvation? Should you understand the “belief” salvation as “Salvation A” of which you receive 100%, followed by “Salvation B” of which you gradually receive as much as you can earn? This option deals with some of the difficulties in Question 2 (A), but you might have a hard time supporting it with Catholic doctrine.

Yes or no? If yes, same or different? Based on these simple questions, you can know which option to choose: One, two, or three.

Get it done.

You are presuming a fallacy in Sanctifying Grace. Which makes it impossible for me to choose one of your options. Salvation is the gift from God. The gift of salvation does not imply that one is already Holy. It means that through sanctification we may obtain salvation. We are not made Holy just by declaring that we believe in Jesus Christ. Even the devil believes in Jesus Christ. You can’t possibly say that he is Holy.

 

[srferdave]

Let me ask you something. Can anything that is NOT Holy enter the kingdom of Heaven?

 

[Randy_Carson]

I’m not following mmmcounts’ posts at all, here. Maybe someone can explain to me what he is saying 'cause I’m not getting it from his/her posts.

Here is my take:

Salvation is a process that begins when we first become Christians and ends when we stand before God in heaven.

There are four aspects of salvation: redemption, forgiveness, sanctification, justification.

Each of these can be demonstrated from scripture or logic to be a process, also.

 

[Lux_Caelum]

I’ve been reading and re-reading his posts and I still don’t understand what he’s talking about.

Is that the confusing protestanism at work?

 

[SCGiants]

“Faith without works is dead”
This imo has NOTHING to do with rewards of any kind, It simply means that you cannot say that “I have faith” and your actions do not follow your tounge. Meaning a person with Faith will listen and ACT upon what Jesus said. If your actions are to do nothing then you have no real faith to begin with… you have “dead” faith. One of faith will follow Jesus’ teachings. If you love God your actions will be what proves it. As said elsewhere… (paraphrased)“it is not enough to believe in God… for even the Demons believe and shake” - you have to have works behind it… it is your works that proves that you love Jesus.
Talk is cheap in other words.
Now of course if you have faith (which if you do works will follow) then rewards come… but that shouldn’t be the reason for doing works. We do works because we know that it pleases God and to please God should be our ONLY mission in life.
Also salvation comes from having Faith… from believing that Jesus is our Savior… but if you believe and most importantly LOVE The Father/Jesus/The Holy Ghost then your actions will SHOW it when you deal with every day life activities… not just going to church and praying but how treat others as well.
I hope this helped.

 

[mmmcounts]

You are presuming a fallacy in Sanctifying Grace. Which makes it impossible for me to choose one of your options. Salvation is the gift from God. The gift of salvation does not imply that one is already Holy. It means that through sanctification we may obtain salvation. We are not made Holy just by declaring that we believe in Jesus Christ. Even the devil believes in Jesus Christ. You can’t possibly say that he is Holy.

So you’re choosing option 1 with a revision to the presuppositions concerning belief in Jesus. Namely, that no salvation of any kind is involved when someone believes in Jesus and prays for forgiveness of sins. Let me ask you something. Should we just not even bother with asking Jesus for salvation and go straight into working it out for ourselves? You already told me the whole “believing in Jesus” thing doesn’t contribute to making you holy (set aside the whole “receiving the Holy Spirit” thing for a moment, of course)…

Anyway, you actually mean to tell me the “process” of salvation doesn’t even start when someone believes in their heart and confesses with their mouth that Jesus is Lord? (Really, what did you think I was talking about when I spoke of believing in Jesus?) You’re telling me there’s nothing happening there concerning salvation. All right, that’s fine. It’s not what I expected, but it is what it is.

 

[srferdave]

I’ve been reading and re-reading his posts and I still don’t understand what he’s talking about.

Is that the confusing protestanism at work?

I’m gonna have to agree with you on this one Lux. He/she is making no sense. Trying to make sense out of it and provide some intelligent feedback for his/her fallacy is not working. Maybe somebody can explain to me what he/she is trying to say.

My point can be taken or left for others to grasp. But obviously what i am saying to mmmcount is not sinking in.

 

[broski234]

I’m not following mmmcounts’ posts at all, here. Maybe someone can explain to me what he is saying 'cause I’m not getting it from his/her posts.

Here is my take:

Salvation is a process that begins when we first become Christians and ends when we stand before God in heaven.

There are four aspects of salvation: redemption, forgiveness, sanctification, justification.

Each of these can be demonstrated from scripture or logic to be a process, also.

Randy,
I’m not following them either. And he still hasn’t addressed any of my questions.

 

[JasonHC]

I think this verse frames it very clearly:

James 2:14 - What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?

It doesn’t say “Can such faith reward him?” The word ‘save’ is the exact same word used in Ephesians 2:8:

“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—” (Ephesians 2:8)

 

[angeljeanr]

You know when you are going to Heaven or hell when you die and you reach judgement. It’s a little presumptious to claim your “right” to Heaven. That is why dying is the single most important act in our lives. That’s what I would tell your friend. Also, he/she may be just one of the ones Jesus told us about when he says “I never knew you”!

i was listening to EWTN and the Father was talking about presumption being one of the Unforgivable sins against the Holy Spirit. So you can add that as a response to your friend.

 

[srferdave]

i was listening to EWTN and the Father was talking about presumption being one of the Unforgivable sins against the Holy Spirit. So you can add that as a response to your friend.

Maybe you mean grave sin? There is no sin that God won’t forgive.

 

[ryanoneil]

Furthermore, chapter 2 in James shows that we are justified in the eyes of man by works, since man can’t see faith.

It was God who was testing Abraham: **Some time after these events, God put Abraham to the test. He called to him, “Abraham!” “Ready!” he replied (Gen 22:1). **

There is no mention of men around to be justified in front of. This was strictly between God and Abraham.On the third day Abraham got sight of the place from afar. Then he said to his servants: “Both of you stay here with the donkey, while the boy and I go on over yonder. We will worship and then come back to you.” (Gen 22:4-5)

Then we learn that Abraham passed God’s test of faith. **“For now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.” (Gen. 22:12) **And, “By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son, indeed I will greatly bless you.” (Gen. 22:16-17)

If He already knew Abraham had saving faith, why did He put him to the test? It wasn’t for other men. It was to complete his faith.

You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by the works. (James 2:22)

 

[JasonHC]

It’s also significant to compare these passages:

James 2:14-16

What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?

Matthew 25:41-46

"Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ "They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

 

[JasonHC]

I will be in heaven, no matter what. That’s what Jesus did for me. I’m sorry that you don’t believe He did it for you too. You’d have to believe it to actually get into heaven.

Wow… This means even if he wants to go to hell he can’t. Does this suggest that Christians who become athiests are still guaranteed to go to heaven? It almost sounds like a certain type of predestination. I’m picturing something like a little kid kicking and screaming as he says, “I don’t want to go to heaven!”

Anyway, Jesus says otherwise:

John 15:1-6

"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful. You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me. "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

Message: You don’t believe that the words of Paul are also the Word of God and therefore hold the same authority as the words of Jesus?

No wonder we don’t agree.

The words of St. Paul agree St. John and Jesus:

From St. Paul’s teachings:

God “will give to each person according to what he has done.” To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life (Rom 2:5-6)

From our Lord’s teachings:

For the Son of Man is going to come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and **will repay every man according to his deeds**. (Matt 16:27)

'And I will kill her children with pestilence, and all the churches will know that I am He who  searches the minds and hearts; and **I will give to each one of you according to your deeds**. (Rev 2:23)

From St. John’s vision:

And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and t**he dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds**. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades  gave up the dead which were in them; **and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds**. (Rev 20:12-13)

All three are referring to the same thing:

We will be judged by what we do.

 

[JasonHC]

Sorry for the constant posting, but I did have another comment I wanted to make:

The real problem with faith and works is that protestants are confusing Romans 4:2-16 with James 2:14-26. In fact, Luther didn’t properly understand the two passages and thus considered James an epistle of straw. He literally tossed it from his Bible.

In anycase, consider this ‘contradiction’

Romans 4:2 says, “If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God.”

James 2:24 says “You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.”

Interestingly, Paul and James both quote Genesis 6:15:

For what does the Scripture say? “ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.” (Rom 4:3)

and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God. (Jas 2:23)

Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. (Gen 6:15)

So, apostle Paul is saying Abraham was justified without works, while James was saying Abraham was justified by works. How do we explain this supposed contradiction? The answer is in understanding what St. Paul meant by ‘works’. He was referring to works of the law, in particular, circumcision.

The end of Romans 3 states the following:

27Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law. 29Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 31Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

and Romans 4 begins as follows:

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? 2If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3What does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”

St. Paul makes it very clear that his use of the word ‘works’ primarily refers to circumcision:

Romans 4:9-12

9Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. 12And he is also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

Why was St. Paul referring to circumcusion? Because, the first century Judiazers were going around saying:

“Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” (Acts 15:1)

And…

Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to obey the law of Moses.”

Paul was at the council of Jerusalem to dispute the matter, so he knew the issue quite well. Romans 4 is addressing the same issue regarding circumcision. This very issue is also addressed to the Galatians:

Galatians 5:2-4

2Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

So what’s the problem with obeying the whole law?

“for as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law [of Moses], to perform them’” (Gal 3:10, NASB).

Cursed is he who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’ (Deut 27:26, NASB)

So the promises that the Iraelites failed to keep bound them to a curse when they agreed to keep them. That curse is a curse particular to the Mosaic Contract, which was specifically removed by Christ:

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us–for it is written, " CURSED IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE"-- (Gal 3:13).

This is why attempting to be justified by works (of the law) was such a problem for St. Paul. That is what he was addressing in Romans 4.

The point is this: Abraham was justified apart from the works of the law, since he was justified ‘430 years before the Mosaic Law’ (Gal 3:17).

Thus we can see that St. Paul did not contradict St. James who was not referring to anything like circumcision but rather works unto righteousness (James 2:20-24)

Here are a few more verses to consider:

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love. (Galatians 5:6)

And I think St. John knows how faith is expressed through love:

Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue** but with actions** and in truth. (1 John 3:18)

 

[ryanoneil]

This link really speaks to this topic: Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification
Thanks for the PM DD2007!

 

[mmmcounts]

This link really speaks to this topic: Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification
Thanks for the PM DD2007!

It sure does! Especially here.

“According to Catholic understanding, good works, made possible by grace and the working of the Holy Spirit, contribute to growth in grace, so that the righteousness that comes from God is preserved and communion with Christ is deepened. When Catholics affirm the “meritorious” character of good works, they wish to say that, according to the biblical witness, a reward in heaven is promised to these works. Their intention is to emphasize the responsibility of persons for their actions, not to contest the character of those works as gifts, or far less to deny that justification always remains the unmerited gift of grace.”

I’ll just leave that out there.

 

[angeljeanr]

Maybe you mean grave sin? There is no sin that God won’t forgive.

no dave, sins against the Holy Spirit are unforgiveable please read below:
Truly I say unto you, All their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they utter: but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: he said this because they (the Pharisees’) persisted in saying, ‘He has an unclean spirit’. Mark 3:28-29

He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters. Through this I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven these men (the Pharisees), but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. And whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. Matthew 12:30-32
Also read Hebrews 6:4-9/ 10:26-27.

The Catholic church teaches that there are 6 sins that fall into this catagory
Despair i.e. to not believe in Hope
Presumption i.e. to believe one does not need or already has grace
Impenitence i.e. not feeling regret about one’s sin or sins
Obstinacy i.e. unwillingness to seek God
Resisting the known truth
Envy of another’s spiritual welfare

the reason this is considered unforgiveable is because “11 [29] Whoever blasphemes against the holy Spirit: this sin is called an everlasting sin because it attributes to Satan, who is the power of evil, what is actually the work of the holy Spirit, namely, victory over the demons.” (footnotes from the NAB)