A
ajcstr
Guest
Also, could Jews eat with Gentiles… Eucharist implications
- Status
A
AugustTherese
Guest
Good work, fellas!steve-b:
Also, could Jews eat with Gentiles… Eucharist implications
Be it known therefore to you, men, brethren, that through him forgiveness of sins is preached to you: and from all the things, from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses. Acts 13:38
S
spina1953
Guest
How is it in Matthew 25:31-46 talks about what people did when they are judged by Christ. Some did works like feeding the hungry, etc. and others did not . It would seem to me it takes more than just faith to be saved; it takes doing something with faith not just saying one has faith. its like saying I’m a cook but does not cook what good is saying that if one does not do any cooking? I see faith in the same way its all good and well to say one has faith but if one does nothing with it its just a bunch of words that has nothing behind it.
Of course words do not save by itself just as faith by itself does not save. it takes both faith and works since if one really has faith they are open to Christ so that he can do His works through one. Did not Jesus say let your works shine so others might see and give Glory to God? Seems to me it takes more than faith it also takes words along with faith, but in the end it is Christ who decides who is saved and who is not.
Of course words do not save by itself just as faith by itself does not save. it takes both faith and works since if one really has faith they are open to Christ so that he can do His works through one. Did not Jesus say let your works shine so others might see and give Glory to God? Seems to me it takes more than faith it also takes words along with faith, but in the end it is Christ who decides who is saved and who is not.
L
lanman87
Guest
After reading reading pretty much this entire thread and other threads on the same topic I’ve come to the conclusion that the Protestant/Evangelical definition of faith is different than the Catholic definition. And that when you flesh out the Protestant definition it is much closer to the Catholic understand than most of us realize.
I will just tell you what I was taught. That faith is surrendering your life to Christ. That is someone truly surrenders their life to Christ then they will be obedient to Christ, they will Love the Lord and Love their neighbor, they will help the poor and the sick and so on. So in a sense faith produces or gives birth to works. And that if someone claims to have faith but it doesn’t give birth to works and obedience then it isn’t faith. It is a counterfeit or illegitimate claim of faith.
So from what I can tell, Catholics believe you can have a real genuine faith and it not result in works. Basically, that someone can genuinely surrender their life to Christ and yet not strive to be obedient. To an Evangelical that concept is an oxymoron. The idea that someone can give their heart and life to Christ in faith and it not produce obedience and works doesn’t make sense.
Maybe it is because I was taught conversion theology instead of covenant theology. Conversion theology basically says we aren’t Christians because we were born into a Christian family and was baptized into the Church. It is that even those of us born into a Christian family must, at some point, respond to call of God through the Holy Spirit and surrender or heart and life to Christ. We aren’t Christians until we personally respond to the Gospel and are converted to Christianity. So the idea that someone can respond to the prompting of the Holy Spirit and surrender their heart and life to Christ and not have a change in how they live their life to produce obedience and works just isn’t possible.
S
spina1953
Guest
Hi Ianman87, I have to say Catholic’s who have been taught their religious beliefs would say one can have genuine faith and not result in works, nor have faith but not strive to be obedient. I’m not sure where you go that idea about Catholic’s. i will say not every Catholic has been taught the religious beliefs of the Church for what ever reason. I will agree with you statement that at some point one has to respond to the call of God through the Holy Spirit to do whatever work God prompts one, and that is a choice to accept or not. God does not stop prompting one to do His will. Whether Catholic or non-Catholic, works do I believe go along with faith since faith is an action word that is in English a verb denoting action. So if anyone says they have faith but do nothing with it as James pointed out is a useless faith and has no meaning. its not enough to say one has faith if they are not willing to do anything with it, as anyone can say the words. its like telling someone you love them but never show that you love them you just say the words; it means nothing then. Yes, if we believe in Christ and the Good News he gave us then there is a change in a person. I agree that someone can respond to the prompting of the Holy Spirit and not change to produce obedience and works is not possible.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Ianman87:
.
The problem with this theory, is that it’s unbiblical.
You can have faith to move mountains, but if you have not also charity, you gain nothing according to St. Paul in 1st Corinthians 13 (by the way, please notice you can have faith without charity).
.
.
The problem with this theory, is that it’s unbiblical.
You can have faith to move mountains, but if you have not also charity, you gain nothing according to St. Paul in 1st Corinthians 13 (by the way, please notice you can have faith without charity).
A
AugustTherese
Guest
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
It is very biblical, it actually takes the context of James into account instead of just picking a single verse out of context, using the wrong meaning of a word, and developing an doctrine around it.
A
AugustTherese
Guest
This is the context of Saint James’ admonishment:Cathoholic:
It is very biblical, it actually takes the context of James into account instead of just picking a single verse out of context, using the wrong meaning of a word, and developing an doctrine around it.
“What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?” James 2:14 ESV
You are presupposing that if someone has faith, then they will automatically have works. That is not biblical, as the Scripture I just referenced clearly states the possibility of having faith, but not having works. If your claim were true, there would be no point of Saint James’ exhortation.
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
Saying you have faith and actually having faith are not the same thing. That is the whole point of what James is saying. He is refuting easy believism.
A
AugustTherese
Guest
“But someone will say, ‘You have faith and I have works.’ Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!”AugustTherese:
Saying you have faith and actually having faith are not the same thing. That is the whole point of what James is saying. He is refuting easy believism.
James 2:18-19
Your presupposition is refuted if you read on. Having faith alone is the whole admonishment. If there is no faith, why write the exhortation? He’s not writing to faithless pagans, he’s writing to Christians with faith that are lacking works.
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
But I didn’t appeal to “James” Ianman87.
I cited St. Paul (who is saying the same thing you are denying from St. James).
I cited St. Paul (who is saying the same thing you are denying from St. James).
T
tgGodsway
Guest
Certainly you will not say that keeping the Law of God has power to save? Have you not read Paul’s writings to the Galatians where he said "What purpose then does the law serve? It was added (to Israel) because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made;
That seed was Christ. But the Law acted as a restrainer to prick the conscience’s of the law breaker.
Paul, in the context of one who supposedly keeps the law, said, "there is none righteous, no not one; v11 there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. Ro. 3:10,11
"Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become GUILTY before God. Ro. 3:19
The Law can produce only one thing: GUILT. to which the law breaker may have remorse and repentance. This response would usher in mercy and grace. The law can do nothing more than show people their guilt as it was designed to do.
That seed was Christ. But the Law acted as a restrainer to prick the conscience’s of the law breaker.
Paul, in the context of one who supposedly keeps the law, said, "there is none righteous, no not one; v11 there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. Ro. 3:10,11
"Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped and all the world may become GUILTY before God. Ro. 3:19
The Law can produce only one thing: GUILT. to which the law breaker may have remorse and repentance. This response would usher in mercy and grace. The law can do nothing more than show people their guilt as it was designed to do.
Last edited:
L
LoveJoyPeace
Guest
By what interpretation? Where did this come from?
T
tgGodsway
Guest
I would like to jump in here. “if someone says he has faith but does not have works…” should not automatically mean that his faith is not real or a faith that God cannot see. God saw Abrahams faith and declared him righteous years before Abraham had works.
It is only because he has no works that we human beings cannot literally see his faith. This is why James concluded that it was a dead faith. A dead faith is a faith that does not work in practical ways, as illustrated in verse 15.
But the fact that it is dead is evidence that it was once alive. A dead faith cannot deliver or save anyone from anything. This is why the answer to the question is: NO! a dead faith does not profit. … anyone in Christ!
It is only because he has no works that we human beings cannot literally see his faith. This is why James concluded that it was a dead faith. A dead faith is a faith that does not work in practical ways, as illustrated in verse 15.
But the fact that it is dead is evidence that it was once alive. A dead faith cannot deliver or save anyone from anything. This is why the answer to the question is: NO! a dead faith does not profit. … anyone in Christ!
A
AugustTherese
Guest
The Law does not produce guilt, sin produces guilt. The Law is holy and is given to us for our happiness.
“What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means!..So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.” Romans 7:7,12
“Happy the man who obeys me, and happy those who keep my ways.” Proverbs 8:33
What we could not do on our own without grace, we can now fulfill with the empowerment Christ bestows to us through His Spirit of sanctifying grace.
“By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” Romans 8:3-4
By being given the Holy Spirit and walking according to Him living in us, we can now remain alive by obeying the commandments of God:
“keep my commandments and live.” - Proverbs 7:2 ESV
“And now, O Israel, listen to the statutes and the rules that I am teaching you, and do them, that you may live." Deuteronomy 4:1 ESV
"And a ruler asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.’” - Luke 18:18-20 ESV
A
AugustTherese
Guest
This is spot-on, tgGodsway! I commend your words here. Many like to claim that those that have faith without works, really have no faith at all. That is incorrect; just because something is dead does not mean it does not exist. And, you are correct, it means that their faith was once alive and now has died due to a lack of producing works. Now, see how a person IS justified by works, and NOT by faith alone.
Last edited:
C
Cathoholic
Guest
tgGodsway:
Just affirm what St. Paul said tgGodsway.
You can have faith to move mountains and still gain “nothing”. It’s a dead (“not lively”) faith to be sure because it is not coupled to charity and hope, but it is still a REAL faith that we are told contextually to “abide” in. (We just need to “abide” in MORE than merely faith)
But it still MAY be a REAL faith.
Just affirm the Bible tgGodsway. All of it.
.
Trent on a Dead Faith yet still REAL FAITH
.
No. It should not automatically mean that this guy’s faith is “not real”. Maybe this guy’s faith is “real”, maybe it is not.
Just affirm what St. Paul said tgGodsway.
You can have faith to move mountains and still gain “nothing”. It’s a dead (“not lively”) faith to be sure because it is not coupled to charity and hope, but it is still a REAL faith that we are told contextually to “abide” in. (We just need to “abide” in MORE than merely faith)
But it still MAY be a REAL faith.
Just affirm the Bible tgGodsway. All of it.
.
Trent on a Dead Faith yet still REAL FAITH
.
And
http://www.thecounciloftrent.com/ch6.htm
Last edited:
L
lanman87
Guest
Can you commit on this article.
www.desiringgod.org
Does James Contradict Paul?
Even though language can sometimes confuse us--like when the same word carries multiple meanings--the Bible is not contradictory.
www.desiringgod.org
C
Cathoholic
Guest
Ianmam87:
www.desiringgod.org
The article ("Does James Contradict Paul?) by John Piper has so many presuppositions and errors, I didn’t know where to begin.
The answer to Piper’s question ("Does James Contradict Paul?) is of course "No! St. James does NOT contradict St. Paul.
But the reasons Piper used to support his correct conclusion in some cases inverts the meaning of what both Sts. James and Paul are saying.
It will be a big critique so perhaps I will critique Piper’s article later.
Does James Contradict Paul?
Even though language can sometimes confuse us--like when the same word carries multiple meanings--the Bible is not contradictory.
www.desiringgod.org
The article ("Does James Contradict Paul?) by John Piper has so many presuppositions and errors, I didn’t know where to begin.
The answer to Piper’s question ("Does James Contradict Paul?) is of course "No! St. James does NOT contradict St. Paul.
But the reasons Piper used to support his correct conclusion in some cases inverts the meaning of what both Sts. James and Paul are saying.
It will be a big critique so perhaps I will critique Piper’s article later.
Last edited:
- Status