Scripture… is it sufficient

[YuRa]

James 2:14 ¶ What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?

James 2:15 If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food,

James 2:16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for {their} body, what use is that?

James 2:17 Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, {being} by itself.

Then this is where it gets tricky and where many misunderstand. He says faith without works is dead. Amen to that. He uses the example that if we have the ability to show mercy and we don’t use it what good is it to us. Saying that kind of faith without fruit is dead, meaning it does not save you. And if you have non fruitful faith then you are dead (separated from God).

James 2:18 ¶ But someone may {well} say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.”

Lets look into this carefully. You have faith and I also have faith with works, so show me you faith without the works! He is asking directly show me what kind of faith you have? Then he will say I will show you my faith by the works I do. He is challenging the persons faith; he asks show me your faith without any works! He then says I will show you mine through the works that I do.

Then James say the following:

James 2:19 You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.

He says ok you can’t show me your faith by works look at the demons they believe just like you but still shudder, and will perish. Just like that man who has faith that does not produce fruit.

Then he repeats himself from v.17:

James 2:20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?

He says again faith without works is not faith at all it is dead. You can not have saving faith without works or else you believe in vain like the demons that shudder and will perish.

 

[Nun_ofthe_Above]

One side always manages to use the Scriptures to show how they are right and the other side just holds on to the traditions of there fathers who have no authority compared to the clear teachings of the Bible.

Please carrect me if I am wrong,

Would it not be fair to say that the church Father’s lived in a time when tradition and their own first hand experience which were passed on to the next generation of early fathers to become tradition; infered an authority to determine the teachings and practices of The Church and also which books were acceptable to be included in the Bible to which all Christians hold so much value? (Albeit, some Bibles now more complete than others)

Peace

 

[YuRa]

Then he asks a question to go along with faith without works is dead:

James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?

After that he writes:

James 2:22 You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;

James 2:23 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.

So Abrahams faith resulted in his doing works, look he says faith was working with his works to perfect it (his faith). What is perfect faith? The kind that is not dead that produces fruit. So then Abraham had the kind of faith that saves a man and to him was imputed Christ’s righteousness. Then he was called a friend of God and had eternal life. What started the whole thing thought? What made Abraham do the work of bringing Isaac? Was it not faith in God?

Then James ends with:

James 2:24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

James 2:25 In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?

James 2:26 For just as the body without {the} spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

He says you see a man is justified by works and not faith alone. The reason why is because true saving faith is not dead like the demons but will produce fruit without fails. He ends with v.26 just as we are separated from God if we do not have the Holy Spirit, in the same our faith is in vain is we do not produce works.

Amen. I love James chapter 2. The whole topic is that Saving Faith will produce fruits, if it does not you believe in vain like the demons. The kind of faith the demons had was the faith that they knew Jesus was but never acted on His offer. Then we see the whole chapter is about testing ourselves. If we say we have faith but produce no fruit then we believe in vain and are not saved. This same theme is in so many other places in the Bible.

What’s the answer then that James supports?

1.  Faith results in Salvation and produces fruit without fail.

So my dear friends if you say you have faith but you have no fruit you are lying to yourself, and will be damned in Hell for eternity. But if you do have faith that Jesus died in your place, then you will produce fruits for the Father because you love him. May the Lord bless you and may you produce fruit for His glory.

Yura

 

[Nun_ofthe_Above]

YuRa,

I can appreciate your thought process on this, however I don’t agree with your conclusion. I guess on this point we shall agree to disagree.

My prayers are with you

 

[Beaver]

The problem with Yura is, that you have not a clue as to what Tradition is?

 

[YuRa]

The problem with Yura is, that you have not a clue as to what Tradition is?

I find this insulting, because I do know what tradition is. It’s the passing down of something that is developed over time, and if tradition changes one word of the Bible it is heresy. Unless Christ or the apostles taught it I will never believe it. The Scriptures are the only Absolute that we have when it comes to our beliefs. Our traditions should never become as equals with Scripture. Instead our traditions should be taken out of the Scriptures.

Tradition is not an absolute; Scripture is. Gods’ words overrule any words of man.

 

[YuRa]

YuRa,

I can appreciate your thought process on this, however I don’t agree with your conclusion. I guess on this point we shall agree to disagree.

My prayers are with you

I do not agree to disagree with you, the Bible is clear about this. If you refuse to believe it then you are holding on to tradition not the word of God. Those are not just my thoughts; that is what James was talking about. The conclusion is right it is just not what you were always taught therefore it in your mind it must be wrong. Until you understand that Salvation is apart from the works of man and works are a result of it; you will be trapped in traditions of man and not the clear teachings of Christ and the apostles.

 

[YuRa]

So I come back to my original question:

but what happens when oral tradition contradicts written? Should we follow oral tradition of what the Scriptures say?

Scripture is clear in how a man is saved. Tradition is also clear in how a man is saved. Which one are you going to chose? Tradition of man or the word of God?

 

[YuRa]

Would it not be fair to say that the church Father’s lived in a time when tradition and their own first hand experience which were passed on to the next generation of early fathers to become tradition; infered an authority to determine the teachings and practices of The Church and also which books were acceptable to be included in the Bible to which all Christians hold so much value? (Albeit, some Bibles now more complete than others)

I agree our father did live tradition itself. Have you ever played telephone though? You know how it starts out good, and then it ends with something kind of funny and cute. That’s sort of what happens over time when people start taking mans word over the word of God. I use books out of the Bible that are recognized by most denominations (I least I believe I did lol)

 

[john_ennis]

YuRa:

Until you understand that Salvation is apart from the works of man and works are a result of it; you will be trapped in traditions of man and not the clear teachings of Christ and the apostles.

Yura,
What you say about an obedient faith saving us is true. But that obedience plays a part. You are mistaken when you say such works are “of man”. Do you dare to say the works of charity Christ performs through us have no salvific value?

“Clear” you say? The works you speak of, as they are described in Matthew (the sheep and the goats) and Luke (“What must I do to have eternal life?”), these works are “clearly” described as things we must do. They aren’t spontaneous outcomes of our faith. They are willful obedience.

I will retract everything I say if you can show me that Sole Fide was a significant belief of any Christians during the first fourteen centuries.

Peace.
John

 

[john_ennis]

YuRa:

The Scriptures are the only Absolute that we have when it comes to our beliefs.

Where in Scripture does it say this? Neither Scripture nor Sacred (Apostolic) Tradition support it.

How about the opposite? BOTH Scripture (2Thess("Hold fast to the teachings I’ve handed down to you, both oral and written)) and tradition (Augustine and every other Father who bothered to address the issue) say that the entirety of the word is found not in Scripture alone.

Our traditions should never become as equals with Scripture. Instead our traditions should be taken out of the Scriptures.

Let’s see, the New Testament Canon was identified where in Scripture? Nowhere. A Church council (Tradition!) at the end of the 4th century infallibly (you and I certainly hope!) identified the books which ought to be considered Scriptural. If not, you and I are reading an infallible source that’s been identified by fallible means.

Peace, as always.
John

 

[YuRa]

Do you dare to say the works of charity Christ performs through us have no salvific value?

Oh I do agree works are performances done through us by the work of Christ. They are a fruit of our salvation not the other way around.

Clear" you say? The works you speak of, as they are described in Matthew (the sheep and the goats) and Luke (“What must I do to have eternal life?”), these works are “clearly” described as things we must do

Let us see how Christ replies.

Matt 19:16 ¶ And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?”

Matt 19:17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is {only} One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Matt 19:18 {Then} he *said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER; YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY; YOU SHALL NOT STEAL; YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS;

Matt 19:19 HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER; and YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

Matt 19:20 The young man *said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?”

Matt 19:21 Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go {and} sell your possessions and give to {the} poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

Now lets read carefully what is talked about here: A man comes up to Jesus and say “What should I do to be saved?” That’s a fair question isn’t it? He assumes you have to do something. Christ gives him a long reply saying follow the Law completely if you want to be saved. He says I did, Christ knowing that this man is a sinner and has a filthy righteousness say give up everything and come follow me or believe in Me. Now what does this all mean? The man was seeking salvation with his own righteousness and Christ tells him he is not righteous and to follow Him if He wants salvation. Meaning when the man would have faith in Christ, Christ’s righteousness would be imputed on the man resulting in his salvation.

Christ in Matt. 19:16 shows us that we are sinful and need His righteousness for salvation. Not that we have to do something for salvation, but just the opposite. That goes right alone with Luke, the same topic.

I will reply on in Matthew (the sheep and the goats) in a little bit.

 

[john_ennis]

YuRa:

Do you dare to say the works of charity Christ performs through us have no salvific value?

Oh I do agree works are performances done through us by the work of Christ. They are a fruit of our salvation not the other way around.

Clear" you say? The works you speak of, as they are described in Matthew (the sheep and the goats) and Luke (“What must I do to have eternal life?”), these works are “clearly” described as things we must do

Let us see how Christ replies.

Matt 19:16 ¶ And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?”

Matt 19:17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is {only} One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Matt 19:18 {Then} he *said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER; YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY; YOU SHALL NOT STEAL; YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS;

Matt 19:19 HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER; and YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

Matt 19:20 The young man *said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?”

Matt 19:21 Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go {and} sell your possessions and give to {the} poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

Now lets read carefully what is talked about here: A man comes up to Jesus and say “What should I do to be saved?” That’s a fair question isn’t it? He assumes you have to do something. Christ gives him a long reply saying follow the Law completely if you want to be saved. He says I did, Christ knowing that this man is a sinner and has a filthy righteousness say give up everything and come follow me or believe in Me. Now what does this all mean? The man was seeking salvation with his own righteousness and Christ tells him he is not righteous and to follow Him if He wants salvation. Meaning when the man would have faith in Christ, Christ’s righteousness would be imputed on the man resulting in his salvation.

Christ in Matt. 19:16 shows us that we are sinful and need His righteousness for salvation. Not that we have to do something for salvation, but just the opposite. That goes right alone with Luke, the same topic.

I will reply on in Matthew (the sheep and the goats) in a little bit.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

YuRa:

Do you dare to say the works of charity Christ performs through us have no salvific value?

Oh I do agree works are performances done through us by the work of Christ. They are a fruit of our salvation not the other way around.

Clear" you say? The works you speak of, as they are described in Matthew (the sheep and the goats) and Luke (“What must I do to have eternal life?”), these works are “clearly” described as things we must do

Let us see how Christ replies.

Matt 19:16 ¶ And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?”

Matt 19:17 And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is {only} One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”

Matt 19:18 {Then} he *said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, "YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER; YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY; YOU SHALL NOT STEAL; YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS;

Matt 19:19 HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER; and YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."

Matt 19:20 The young man *said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?”

Matt 19:21 Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go {and} sell your possessions and give to {the} poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

Now lets read carefully what is talked about here: A man comes up to Jesus and say “What should I do to be saved?” That’s a fair question isn’t it? He assumes you have to do something. Christ gives him a long reply saying follow the Law completely if you want to be saved. He says I did, Christ knowing that this man is a sinner and has a filthy righteousness say give up everything and come follow me or believe in Me. Now what does this all mean? The man was seeking salvation with his own righteousness and Christ tells him he is not righteous and to follow Him if He wants salvation. Meaning when the man would have faith in Christ, Christ’s righteousness would be imputed on the man resulting in his salvation.

Christ in Matt. 19:16 shows us that we are sinful and need His righteousness for salvation. Not that we have to do something for salvation, but just the opposite. That goes right alone with Luke, the same topic.

I will reply on in Matthew (the sheep and the goats) in a little bit.

No he did not dare say what Christ did had no salvific value.If you would read the posts with an intrest of what they say instead of with an anti-catholic bias you would see what they say clearly God Bless

 

[john_ennis]

Yura,

Thank you, but you ducked the question of WHY you’re so sure that Christ’s works of charity, done through us, can have no salvific value. Many say they’re works of men, so they can’t have such value. Now that you agree they’re not, will you reconsider?

Your treatment of Matthew 19 is perhaps one way to read it, though you won’t find anyone before Luther doing so. Please, read Luke 10 (what must I do…? Christ answers with the good Samaritan parable) as well, and see how striking it ought to be for you that Christ never says, “You don’t have to DO anything…” We do have to do something.

But it’s no reason to boast. I hope you’re aware that the Catholic Church teaches that it’s heresy to believe that any such works originate with us. They are merely our cooperation with Jesus, “from whom all good things come” (I love that part of the liturgy).

Peace.
John

 

[Pax]

YuRa:

Wow, let us look at those places you sited and see how they hold up to your beliefs.

ACTS 2:38
And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Peters call to repentance then to baptism and do it all in the name of Christ and you will be forgiven. Now is that statement false? Will they not be forgiven? It does not say you are saved by baptism and repentance but says to do it all in the name of Jesus. If you do all that you will be forgiven and will receive the Holy Spirit. He never says that’s how you are saved like in Eph 2:8 and Titus 3:5 ]

Please read the verse again and understand what it is that you are reading. Peter says"…be baptised everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ…" Contrary to your statement, Peter is indeed telling them that it is baptism that will provide forgiveness and the Holy Spirit. When Peter says in the name of Jesus Christ, he is refering to Jesus command to go forth and baptize all nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.[Matt 28:19]

You make it sound as if they (i.e. those to be baptized) are baptizing themselves. They are being baptized in the Trinitarian formula by others. They are recieving a free gift of forgiveness and the Holy Spirit through baptism. All Christians understood this and even Luther believed it as do most if not all modern day Lutherans. Your understanding is a late comer to Christianity and it is a tradition of men.

YuRa:

ACTS 22:16
And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

Look again at the call. Go get up and be baptized and wash you sins away calling on His name. Its pretty clear, and you make it out to be that by the act of baptism we are forgiven.

Well that is what the scripture says and all of this is accomplished by the power of God. Let me take you back to the OT where we see a clear forshadowing and prefiguring of baptism and you will see that Catholics have it right. In Ezekiel 36:25-28 it says, “I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances. You shall dwell in the land which I gave to your fathers; and you shall be my people, and I will be your God.”

YuRa:

JOHN 3:5
Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Now look closely is that statement false? Of course not, then why was the criminal that hung next to Christ saved? Did he get baptized? And if you are a believer why wouldn’t you get baptized if you had the time?

MARK 16:16
He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

See this is a great example of how you interpret the Bible. Read the whole verse, but he who does not believe will be condemned. Again was the Criminal next to Christ on the cross saved? Again if you have time, every believer will get baptized.

You are wrongly attempting to use the incident of the Good Thief to refute the necessity of baptism. Jesus instituted baptism and every Christian is supposed to be baptized. Obviously, there will be exceptions such as the good thief who did not have the opportunity to be baptized while on the cross. You are wrong to attempt to use an exception to establish a rule. While we are normally and always bound by God’s commands, God is not bound by them. This is why the good thief will be with Jesus in Paradise. He could not be baptized but he desired to do God’s will and for him in his circumstances that was sufficient.

 

[YuRa]

As LutheranStudent has already mentioned:

Galations 1:8, Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22:18 all say not to change the gospel or the word of God.

Different canons were created because different people did not agree if certain books were actual God breathe. No words of God were changed. And the early church had creeds to remember the teaching of the apostles and Christ.

Do you not understand yet, that when we add to Gods word we make ourselves to be gods, by adding or changing we act as gods and we think that the original writer was not smart enough to write it the correct way the first time.

and tradition (Augustine and every other Father who bothered to address the issue) say that the entirety of the word is found not in Scripture alone.

Just because some man said something does not make him right, unless God speaks through a man I will never believe what he says. The fathers traditions of the Word means nothing to me if they go against the original writers said and meant.

Let’s see, the New Testament Canon was identified where in Scripture? Nowhere. A Church council (Tradition!) at the end of the 4th century infallibly (you and I certainly hope!) identified the books which ought to be considered Scriptural. If not, you and I are reading an infallible source that’s been identified by fallible means.

Oh canon is all God breathe, it is infallible, mans word is what is fallible. Mans words means nothing if they are not backed up by an absolute.

 

[john_ennis]

Lisa4Catholics:

No he did not dare say what Christ did had no salvific value.If you would read the posts with an intrest of what they say instead of with an anti-catholic bias you would see what they say clearly God Bless

Hey, now wait a minute. I think Yura and I are both having the same trouble showing the quotes distinctly. I was the one who said, “Would you dare…” It’s cool, man.
Peace!
John

 

[Pax]

Another thing that might help you appreciate baptism is the event in scripture where John baptizes Jesus. We are told in Matt 3:16-17 "that he went up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and alighting on him; and lo, a voice from heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

Notice that Jesus did not need to be baptized, but He told John to baptize Him anyway in order to fulfill “all righteousness”[see Matt 3:15]. And once Jesus is baptized the Holy Spirit descends upon him just as we receive the Holy Spirit at our baptism per Acts 2:38. When Jesus is baptized God the Father’s voice is heard and he says "this is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased. By our baptism we become adopted sons and daughters and it fulfills “all righteousness.” The baptism of Jesus is instructive for us and should help remove your doubts about the importance and efficacy of baptism.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

john ennis:

Hey, now wait a minute. I think Yura and I are both having the same trouble showing the quotes distinctly. I was the one who said, “Would you dare…” It’s cool, man.
Peace!
John

My profound apology is in order,the other observations of assumptions made by YuRa coupled with quote problems led to misunderstanding,therefore I beg your parden to both of you:bowdown2: And beg your forgiveness to my indescretion God Bless