Unless I misread your previous comment, yes--James is speaking to the believers--those who have already put their faith into Christ. Paul was called Paul because that was his Roman name--he was the witness to the gentiles. Paul is often speaking to those who have yet to put their faith in Christ. This is consistent with the position that we are not justified by faith alone.
Unless I misread your previous comment, yes--James is speaking to the believers--those who have already put their faith into Christ. Paul was called Paul because that was his Roman name--he was the witness to the gentiles. Paul is often speaking to those who have yet to put their faith in Christ. This is consistent with the position that we are not justified by faith alone.
M
Mr. Darby
Guest
Read my post 14. Paul and James are not speaking about the same event in Abraham's life. Abraham was already justified by faith many years before his offering of Isaac. The idea here is that Abraham's faith was justified in the eyes of men because of the deeds his faith inspired. James comments:
Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my work
The idea here is clearly that real faith will produce deeds, and in that manner the believer receives practical justification in the eyes of men .
However the book of James has three aspects:
In it's historical sense, it was addressed in history to 1st Century Jewish believers in Christ. In it's practical application, it provides many practical teachings for believers concerning the deeds that saving faith inspires. In it's eschatological sense, it speaks primarily to Jewish believers in the last days awaiting the return of Christ. Of course, coming from a Catholic perspective, I don't know that the argument for the Dispensational teachings of the book will resonate very much with you, as I don't know how familiar you are with Dispensational theology and the logic that goes with it. But, I have a day off tomorrow, and I will try to post some material on this if I have time.
Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my work
The idea here is clearly that real faith will produce deeds, and in that manner the believer receives practical justification in the eyes of men .
However the book of James has three aspects:
In it's historical sense, it was addressed in history to 1st Century Jewish believers in Christ. In it's practical application, it provides many practical teachings for believers concerning the deeds that saving faith inspires. In it's eschatological sense, it speaks primarily to Jewish believers in the last days awaiting the return of Christ. Of course, coming from a Catholic perspective, I don't know that the argument for the Dispensational teachings of the book will resonate very much with you, as I don't know how familiar you are with Dispensational theology and the logic that goes with it. But, I have a day off tomorrow, and I will try to post some material on this if I have time.
I'm always happy to listen regardless. I've been a Protestant far longer than I've been a Catholic, so the Protestant position isn't difficult for me to grasp. Of course this doesn't mean I will agree with the interpretation--but please do share
LOL, Okay,
I don't want to be that man either, ...I see Mr D has explained our position more succinctly, however, may I urge you in brotherly love to take James' challenge, ...for your benefit, because if I'm wrong I lose nothing, but if what I say is taught from the Word, then your experience of Eternity will not be all that it could of been.
Blessings,
Gene
I don't want to be that man either, ...I see Mr D has explained our position more succinctly, however, may I urge you in brotherly love to take James' challenge, ...for your benefit, because if I'm wrong I lose nothing, but if what I say is taught from the Word, then your experience of Eternity will not be all that it could of been.
Blessings,
Gene
Why is it New Birth and Not Religion?
Because our English word religion comes to us from the Latin word re-lique, which means to re-bind, if we want to see the true sense of our word religion just substitute the word rebind in the sentence.
Jesus said one part of His mission was to set the captives free, so, if Jesus sets us free from our captivity to sin by being born again then why would we want to become religious (rebound) again to rules, rituals or regulations?
Blessings,
Gene
Because our English word religion comes to us from the Latin word re-lique, which means to re-bind, if we want to see the true sense of our word religion just substitute the word rebind in the sentence.
Jesus said one part of His mission was to set the captives free, so, if Jesus sets us free from our captivity to sin by being born again then why would we want to become religious (rebound) again to rules, rituals or regulations?
Blessings,
Gene
I see -- well I guess we got to the nitty gritty of it. Props to us ;P
It appears we're in a pretty big disagreement since this is your position, while my position is that we are not justified by faith alone.
James 2:21-22 says "Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected"
And of course in verse 14 where it says "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." This is in fact the only place in the Bible that says the term "Faith Alone," -- where it says "not by faith alone."
Abraham's work was in response to his belief in God, but if God told him to sacrifice Isaac and Abraham said, "No, but I still believe in you," then what good would his faith have been?
In James 2:15-16, it says "If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, 'Go in peace, be warmed and filled,' and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that?"
I suppose we've reached our limit on this one--we both feel strongly about our position. I enjoyed the discussion. I'm happy to let you put in the final word of course, I don't want to be "that guy"
God bless and take care.
Having followed this discussion between you and Gene........(not that it matters and means anything) but
I just wanted to congratulate both of you for showing the world how two believers of different denominations can have a discussion over a Bible issue with dignity, love and respect for each other.
!!!!Now we are getting somewhere! You are very correct Mr. D. I look forward to your comments.
Having followed this discussion between you and Gene........(not that it matters and means anything) but
I just wanted to congratulate both of you for showing the world how two believers of different denominations can have a discussion over a Bible issue with dignity, love and respect for each other.
Thanks for the encouragement, Major.
I guess there are times where I have to remind myself that if what I'm doing is not done in charity, then there's probably no point in doing it at all. But anyway, JustPassingThru did it with far more class anyway
M
Mr. Darby
Guest
I am in the process of writing a short article on the Dispensational ramifications of the book of James that I can share here and elsewhere. I will post it as a separate thread once I get finished with it. It will be way too long to post here, and I think it will deserve it's own thread. I'll keep you guys posted.
I'm always happy to listen regardless. I've been a Protestant far longer than I've been a Catholic, so the Protestant position isn't difficult for me to grasp. Of course this doesn't mean I will agree with the interpretation--but please do share
You have been having such an excellent conversation with Gene that I have been reluctant to join in. I did not want you to think that a bunch of protestants were ganging up on you.
I do not know if I can help in your understanding and I would encourage you to think Bible and not denominational teaching. You know that I am a Baptist by choice but if and when it conflicts with the Scripture then I always go with Scripture.
Now, you have been speaking of "justification" and how works and faith correspond one with another. You have stated in several places "that we are not justified by faith alone" the last of those was in comment #61. I only say that for context and nothing more so it is NOT a gotcha moment.
I will add my two cents in and maybe get some change in the process. The word JUSTIFY is more of a "legal" word than a "theological" word. As far back as Genesis the question was asked...........
"Shall not the judge of all the earth deal "JUSTLY"? (Gen. 18:25).
If we accept the Lord Jesus Christ who died in our place, we are justified...Declared not guilty by God and at the same time we find ourselves at peace with God spared from the penalty of sin which is death.
How then can God be righteous when He acquits a man and declares him righteous. How can He do such a thing and maintain His integrity? Paul makes the problem even more acute by showing that all people are sinners in Romans 3:23. So if God declares someone righteous, He is declaring one to be righteous who is in fact unrighteous? How can that possibly be done???
I know this is a long post.......but I hope you are still with me. So then, what do the Scriptures say.......................
The process of declaring us not guilty begins and ends with God.
Romans 3:26----
"To declare I say at this time his righteousness: that he (God) might be just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus".
This action can only be realized by the sinner by FAITH and takes place at the moment of conversion.
Read the verse above again!!
Because God is just---acknowledging the gravity of our sin-----and the JUSTIFIER---paying the penalty for our sin, He does not violate His attributes.
In the book of Romans, Paul address Abraham's justification.
Romans 4:2-3...............
"For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. For what saith the Scriptures?
Abraham believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness."
Paul quoted Moses for it was Moses who said in Gen. 15:6
"Abraham believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness".
The word "reckoned" here is not used in the vernacular sense. It does not mean "I guess so, or I hope so".
The Greek word used in Romans means "CREDITED". It was "Credited" to him as righteousness so that there is no guesswork in any aspect of justification.
The Hebrew word in Genesis 15:6....."Counted" refers to a business transaction and has to do with paying a bill.
Now lets look at Romans 4:4-5 for context...............
"Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in[a] him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness".
Abraham was not righteous. Justification never means to make a man righteous. It only means that God reckons and treats a man as if he were righteous. Paul reasons in verses 4-5 of Romans 4 that justification by works rests on the principle that men can earn their salvation by doing good things. IF...IF that were true, good men would be saved by their good works. BUT that would contradict all the other BIBLE verses that tell us salvation is a gift from God!!!!
But justification by faith alone rests on the principle that God imputes righteousness to the ungodly as a free gift. Salvation then can not be earned or worked for by the sinner but is freely given to him when he places his faith in the blood of Jesus Christ.
Now does James agree with Paul on this???? YES. James 2:21-26 DOES NOT CONTRADICT Romans 4:1-6.
The unjustified man, according to Romans is a condemned sinner but in James he is a hypoctite. Conseqently, Abraham's justification in this passage consisted of mans verdict. Christians, Jews and Arabs have declared righteous this man of God because of the faith he demonstrated when he offered his son.
Now James 2:22 says.....
22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works;"
It was OUT OF FAITH that produced the works that Abraham did. Salvation is not accomplished through the cooperation of faith and works, but instead, faith finds its course of operation of expression in works.
Sounds great and needed. I look forward to reading it!
M
Mr. Darby
Guest
I have realized that it is going to take me a while to write all of the article and that it is going to be rather lengthy, so I believe that I will start posting it here in small sections as it is written so that any discussion can take place. Later, I'll post it in it's length here as a study.
The book of James can be looked at from three different perspectives.
1. From the historical perspective, it was literally written to Jews in the first century A.D., presumably most, if not all, of whom were believers in Jesus Christ.
2. From a contemporary perspective, it has much practical teaching for the believer in Christ concerning the true nature of faith. The book of James teaches us that real faith will produce actions on the part of the believer. There is a belief that is merely an intellectual knowledge of something, and then there is belief that actually stirs one to action. It is only by actions that belief is demonstrated.
3. From the eschatological perspective, the book of James especially relates to those Jewish believers who are alive at the time of the Tribulation. Bullinger observes in his notes on James in the Companion Bible, "If we distinguish the dispensations, James affords instruction for all believers, but is plainly addressed 'to the twelve tribes'.....In days not far off the epistle will appeal to Israel when to them the gospel of the Kingdom is once more announced."
It is the third of the above perspectives that I will focus on here. As Bullinger observes, the Epistle of James is addressed to the twelve tribes of the nation of Israel. Note the opening verse of the Epistle:
"James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting."
James is here referring to those Jews who were scattered among the Gentile nations. They were the Jews of the 'diaspora'. That which the KJV translators rendered as "are scattered abroad" is "en te diaspora" in the Greek text. So James is speaking to the "twelve tribes of the Diaspora".
Another clue to the Jewish character of the epistle is found in 2:2:
"For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment".
The word translated 'assembly' in the KJV is "sunagogen" in the Greek; ie. "Synagogue".
The fact that the saints here addressed are Jewish points to the end time nature of the book of James. The saints sealed by God in the Tribulation are the Jewish 'remnant' of Israel. Revelation 7:4 tells us:
"And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel."
After the Rapture of the Church, God will again turn to dealing with the nation of Israel, and will seal a remnant of this nation.
It must be remembered that the Bible is a Jewish book that relates God's dealings with the Jewish nation. If we fail to recognize passages relating to Israel, and incorrectly apply them to the predominantly Gentile bride of Christ, we will always be leading ourselves into erroneous doctrines. To be properly understood, the book of James must be viewed in the light of the fact that it is addressed to the nation of Israel. When the Bible speaks of Israel, it means "Israel" as a literal ethnic group chosen by God, and never means the Church. (Though there are Jewish believers in this age, and they are part of the Church.)
The book of James can be looked at from three different perspectives.
1. From the historical perspective, it was literally written to Jews in the first century A.D., presumably most, if not all, of whom were believers in Jesus Christ.
2. From a contemporary perspective, it has much practical teaching for the believer in Christ concerning the true nature of faith. The book of James teaches us that real faith will produce actions on the part of the believer. There is a belief that is merely an intellectual knowledge of something, and then there is belief that actually stirs one to action. It is only by actions that belief is demonstrated.
3. From the eschatological perspective, the book of James especially relates to those Jewish believers who are alive at the time of the Tribulation. Bullinger observes in his notes on James in the Companion Bible, "If we distinguish the dispensations, James affords instruction for all believers, but is plainly addressed 'to the twelve tribes'.....In days not far off the epistle will appeal to Israel when to them the gospel of the Kingdom is once more announced."
It is the third of the above perspectives that I will focus on here. As Bullinger observes, the Epistle of James is addressed to the twelve tribes of the nation of Israel. Note the opening verse of the Epistle:
"James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting."
James is here referring to those Jews who were scattered among the Gentile nations. They were the Jews of the 'diaspora'. That which the KJV translators rendered as "are scattered abroad" is "en te diaspora" in the Greek text. So James is speaking to the "twelve tribes of the Diaspora".
Another clue to the Jewish character of the epistle is found in 2:2:
"For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment".
The word translated 'assembly' in the KJV is "sunagogen" in the Greek; ie. "Synagogue".
The fact that the saints here addressed are Jewish points to the end time nature of the book of James. The saints sealed by God in the Tribulation are the Jewish 'remnant' of Israel. Revelation 7:4 tells us:
"And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel."
After the Rapture of the Church, God will again turn to dealing with the nation of Israel, and will seal a remnant of this nation.
It must be remembered that the Bible is a Jewish book that relates God's dealings with the Jewish nation. If we fail to recognize passages relating to Israel, and incorrectly apply them to the predominantly Gentile bride of Christ, we will always be leading ourselves into erroneous doctrines. To be properly understood, the book of James must be viewed in the light of the fact that it is addressed to the nation of Israel. When the Bible speaks of Israel, it means "Israel" as a literal ethnic group chosen by God, and never means the Church. (Though there are Jewish believers in this age, and they are part of the Church.)
One must consider that if any Tribulation saint takes the Mark of the Beast, there is no hope (Revelation 14:9-11). Faith alone will not save him. In other words, people of the Tribulation will have to DO SOMETHING to be saved. They can not take the "Mark of the Beast". Today that does not apply to us as salvation is a gift from God to those who believe THEN good works follow those that do believe.
As Mr. Darby has correctly said, the book of James has doctrinal application to the Tribulation. Thus,the book of James is addressed in the first verse of the first chapter . . . "to the twelve tribes" when God will once again be using the Jews to spread His message.
James 1:1 ............
"James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting."
So then, when we read the Bible, we must always check to see if the Bible indicates which individuals it is addressing. The book of James is addressed to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad during the Tribulation period. Two areas dealt with in James, the necessity for patience and the condemnation of the rich, clearly reveal the Tribulation flavor of the book of James.
That being understood, it is then error to use those doctrinal teachings that apply to the Tribulation to us today.
As Mr. Darby has correctly said, the book of James has doctrinal application to the Tribulation. Thus,the book of James is addressed in the first verse of the first chapter . . . "to the twelve tribes" when God will once again be using the Jews to spread His message.
James 1:1 ............
"James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting."
So then, when we read the Bible, we must always check to see if the Bible indicates which individuals it is addressing. The book of James is addressed to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad during the Tribulation period. Two areas dealt with in James, the necessity for patience and the condemnation of the rich, clearly reveal the Tribulation flavor of the book of James.
That being understood, it is then error to use those doctrinal teachings that apply to the Tribulation to us today.
Thanks, Major.
I understand what you're saying. I suppose I've read the Bible in very different ways between my teens and my twenties. I think the first time I ever truly read the Bible, I was about 16 and I did it as you said -- not through the lenses of a denomination, but strictly as, as you could say, listening to the Holy Spirit.
Whenever I read the Bible, I still listen to the Holy Spirit for guidance, but now reading it through Catholic lenses, the scriptures have becomes far more clearer and understandable. Part of this is because while I believe all scripture if profitable for teaching (2 Timothy 3:16), I also acknowledge that the Church is the pillar of truth (1 Timothy 3:15).
But just because this is my position doesn't mean these points that I oppose shouldn't be brought up and challenged. What if there is validity to them? They should at the very least be questioned for the sake of knowing the truth. I'm not afraid of knowing the truth, as I know you guys aren't either.
One of the things I pray for is for everyone to be more adventurous in their seeking to get closer to God.
I understand what you're saying. I suppose I've read the Bible in very different ways between my teens and my twenties. I think the first time I ever truly read the Bible, I was about 16 and I did it as you said -- not through the lenses of a denomination, but strictly as, as you could say, listening to the Holy Spirit.
Whenever I read the Bible, I still listen to the Holy Spirit for guidance, but now reading it through Catholic lenses, the scriptures have becomes far more clearer and understandable. Part of this is because while I believe all scripture if profitable for teaching (2 Timothy 3:16), I also acknowledge that the Church is the pillar of truth (1 Timothy 3:15).
But just because this is my position doesn't mean these points that I oppose shouldn't be brought up and challenged. What if there is validity to them? They should at the very least be questioned for the sake of knowing the truth. I'm not afraid of knowing the truth, as I know you guys aren't either.
One of the things I pray for is for everyone to be more adventurous in their seeking to get closer to God.
Absolutely! Good stuff.
Whoa LS, don't sell yourself short bro, it takes two to tango.
And like LS said, thank you major for the encouragement, may I add that our discussion is a practical example for all to see how the Holy Spirit works in His children,
...we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. 1 Cor 8:1
Annddd, they will also prove (works) their faith in Jesus Christ by being decapitated, ...so any of you lurkers that think you will wait for the Church to be raptured and then come to Jesus, well...,
Blessings,
Gene
And like LS said, thank you major for the encouragement, may I add that our discussion is a practical example for all to see how the Holy Spirit works in His children,
...we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. 1 Cor 8:1
Annddd, they will also prove (works) their faith in Jesus Christ by being decapitated, ...so any of you lurkers that think you will wait for the Church to be raptured and then come to Jesus, well...,
Blessings,
Gene
LS, bro, I'm dying to ask you a question, since this is the second time you have mentioned it, it's kinda personal, do you mind?
Blessings,
Gene
Blessings,
Gene
"The Robinson children are all such good children. What lucky parents". Did any of the Robinson children become Robinsons because of how good they are? Or are they good because they are Robinsons?
This is basically what James is teaching. A child of God does not become a child of God because of their goodness-----they display goodness because they are children of God. Works are a RESULT of salvation, not the cause of it---James teaches us this. We may say we are Christians----but our fruits show if we are saved---our fruits don't save us.
This is basically what James is teaching. A child of God does not become a child of God because of their goodness-----they display goodness because they are children of God. Works are a RESULT of salvation, not the cause of it---James teaches us this. We may say we are Christians----but our fruits show if we are saved---our fruits don't save us.
Don't mind -- feel free to ask, friend.
Morin' Bro,
First off, I don't ask this question to my brother to start a theological debate, also I don't ask this question with any hidden motives or agendas, it stems from simple curiosity, so I would ask any and all that read this post to refrain from any attacks, defamation or flaming on our brother should he chose to reply.
It has been my observation that many men of God have changed their minds about what they believed at first, when they first met Jesus, ...have changed direction is what I'm trying to say, so dear brother, you have stated you started out "Protestant" and have switched camps, or converted, how ever you want to say it, to "Catholicism," ...my question, if you chose to answer, is how did that come about, what happened in you life to change your mind, ...what did the Lord show you in His Word to cause this change?
Now, I said my question is personal, I realize I'm asking you to bare your heart before a large audience, so I realize the difficulty this might be for you, so if you chose to not answer I understand, I will still respect you and cherish you as a brother in Christ.
In His Love,
Gene
First off, I don't ask this question to my brother to start a theological debate, also I don't ask this question with any hidden motives or agendas, it stems from simple curiosity, so I would ask any and all that read this post to refrain from any attacks, defamation or flaming on our brother should he chose to reply.
It has been my observation that many men of God have changed their minds about what they believed at first, when they first met Jesus, ...have changed direction is what I'm trying to say, so dear brother, you have stated you started out "Protestant" and have switched camps, or converted, how ever you want to say it, to "Catholicism," ...my question, if you chose to answer, is how did that come about, what happened in you life to change your mind, ...what did the Lord show you in His Word to cause this change?
Now, I said my question is personal, I realize I'm asking you to bare your heart before a large audience, so I realize the difficulty this might be for you, so if you chose to not answer I understand, I will still respect you and cherish you as a brother in Christ.
In His Love,
Gene