Exegesis or Bible Butchery in James 2 - Pick one

[BobRyan]

This thread is for those who would agree with me that you are saved by grace through faith alone - not of works.

Those who agree that at the moment of salvation - the New Birth, you are justified before God.

Those who agree that sanctification is a process that begins at the moment of justification and continues on all through the rest of the life of the Christian.

-----------------

Ok so to that group I say -- look at James 2
24"you see then that man is justified by works and NOT by faith alone"

Now here is my question for the group -- will you choose Bible Butchery instead of exegesis when confronted with this text?

Perhaps a bit MORE of James 2 just so we are perfectly clear on this exercise....

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works[/b] when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22 You see that faith was working with his works[b/], and as a result of the [B][B]works, faith was perfected;
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.
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
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?

Now just so we are very very clear -- lets give an example of "Bible butchery" as a non-solution to the problem.

Example:


Twist that text around and say to yourself that it says "MAN IS justified by FAITH alone and then once that happens good works will follow as a result of being born again"..... in other words completely rid yourself of the texts "NOT by faith alone" and "Justified by WORKS" details because they are far too inconvenient for what we already believe to be the case before coming to this text.


Now come on people - here is a case where we actually agree on the "by faith alone and NOT by works" details for justification - so no need for you to be afraid on this one.

My point here is that IF we can ever get Christians to stop butchering texts that don't please them as "the only solution" to such problems - we go a long way to restoring a model for discovering true Bible doctrine.

So let's start with this common ground problem where in fact we are in agreement in terms the bias we BRING TO THE TEXT -- now find a solution without butchering it..

In Christ,

Bob

[tragic_pizza]

So Justification and Sanctification. What's the problem?

[Shiloh]

Tha problem is that BobR is a SDA's and that is a "WORKS" religion. He teaches that the 10 commandments are moral laws and they have to "keep" them including the Sabbath. We know that the Sabbath is a ceremonial law which the New Testament Christians are told in Col.2:14-17 not to be judged by. The confused SDA's try to tell us that the 10 commandments are God's laws and the other laws are laws of Moses.

The SDA's believe their goddess Mrs. White's writings are inspired. As does the Mormans with their "Book of Mormans" and the Christian Scientists who believe Mary Baker Eddie's writings were inspired. They believe in her "investigative judgement" which began in 1844 and continues to this day to determin who will go to their heaven.

The SDA's teach Salvation by works. This is not Biblical as we read in John 3:16, Eph. 2:8,9. Paul condemned this in Gal.4:9,10 when he said they were fallen from Grace in doctrine and now taught salvation by the law.

Here is a quote from Mrs. White in their book, "Answers to Objections" by Francis D. Nichol, on page 402, "Those who accept the Savour, however sincere their conversion, should never be taught to say or to feel that they are saved. This is misleading. Every one should be taught to cherish hope and faith; but even when we give ourselves to Christ and know that He accepts us,we are not beyond the reach of temptation...Only he who endures the trial will receive the crown of life."

This is the sin of Seventh-Day Adventism.

[BobRyan]

So Justification and Sanctification. What's the problem?

I don't claim that there is a problem between Justification and sanctification. I claim that even though we come to James 2 with a certain understanding of "Justification by faith without the works of the Law" from Romans 3... AND we have the view of "Saved by grace through faith not of works" from Eph 2 --

We still have to work on something that is "exegetically correct" -- and honest - in terms of the text in James 2 "Justified by WORKS and NOT by Faith alone".

We need to take a hard look at the text that is honest and above board - that fully embraces each inconvenient detail IN the text without simply glossing over it or worse - "rewriting it" to say the OPPOSITE of what it says.

My example given in the OP shows a solution that simply rewrites the text using exact contradictions to the language used IN the text. My suggestion is that we avoid that approach and try something more honest to the text of scripture even though we do come to it with a prior bias.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Tha problem is that BobR is a SDA's and that is ... (whining ranting and slander deleted here)

Uh! Then there is always the "avoid the text entirely and bash other denominations" solution given time after time by Shiloh.

I guess that kind of non-answer appeals to some -- but most on this board have held to a higher standard.

Now back to the topic...

In Christ,

Bob

[Shiloh]

This thread is for those who would agree with me that you are saved by grace through faith alone - not of works.

Those who agree that at the moment of salvation - the New Birth, you are justified before God.

Those who agree that sanctification is a process that begins at the moment of justification and continues on all through the rest of the life of the Christian.

-----------------

Ok so to that group I say -- look at James 2
24"you see then that man is justified by works and NOT by faith alone"by Bob

I gave the reason for your incorrect interpretation of James 2:24. You take one verse out of context and bulid a whole doctrine around it. Of course it is nothing new to you SDA's. Mrs. White your goddess of confusion set a date for the Lord to return and when He didn't she started a whole new "religion" which you have fallen for hook line and sinker.

No Bob, you don't get Saved by works, the Baptist have told you that a thousand times. Salvation comes by Grace through Faith(.) Then......you WORK out your salvation.

It is the faith that produces the good works.

[Shiloh]

I might add: Bashing denominations is not my game, but exposing false doctrine is my aim.

[BobRyan]

[quote]Shiloh
I gave the reason for your incorrect interpretation of James 2:24.


#1. I did not interpret the text at ALL. I simply quoted it.

#2. you gave NO solution to the problem stated in the OP all you did is whine that another denomination exists that does not agree with you. That task at hand is to ADDRESS the points raised.

#3. I gave an example of abusing the text and suggested that ANOTHER solution be found.

Try again.

Shiloh -- still on a rant...
You take one verse out of context and bulid a whole doctrine around it.


I gave NO doctrine based on James 2 RATHER I gave doctrine based on Romans 3 and Ephesians 2 which is (and I quote) "Saved by Grace through faith NOT of works".

At some point Shiloh you simply have to start reading and responding to what is being posted.

Shiloh said

Of course it is nothing new to you SDA's. Mrs. White your goddess of... (obligatory ranting whining and slander deleted here)


Question for Shiloh. Why do you keep giving me opportunity after opportunity to expose your standards, motives and practices like that? At some point I have to think that pride alone would call you back to reason.

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

Bob I have to say this is not your typical post. Not sure what you are up to :laugh:

And I happen to agree with you that modern day Christendom really struggles with James. Well they don't admit that they do, because the mainly say what you said and think they have solved the problem for themselves, but in reality they have made this issue even bigger.

In order to correctly determine what is being spoken of in James, or any NT book for that matter, one must start from the very beginning. One must start with salvation, faith/believe and works and what is involved in each.

The great thing about the Bible is that it leaves only room for one interpretation and that is The Interpretation, which is given by the Holy Spirit. All else, while we may think that it comes from the Holy Spirit is actually given my man.

What we must constantly do is try to die to self long enough to allow the Holy Spirit to guide us into ALL Truth regarding Scripture.

Now with all that being said there is only one way that this Scripture fits into line with all other Scripture, and that is James is not dealing with eternal (spiritual) salvation.

The question is how can we know that, and as you have rightly pointed out James talks about being saved not by faith alone, but by faith mixed with works. And we also know from Ephesians and Romans that eternal (spiritual) salvation does not have works mixed in before, during or after. So the context is not eternal (spiritual) salvation at all.

James 1 actually tells us what he is talking about and that is the context of James is speaking of the salvation of the soul. The salvation of the soul is a process that is wrought by mixing faith with works, whereas the salvation of the spirit is by faith alone in the finished works of Christ alone.

IMHO to see James in any other "light" is to place numerous contradictions on Scripture which can not be there.

[Dustin]

Bob: True faith will produce works. That's what James is saying. Abraham believed God, and did something, he didn't just sit in his tent and think about all the faith he had in what God promised him.

I said this before in another thread, James is exhorting believers to "put thier money where thier mouth is." James says "Oh, you have faith huh, well show me your faith, and do something with it."

Not so theological, but correct at the very least.

Soli Deo Gloria,
Dustin

[BobRyan]

Bob I have to say this is not your typical post. Not sure what you are up to :laugh:

Agreed. I have left the job of interpreting James 2 in some consistent way with accepted beliefs about Romans 3 and Ephesians 2 (accepted by all of us) -- as an exercise for each participant and reader.

I did not provide the solution.


And I happen to agree with you that modern day Christendom really struggles with James. Well they don't admit that they do


True. And the point of this exercise is to work through the problem without trashing the text or "complaining that it even exists" as Shiloh did right out of the gate in response to "the mere quote of it".



Now with all that being said there is only one way that this Scripture fits into line with all other Scripture, and that is James is not dealing with eternal (spiritual) salvation.


Ok. But he does deal with the term "justification" explicitly.

And in connection with "bad faith" HE says "can that faith SAVE him" so although I think you are on the right track - we can not completely divorce the subject of salvation from his teaching.


The question is how can we know that, and as you have rightly pointed out James talks about being saved not by faith alone, but by faith mixed with works. And we also know from Ephesians and Romans that eternal (spiritual) salvation does not have works mixed in before, during or after.


And that is the rub. We have to find a solution that it honest with the text in James AND retains the truths stated in Romans 3 and Ephesians 2.


J. J.
James 1 actually tells us what he is talking about and that is the context of James is speaking of the salvation of the soul. The salvation of the soul is a process that is wrought by mixing faith with works, whereas the salvation of the spirit is by faith alone in the finished works of Christ alone.

That is a new one on me.

Please provide more details.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Bob: True faith will produce works. That's what James is saying. Abraham believed God, and did something, he didn't just sit in his tent and think about all the faith he had in what God promised him.


Agreed. But the task is to use the very words of the text and show how it is true that "man is justified by works and NOT by faith alone".

In other words -- if James had written "True faith produces good works - Abraham was justified by faith alone and then in his new born-again new-creation state he produced good works" then I don't think any of us would have much of a challenge interpreting the text easily with Romans 3 and Eph 2.

So I agree with where you 'want' the text to go -- the problem is to show in the details of the text - that it's statement "justified by works and NOT by faith alone" is something we all could sign up to - stand up in church and say with a straight face - and fully believe.

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

Ok. But he does deal with the term "justification" explicitly.
True. That is a word that I should have added into my little mix. When folks see the words salvation, faith/believe, saved, jusitification or justified, etc. they automatically assume a text is speaking to eternal salvation.

You could even add in eternal life or everlasting life, and several other terms probably.

we can not completely divorce the subject of salvation from his teaching.
Exactly. But context tells us what type of salvation he is speaking about. And because works are in the context the context is not eternal (spiritual) salvation.

That is a new one on me.

Please provide more details.

Unfortunately these days it s a new one on a lot of people. I will send you a PM, because the answer to your question need much more detail than time and space allow on here.

[BobRyan]

Speaking of the term "Justification" used in James 2 "You see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone"

True. That is a word that I should have added into my little mix. When folks see the words salvation, faith/believe, saved, jusitification or justified, etc. they automatically assume a text is speaking to eternal salvation.


Ok so when it says "you see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone"... how should we read that?

Justification implies a judicial legal action (From Just and Justice) where something is proven or declared to be upheld/innocent/defended/cleared-of-legal-charges etc.

So how would you render this - in keeping with the text?


You could even add in eternal life or everlasting life, and several other terms probably.

As in "So you see that a man obtains eternal life by works and not by faith alone"???

IS that what you are saying?

In Christ,

Bob

[hillclimber1]

This thread is for those who would agree with me that you are saved by grace through faith alone - not of works.

Those who agree that at the moment of salvation - the New Birth, you are justified before God.

Those who agree that sanctification is a process that begins at the moment of justification and continues on all through the rest of the life of the Christian.

-----------------

Ok so to that group I say -- look at James 2
24"you see then that man is justified by works and NOT by faith alone"

Now here is my question for the group -- will you choose Bible Butchery instead of exegesis when confronted with this text?

Perhaps a bit MORE of James 2 just so we are perfectly clear on this exercise....

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works[/b] when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22 You see that faith was working with his works[b/], and as a result of the [B][B]works, faith was perfected;
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.
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
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?

Now just so we are very very clear -- lets give an example of "Bible butchery" as a non-solution to the problem.

Example:



Now come on people - here is a case where we actually agree on the "by faith alone and NOT by works" details for justification - so no need for you to be afraid on this one.

My point here is that IF we can ever get Christians to stop butchering texts that don't please them as "the only solution" to such problems - we go a long way to restoring a model for discovering true Bible doctrine.

So let's start with this common ground problem where in fact we are in agreement in terms the bias we BRING TO THE TEXT -- now find a solution without butchering it..

In Christ,

Bob
It doesn't take you any time at all to veer off the truth, does it? And what does SDA mean?

[J. Jump]

Ok so when it says "you see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone"... how should we read that?

Justification implies a judicial legal action (From Just and Justice) where something is proven or declared to be upheld/innocent/defended/cleared-of-legal-charges etc.

So how would you render this - in keeping with the text?
Well this text happens to go hand in hand with the adoption texts. Unfortunately the usage of the word "adoption" has clouded its biblical meaning. When people speak of adoption today they think of it as being added to the family. But the Biblical use of the word means being approved. The literal rendering is son placement or son placing. Adoption means approving something for use.

For example I like to play a dominoes game which for whatever reason is called Mexican train. There are several different versions or rules. So if I am playing with someone that plays different than I do and I like their rules I might "adopt" their rules the next time I play.

Adoption in Scripture has to do with a child being approved and adopted into a position within the family not being placed into the family.

And in order for this adoption to occur the child must be found blameless or justified. The Bible speaks of a finished justification as well as a continual justification.

Jesus told Peter that if he didn't allow Him to wash him that he would have no part "with" Him.

We are "in" Christ through salvation by grace through faith apart from works. But our part "with" Christ is based on allowing Him to continually wash us through the water (Word) and His blood which is currently on the mercy seat in tabernacle in heaven, which is "if" we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.

This goes back to the OT priest who was fully cleansed one time, but before he entered the Holy of Holies he must wash what had come in contact with earth. It was a partial washing that happened from time to time. If he didn't wash and walked into the Holy of Holies unclean or with blame then he died.

This is a physical representation of what can and will happen to our soul if we skip the sanctification aspect of salvation or the salvation of the soul.

As in "So you see that a man obtains eternal life by works and not by faith alone"???

IS that what you are saying?
Well unfortunately Bible translators have placed a HUGE hurddle in the way of many that study Scripture. First of all most every time the word eternal is used it a very poor translation. I'm specifically speaking of when used in front of "life". Some translations have changed the word from eternal to everlasting, which is a better translation of what they are trying to get across, but still a miss translation of the word most of the time.

The Greek word is aionios, which is an adjective of the word aion. Aion means age. It's a period of time, and when used in Scripture it most often if not always is referring to the 1,000-year reign of Christ. That is the next age that awaits the saved. And we can either have life in that age, or we can lose our life in that age, according to Scripture. The word life is the same Greek word for soul. So it could be said and rightly so that we can find our soul in the coming age or we can lose our soul in the coming age.

Which goes right in line with Paul's teaching on the judgement seat of Christ where he said that there will be those that suffer loss at the JSOC. Most Christians say that it will be a loss of rewards. However the text says it will be a loss of something that they are already in possession of, so it can't mean a loss of rewards, because those will not be currently possessed at the JSOC.

By the way I fixed the PM. Sorry about leaving out the most important part. :laugh: Again IMHO this is the only way Scripture lines up with other Scripture without placing contradictions into the texts.

[BobRyan]

I agree that there is some more leverage if we can insert the term "adoption" into the text... but sticking with the terms given "You see then that a man is JUSTIFIED by works AND NOT by faith alone" -- how do we interpret it -- using the words "IN" the text?

As for "eternal" vs "everlasting" -- I have no problem with that substitution since I vew them as having basically the same scope and have made that same Aion argument in the case of eternal fire. In that case "eternal" references both the source (eternal God) and the context (until all is complete).

However I don't see how this is solving the problem.

I still have "For you see then that a man is JUSTIFIED by Works and NOT by FAITH ALONE".

I will propose another failed solution as I did in the OP for reference.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

It doesn't take you any time at all to veer off the truth, does it? And what does SDA mean?

What kind of nonsense non-answer is that?

(So many ways NOT to address the point -- so little time, eh HC?)

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

In the OP I gave an example of a failed solution of the form "you see then that a man is NOT JUSTIFIED by Works but by Faith alone -- and AFTER that comes good works".

A solution that is in keeping with Romans 3 and Eph 2 but totally butchers James 2 which IS included in the "ALL SCRIPTURE" of 2Tim 3:16 that we are not to butcher - but rather read -- and study.

Another failed solution would be on the opposite side.

We could conclude "No one can enter into salvation by faith alone - they must have good works to come to Christ and be justified".

That failed solution does no violence at all to the actual text of James 2. But it totally contradicts Romans 3 and Eph 2 so it too is unnacceptable.

So we have the "boundary" conditions - neither of them is acceptable.

Something in the middle I think.

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

"You see then that a man is JUSTIFIED by works AND NOT by faith alone" -- how do we interpret it -- using the words "IN" the text?
Well I thought I had explained that :laugh: But I guess it wasn't very clear :laugh: The justification that James is speaking of is a justification that qualifies one for the kingdom not for eternity. He is not speaking of eternal salvation, because his audience is already saved. He is speaking of a justification "for" them that is beyond what they already possess. One must be justified in order to have a position within the coming kingdom. If the "saved" individual is found with blame as he/she stands before the Judge on that day then they will not have a position within that kingdom as they will not have been justified.

However I don't see how this is solving the problem.
Well this is an area that I can't help on. I can only proclaim the Truth as I believe the Holy Spirit to have guided me, and the convincing part comes from Him.

However I would say that the problem is solved because the text has not been changed, and it flows without contradiction when comparing it with other Scripture whether in the OT or NT.

As long as one places James into a context of eternal salvation then contradictions are going to arise. And they will arise in two ways. One will say that the person that does not work will lose their eternal salvation while the other group will say that person was simply not saved. Neither of those arguments hold to the test of Scripture.

I still have "For you see then that a man is JUSTIFIED by Works and NOT by FAITH ALONE".
He/She is justified by a mixture of faith and works for his/her place in the kingdom of Christ.

Hope that helps.

[BobRyan]

"you see then that to get both eternal life AND entrance into the millennial kingdom a man must be justified by WORKS and not by faith alone... but if he just wants eternal life then to inherit eternal life he can still just be justified by faith alone without works"

Are you saying this is the way the text should be read?

What is the "exegesis" that could be used IN the text to support such an insert?

Recall that in the details of the text of James 2 -- James DOES cite an example of those who do believe the right facts to be true but do not act on that belief in terms of good works. Notice that he does not say "the demons get eternal life but they do not get into the Millennial kingdom" - but that would be a good case to measure out the subtle difference between the reward of those who believe and DON't have the fruits getting eternal life but NOT entrance into the Kingdom.

In Christ,

Bob

[av1611jim]

James 2:17-26 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 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 works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

If a person were to approach this passage honestly it would be an easy thing to figure out.
Notice what James says in the last sentence of the passage. The body without the spirit is dead. Think about it. You are alive and animated. Why? Your spirit is still IN you. Your spirit is what gives life to your body and proves you are alive.
Then notice his conclusion. Even so...faith without works is dead. Just like your pysical body without a spriit can do nothing and is useless, EVEN SO...your faith is useless without SOMETHING that proves it is alive.

Paul bears this out when he says the just shall live BY faith. Faith is the live giving element which produces the action. No faith, no life. If there is no life (works/action) present then there is no faith. It is dead.

James says in effect; you say you have fatih? Prove it.

James uses Abraham as a perfect example because prior to Abraham offering Isaac, the Scripture says Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed to him. This righteousness came about without works, but his justification came about when his faith PRODUCED action which demonstrated that indeed Abraham did indeed believe God. Abraham said: knowing he was going to sacrifice his son, kill and burn him,: "wait here while I and the lad worship and WE will return". Abraham believed God would fulfill his promise of a great nation coming from Isaac. He had FAITH in that promise and even though he had to kill the son of promise he believed God would keep his promise. The action Abraham took is what justified his faith in God.

What we encounter when comparing Paul with James is as JJump indicated. TWO contexts for the word justification. Never define Biblical word usage outside of CONTEXT. You get into a big 'ol mees that way as evidenced by the many false teachers, i.e. SDA, LDS, JW, etc.

[J. Jump]

Are you saying this is the way the text should be read?
I'm speaking more of what the context is, and with the correct context we can draw out the correct interpretation.

Recall that in the details of the text of James 2 -- James DOES cite an example of those who do believe the right facts to be true but do not act on that belief in terms of good works.
Exactly. That is the whole point. You can believe that Jesus is the Christ, Annointed King, all you want to. You can believe He is coming back. You can believe He is going to rule and reign over the earth for 1,000 years. But if that faith does not motivate you to produce the works that God intended for you to do that faith alone will not save you, because you must be found blameless in regard to works on judgement day. You can have all the faith in the world, but if you don't produce fruit you are not going to have your soul saved at the JSOC. You will lose your soul. You will lose the double portion of the inheritance. You will not be adopted as a son, despite having the faith.

That's why he says will that faith save you, and the way it is structured the answer to the question is no. That faith will not save you. Only a faith that produces fruit will save you on that day.

But one's eternal destiny is not judged at that time. That judgement is already been had while the person was on this earth. Judgement after death or after the rapture is a judgement based solely on the works of the person, so eternal salvation is not in question according to context.

[Dustin]

James 2:17-26 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 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 works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

If a person were to approach this passage honestly it would be an easy thing to figure out.
Notice what James says in the last sentence of the passage. The body without the spirit is dead. Think about it. You are alive and animated. Why? Your spirit is still IN you. Your spirit is what gives life to your body and proves you are alive.
Then notice his conclusion. Even so...faith without works is dead. Just like your pysical body without a spriit can do nothing and is useless, EVEN SO...your faith is useless without SOMETHING that proves it is alive.

Paul bears this out when he says the just shall live BY faith. Faith is the live giving element which produces the action. No faith, no life. If there is no life (works/action) present then there is no faith. It is dead.

James says in effect; you say you have fatih? Prove it.

James uses Abraham as a perfect example because prior to Abraham offering Isaac, the Scripture says Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed to him. This righteousness came about without works, but his justification came about when his faith PRODUCED action which demonstrated that indeed Abraham did indeed believe God. Abraham said: knowing he was going to sacrifice his son, kill and burn him,: "wait here while I and the lad worship and WE will return". Abraham believed God would fulfill his promise of a great nation coming from Isaac. He had FAITH in that promise and even though he had to kill the son of promise he believed God would keep his promise. The action Abraham took is what justified his faith in God.

What we encounter when comparing Paul with James is as JJump indicated. TWO contexts for the word justification. Never define Biblical word usage outside of CONTEXT. You get into a big 'ol mees that way as evidenced by the many false teachers, i.e. SDA, LDS, JW, etc.

Amen! Very wise words, Jim.

[BobRyan]

I point out the failing case that Jamaes highlights regarding those who accept the facts - but do not follow what they know to be true - with works of obedience (James' even states that the Demons are in that group)


Exactly. That is the whole point. You can believe that Jesus is the Christ, Annointed King, all you want to. You can believe He is coming back. You can believe He is going to rule and reign over the earth for 1,000 years. But if that faith does not motivate you to produce the works that God intended for you to do that faith alone will not save you, because you must be found blameless in regard to works on judgement day. You can have all the faith in the world, but if you don't produce fruit you are not going to have your soul saved at the JSOC. You will lose your soul. You will lose the double portion of the inheritance. You will not be adopted as a son, despite having the faith.

Ok so -- "lost".

And as James points out - the demons are an example of beings in that group -- who are lost even though they know the true facts.

J.J said

That's why he says will that faith save you, and the way it is structured the answer to the question is no. That faith will not save you. Only a faith that produces fruit will save you on that day.

Ok..

J.J said

But one's eternal destiny is not judged at that time. That judgement is already been had while the person was on this earth. Judgement after death or after the rapture is a judgement based solely on the works of the person, so eternal salvation is not in question according to context.

There is nothing in the text about "aftger death, after rapture".

However you seem to introduce the idea of "saved while lost".

Given that James claims that the demons are to be included in this group of beings that know the right facts (believe and tremble) but show no inclination to actually live a life of obedience -- is it your claim that they too are "saved while being lost"??

Certainly they do fit the mold of at one time being IN the family of God.

Still -- I have to admit that the "Saved while lost" idea is not coming out in James 2 --

"Can that faith save him? No but that does not matter because while lost he is saved anyway" seems to be the wording your are looking for in the text. But I do not find it.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

James 2:17-26 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 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 works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know,

O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

If a person were to approach this passage honestly it would be an easy thing to figure out.
Notice what James says in the last sentence of the passage. The body without the spirit is dead. Think about it. You are alive and animated. Why? Your spirit is still IN you. Your spirit is what gives life to your body and proves you are alive.
Then notice his conclusion. Even so...faith without works is dead. Just like your pysical body without a spriit can do nothing and is useless, EVEN SO...your faith is useless without SOMETHING that proves it is alive.


Agreed. In fact if the text had ONLY said "Faith without works is useless" we could easily reconcile it with "Justified by faith wihtout the works of the law".

But when it comes to the subject of - Justification - and it says "you seen then that a man is justified by Works and NOT by faith alone"...

it speaks specifically of the concept of Justification.



Paul bears this out when he says the just shall live BY faith. Faith is the live giving element which produces the action. No faith, no life. If there is no life (works/action) present then there is no faith. It is dead.

James says in effect; you say you have fatih? Prove it.

James uses Abraham as a perfect example because prior to Abraham offering Isaac, the Scripture says Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed to him. This righteousness came about without works, but his justification came about when his faith PRODUCED action which demonstrated that indeed Abraham did indeed believe God.


Ok -- that is certainly using the details in the text. Are you really saying that as a Believer Abraham was NOT justified UNTIL some great work was done -- added -- for example offering up his only son as a human sacrifice??

If so - how do you reconcile that with "justified by faith APART from the works of the Law" in Romans 3??


What we encounter when comparing Paul with James is as JJump indicated. TWO contexts for the word justification. Never define Biblical word usage outside of CONTEXT.


Ok - please detail the "two contexts" for the term Justification.

J.J has stated a context for "saved while lost" for those who miss out on the millenial kingdom (soul lost) while spirit still saved. His argument is that the faith that is seen to fail in James 2 is the faith of saints who ARE eternally saved "anyway" - but their souls are lost.

Is that your "2nd context"??


You get into a big 'ol mees that way as evidenced by the many false teachers, i.e. SDA, LDS, JW, etc.

SBC, RCC, ... terms that say nothing about truth vs error - they are just shorthand for denominational titles.

It is only in looking INTO the doctrinal statements that you actually "prove" something.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Now that I have you in a sane moment --

Let's review where we are going with this idea of two contexts for Justification -- the two justifications.

The First kind of Justification:

Romans 5:1 Having BEEN Justified we HAVE peace with God through Christ
Rom 3:28 "we maintain that a man is justified by faith APART from the works of the law".

In this kind of justification -- the salvation state "changes". The lost become saved. The wicked are "born again" - the "good tree" of Matt 7 is "created" via the "New Birth" John 3 - "New Creation" 2Cor 5 process promised in the Gospel. The Person becomes saved.

To reject this - to NOT take part in this justification - is to remain lost.

The Second Kind of Justification

"you see then that a man is justified by Works and not by faith alone" -

this is the kind of justification we are discussing in James 2.

It Merely demonstrates the fact of the first Justification and does not change the state of the person - because the person is already saved.

And if it merely "demonstrates the fact of the first Justification" -- then "By definition" NOT having it - demonstrates the fact that the person does not HAVE the first justification to start with.

In other words it is an "objective" emperical - discoverable (demonstratable by God) fact according to Christ in Matt 7 as HE compares "good trees" to "bad trees" using the SAME principle of truth that we see in James 2.

In Job 1 God STARTS by saying that Job is righteous - but then He has to SHOW that what He stated as fact in the very start - is observable - is discoverable - can be SEEN to be fact.

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

Still -- I have to admit that the "Saved while lost" idea is not coming out in James 2 --

"Can that faith save him? No but that does not matter because while lost he is saved anyway" seems to be the wording your are looking for in the text. But I do not find it.
Bob that's because you are still trying to get the book of James to fit into a context that it is not speaking to. James is not speaking of eternal salvation.

James is speaking to eternally saved individual, so that is not even in the picture. As long as you try to keep eternal salvation as part of the discussion James is not going to make sense, because that's not what he's talking about.

The audience that he is speaking to is eternally saved, and he is addressing something that is beyond that salvation.

Given that James claims that the demons are to be included in this group of beings that know the right facts (believe and tremble) but show no inclination to actually live a life of obedience -- is it your claim that they too are "saved while being lost"??

Certainly they do fit the mold of at one time being IN the family of God.
Salvation is not available for the demons, so it is a moot point to try to wrangle them into the conversation.

Bottom line is if we try to make James to be about eternal salvation then mistakes are going to be made and contradictions are going to arise. We have to keep James in the context that was originally given if we are going to fully understand what the Holy Spirit is trying to reveal to us through this book.

[webdog]

James 2:17-26 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 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 works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

If a person were to approach this passage honestly it would be an easy thing to figure out.
Notice what James says in the last sentence of the passage. The body without the spirit is dead. Think about it. You are alive and animated. Why? Your spirit is still IN you. Your spirit is what gives life to your body and proves you are alive.
Then notice his conclusion. Even so...faith without works is dead. Just like your pysical body without a spriit can do nothing and is useless, EVEN SO...your faith is useless without SOMETHING that proves it is alive.

Paul bears this out when he says the just shall live BY faith. Faith is the live giving element which produces the action. No faith, no life. If there is no life (works/action) present then there is no faith. It is dead.

James says in effect; you say you have fatih? Prove it.

James uses Abraham as a perfect example because prior to Abraham offering Isaac, the Scripture says Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed to him. This righteousness came about without works, but his justification came about when his faith PRODUCED action which demonstrated that indeed Abraham did indeed believe God. Abraham said: knowing he was going to sacrifice his son, kill and burn him,: "wait here while I and the lad worship and WE will return". Abraham believed God would fulfill his promise of a great nation coming from Isaac. He had FAITH in that promise and even though he had to kill the son of promise he believed God would keep his promise. The action Abraham took is what justified his faith in God.

What we encounter when comparing Paul with James is as JJump indicated. TWO contexts for the word justification. Never define Biblical word usage outside of CONTEXT. You get into a big 'ol mees that way as evidenced by the many false teachers, i.e. SDA, LDS, JW, etc.
Thank you for some correct exegesis and logic. You hit the nail on the head. A "dead" faith without works is like a "dead" car without a battery. The car is still a car, and faith is still faith, but neither are "runnning". It does NOT speak of losing your salvation or Millenial Exclusion. Reading those two arguments is like watching a football player and basketball player explaing the rules of hockey. They're in the wrong game.

[J. Jump]

av1611jim I have a question for you. It seems that there are a couple of folks here that have jumped on the bandwagon of support for what you have said. However, these two are not even in agreement as to what you have said as far as I can tell :)

So would you mind clarifying your post some for us. From your post are you saying that a person with a dead faith was never saved in the first place? Are you saying that a person with a dead faith is still saved?

A followup question . . . if you believe that a person is eternally saved, but has a dead faith what does that look like? What are the results of having a life lived with dead (non-fruit producing) faith?

You say that James is telling a person of faith that if they have faith to prove it. What type of faith are they supposed to be proving? Are they supposed to prove their faith in the substitutionary death and shed blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, or are they supposed to prove their faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Annointed King?

I agree with the statement you made, but am looking for some clarification on what you mean by it.

Thanks in advance for your time and clarification.

[tragic_pizza]

I don't claim that there is a problem between Justification and sanctification. I claim that even though we come to James 2 with a certain understanding of "Justification by faith without the works of the Law" from Romans 3... AND we have the view of "Saved by grace through faith not of works" from Eph 2 --

We still have to work on something that is "exegetically correct" -- and honest - in terms of the text in James 2 "Justified by WORKS and NOT by Faith alone".

We need to take a hard look at the text that is honest and above board - that fully embraces each inconvenient detail IN the text without simply glossing over it or worse - "rewriting it" to say the OPPOSITE of what it says.

My example given in the OP shows a solution that simply rewrites the text using exact contradictions to the language used IN the text. My suggestion is that we avoid that approach and try something more honest to the text of scripture even though we do come to it with a prior bias.

In Christ,

BobOK, read "Christian Doctrine" by Shirley Guthrie, or "Basic Christian Doctrine" by John Leith, who cover the subject exhaustively.

[BobRyan]

Many on this board - including me - accept that in the church -- and in the group of people who "read the Bible" there is both the saved and the lost.

And in that group some have faith that is living - and others just pretend -- so no faith at all.

Saved by grace through FAITH speaks of real faith -- not fake faith.

Quote:Bob said
Still -- I have to admit that the "Saved while lost" idea is not coming out in James 2 --

"Can that faith save him? No but that does not matter because while lost he is saved anyway" seems to be the wording your are looking for in the text. But I do not find it.
However J.J you seem to assume that ALL are saved...

J Jump

Bob that's because you are still trying to get the book of James to fit into a context that it is not speaking to. James is not speaking of eternal salvation.

James is speaking to eternally saved individual, so that is not even in the picture. As long as you try to keep eternal salvation as part of the discussion James is not going to make sense, because that's not what he's talking about.

The audience that he is speaking to is eternally saved, and he is addressing something that is beyond that salvation.

Where do we see that James thinks everyone in church is "saved" or that all readers of scripture are "saved"??

In the failing examples that he gives in James 2 -- he includes demons. How can we possibly think that he only considers the case of the saved??

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

Bob you are starting to get off track now. Nowhere did I say that everyone that attends a church is saved. Nor did I ever say that everyone who had picked up a Bible and read it is saved. Nor did I say that James said either of those two things.

If our conversation is going to be productive at all you are going to have to stick with what I say not put words in my mouth.

What I said was the folks that James was addressing in his book were saved individuals.

The problem is that 21st century people are looking at Scripture through 21st century glasses. We have a LOT of people that attend churches in the church building these days. And yes there are unsaved folks that attend those meetings. But just because that is true today doesn't mean that is the way that the Bible speaks to matters.

The Bible speaks to saved folks. The Bible has very little to say to unsaved folks. And the reason being is that the Bible is a Spiritual book and can not be understood by the spiritually dead.

The ONLY message that an unsaved person can understand is that Jesus Christ died and shed His blood on their behalf a sinner. And until they believe that they will remain in a spiritually dead condition and the Bible will remain a closed book to them.

For the vast majority of Scripture it is a book to the saved about matters after the moment of salvation.

As far as I can tell through Scripture that when the "church" is spoken of it is speaking about saved individuals that are a part of the body, it is not speaking of the "building" where unsaved and saved folks gather.

[BobRyan]

Bob you are starting to get off track now. Nowhere did I say that everyone that attends a church is saved. Nor did I ever say that everyone who had picked up a Bible and read it is saved. Nor did I say that James said either of those two things.

That is a good starting point - because we all agree to it.

in that case the failing examples of James 2 (a group in which demons are members) has easily got to be identified with the lost.

Particularly when you consider "by grace you are saved through faith" and we are "justified by faith apart from the works of the law".. ALL require REAL living faith.

To argue for ANOTHER salvation "apart from real faith" -- in fact "apart from faith at all" is to invent a kind of salvation not even mentioned in James 2. You may argue that you "believe in it anyway" and even that you found some other text that leads you to believe in "justified without real faith at all" but you have to admit that you did not find that teaching in James 2. In fact I doubt that you found it in James at all. Which is the first rule for context and good exegesis - notice how the author uses the subject..

James argues that the kind of faith that has no works is the faith of demons -- it is dead faith. Suppose a man comes along saying "I believe as the demons believe and nothing more" is that "saving faith" ?? is that the grounds for the Gospel promise "saved by grace through faith"?? James seems to argue that such faith is no faith at all. Surely that is a fair and reasonable description of the lost. Especially since we agree that not everyone in church is saved and not everyone reading the Bible is saved.


in Christ,

Bob

[Darron Steele]

This thread is for those who would agree with me that you are saved by grace through faith alone - not of works.

Those who agree that at the moment of salvation - the New Birth, you are justified before God.

Those who agree that sanctification is a process that begins at the moment of justification and continues on all through the rest of the life of the Christian.

-----------------

Ok so to that group I say -- look at James 2
24"you see then that man is justified by works and NOT by faith alone"

Now here is my question for the group -- will you choose Bible Butchery instead of exegesis when confronted with this text?

Perhaps a bit MORE of James 2 just so we are perfectly clear on this exercise....

21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works[/b] when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?
22 You see that faith was working with his works[b/], and as a result of the [B][B]works, faith was perfected;
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.
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.
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?

Now just so we are very very clear -- lets give an example of "Bible butchery" as a non-solution to the problem.

Example:



Now come on people - here is a case where we actually agree on the "by faith alone and NOT by works" details for justification - so no need for you to be afraid on this one.

My point here is that IF we can ever get Christians to stop butchering texts that don't please them as "the only solution" to such problems - we go a long way to restoring a model for discovering true Bible doctrine.

So let's start with this common ground problem where in fact we are in agreement in terms the bias we BRING TO THE TEXT -- now find a solution without butchering it..

In Christ,

Bob
I tend to put this passage alongside such classics as

Romans 4:5 “And to the one| who does not work, but believes on him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”
--ESV|Campbell et al, Living Oracles, page 290.

Ephesians 2:8-10 “for by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may |boast hym selfe. For |in Christ Jesus, God made us new people| for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (ESV|BishB|ICB|ESV).

Some like to place James 2 against these latter passages to negate them. I believe in the Baptist slogan "Compare Scripture with Scripture." James 2 describes the faith that saves someone. A person who has the type of faith that would work is saved the moment s/he has it. James 2 addresses people who live after conversion, which is most of us. Our faith is not biblical faith if it does not go to work.

Paul himself clarifies this: Galatians 5:6 “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, |but only | the kind of faith that works through love” (NASB|ESV|ICB).

[BobRyan]

The point in the OP is not to "negate Romans 3 with James 2" rather the point is to RETAIN a proper view of Eph 2 and Romans 3 and STILL not butcher the text of James 2.

That means instead of ignoring the words in James 2 - we have to actually use them.

Many people say "When I open the Bible to James 2 -- I simply read Romans 3 instead that says we are justified by faith apart from the works of the Law".

But that is not a rendering of James 2 at all - it is just a confession about not being able to deal with what it says.

My argument is that Romans 3 is to be accepted without butchering it for the sake of James 2 ... and James 2 must be accepted without butchering it for Romans 3.

Jim (as much as I don't like his demoninational bashing inserts of non-proofs) is on the right track with the two justifications.

Hence my post - to take this solution to the next steps -
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=946181&postcount=27

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

That is a good starting point - because we all agree to it.

in that case the failing examples of James 2 (a group in which demons are members) has easily got to be identified with the lost.

Particularly when you consider "by grace you are saved through faith" and we are "justified by faith apart from the works of the law".. ALL require REAL living faith.

To argue for ANOTHER salvation "apart from real faith" -- in fact "apart from faith at all" is to invent a kind of salvation not even mentioned in James 2. You may argue that you "believe in it anyway" and even that you found some other text that leads you to believe in "justified without real faith at all" but you have to admit that you did not find that teaching in James 2. In fact I doubt that you found it in James at all. Which is the first rule for context and good exegesis - notice how the author uses the subject..

James argues that the kind of faith that has no works is the faith of demons -- it is dead faith. Suppose a man comes along saying "I believe as the demons believe and nothing more" is that "saving faith" ?? is that the grounds for the Gospel promise "saved by grace through faith"?? James seems to argue that such faith is no faith at all. Surely that is a fair and reasonable description of the lost. Especially since we agree that not everyone in church is saved and not everyone reading the Bible is saved.
Bob the problem that you continue to have is that you are trying to mix contexts. As long as you try to do that you are going to have problems. You are talking about James in the context of eternal salvation, but that's not the context of James. So most of the points you are trying to make above are moot. They have no relevance to the text in question, because you are asking questions of the text that are not being discussed.

But to answer one of your questions: Suppose a man comes along saying "I believe as the demons believe and nothing more" is that "saving faith" ??
To answer this we need to know something about "a man." Is this man saved by grace through faith? Or are you asking about this man in an eternal sense?

If you are asking in an eternal sense then the answer is no, because believing that God is One God is not the faith that saves a person for eternity. It is believing in the death and shed blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, Who died in their place a sinner.

So no that man's faith would not save him.

Now if that man has already been saved by grace through faith and the question is if a man believes the way the demons do will that saved him. Again the answer to that question is no it will not. Because as James tells us just because a person believes the right things in regard to Jesus as the Christ that does not save them. That faith must result in obedience, faithfulness and cause one to be an overcomer just as He overcame.

Faith alone does not save a person. But the unsaved person is not even in view in that second question.

[BobRyan]

Bob said

That is a good starting point - because we all agree to it.

in that case the failing examples of James 2 (a group in which demons are members) has easily got to be identified with the lost.

Particularly when you consider "by grace you are saved through faith" and we are "justified by faith apart from the works of the law".. ALL require REAL living faith.

To argue for ANOTHER salvation "apart from real faith" -- in fact "apart from faith at all" is to invent a kind of salvation not even mentioned in James 2. You may argue that you "believe in it anyway" and even that you found some other text that leads you to believe in "justified without real faith at all" but you have to admit that you did not find that teaching in James 2. In fact I doubt that you found it in James at all. Which is the first rule for context and good exegesis - notice how the author uses the subject..

James argues that the kind of faith that has no works is the faith of demons -- it is dead faith. Suppose a man comes along saying "I believe as the demons believe and nothing more" is that "saving faith" ?? is that the grounds for the Gospel promise "saved by grace through faith"?? James seems to argue that such faith is no faith at all. Surely that is a fair and reasonable description of the lost. Especially since we agree that not everyone in church is saved and not everyone reading the Bible is saved.
J.J
Bob the problem that you continue to have is that you are trying to mix contexts. As long as you try to do that you are going to have problems. You are talking about James in the context of eternal salvation, but that's not the context of James. So most of the points you are trying to make above are moot. They have no relevance to the text in question, because you are asking questions of the text that are not being discussed.

I am not the one saying that demons on in that group - James is.

You are the one insisting that this group can ONLY include the saved -- and each time I point out that the text does not say that - and that the text SHOWS demons to be in the failing group - you respond as if James had not said it.

You are coming to the text with a pre-bias that James can not be talking about the lost even in his failed examples that include demons. But you never show that the text itself supports you in that assumption. You simply complain that I am not taking the same pre-bias to the text and also ignoring James' statement about demons being examples of the failed-faith non-faith group.

How is that "proving" something from the text for your argument?

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

J.J said

But to answer one of your questions:
Quote:
Suppose a man comes along saying "I believe as the demons believe and nothing more" is that "saving faith" ??
To answer this we need to know something about "a man." Is this man saved by grace through faith? Or are you asking about this man in an eternal sense?



According to James - this is not valid faith -- so he can ONLY be at BEST "saved by grace through non-faith" -- a principle for which we have no bible support.

Which means that the non-faith of demons is still "no faith" and is not a form of any promise at all in the Gospels.


Now if that man has already been saved by grace through faith and the question is if a man believes the way the demons do will that saved him. Again the answer to that question is no it will not. Because as James tells us just because a person believes the right things in regard to Jesus as the Christ that does not save them. That faith must result in obedience, faithfulness and cause one to be an overcomer just as He overcame.

Faith alone does not save a person.


So he remains unsaved according to your view .

But then innexplicably you add -


But the unsaved person is not even in view in that second question.

[J. Jump]

I am not the one saying that demons on in that group - James is.
Bob I don't have a problem with James talking about the demons. Again I have never stated that. I have stated that you are putting far more emphasis than what is needed on the demons being a part of James' conversation.

You are the one insisting that this group can ONLY include the saved
Actually Bob the text does say that the people he was addressing were saved. James 1 makes that crystal clear.

-- and each time I point out that the text does not say that - and that the text SHOWS demons to be in the failing group - you respond as if James had not said it.
Again James is dealing with a faith that is outside of eternal saving faith, so I respond because your points are moot regarding the demons. James is dealing with something outside of eternal saving faith. And until you come to the text seeing something other than eternal saving faith then your points will be moot no matter what you say.

You are coming to the text with a pre-bias that James can not be talking about the lost even in his failed examples that include demons.
Actually I think James is dealing with lostness. It's just that you and I differ on what lostness is. You equate lost with unsaved, while I believe Scripture equates lost in a different way. So when you see lost you automatically assume the context is eternal salvation, but James 1 clearly shows us that that is not the case, so lost must then mean something other than unsaved. Again we have discussed this more in our PMs, so I'll just leave it at that.

But you never show that the text itself supports you in that assumption. You simply complain that I am not taking the same pre-bias to the text and also ignoring James' statement about demons being examples of the failed-faith non-faith group.
Bob again the same exact thing could be said of you. So you fail to prove anything. I could just as easily say But you never show that the text itself supports your assumption that lost equals unsaved. You simply right me off as making assertions, but you come to the text with a pre-bias and don't like it that I don't buy into your pre-bias.

See Bob that doesn't prove anything.

I think it is time to exit our conversations, because they are becoming pointless. Now I guess you can claim like Steaver that you win by default if you want to, but I don't think going further is going to do anything. We are stuck on the first step and there is no point in going to step two with step one undone.

[bound]

I just wanted to pop in and offer a congratz to everyone in this thread. I'm following along and frankly I'm enjoying the challenging thoughts everyone is offering. :thumbs:

This is how topics should be discussed. God Bless. :applause:

Peace Guys.

[BobRyan]

Bob I don't have a problem with James talking about the demons. Again I have never stated that. I have stated that you are putting far more emphasis than what is needed on the demons being a part of James' conversation.


The failing case is seen in James 2 in living color. Failing faith "does not save" it is in fact "the faith of demons".

Your point is "it does not need to be saving faith - because they are already saved who have the faith of demons".

And that - is the point that has to be proven rather than merely asserted. How in the world do you expect it to be accepted without some kind of proof from scripture?

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

James 2
15 If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food,
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?
17 Even so ]faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.[/b]
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.''
19 You believe that God is one. You do well; the ]demons also believe, and shudder.[/b]
20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?


James has addressed the issue of “faith that can NOT save” and has shown that this faith that can not save is – “dead faith” is “useless faith”. He points out that it is the same kind of faith demons have. So when the Bible says “By grace are you saved through FAITH” is it talking about dead faith that can not save? Some conclude that it is – others that it is not.

It is left as an exercise for the reader in this case.

James calls the faith of demons – claimed by many today - “dead faith” – Paul does not claim “By grace your are saved by dead faith without works”. And so Paul and James are in fact in perfect agreement. Those who would preach “peace and safety” to people who in fact have “dead faith” – are saying to them “yes well dead faith maybe – but still saved by grace through dead useless faith – so that is just so much MORE heaven for you my friend”

My argument is that to tell those with dead faith -- i.e the faith of demons -- that they are saved is to preach "peace and safety" to the lost. Telling them that all is well - go back to sleep -- even while the Holy Spirit is convicting them of sin and righteousness and judgment.

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

The failing case is seen in James 2 in living color. Failing faith "does not save" it is in fact "the faith of demons".
Bob talk about making an assertion. Dead faith is not equated to the faith of demons. You are making that connection not the text.

Your point is "it does not need to be saving faith - because they are already saved who have the faith of demons".
Why do you insist on putting words in my mouth Bob? I have never said this. I haven't even implied this. I said the audience of James' letter was saved individuals. James 1 makes this abundantly clear. So the context of James is NOT eternal salvation. So James chapter 2 is obviously talking about being saved from something that is different that what a person is saved from at the moment of by grace through faith.

And that - is the point that has to be proven rather than merely asserted. How in the world do you expect it to be accepted without some kind of proof from scripture?
Bob I have give you all kinds of proof from Scripture. You just don't like what it is saying so you keep trying to work your way around it. It is what it is and it says what it says, so we can either accept it even though it may not be what we have always believed or what our favorite Bible teacher has taught us, but Scripture says what it says and we have to accept it for that.

James has addressed the issue of “faith that can NOT save” and has shown that this faith that can not save is – “dead faith” is “useless faith”.
Agreed.

He points out that it is the same kind of faith demons have.
I would agree that demons' faith is useless. It does them no good to believe God is one God.

So when the Bible says “By grace are you saved through FAITH” is it talking about dead faith that can not save? Some conclude that it is – others that it is not.
This is where you start walking down the Bob trail instead of Scripture. The faith that is in view in James is not the same faith that is in view in Ephesians 2. That is the point that I have been trying to get you to see. Ephesians is talking about eternal saving faith. James is talking about a present faith that is beyond eternal saving faith. You are mixing contexts. While you are comparing Scripture with Scripture you are actually pitting Scripture against Scripture because you are taking a passage that is talking about apples and you are comparing it with a Scripture that is talking about oranges.

James calls the faith of demons – claimed by many today - “dead faith” – Paul does not claim “By grace your are saved by dead faith without works”. And so Paul and James are in fact in perfect agreement.
They aren't in agreement in these two passages that you are using because they aren't talking about the same faith. Therefore they are not to be compared to each other. However Paul does agree with James, because he preaches the same message that works are to follow after salvation and if they don't then there will be consquences both here in this life and the age to come. So in that respect yes they are in agreement.

Those who would preach “peace and safety” to people who in fact have “dead faith” – are saying to them “yes well dead faith maybe – but still saved by grace through dead useless faith – so that is just so much MORE heaven for you my friend”
Well I do agree that there are Christians that do preach what you have advocated, but I do not agree with it, because it is just as untrue as what you are selling wtih all due respect. That message is preached to the peril of those that hear and believe. There will be consequences for the disobedient, unfaithful, non-overcoming Christian and it will be more than simply losing a reward or rewards that might have been. And unfortunately we can see the fruits of the preaching of peace and safety. We now have a church that is sick, dying, naked and full of shame, but yet it says that it is just the opposite.

My argument is that to tell those with dead faith -- i.e the faith of demons -- that they are saved is to preach "peace and safety" to the lost.
But your argument is moot because you are saying that dead faith is equal to unsaved in an eternal sense and that's not what the text says. It is preaching peace and safety to the lost, but not in an eternal sense. The Bible clearly teaches that eternal salvation is a one-time event not a life long process. And what you are contending for is a life long process that at the end if you have believed the right thing and done the right things you will be saved. But that's just not what the Bible teaches.

Telling them that all is well - go back to sleep -- even while the Holy Spirit is convicting them of sin and righteousness and judgment.
I would agree with this point. It is time Christians woke up from their slumber or that day is going to overtake them like a thief in the night.

Bob I say this with all due respect. I applaud you for seeing the "problems" of Christendom. However I think you have over corrected in trying to preach against them just as I believe Luther went too far when he saw a works-based salvation message back in the day.

It's good to see the problem, but we have to let Scripture answer the problem not overcorrect what Scripture says.

[av1611jim]

av1611jim I have a question for you. It seems that there are a couple of folks here that have jumped on the bandwagon of support for what you have said. However, these two are not even in agreement as to what you have said as far as I can tell :)

So would you mind clarifying your post some for us. From your post are you saying that a person with a dead faith was never saved in the first place? Are you saying that a person with a dead faith is still saved?

A followup question . . . if you believe that a person is eternally saved, but has a dead faith what does that look like? What are the results of having a life lived with dead (non-fruit producing) faith?

You say that James is telling a person of faith that if they have faith to prove it. What type of faith are they supposed to be proving? Are they supposed to prove their faith in the substitutionary death and shed blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, or are they supposed to prove their faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Annointed King?

I agree with the statement you made, but am looking for some clarification on what you mean by it.

Thanks in advance for your time and clarification.

Frankly I thought my comments were quite clear. But in order to answer your follow-up questions we need to look elsewhere since James does not address those questions. And we really should stay on topic according to the OP. This is about a particular passage in James.

James is talking about the kind of faith which PROFITS a man. Eternal salvation cannot be said to be to our profit. It is a debt we owe which was paid by Christ. Debt and profit are diametrically opposed to one another, are they not? Therefore; faith which is spoken of by Paul in Ephesians (2:8-9) has debt as its basis. But James here in 2:14 speaks of the kind of faith which brings profit. And THAT is the kind of faith James is addressing. The kind of faith which will bring us profit. So then what exactly is this profit-faith which we are supposed to demonstrate and why? We have to go all the way to James 5 to get the answer for that one.

James 5:7-8 Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain. Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.

Profit faith is the kind which DOES something. Debt faith is the kind which believes something/Someone.

THE COMING OF THE LORD!!! Now that begs the question. Why should we DO all the things James tells believers to do since Jesus is coming? We need to go to other Scriptures for that one also. But let me paraphrase. Behold He cometh with ten thousands of His saints and His reward is with Him. Reward! We must ALL stand before the Judgment seat of Christ. Be not ashamed at His coming. Can 'dead faith" save a man from this? No! A thousand times no! But we are talking about believers! So obviously if he is at the JSOC then he IS A SAVED MAN is he not? Therefore this man must DO something as James uses his entire letter to tell us. One must read the entire letter. James is advising his readers to live a Christan life because the coming of the LORD draweth nigh.

Like I said. Ya take something out of context and you end up with a mess. As evidenced by the ---church and the ---church and the ---church. (happy Bob R? Didn't mention any one by name just for you.)

Paul tells us the same thing in many of his letters also. He just doesn't used the same words all in the same place. Unfortunately (or Providentially) James did. So we have folks wresting the Scriptures to their own destruction, while others are wise and study to shew themselves approved.

Bottom line? Jesus is coming soon so you had better be LIVING like it since you will stand before Him and give account for the gift He has given you and IF you have wasted it or it has not produced fruit then you will not be saved from the Law of Sowing and Reaping which all men are bound by. Obviously if you are at the Judgment Seat of Christ and not at the Great White Throne then you must have placed you debt-faith in Him at some point in you life. But He is interested in your profit-faith at that time. Don't believe it? Read the word picture He gave us in Matt 25.

See? See? I TOLD you we would have to go to other Scriptures for the WHOLE truth. James is not isolated from Scripture. His letter is PART of the WHOLE!!!

[J. Jump]

AMEN Brother Jim!

[BobRyan]

James is talking about the kind of faith which PROFITS a man. Eternal salvation cannot be said to be to our profit. It is a debt we owe which was paid by Christ. Debt and profit are diametrically opposed to one another, are they not? Therefore; faith which is spoken of by Paul in Ephesians (2:8-9) has debt as its basis. But James here in 2:14 speaks of the kind of faith which brings profit. And THAT is the kind of faith James is addressing. The kind of faith which will bring us profit. So then what exactly is this profit-faith which we are supposed to demonstrate and why? We have to go all the way to James 5 to get the answer for that one.

ONE Faith.

ONE Lord

ONE baptism

TWO contexts for Justification.

but that is as far as you can take it from Scripture.

In Christ,

Bob

[Dustin]

I decided to edit this post.

[BobRyan]

My point is "Can that faith SAVE" is an explicit reference to salvation. It is the SAME faith that ACCEPTS Christ - that WALKS in Christ.

"AS you have RECEIVED Christ Jesus so WALK in him" Col 2.

John states this as well as 1John 2 "The one that SAYS He knows Christ ought to also to WALK in him" and if he does not then the person who SAYS he knows Christ "is lying" according to John.

So while it is true that JUSTIFICATION PAST (as we see in Romans 5:1) is different from the "WILL BE Justified" future context of Romans 2:13 and James 2 "Justified by works and not by faith alone" -- it is still the SAME person who was already saved "past tense" in "Justification past".

The salvation state does not change simply because the objective form of Justification SHOWS that you are saved.

But the point some are arguing is that the objective form of justification (the one referenced in James 2) can say you are NOT saved while the past form still insists that you are... something that seems to be denied in James 2 "can that faith save him" and Christ denies it in Matt 7 "Not everyone who SAYS Lord Lord" and John denies it in 1John 2 saying that such a person is "lying".

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

Bob how many times does it have to be said James is not speaking of eternal saving faith. That is not the context. You are wrestling James out of the context that he intended to try and "prove" "your" doctrine to be true.

If James is talking about eternal saving faith then that contradicts what some of the rest of Scripture says about eternal saving faith. Because other Scripture says it is a one-time event that once it is complete it is complete forever without change. But James says that this faith is a lifetime thing that can change, so it becomes a process.

So we are only left with one option and that is this is a faith that is mixed with works that produces the salvation of the soul, not eternal salvation. To see it any other way is to introduce unexplainable contradictions that do not belong in the Word of God.

It really is that simple.

[av1611jim]

Bob how many times does it have to be said James is not speaking of eternal saving faith. That is not the context. You are wrestling James out of the context that he intended to try and "prove" "your" doctrine to be true.

If James is talking about eternal saving faith then that contradicts what some of the rest of Scripture says about eternal saving faith. Because other Scripture says it is a one-time event that once it is complete it is complete forever without change. But James says that this faith is a lifetime thing that can change, so it becomes a process.

So we are only left with one option and that is this is a faith that is mixed with works that produces the salvation of the soul, not eternal salvation. To see it any other way is to introduce unexplainable contradictions that do not belong in the Word of God.

It really is that simple.

I might add that in order for Bob ryan to be correct with his interpretation then he would have to toss all of 1 John out the window. Particularly THIS passage:

1 John 5:13-15 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may KNOW that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.

Present possession. We HAVE eternal life. No works can change it otherwise it is NOT eternal to begin with. It was only temporary.

James is not addressing salvation in eternity. He is addressing salvation at the coming of Christ. Salvation from what then? From being ashamed at His coming. From receiving for the bad done in the body. From being a castaway. From losing your soul. From having a portion WITH the hypocrites. From being beaten and cast into prison. From having that which you have taken and given to another.

You all recognize these things. You have read them yourselves. Now, just understand them.
The entire book of James is about HOW to live a Christian life BECAUSE the Lord's coming is near. And you should not be ashamed at His coming.

Who is ashamed? A child who has displeased his parent maybe? A child who has done wrong and is facing his parent and expecting correction maybe? Just maybe?

[BobRyan]

I might add that in order for Bob ryan to be correct with his interpretation then he would have to toss all of 1 John out the window. Particularly THIS passage:

In order for me to be incorrect I would have to toss all of 1 John out the window.

]1John 2
3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
4 The one who says, "" I have come to know Him,'' and ]does not keep His commandments, is a liar[/b], and the truth is not in him;
5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:
6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

For my view to be wrong someone would need to eisegete the idea of "lying but saved" in 1John 2.

Something that John does not support at all.


For my view to be wrong someone would need to eisegete the idea of
"the good tree with wicked fruit" in Matt 7 -- something Christ flatly denies.

To be wrong someone would need to "invent" the idea of "faith that does not save -- that SAVES anyway" in James 2.



1 John 5:13-15 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may KNOW that ye have eternal life,


Indeed "THESE THINGS" which include 1John 2 telling us that the one who CLAIMS to know Christ is in fact lying if they do not WALK as Christ walked.

An inconvenient detail in the text of 1John to be sure -- but one worth paying attention to.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

.
James is not addressing salvation in eternity. He is addressing salvation at the coming of Christ.

nothing in all of scripture supporte the wild conjecture "saved but lost". There is no scripture at all in support of such self-conflicted contradictory suppositions.

When James speaks of "salvation" he "really means it". He does not mean to say that "demons are lost but still saved". He does not mean that "faith that can not save SAVES ANYWAY".

When we say "by faith are you SAVED through faith " we are speaking of the right view of faith - the one that stands up to the rule of Christ in Matt 7 and does as HE predicts it will do.

For as Scripture says
Col 2
4 I say this so that no one will delude you with persuasive argument.
5 For even though I am absent in body, nevertheless I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good discipline and the stability of your faith in Christ.
6 Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him,

Yet how often are many deluded by persuasive argument that we do NOT walk in Christ in faith JUST AS we receieved Him - rather we are "lost but saved" in strict violation of the text.

Such a deception -- so Paul must repeatedly urge throughout the NT "be not deceived".

1Cor 6
7 Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?
8 On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.

9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers,will inherit the kingdom of God.
11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.


You have to ask yourself who kept "deceiving them" about the idea that rebellion would welcomed in Gospel salvation.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Bob how many times does it have to be said James is not speaking of eternal saving faith.

Repeating a point of conjecture does not make it appear suddenly "in" the text.

Here is what James 2 says

James 2
17 Even so ]faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.[/B]
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.''
19 You believe that God is one. You do well; the ]demons also believe, and shudder.[/B]
20 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?

hmm "dead faith" and "foolish to think it is anything but useless"

this is not "saved by grace through useless faith" though some seem to think of it that way.

James -

If James is talking about eternal saving faith then that contradicts what some of the rest of Scripture says about eternal saving faith. Because other Scripture says it is a one-time event that once it is complete it is complete forever without change.

Actually no text says that.

But the problem is if you insert a false idea into some other text -- then come to this one where you admit "it is not here" and insert it here "too" because of the insert made to other texts - it is eisegesis that builds flaw built upon flaw.

#1. You should not insert prior bias into James 2 even if it were correct. you have to let James 2 "speak" and without wrenching it for some other goal.

#2. There is no text that states "OSAS" not in all of scripture so why stand James 2 on it's head?

In Christ,

Bob

[J. Jump]

Repeating a point of conjecture does not make it appear suddenly "in" the text.
And neither does isolating Scripture from other Scripture prove your point. But unfortunately you don't stop there you try to say that you compare Scripture with Scripture, but you compare a Scripture that is talking about apples and one that is talking about oranges and then you say see I am right. But that doesn't make you right either.

Let me give you an example and then we truly have come to an end in productive conversation (because you have resorted back to your read and green cutouts :) ).

hmm "dead faith" and "foolish to think it is anything but useless"

this is not "saved by grace through useless faith" though some seem to think of it that way.
You are comparing eternal saving faith to sanctifiying faith. They are not the same thing. James talks about a faith that works, but Paul talks about grace through faith apart from works. Those two texts are not comparable, because they aren't talking about the same thing.

One says you must have works and the other says that it is apart from works. Try as you might there is NO WAY to make those verses talk about the same thing.

But what you are doing is just seeing the word faith and saying ah well that text has faith and this text has faith they must be talking about the same thing. That's mixing contexts. Context is king, and you have just thrown it into the garbage heap.

If James is talking about eternal saving faith then that contradicts what some of the rest of Scripture says about eternal saving faith. Because other Scripture says it is a one-time event that once it is complete it is complete forever without change.

Bob - Actually no text says that.
Actually Ephesians 2:8-9 does (says you have been saved - completed action) and so does Acts 16:30-31. It says believe (aorist tense) and you will be saved. That doesn't mean believe now and continue to believe the rest of your life and you will be saved at the end of the journey. It means believe right now and you will be saved.

But the problem is if you insert a false idea into some other text -- then come to this one where you admit "it is not here" and insert it here "too" because of the insert made to other texts - it is eisegesis that builds flaw built upon flaw.
Bob the only false idea being imposed onto a text is you saying that James is talking about eternal saving faith. He tells us in the first chapter that he is talking to folks that are already saved. How can it be more simple to see?

#1. You should not insert prior bias into James 2 even if it were correct.
Bob comparing like Scripture with like Scripture is not inserting a bias into James 2. Knowing the difference between eternal saving faith and sanctifying faith is not iserting a bias into Scripture. It is merely allowing the context of the text tell us what the words mean instead of imposing our own definitions onto words to get them to mean what we want them to mean.

#2. There is no text that states "OSAS" not in all of scripture so why stand James 2 on it's head?
Bob that's just not true. Ephesians 2:8-9 tells us that. It says you have been saved. The langauge used there is a perfect tense, which means the action has been completed in the past and is once and for all never needing to be repeated. Acts 16:30-31 says believe and you will be saved. It doesn't say believe and then you'll be saved until you stop believing or until you commit unrepentant adultery or murder or lie too many times or whatever scenario you want to throw into the mix.

Scripture is very plain and very clear that once you are saved there is NOTHING that is going to change that. NOTHING. Period.

[av1611jim]

In order for me to be incorrect I would have to toss all of 1 John out the window.

]1John 2
3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
4 The one who says, "" I have come to know Him,'' and ]does not keep His commandments, is a liar[/b], and the truth is not in him;
5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:
6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

For my view to be wrong someone would need to eisegete the idea of "lying but saved" in 1John 2.

Something that John does not support at all.


For my view to be wrong someone would need to eisegete the idea of
"the good tree with wicked fruit" in Matt 7 -- something Christ flatly denies.

To be wrong someone would need to "invent" the idea of "faith that does not save -- that SAVES anyway" in James 2.




Indeed "THESE THINGS" which include 1John 2 telling us that the one who CLAIMS to know Christ is in fact lying if they do not WALK as Christ walked.

An inconvenient detail in the text of 1John to be sure -- but one worth paying attention to.

In Christ,

Bob


Nice little dance there Bob. Do you disco also?:laugh:

You COMPLETELY ignored the text I posted. You ignored the Word of God calling you out. You ignored everything JJump and I have been telling you.
On the other hand , both JJ and I know full well the game you are playing with Scripture. We have seen it time and again by the works+fatih = salvation people. Oh you may holler and stamp your foot saying you believe in saving faith by grace but you do not really believe it. You are dishonestly trying to make the Scripture support your doctrine and it cannot.

Now; try again. John tells us you may KNOW that you HAVE eternal life. He goes on to tell us that we may KNOW that we HAVE what we ask of God within His will. If we KNOW it is His will we be saved, then we can KNOW that we HAVE it when we ASK for it.

But you say the opposite. Who is lying? You or Scripture?

Show me ONE place James mentions faith in the finished work of Christ. One place he talks about the shed blood of christ. One place he talks about the resurrection of Christ. Just ONE Bob!!!!

Paul is very plain as to what the gospel is.You can read it in 1 Cor 15. Show me ONE place in James you can find the same.

Since you and I both know you will not find what I am asking you to find and show me: your entire argument falls by the wayside; hence this discussion has reached impasse.

:BangHead: :BangHead: :wavey:

[BobRyan]

Hey Jim - you ignored 1John 2 calling you out. You completely ignored 1John 2:4-7 saying that "he is a liar" that claims to KNOW Christ and yet does not walk as Christ walked!!

You pretend that "Assurance" in 1john has "nothing to do with THESE THINGS I HAVE WRITTEN" as John says. you pretend it says "THESE THINGS I have written that you may IGNORE THEM and not be aware of who is lying when they CLAIM to have known Christ ... rather you may be assured ANYWAY no matter WHAT you find written here to the contrary"

Where in the world did you dig up such a text Jim? Why not pay attention to the one that you actually quoted?

I do not question "THAt you may KNOW you have eternal life" I question your turning a blind eye to "THESE THINGS I HAVE WRITTEN THAT you may know" and then further ignoring 1John 2 "The one that SAYS He KNOWS Christ but does not walk as Christ walked is a liar".. because "obviously" that is part of the "THESE THINGS" that John WROTE in 1John.

Just stating the obvious here - but that seems to be the part of the text of scripture that displeases you - so you blame ME for it as if I had written it! How "surprising".

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

In order for me to be incorrect I would have to toss all of 1 John out the window.

]1John 2
3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
4 The one who says, "" I have come to know Him,'' and ]does not keep His commandments, is a liar[/b], and the truth is not in him;
5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:
6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

For my view to be wrong someone would need to eisegete the idea of "lying but saved" in 1John 2.

Something that John does not support at all.


For my view to be wrong someone would need to eisegete the idea of
"the good tree with wicked fruit" in Matt 7 -- something Christ flatly denies.

To be wrong someone would need to "invent" the idea of "faith that does not save -- that SAVES anyway" in James 2.



At this point Jim - it would have served you well not to turn a blind eye to the "THESE THINGS" that John wrote in 1john 2...



Indeed "THESE THINGS" which include 1John 2 telling us that the one who CLAIMS to know Christ is in fact lying if they do not WALK as Christ walked.

An inconvenient detail in the text of 1John to be sure -- but one worth paying attention to.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Show me ONE place James mentions faith in the finished work of Christ. One place he talks about the shed blood of christ. One place he talks about the resurrection of Christ. Just ONE Bob!!!!



Paul calls what you are doing above "another gospel" in Gal 1:5-9 inventing the idea of ANOTHER Faith and ANOTHER salvation.

In 1 Cor 3 Paul says "NO FOUNDATION" can be laid other than Christ but here YOU argue for FAITH in something OTHER THAN CHRIST as the faith that "SAVES".

How transparent sir.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

I point out IN THE TEXT that James says that this "useless faith" is the "faith of demons" and that your "SAVED WHILE LOST" idea is NOT found in James 2 at all

Quote:
Repeating a point of conjecture does not make it appear suddenly "in" the text.
Your insightful reponse is to complain that I AM referencing the details IN THE text of scripture while you insist that we NOT look at James 2 to know what James is talking about AND to complain that the text font I am using - has color in it!!

J Jump said
And neither does isolating Scripture from other Scripture prove your point. But unfortunately you don't stop there you try to say that you compare Scripture with Scripture, but you compare a Scripture that is talking about apples and one that is talking about oranges and then you say see I am right. But that doesn't make you right either.

Let me give you an example and then we truly have come to an end in productive conversation (because you have resorted back to your read and green cutouts :) ).

Surely you can not be fully satisified with such a non-Bible defense for your argument!

Let's go back to using Exegesis - exegete THE TEXT instead of simply abusing it in favor of another mythical (as yet unquoted) text that leads you not to pay attention to the details IN the text of James 2 as you insert the idea that "the faith of demons" is saving faith "anyway".

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Quote:
But the problem is if you insert a false idea into some other text -- then come to this one where you admit "it is not here" and insert it here "too" because of the insert made to other texts - it is eisegesis that builds flaw built upon flaw.

Bob the only false idea being imposed onto a text is you saying that James is talking about eternal saving faith. He tells us in the first chapter that he is talking to folks that are already saved. How can it be more simple to see?

James 1 NEVER claims that ALL examples of failure (including that of demons) HAS to be the act of a SAVED person!!

James 1 NEVER claims that ALL members of a local church ARE SAVED!

James 1 NEVER says that "I am writing to you that have useless faith -- the faith of demons - to tell you that this is in fact the FAITH by which we are saved under the conditions of SAVED by Grace THROUGH Faith".

It is not done in James 1 NOR in all of scripture!

Your idea of "two Salvations" and "TWO Faiths" is in fact "TWO Gospels".

James makes NO MENTION of two salvations - so you insert it.
James makes NO MENTION of "two faiths" - so you insert it.
James makes NO MENTION of "SAVED while not having faith that saves" -- so you insert it.

This is classic abuse of the text to take what James DOES mention "the faith of demons" the "faith that does NOT save and IS useless" and spinning it around with the "inserts" you make to the text.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

James 2:17-26 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 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 works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. ... For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

If a person were to approach this passage honestly it would be an easy thing to figure out.
Notice what James says in the last sentence of the passage. The body without the spirit is dead. Think about it. You are alive and animated. Why? Your spirit is still IN you. Your spirit is what gives life to your body and proves you are alive.
Then notice his conclusion. Even so...faith without works is dead. Just like your pysical body without a spriit can do nothing and is useless, EVEN SO...your faith is useless without SOMETHING that proves it is alive.

Paul bears this out when he says the just shall live BY faith. Faith is the live giving element which produces the action. No faith, no life. If there is no life (works/action) present then there is no faith. It is dead.

James says in effect; you say you have fatih? Prove it.

After showing ACCEPTANCE of James 2 -- Jim turns around to deny it all by inventing the idea "of TWO Faiths".

But in the quote Above Jim inwittingly admits that this is NO FAITH!!

(As is seen in the highlights).

And now he is stuck with "saved by grace through NO FAITH" so he must "invent" another faith, AND another salvation -- i.e. "another gospel".

How sad after such a good noble start to turn back on it!!

Jim said -
James uses Abraham as a perfect example because prior to Abraham offering Isaac, the Scripture says Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed to him. This righteousness came about without works, but his justification came about when his faith PRODUCED action which demonstrated that indeed Abraham did indeed believe God.


Here Jim admits that this is REAL faith IN GOD -- not simply "ANOTHER faith" that is "optional". Rather it is the life that SHOWS that REAL faith in God EXISTS.

The "Saved ANYWAY even though the life shows nothing but DEAD faith" is not in James - is not in all of scripture -- so Jim makes it up after having done so well on this post.

How sad.

Jim you were doing so well - how is it then that you have fallen on your sword on this one?

In Christ,

Bob

[Brother Bob]

Shiloh posted; bulid a whole doctrine
Thats it Bob, you are BULIB a whole doctrine.

Just thought I would throw that in there, for He belittled, His Blood Spoke My Name, before for a typo, got a big laugh from another poster.

[BobRyan]

I like the idea that creating erroneous doctrines is to BULID false doctrine - who better to point that out than SHiloh!!:laugh:

What a great catch Bob - thanks! Long live the TYPO!!:applause:

Though I have to tell you - the times when Shiloh IS modeling Christian attributes on this board have been the exception not the rule so far - so the incident you are referencing does not really stand out as surprising in the least. In fact - it might be a sign of improvement.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Just testing a theory out on those who invent this idea of "Soul lost WHILE spirit is saved" --

For those like Jim and J. Jump that DO believe that -- what is your position on the Bible doctrine of perseverance of the saints? Do you accept or reject it?

In Christ,

Bob

[av1611jim]

Just testing a theory out on those who invent this idea of "Soul lost WHILE spirit is saved" --

For those like Jim and J. Jump that DO believe that -- what is your position on the Bible doctrine of perseverance of the saints? Do you accept or reject it?

In Christ,

Bob

Different subject, different thread. Put your gun away and stop
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :p hijacking this one.

[av1611jim]

After showing ACCEPTANCE of James 2 -- Jim turns around to deny it all by inventing the idea "of TWO Faiths".

But in the quote Above Jim inwittingly admits that this is NO FAITH!!

(As is seen in the highlights).

And now he is stuck with "saved by grace through NO FAITH" so he must "invent" another faith, AND another salvation -- i.e. "another gospel".

How sad after such a good noble start to turn back on it!!



Here Jim admits that this is REAL faith IN GOD -- not simply "ANOTHER faith" that is "optional". Rather it is the life that SHOWS that REAL faith in God EXISTS.

The "Saved ANYWAY even though the life shows nothing but DEAD faith" is not in James - is not in all of scripture -- so Jim makes it up after having done so well on this post.

How sad.

Jim you were doing so well - how is it then that you have fallen on your sword on this one?

In Christ,

Bob

You ARE a disco dancer aren't you Bob? :BangHead: :BangHead:

I know how JJ feels now. You sure have a way of twisting a persons words and putting your own into their mouths.

Did Ellen G. White teach you this?

[BobRyan]

You ARE a disco dancer aren't you Bob? :BangHead: :BangHead:

{Jim's obligatory ranting deleted here)..

You have a funny way of collapsing when your argument runs aground Jim.

I guess that just leaves me with the open door of continually reminding you of the point where you made your blunder.

Coming up.

Enjoy. As I am sure you must have a zillion ways to "rant rather than respond to the point".

See post 62 and "respond to the point" rather than ducking -- it is on THIS page still.

Need help? http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=949661&postcount=62

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Jim said
James is not addressing salvation in eternity. He is addressing salvation at the coming of Christ. Salvation from what then? From being ashamed at His coming. From receiving for the bad done in the body. From being a castaway. From losing your soul. From having a portion WITH the hypocrites. From being beaten and cast into prison. From having that which you have taken and given to another.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=949426&postcount=51


Here Jim DOES jump in the ditch of "soul lost while spirit saved"
Bob said
Originally Posted by BobRyan
Just testing a theory out on those who invent this idea of "Soul lost WHILE spirit is saved" --

For those like Jim and J. Jump that DO believe that -- what is your position on the Bible doctrine of perseverance of the saints? Do you accept or reject it?

In Christ,

Bob


but when called on this Jim pretends not to have read HIS OWN post...

Different subject, different thread. Put your gun away and stop
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :p hijacking this one.

Stop "gaming the thread" Jim - and start responding to the points raised - even when it places you in a position of having to admit to your own blunders. The question above was not to "debate perseverence" it was to try to find out "What problem you think you solve" by inventing things out of thin air (like soul LOST while spirit still saved). I am just proposing that this may be an attempt to solve the Perseverance problem for those who reject that Bible doctrine.

Why not answer the question instead of rabbit-trailing and misdirecting?

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Since Jim is on the record on this thread as "getting something right" I wanted to be sure everyone had the link -- so

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=945813&postcount=22


Originally Posted by av1611jim
James 2:17-26 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 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 works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. ... For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

If a person were to approach this passage honestly it would be an easy thing to figure out.
Notice what James says in the last sentence of the passage. The body without the spirit is dead. Think about it. You are alive and animated. Why? Your spirit is still IN you. Your spirit is what gives life to your body and proves you are alive.
Then notice his conclusion. Even so...faith without works is dead. Just like your pysical body without a spriit can do nothing and is useless, EVEN SO...your faith is useless without SOMETHING that proves it is alive.

Paul bears this out when he says the just shall live BY faith. Faith is the live giving element which produces the action. No faith, no life. If there is no life (works/action) present then there is no faith. It is dead.

James says in effect; you say you have fatih? Prove it.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=945813&postcount=22




After showing ACCEPTANCE of James 2 -- Jim turns around to deny it all by inventing the idea "of TWO Faiths".

But in the quote Above Jim inwittingly admits that this is NO FAITH!!

(As is seen in the highlights).

And now he is stuck with "saved by grace through NO FAITH" so he must "invent" another faith, AND another salvation -- i.e. "another gospel".

How sad after such a good noble start to turn back on it!!



Jim said -
James uses Abraham as a perfect example because prior to Abraham offering Isaac, the Scripture says Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed to him. This righteousness came about without works, but his justification came about when his faith PRODUCED action which demonstrated that indeed Abraham did indeed believe God.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=945813&postcount=22



Here Jim admits that this is REAL faith IN GOD -- not simply "ANOTHER faith" that is "optional". Rather it is the life that SHOWS that REAL faith in God EXISTS.

The "Saved ANYWAY even though the life shows nothing but DEAD faith" is not in James - is not in all of scripture -- so Jim makes it up after having done so well on this post.

How sad.

Jim you were doing so well - how is it then that you have fallen on your sword on this one?

(this time posted with the links to Jim's initial statements above)

In Christ,

Bob

[bmerr]

BobR,

bmerr here. I've not taken the time to read through all the posts, but I've seen enough to realize that approaching the subject from a different angle might help. I'd also like to commend you for the open-mindedness with which you seem to have tackled this oft-avoided or exitgeted :laugh: text.

Most of the posts so far seem to be circling around the "faith" aspect of James 2, "what kind of faith", "spirit-saving but not soul-saving faith", and such like, and, sadly (though not suprisingly) not much progress seems to have been made. Lots of heat, not much light.

This may have been covered already, and if so, forgive me for bringing it up again, but maybe we should identify the kind of works James is speaking of, since so many seem to object to works being a part of God's plan of salvation.

First off, we all know that both Paul and James use Abraham as an example of salvation, justification, or righteousness by faith. Paul clearly speaks of justification by faith apart from the "works of the law" (Rom 3:28, etc). Paul also states that our salvation is not because of our own righteous works (Titus 3:5).

Since both Paul and James were inspired by the same Spirit, we know that James cannot be speaking of either of these two types of works. Agreed so far?

When Abraham offered Isaac, the Mosaic Law had not yet been given, so it was not a work of the Law, nor is offering one's son as a whole burnt offering something that would be considered a "good deed" to score brownie points with God, so neither of the above mentioned classes of works is involved here.

So what kind of work was it for Abraham to offer Isaac? Simply obedience to God's command. It's the only kind left to consider as far as I can tell.

Since Heb 5:9 says that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to those who obey him, we know that obedience is neccessary. This would fit right in with both Paul and James. It's the only way I know of to make sense of the passage without doing it harm.

For your consideration.

In Christ,

bmerr

[av1611jim]

bmerr;
While it is not the ONLY way to make sense of this passage, I will agree with you that it is a viable interpretation. And it does no violence to the remainder of Scripture either.

Good thinking! (thumbs up!)

Yes. Obedience is necessary for anyone who claims the name of Christ.

[av1611jim]

Since Jim is on the record on this thread as "getting something right" I wanted to be sure everyone had the link -- so

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=945813&postcount=22


[/i]


After showing ACCEPTANCE of James 2 -- Jim turns around to deny it all by inventing the idea "of TWO Faiths".

But in the quote Above Jim inwittingly admits that this is NO FAITH!!

(As is seen in the highlights).

And now he is stuck with "saved by grace through NO FAITH" so he must "invent" another faith, AND another salvation -- i.e. "another gospel".

How sad after such a good noble start to turn back on it!!





Here Jim admits that this is REAL faith IN GOD -- not simply "ANOTHER faith" that is "optional". Rather it is the life that SHOWS that REAL faith in God EXISTS.

The "Saved ANYWAY even though the life shows nothing but DEAD faith" is not in James - is not in all of scripture -- so Jim makes it up after having done so well on this post.

How sad.

Jim you were doing so well - how is it then that you have fallen on your sword on this one?

(this time posted with the links to Jim's initial statements above)

In Christ,

Bob

Bob;
When you admit to lying I will continue this discussion.

You have put YOUR words in quotation marks as if they were mine or jjump's thereby indicating we said those things. Stop misrepresenting people and we can have a civil discussion.

Nobody here said any kind of faith is optional. Nobody here said one is saved by grace through no faith.

Stop lying. And leave Ellen G. White's cult. Cultists lie and twist words.

[BobRyan]

This may have been covered already, and if so, forgive me for bringing it up again, but maybe we should identify the kind of works James is speaking of, since so many seem to object to works being a part of God's plan of salvation.

First off, we all know that both Paul and James use Abraham as an example of salvation, justification, or righteousness by faith. Paul clearly speaks of justification by faith apart from the "works of the law" (Rom 3:28, etc). Paul also states that our salvation is not because of our own righteous works (Titus 3:5).

Since both Paul and James were inspired by the same Spirit, we know that James cannot be speaking of either of these two types of works. Agreed so far?

When Abraham offered Isaac, the Mosaic Law had not yet been given, so it was not a work of the Law, nor is offering one's son as a whole burnt offering something that would be considered a "good deed" to score brownie points with God, so neither of the above mentioned classes of works is involved here.

So what kind of work was it for Abraham to offer Isaac? Simply obedience to God's command. It's the only kind left to consider as far as I can tell.

Since Heb 5:9 says that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to those who obey him, we know that obedience is neccessary. This would fit right in with both Paul and James. It's the only way I know of to make sense of the passage without doing it harm.



You are right in that Paul always uses the term "Works of the Law" (as we see in Romans 3) to mean "Works APART from Faith" - and so it is always "bad" in the NT.

But you are wrong to think that the writings of Moses is anything OTHER than "the commands of God" such that obedience to that text of scripture is anything OTHER than "obedience to the commands of God".

You are also wrong to conclude that Abraham was not subject to the "Laws, statutes and commands" of God just as God placed Israel in subjection to His "Laws, statutes and commands".

God says of BOTH Abraham AND Israel that they were to keep His "Laws, statutes and commandments". The difference is not that Moses gave inferior laws based on works and that God gives Laws that Christians can obey -- rather God is the Author of ALL scripture and ALL His Word is to be Obeyed "For scripture can not be broken" John 10:35.

The difference is that "Works of the Law" by definition (according to Romans 3) is "Works apart from faith".

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Jim - three posts from you and still you have nothing stubstantive to say on the subject while fleeing from your own post earlier on this thread ....

That is a new low for you sir.

Join the topic or simply read.

In Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

It is always amazing to me that there are those who will bend scripture to any extreme to sustaing their own devotion to man-made tradition.

Why is this so popular among Christians today?

In Christ,

Bob

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

AV1611jim:

"....Stop lying. And leave Ellen G. White's cult. Cultists lie and twist words.....")

GE:

I am a staunch opposer of EG White's, but I assure you here this day, if but the SDA Church listened to her, they might have discovered the Gospel by now. What pity they actually despised their own profetess all these years!

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

bmerr:

"Since Heb 5:9 says that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to those who obey him, we know that obedience is neccessary"

GE:

In fact, obedience is necessary for and unto good works, Christ being the Author of eternal salvation.
The saved are the only who experience the urgency of good works; the unsaved do not bother, or at best, take a try at it out of humanistic considerations.
Good works never creates the basis for salvation; it always follow like the good tree's fruit. The roots and stems and leaves work together to produce the fruit - good works.
The fruit doesn't make the tree; but the fruit do, 'make the tree' like the bird's feathers, do 'make the bird'.