How do Fundamentalists interpret James 2?

[JoeV]

Fundamentalists (at least the vast majority of them) believe in sola fide, correct? Please explain to me, then, what you believe James 2 is trying to say when he says "faith without work is dead" and "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." If he is not supporting justification by faith AND works, what is he trying to say? Thank you, brothers and sisters.

Joe V.

[Vambram]

This Independent Baptist fundamentalist shall present some thoughts and commentaries on this topic. It looks like a reminder is perhaps needed towards JoeyV that in order to get the correct understanding of the Scriptures, one really does need to look at the whole context, context context of the verse in question. Therefore, I am posting the following commentary and analysis of James 2:14-26
Just as the law of love gives no excuse for respect of persons, so the possession of faith gives no license to dispense with good works. A believer must not only demonstrate his love by ready acceptance of others, but he must also demonstrate his faith by responsible aid to others. James went on in his letter to emphasize the expression of true faith, to outline the evidence of true faith, and finally to cite examples of true faith.
Another shift in the argument of the epistle can be seen by James’ use of my brothers. He introduced this paragraph with a rhetorical question, What good is it… if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? The emphasis is not on the true nature of faith but on the false claim of faith. It is the spurious boast of faith that James condemned. Such "faith" does no "good"; there is no "profit" (ophelos, used in the NT only here and in James_2:16; 1 Corinthians_15:32). It is worthless because it is all talk with no walk. It is only a habitual empty boast ("claims" is in the pres. tense). Can such faith save him? A negative answer is anticipated in the Greek. Merely claiming to have faith is not enough. Genuine faith is evidenced by works.
The rhetorical question is followed by a hypothetical but realistic illustration: Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. (James frequently wrote about the poor: James_1:9, James_1:27; James_2:2-6, James_2:15.) For one in need of the basics of life, sentimental good wishes do little good, like the common Jewish farewell, Go, I wish you well (lit., "Go in peace," cf. Jud. Judges_18:6; 1 Samuel_1:17; 2 Samuel_15:9; Mark_5:34; Luke_7:50). If nothing is done to fill the pressing need for warm clothes and satisfying food, what good is it? The same phrase that James used to introduce this paragraph (James_2:14) is repeated for emphasis.
The vain boast, faith by itself, or faith in and of itself with no evidence of action, is dead. Workless faith is worthless faith; it is unproductive, sterile, barren, dead! Great claims may be made about a corpse that is supposed to have come to life, but if it does not move, if there are no vital signs, no heartbeat, no perceptible pulse, it is still dead. The false claims are silenced by the evidence.
James 2:18-20 may be one of the most misunderstood sections of the entire epistle. But someone will say, You have faith; I have deeds. An imaginary respondent, "someone," was introduced. He did not object to James’ conclusion. He agreed that faith without works is dead. But he wrongly disparaged faith while stressing works.
What follows, Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do, may be the continuation of the respondent’s words. If so, they should be included within quotation marks. (If this were James’ response to a contender’s "I have deeds," James would have written, "Show me your deeds without faith.") Though recent translations do not include the second half of James_2:18 in the quotation of the respondent (e.g., NEB, NIV, RSV), the NASB correctly considers this entire verse part of his remarks. The Greek, of course, does not include quotation marks, which accounts for the variations in English. It seems, however, that the respondent is throwing down the challenge, "Show me your faith apart from (chōris, ‘without’) works, and I will show you my faith by (ek, ‘emerging from’) my works" (author’s trans.). It may be well to include even James_2:19 as part of the respondent’s argument: You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that — and shudder. If so, he may be a typical Gentile believer who attacked the creedal belief of monotheism accepted by all Jews. He was saying, to "believe" in one God may be good so far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. The demons do that. In fact not only do they believe (the same verb, pisteuō); they even "shudder," or "bristle up" (phrissousin, an onomatopoeic verb used only here in the NT). The "belief" in one God may not be "trust" in that God. Unless it is "trust," it is not true faith and will not be evidenced in good works.
In other words the respondent is saying, "Faith is not the key; what counts is works." Thus the respondent has gone too far. James did not say that works are essential to faith, or that faith is unimportant. His argument was that works are evidence of faith.

Other commentators understand this passage to mean that James (James_2:18) challenged the "someone" to show his faith without deeds — the point being that it cannot be done! James, however, said that faith can be demonstrated (only) by what one does (James_2:18). The demons’ "belief" in God is inadequate. Such a so-called but unreal faith is obviously unaccompanied by deeds on their parts.
In James 2:20, the Apostle did not launch into a lengthy refutation of the respondent. The apostle simply addressed him forcefully, You foolish man, and returned to his original argument that faith without deeds is useless (argē, "lazy, idle, negligent"). The adjective "foolish" (kene) is usually translated "vain," "empty," or "hollow" (cf. mataios, "worthless, fruitless, useless," in James_1:26). Flimsy faith is dead; so are empty, faithless works. James’ argument is not pro-works/anti-faith or pro-faith/anti-works. He has simply said that genuine faith is accompanied by good works. Spiritual works are the evidence, not the energizer, of sincere faith.
In James 2:21-26, the Apostle gave a final proof of this teaching by talking about two Biblical examples, Abraham and Rahab.
He presented each example in the form of a question, anticipating the reader’s ready agreement.
Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? This question is often held to be directly opposed to Paul’s statement that Abraham’s faith, not his works, caused God to declare him righteous (Romans_4:1-5). Paul, however, was arguing for the priority of faith. James argued for the proof of faith. Paul declared that Abraham had faith, and was therefore justified, or declared righteous (Genesis_15:6), prior to circumcision (Genesis_17:11; cf. Romans_4:9). James explained that Abraham’s faith was evident in his practice of Isaac’s sacrifice (Genesis_22:12), and he was therefore justified, or declared righteous. Works serve as the barometer of justification, while faith is the basis for justification. James emphasized the joint role of faith and… actions… working together. Faith is the force behind the deed. The deed is the finality of the faith. The verb translated was made complete (eteleiōthē) means to "carry to the end." Faith finds fulfillment in action. So it was with Abraham. James and Paul quoted the same passage — Genesi_15:6 — to prove their points (cf. Romans_4:3). Paul said that Abraham was justified by faith, and James said that Abraham was justified by faith evidenced by what he did.
In James 2:25, the Apostle says that was
declared righteous for her actions in welcoming the spies and helping them escape.
In James 2:26, I see very easily that the conclusion is very clear and understandable, once one makes sure that one looks at the context, context, context, of James 2:17, and James 2:24. Faith and deeds are as essential to each other as the body and the spirit. Apart from (chōris) the spirit, or the "breath" (pneumatos) of life, the body is dead. Apart from (chōris) the evidence of works, faith may be deemed dead. It is not the real thing. True faith continually contributes to spiritual growth and development.
Not only is a believer to stand confidently on God’s Word even in the midst of trials and temptations (James_1:1-27), but also he must serve his brothers and sisters in Christ (James_2:1-26). He is to accept all members of God’s family without favoritism (James_2:1-13) and to aid the family with a working faith (James_2:14-26). To gain spiritual maturity a believer must be what God wants him to be and do what God wants him to do.

:groupray: :cool: :amen:

[sageoffools]

Faith without works is dead in the same way that marriage without love is dead. You can have a marriage without love, but how much of a marriage is it really?
Once you are married, you can still remain married long after you stop doing anything that resembles marriage. Likewise, once you are saved, you remain saved long after you stop doing anything that resembles being a child of God. As James said, and Vam expounded on, how do you demonstrate your faith without doing works? How do you demonstrate your marriage without showing love? Sure you can point to one time when you said some words, but what have you done today?

[desmalia]

Fundamentalists (at least the vast majority of them) believe in sola fide, correct? Please explain to me, then, what you believe James 2 is trying to say when he says "faith without work is dead" and "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." If he is not supporting justification by faith AND works, what is he trying to say? Thank you, brothers and sisters.

Joe V.
How do I (a fundamentalist) interpret James 2? Well, as as Vembram so eloquently said, in the context of Scripture, as it was intended to be.

Quite simply, God-given faith changes (sanctifies) the heart, the outward expression of which is obedience (works). If you say you have faith, but there is no regeneration in your spirit, do you really have faith? Nope. The Holy Spirit is powerful and changes our lives. We don't work towards deserving Him, He works in us, and we, respond to that working in us. The works are the natural evidence of this amazing gift. Our focus changes from the desire to serve ourselves to the desire to obey His commands.

Obedience is very serious to any believer because it has become our deepest desire to glorify God, not because our salvation hinges on it. Another way you can state it is: faith without works is not a true, living, God-given faith. It is dead. Fake. Not of the Living God.

I hope you can understand now that fundamentalists do not use grace as an excuse to sin (see Romans 6 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%206&version=49)). Far from it. We subscribe very highly to obedience, but with an understanding as to why it is so important. It glorifies our Lord, but it does not justify us for salvation. Christ alone does that.

[SpiritMeadow]

How do I (a fundamentalist) interpret James 2? Well, as as Vembram so eloquently said, in the context of Scripture, as it was intended to be.

Quite simply, God-given faith changes (sanctifies) the heart, the outward expression of which is obedience (works). If you say you have faith, but there is no regeneration in your spirit, do you really have faith? Nope. The Holy Spirit is powerful and changes our lives. We don't work towards deserving Him, He works in us, and we, respond to that working in us. The works are the natural evidence of this amazing gift. Our focus changes from the desire to serve ourselves to the desire to obey His commands.

Obedience is very serious to any believer because it has become our deepest desire to glorify God, not because our salvation hinges on it. Another way you can state it is: faith without works is not a true, living, God-given faith. It is dead. Fake. Not of the Living God.

I hope you can understand now that fundamentalists do not use grace as an excuse to sin (see Romans 6 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%206&version=49)). Far from it. We subscribe very highly to obedience, but with an understanding as to why it is so important. It glorifies our Lord, but it does not justify us for salvation. Christ alone does that.
anyone aware how this faith only doctrine came to be? Well our boy Luther was an Augustinian monk, and was driving the abbot half crazy with his constant worry about whether he could ever be saved. Seemed the more he did, the less he felt it was effective. He was sent off the school to get him off his obsessive worry about his own salvation.

Long after he was actually teaching, he came upon the idea if he were saved by faith alone, he didn't have to worry. But alas then he had to deal with that the predestination thing. So he decided the mere fact that he worried about salvation, mean that he was chosen. No more worries. He did desperately try to remove James from the bible...so I guess HE must have felt it an impediment to his argument.

[desmalia]

anyone aware how this faith only doctrine came to be? Well our boy Luther was an Augustinian monk, and was driving the abbot half crazy with his constant worry about whether he could ever be saved. Seemed the more he did, the less he felt it was effective. He was sent off the school to get him off his obsessive worry about his own salvation.

Long after he was actually teaching, he came upon the idea if he were saved by faith alone, he didn't have to worry. But alas then he had to deal with that the predestination thing. So he decided the mere fact that he worried about salvation, mean that he was chosen. No more worries. He did desperately try to remove James from the bible...so I guess HE must have felt it an impediment to his argument.Aw, what a fun little story. Did ya come up with that all by yerself, or did you just borrow it from someone else?
Seriously, please at least try to back up your "arguments" with some actual verifiable fact. Thanks.

[Vambram]

anyone aware how this faith only doctrine came to be? Well our boy Luther was an Augustinian monk, and was driving the abbot half crazy with his constant worry about whether he could ever be saved. Seemed the more he did, the less he felt it was effective. He was sent off the school to get him off his obsessive worry about his own salvation.

Long after he was actually teaching, he came upon the idea if he were saved by faith alone, he didn't have to worry. But alas then he had to deal with that the predestination thing. So he decided the mere fact that he worried about salvation, mean that he was chosen. No more worries. He did desperately try to remove James from the bible...so I guess HE must have felt it an impediment to his argument.
Contrary to what some might believe, as a Christian, I do not base my beliefs and doctrines upon whatever Martin Luther ever said or did. Instead, my beliefs are founded upon a much more rock solid foundation, known as the preserved written word of God and my faith in my personal Savior the Lord Jesus Christ as the Comforter also known as the Holy Spirit and the third Person of the GODhead teaches me via the convicting power of the Holy Spirit.

[SpiritMeadow]

Aw, what a fun little story. Did ya come up with that all by yerself, or did you just borrow it from someone else?
Seriously, please at least try to back up your "arguments" with some actual verifiable fact. Thanks.
That would be history....

[SpiritMeadow]

Contrary to what some might believe, as a Christian, I do not base my beliefs and doctrines upon whatever Martin Luther ever said or did. Instead, my beliefs are founded upon a much more rock solid foundation, known as the preserved written word of God and my faith in my personal Savior the Lord Jesus Christ as the Comforter also known as the Holy Spirit and the third Person of the GODhead teaches me via the convicting power of the Holy Spirit.
I agree entiring. It saddens me to see people following the often bizarre notions of Luther.

[NewGuy101]

I agree entiring. It saddens me to see people following the often bizarre notions of Luther.
Catholic "history"

That's beside the fact that Augustine preached the doctrine of election as well before Luther/Calvin.

[SpiritMeadow]

Eph 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 because of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

This passage is the perfect bridge between Paul's teaching and James 2:24-26 which says, "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead.

It is clear from Eph 2:8-10 and elsewhere that we are saved by grace and that our initial justification is pure gift and that we have done nothing to earn it. Likewise the passage makes it clear that faith, which is a gift by way of grace, is essential. Furthermore, the passage makes an important point about works. Paul tells us that at the point of our justification we become a new creation in Christ Jesus for good works. Moreover, these works were prepared by the Father in "advance" of our justification.

The works are nothing less than the work of the Father's hands in our hearts, minds, souls, and bodies. The grace of God is what saves us. God's grace provides the gift of faith, and God's grace provides the works that are to be done in justification. If we do not have the works our faith is meaningless.

James says that faith without works is dead. This would seem to be completely compatible with Ephesians 2:10. Likewise, James uses a powerful analogy of the body and spirit.

Paul typically uses the example of cirumcision in saying that we are saved by faith rather than works. In this regard we need to look at some of the other connections Paul makes vis-a-vis circumcision. The following passages are particularly instructive:

Galatians 5:6
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith working through love.

Galatians 6:15
For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.

So what really matters is a new creation and faith working through love. Moreover, Eph 2:10 tells us that we are a new creation in Christ Jesus for good works that God prepared in advance of our justification.

St. Paul said to the Romans that through Jesus Christ we have received "grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations."
If we are to be obedient to God we must follow his commandment of love and if we love someone, we must do something for that person (cf. Jas 2:14-17; Gal 5:6; Lk 10:25-37).
Rm 2:6, "for he will render to every man according to his works." (cf. 2 Cor 5:10).

I hope this is scriptural enough answer, since you don't wish to discuss the historical one.
Blessings.

[Vambram]

Thats a very good post, and this is true.
It is clear from Eph 2:8-10 and elsewhere that we are saved by grace and that our initial justification is pure gift and that we have done nothing to earn it. Likewise the passage makes it clear that faith, which is a gift by way of grace, is essential. Furthermore, the passage makes an important point about works. Paul tells us that at the point of our justification we become a new creation in Christ Jesus for good works. Moreover, these works were prepared by the Father in "advance" of our justification. James says that faith without works is dead. This would seem to be completely compatible with Ephesians 2:10. Likewise, James uses a powerful analogy of the body and spirit. So what really matters is a new creation and faith working through love. Moreover, Eph 2:10 tells us that we are a new creation in Christ Jesus for good works that God prepared in advance of our justification.


Unfortunately, history and the teachings of too many RCC theologians & priests shows me that there is much disagreement with your correct interpretation, SpiritMeadow, of Justification by Grace through Faith.
:):hug::)

[SpiritMeadow]

Catholic "history"
No as I recall, it was a plain old biography of Luther by university prof. Nothing in it to suggest it was apologetic in nature.

That's beside the fact that Augustine preached the doctrine of election as well before Luther/Calvin.
Please site with proof.

Thats a very good post, and this is true.


Unfortunately, history and the teachings of too many RCC theologians & priests shows me that there is much disagreement with your correct interpretation, SpiritMeadow, of Justification by Grace through Faith.
:):hug::)
Ah, so apparently you aren't able to see the point...sorry. Its faith and works. Perhaps your pastor can explain it...or try to...since apparently he would want it to be justification alone. So much for the bible being literal...guess its not when it doen't suit you.

http://iowamusings.blogspot.com
Blessings.

[Vambram]

Context, Context, Context.
When you apply interpretations based upon the context, context, context of the passage of Scripture; then SpiritMeadow you will correctly intepret what the Bible says. I am sorry that you appear to contradict yourself, here, and appear to contradict your own interpretations, now. Works does not justify. There is no justification and salvation by works. Rather, what the Bible so clearly teaches is that God works in and through born-again believers because of Salvation and Justification. However, we are not justified because of works and grace. Salvation is by grace through faith, just as the Scriptures so very clearly says.

The Hebrew and Greek words for "salvation" imply the ideas of deliverance, safety, preservation, healing, and soundness. "Salvation" is the great inclusive word of the Gospel, gathering into itself all the redemptive acts and processes: as justification, redemption, grace, propitiation, forgiveness, imputation, sanctification, and glorification.

Salvation is in Three Tenses

1. The Christian has been saved from the guilt and penalty of sin, and is safe. see Luke 7:50; 1 Corinthians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 2:15; Ephesians 2:5-8; and 2 Timothy 1:9.

2. The Christian is being saved from the habit, the dominion, and the power of sin. Please see Rom.6:14, 8:2; 2 Cor.3:18; Gal.2:19-20; Philippians 1:19, 2:12-13; 2 Thess.2:13

3. The Christian will be saved at the Lord's Return from all of the bodily infirmities that are the result of Sin and God's Curse upon the sinful world (Rom.8:18-23; 1 Cor.15:42-44), and will be brought into entire conformity with the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom.13:11; Heb.10:36; 1 Peter 1:5; 1 John 3:2).

Salvation is by grace through faith, is a free gift and wholly without works (Rom.3:27-28, 4:1-8, 6:23; Eph.2:8).
The divine order is :: first salvation, then works. (Eph.2:8-10; Titus 3:5-8).


:groupray: :amen: :thumbsup:

[SpiritMeadow]

Context, Context, Context.
When you apply interpretations based upon the context, context, context of the passage of Scripture; then SpiritMeadow you will correctly intepret what the Bible says. I am sorry that you appear to contradict yourself, here, and appear to contradict your own interpretations, now. Works does not justify. There is no justification and salvation by works. Rather, what the Bible so clearly teaches is that God works in and through born-again believers because of Salvation and Justification. However, we are not justified because of works and grace. Salvation is by grace through faith, just as the Scriptures so very clearly says.

The Hebrew and Greek words for "salvation" imply the ideas of deliverance, safety, preservation, healing, and soundness. "Salvation" is the great inclusive word of the Gospel, gathering into itself all the redemptive acts and processes: as justification, redemption, grace, propitiation, forgiveness, imputation, sanctification, and glorification.

Salvation is in Three Tenses

1. The Christian has been saved from the guilt and penalty of sin, and is safe. see Luke 7:50; 1 Corinthians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 2:15; Ephesians 2:5-8; and 2 Timothy 1:9.

2. The Christian is being saved from the habit, the dominion, and the power of sin. Please see Rom.6:14, 8:2; 2 Cor.3:18; Gal.2:19-20; Philippians 1:19, 2:12-13; 2 Thess.2:13

3. The Christian will be saved at the Lord's Return from all of the bodily infirmities that are the result of Sin and God's Curse upon the sinful world (Rom.8:18-23; 1 Cor.15:42-44), and will be brought into entire conformity with the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom.13:11; Heb.10:36; 1 Peter 1:5; 1 John 3:2).

Salvation is by grace through faith, is a free gift and wholly without works (Rom.3:27-28, 4:1-8, 6:23; Eph.2:8).
The divine order is :: first salvation, then works. (Eph.2:8-10; Titus 3:5-8).


:groupray: :amen: :thumbsup:
It appears we are wasting our time since you refuse to acknowledge the import of Ephesians. Thats fine. I understand that your faith kinda collapses unless faith alone holds sway. Your lack of interest in responding to the proofs to the contrary would be expected. My faith on the other hand doesn't require me to win this argument, I can argue the facts and not torture them to reflect what I need them to mean.

[Vambram]

It appears we are wasting our time since you refuse to acknowledge the import of Ephesians. Thats fine. I understand that your faith kinda collapses unless faith alone holds sway. Your lack of interest in responding to the proofs to the contrary would be expected. My faith on the other hand doesn't require me to win this argument, I can argue the facts and not torture them to reflect what I need them to mean.
Blinks.

I do NOT deny and I do not refuse to acknowledge the importance of Ephesians chapter 2. Rather, instead, the interpretation I am showing provides the correct interpretation of the entire context, context, context of Ephesians 2 as well as the other passages of Scripture in my posts. :)

[SpiritMeadow]

Blinks.

I do NOT deny and I do not refuse to acknowledge the importance of Ephesians chapter 2. Rather, instead, the interpretation I am showing provides the correct interpretation of the entire context, context, context of Ephesians 2 as well as the other passages of Scripture in my posts. :)


context context context is the new code word for fundies who can't argue. And of course your're right, you. Fundie pride in their personal interpretation is well known. Sorry try once again.

[Vambram]

context context context is the new code word for fundies who can't argue. And of course your're right, you. Fundie pride in their personal interpretation is well known. Sorry try once again.
So lets see if I understand you right, SpiritMeadow. It appears that you would rather pick and choose verses out of the context of the surrounding verses and passages of Scripture around a verse, build a doctrine that way, rather then studying for yourself the entire passage of Scripture in order to try to understand what the verses are teaching? Please correct me if I am wrong, but it really does look like you would rather pick and choose a verse out of a passage to find something to believe, rather than instead do a full exegises of a passage of Scripture. :)
Sorry, SpiritMeadow, but you are gonna have to try again if you want to convince me that the doctrine of faith and works together is required for one to be saved and justified. Instead, I see that the passages of Scripture so very clearly and easily teach that we are saved by Grace through faith, first; and then Ephesians says after that we are created to be HIS workmanship in Christ Jesus. :):):)

[SpiritMeadow]

Wouldn't expect you to argue anything else. Your faith depends on you being right. Mine as I said, does not. Good Day.

[Project 86]

Wouldn't expect you to argue anything else. Your faith depends on you being right. Mine as I said, does not. Good Day.

Everyone's eternity depends on their faith being right. If you put your faith in the wrong things to save you then you could end up in a nasty place after you die. By the way, saying things like "sorry try once again" won't help your argument to get anywhere.

[Albion]

anyone aware how this faith only doctrine came to be?[/qutoe]

Yes. That would be what we usually call The Bible.

[quote[Well our boy Luther was an Augustinian monk, and was driving the abbot half crazy with his constant worry about whether he could ever be saved. Seemed the more he did, the less he felt it was effective. He was sent off the school to get him off his obsessive worry about his own salvation.

Long after he was actually teaching, he came upon the idea if he were saved by faith alone, he didn't have to worry.

But HOW did he come upon that idea? From studying the scriptures.

But alas then he had to deal with that the predestination thing.

Predestination necessarily MEANS salvation by Faith alone. You do understand that point, don't you?

Everyone's eternity depends on their faith being right. If you put your faith in the wrong things to save you then you could end up in a nasty place after you die.

Thank you. How anyone could contend for just any faith, true or not, being saving faith is hard to appreciate, isn't it?.

[JoeV]

But HOW did he come upon that idea? From studying the scriptures.

So Catholics don't study the Scriptures?

I don't see how the context of James 2 makes a difference. All of the verses in that passage are attempting to prove justification by works in addition to faith.

Look at the passage in my sig. The people saying "Lord, Lord" believed, did they not? Yet they received eternal punishment.

[Vambram]

So Catholics don't study the Scriptures?

I don't see how the context of James 2 makes a difference. All of the verses in that passage are attempting to prove justification by works in addition to faith.

Look at the passage in my sig. The people saying "Lord, Lord" believed, did they not? Yet they received eternal punishment.
All those verses in James 2 very clearly show that a Christian shows his faith BY his works, the same as did Abraham as referenced by James here, and also as referenced by Paul in Romans 4. However, these verses very clearly show that works do not save, and that one is not justified because of his works.

[Hentenza]

Look at the passage in my sig. The people saying "Lord, Lord" believed, did they not? Yet they received eternal punishment.

mmmm..... You might want to read your siggy in context. Tell me, who is Jesus talking about in Matthew 7:15-23?

Hint- verse 15 tells you.:idea:

[Albion]

So Catholics don't study the Scriptures?

Wow. That's quite a leap, isn't it? What I said was that LUTHER reached his conclusion from studying the scriptures, and not (as had been alleged here) that he just dreamed something up in order to comfort himself. I didn't say anything about Catholics studying the scriptures.

I don't see how the context of James 2 makes a difference. All of the verses in that passage are attempting to prove justification by works in addition to faith.

Well, they don't. What's more several of us here have explained the real meaning of those verses in every way we can think of. So if you don't understand...and will not react to our explanations by saying what it is that still bothers you, I don't know that there's much more we can do, is there?

Look at the passage in my sig. The people saying "Lord, Lord" believed, did they not? Yet they received eternal punishment.

"Believed" is not the same as having Faith.

You know that even the Devils believe (although I forget the verse at the moment) , but that comprehension or understanding doesn't save them.

[minister50]

Contrary to what some might believe, as a Christian, I do not base my beliefs and doctrines upon whatever Martin Luther ever said or did. Instead, my beliefs are founded upon a much more rock solid foundation, known as the preserved written word of God and my faith in my personal Savior the Lord Jesus Christ as the Comforter also known as the Holy Spirit and the third Person of the GODhead teaches me via the convicting power of the Holy Spirit.
Well said!

[JohnChapter14]

Fundamentalists (at least the vast majority of them) believe in sola fide, correct? Please explain to me, then, what you believe James 2 is trying to say when he says "faith without work is dead" and "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." If he is not supporting justification by faith AND works, what is he trying to say? Thank you, brothers and sisters.

Joe V.

Ok. So you confess Jesus is the Christ and that you have faith in Him but you go and accept the Mark of the beast. Does this mean you have faith in Christ?

[JoeV]

Ok. So you confess Jesus is the Christ and that you have faith in Him but you go and accept the Mark of the beast. Does this mean you have faith in Christ?
Maybe it does. That's why I don't believe in sola fide.

[NewGuy101]

Please site with proof.


Ah, so apparently you aren't able to see the point...sorry. Its faith and works. Perhaps your pastor can explain it...or try to...since apparently he would want it to be justification alone. So much for the bible being literal...guess its not when it doen't suit you.

http://iowamusings.blogspot.com
Blessings.
What proof are you asking for exactly...augustines preaching of election?