Faith AND Works-James 2...Again

[ivdavid]

They[Faith & Works] are intricately tied together and cannot be separated. I think that is James point.

James point is that we shouldn't[separate], not that faith and works are totally inseperable.

Could both of you elaborate on what you mean by faith here - especially in the context of James 2 describing Abraham sacrificing Isaac. What was Abraham to believe here?

 

[tjw]

If someone has faith, avoiding sin and doing good works are things they will do. Works are a result of faith. Since we love Jesus, we will want to do what He commands.

 

[francisdesales]

Could both of you elaborate on what you mean by faith here - especially in the context of James 2 describing Abraham sacrificing Isaac. What was Abraham to believe here?

In James, faith is belief in God, an intellectual certainty that God exists. It also involves trust, in which Abram trusted that God would provide, even if the promise (Isaac) was sacrificed.

Thus, James is not speaking of "true" faith v "false" faith. He doesn't mention such a concept. To him, faith, is good - he specifically tells his audience that "you do well" with faith (intellectual belief). But that faith, alone, was not enough. Faithful trusting in God should be coupled with corresponding actions that display our inner convictions.

Even faith to move mountains is nothing, without love (paraphrase of 1 Cor 13:2)

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

If someone has faith, avoiding sin and doing good works are things they will do. Works are a result of faith. Since we love Jesus, we will want to do what He commands.

Salvific loving works do require faith, but too many consider works as if they were manufactured by a conveyor-belt like faith that automatically spits out "works of love". While in Christ, any loving action is just as much a part of God's Spirit as faith itself is. BOTH are gifts, faith itself doesn't produce love. Faith is not a self-sufficient catalyst for works, as BOTH are from God, a result of being united with His Spirit.

Regards

 

[smaller]

Are there human beings in Hell? Yes or no.

Provide a named human example and I'll tell you.

There are plenty of Scriptural references to people losing their salvation.

There are examples of believers falling in this present life back into the snare of the devil. There are zero examples of that costing any believer 'eternally.'

I'm sure you know most of them, so I won't post them here. There are NO examples of ANYONE burning in Hell. Suffice it to say, I'm having trouble keeping up with all these twists and turns.

I'm consistent with my view. All both do and do not good works, believers or unbeliever.

The tempter also 'functions' in all. So it is not so simply as to just look at man when that is factually not the case. The Spirit of God also functions in believers, so again, just looking at 'man alone' in regards to 'good works' is not void of Gods active participation within them.

My point to you is that the theme of James 2:14-26 is that good deeds are necessary for salvation and that faith alone doesn't save. Yes, Scripture teaches mercy, just not here, and that is the OP.

You said James 2. If you want only to focus in 14-26 that's fine, but none of the scriptures are stand alone. James 2 also contains 'mercy' as previously noted.

I was responding to this claim:

The topic of James is not "eternal mercy", you are missing his entire point, which is that faith without works is dead and therefore cannot save. Certainly Scripture teaches that God is merciful, but not in these verses, which is the OP. Again, feel free to start a thread on the subject of mercy or Dualism or whatever. If you want to comment on James, please post the verses and interpret them. You have quoted and interpreted (misinterpreted) exactly ONE verses and it was verse 13. You are taking the verse out of it's context in an attempt to prove a point.

If you believe His Mercy is not sufficient for any believer who fails to do 'good works continually' that is also your personal view. I don't see it that way, as all believers 'do not do good works' perpetually, therefore Mercy and Grace are Larger Components.

I doubt any sect says their good works alone stand for salvation.

"For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. 11 For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," said also, "Do not kill." If you do not commit adultery but do kill, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy; yet mercy triumphs over judgment. (James (RSV) 2)

This verse has to do with HUMAN judgement and that we are to be merciful in our judgements because "mercy triumphs over judgment".

Says who?

It clearly says to me no different than what Jesus said. Mercy given, mercy received. That's the way it works.

s

 

[WIP]

If someone has faith, avoiding sin and doing good works are things they will do. Works are a result of faith. Since we love Jesus, we will want to do what He commands.

I agree with this. We don't do good works to prove we love Jesus. We don't do good works out of duty. We do good works out of respect, admiration, and love for Jesus. In other words we do good works because we want to not because of what Jesus will do for us but because of what he has already done.

 

[montanaviking]

Could both of you elaborate on what you mean by faith here - especially in the context of James 2 describing Abraham sacrificing Isaac. What was Abraham to believe here?

I have to disagree with francis here. Or perhaps I did not explain myself well enough. The reason I say faith and works cannot be separated is because James said without works faith is dead. If you can have faith without works then works is not necessary. Now again I am not talking about death bed confessions here. I am talking about someone who put his faith in Christ for salvation and then goes on living. What does God expect of you? He expects you to put your faith into practice by following his commands. Now francis is right when he talks about the law of love. Love for God and love for one another drives us to good works, or it should. Every commandment is based upon these two commands. Everything thing God commands us to do is based upon loving him and loving others. If you have no works, you have no faith. If you make no attempt to follow Gods commands, you really have never believed. Your faith was never real. You may have had an intillectual experience, but you never really gave up your life to him. Remember Jesus said thou shalt love the Lord your God with all thy might, with all they heart, with all thy mind and with all thy strength. Not just with your mind, but with your will, your emotions and your physical body. We are to give all we have to him, not just a portion of ourselves.

Remember the unprofitable servent? He had knowlege of God, but had no works. Thus he was cast out.
James said he would show us his faith BY his works. His works were the proof that he had faith. I believe what James is trying to say here is that works and faith are inseperable as the works prove your faith. Without the works your faith is a dead faith. We already know that works will not save us, but works will prove our faith in Christ. Otherwise the faith is only a head knowlege and we haven't really given ourselves to God.

 

[montanaviking]

Salvific loving works do require faith, but too many consider works as if they were manufactured by a conveyor-belt like faith that automatically spits out "works of love". While in Christ, any loving action is just as much a part of God's Spirit as faith itself is. BOTH are gifts, faith itself doesn't produce love. Faith is not a self-sufficient catalyst for works, as BOTH are from God, a result of being united with His Spirit.

Regards

I agree francis. If faith automatically produced love, then why on earth would Jesus command us to love? Real faith is realiizing we are lost without him and we have to give ourselves to him in order to be saved. Then once that is accomplished we must begin to conform ourselves to his will. It doesn't just happen overnight, but with his spirit within us leading us and guiding us and by our own studying of his word, we can begin to grasp what he wants us to do. The great thing about following Christ is that as we strive to follow his commands the easier it becomes because the spirit works within us transforming us in the likeness of God dear son. As we yield our lives and our will to him and set aside those fleshly things that war against the spirit, we become more and more like him. Our love grows and grows.

 

[ivdavid]

Abram trusted that God would provide, even if the promise (Isaac) was sacrificed.

I didn't get this part - What was Abram trusting God to provide if Isaac had already been sacrificed?

 

[francisdesales]

I have to disagree with francis here. Or perhaps I did not explain myself well enough.

After your in-depth explanation, I see we agree, and my concern was over semantics. We "OUGHT" to have both faith and works. If one has only faith, it is not salvific, but it certainly is possible to have faith without works of love. Your first post seemed to state it was not possible, so I mentioned "ought".

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

I agree francis. If faith automatically produced love, then why on earth would Jesus command us to love? Real faith is realiizing we are lost without him and we have to give ourselves to him in order to be saved. Then once that is accomplished we must begin to conform ourselves to his will. It doesn't just happen overnight, but with his spirit within us leading us and guiding us and by our own studying of his word, we can begin to grasp what he wants us to do. The great thing about following Christ is that as we strive to follow his commands the easier it becomes because the spirit works within us transforming us in the likeness of God dear son. As we yield our lives and our will to him and set aside those fleshly things that war against the spirit, we become more and more like him. Our love grows and grows.

Yes, the entire point of James 2 was to exhort people who already had faith to "work", to love. Faith with love bring salvation to men, allowing us to live life to the fullest, even in this world. The act of self-giving makes Christ known to the world, not just statements on the existence of God.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

I didn't get this part - What was Abram trusting God to provide if Isaac had already been sacrificed?

The promise made to Abram by God would be fulfilled, even if Isaac was sacrificed. Whether by a resurrection of Isaac or another child.

Regards

 

[dadof10]

See, I was able to follow you so far - but I'm getting a little confused here. I assume that the difference between the "works of the law" and the "good deeds" is that the latter is done in faith. I know I'm repeating myself here but bear with me - What is this faith that is to accompany the good deeds?

I'll say this again - I'm really trying to understand what you mean by all this. I am familiar with the terms and phrases being used - but I've found that each person may mean it in different ways - hence the request for clarification.

Let me try an analogy.

The "works" Paul is talking about are like works done for an employer, and the "works" James is talking about are like the works done by a son for his father.

If you are employed you work to EARN your money. At the end of the week your employer has an OBLIGATION to pay you what he promised. He may like you (even love you) and you may feel the same about him, but it really doesn't matter. You have a contractual relationship. This is the "Law". This is the mindset Paul was reacting to. As you can see, there is NO NEED for love, faith or a Savoir. You do your part, God is OBLIGATED to do His.

If you do good deeds for your Father, you have no contractual obligation at all. You ostensibly share a mutual love and so do the things to please your Father out of LOVE not OBLIGATION. You may do everything He wants you to do and so foster a beautiful relationship with Him, pleasing Him in every way and living as you were created to live. LOVE is NECESSARY, you must CHOOSE to love your Father every day. These are the "works" James is talking about.

Your Father may ask you to do certain things and you CAN refuse (because you have free will) at the risk of damaging your RELATIONSHIP with Him. If you continue to disobey and your relationship goes south you may grow apart from your Father and CHOOSE to move out of His house. You may still love Him, respect Him, have faith in Him, but due to your fallen human nature, you sin and drive a wedge between you and Him. This is the context of James 2. James is saying that good deeds done in faith are NECESSARY for us to foster our relationship with our Father, and that lack of "works" (disobedience) can lead to loss of salvation. Faith alone doesn't save.

As I'd agree....but is this the sole basis of believing in the "justification by works" doctrine?

David, we don't believe in "justification by works", we believe in justification by Grace alone. We must cooperate with Grace in order to be saved. God gives the will and the means to do the good deeds that he wants us to do "so that no one may boast".

Besides, I am not aware of "sola fide" implying any such thing either - though I am aware of people distorting it into such effect.

My experience shows the opposite. Start a thread on the topic and you'll see how many Christians believe that the moment they "accepted Jesus as Lord and Savior" they were saved, i.e. going directly to Heaven upon death and unable to lose that salvation EVER. I don't think it's a distortion at all.

I am unable to see how you've solved the initial problem - of making God obligated - that was in the "Law of works". If I haven't misunderstood, you are still stating the same thing, only with added qualifications(faith) and a change in perspective - the "Law of works" perspective dealt with receiving salvation by obedience; the current "justification by works" perspective is dealing with losing salvation by disobedience. Am I oversimplifying this because I've missed something? Help me understand what you're saying if this is not what you meant.

The emphasis is on OBLIGATION, not obedience. You're right, as in my analogy above, in BOTH instances there is obedience, but in the first example the employer is obligated to reward the employee, and in the second, the Father is under no obligation at all, the relationship is one of mutual love. That's the difference, and it's like night and day. James and Paul are referring to two totally different things, using the same word. Paul is referring to obligatory works done to earn something, James is referring to good deeds done in faith out of love. Therefore, James and Paul don't contradict, and James' words are not totally wrenched out of context and distorted beyond comprehension. See, win-win...

 

[dadof10]

What does Romans 3:28 mean?

It means exactly what it says, that man is justified by faith, not works of the Law. See, the words mean what they say. Now, what does Jesus mean when He answers the question "what must I do to inherit eternal life" with the words "keep the commandments"?

It seems that either Jesus looks at the "commandments" as above the "Law" or Paul means "Law" in a general sense. What's NOT open to us is to twist Jesus' words out of context to fit our preconceived, man-made doctrine.

 

[dadof10]

If someone has faith, avoiding sin and doing good works are things they will do. Works are a result of faith. Since we love Jesus, we will want to do what He commands.

Correct, we will WANT to do what He commands, but will we always DO it? My experience says "no". James is saying that this lack of charity will affect our salvation.

 

[dadof10]

Provide a named human example and I'll tell you.
There are examples of believers falling in this present life back into the snare of the devil. There are zero examples of that costing any believer 'eternally.'
I'm consistent with my view. All both do and do not good works, believers or unbeliever.

The tempter also 'functions' in all. So it is not so simply as to just look at man when that is factually not the case. The Spirit of God also functions in believers, so again, just looking at 'man alone' in regards to 'good works' is not void of Gods active participation within them.
You said James 2. If you want only to focus in 14-26 that's fine, but none of the scriptures are stand alone. James 2 also contains 'mercy' as previously noted.
If you believe His Mercy is not sufficient for any believer who fails to do 'good works continually' that is also your personal view. I don't see it that way, as all believers 'do not do good works' perpetually, therefore Mercy and Grace are Larger Components.

I doubt any sect says their good works alone stand for salvation.



Says who?

It clearly says to me no different than what Jesus said. Mercy given, mercy received. That's the way it works.

s

I'm with Drew, Smaller. We are talking by each other and not getting anywhere. I prefer to discuss James 2 here. Take care.

 

[ivdavid]

The promise made to Abram by God would be fulfilled, even if Isaac was sacrificed. Whether by a resurrection of Isaac or another child.

I get your intent - though you might have overlooked something here - not an issue of concern in itself but - If it were through another child, wouldn't the promise be nullified (Gen 17:19)?

Anyway, in that sense, Abram believing God would simply mean that he was sure Isaac would not remain dead - he might have believed God to even bring him back alive from the dead, as you said - but Abram's act of obedience there was only playing out or evidencing his faith in God's ability to fulfill His promises, right? If Abram had not sacrificed Isaac, or if he had sacrificed him for any other reason other than out of his faith in God's promise, he would have evidenced his lack of faith in God, right?

Is that how you mean that faith is made complete with works - as in a complete package of faith - beginning with the personal belief, that is then tested or proved or refined by God with works concerned with such faith?

In this sense, can faith and (its evidencing)works really be separable?

Another point to ponder upon - are God's promises dependent on man's believing them for them to be fulfilled? In other words, is there a possibility for God's word to fall based on the faithlessness of man? (Note, we're not talking about conditional covenants, just the promises of God.)

 

[childeye]

Salvific loving works do require faith, but too many consider works as if they were manufactured by a conveyor-belt like faith that automatically spits out "works of love". While in Christ, any loving action is just as much a part of God's Spirit as faith itself is. BOTH are gifts, faith itself doesn't produce love. Faith is not a self-sufficient catalyst for works, as BOTH are from God, a result of being united with His Spirit.

Regards

Dear Joe, you are doing a great job on this thread. I can't resist commenting and please excuse my semantics on the above. Your point is well said and accurate as to oppose apathy but not necesasarily vanity. It is my experience that there is a conveyor belt articulated as the unceasing needs of others in poverty and in need of help that are shall I say falling off this conveyor belt into ruin lest someone catch them in Godly Love. We all must put our money where our mouth is, me included.

 

[francisdesales]

I get your intent - though you might have overlooked something here - not an issue of concern in itself but - If it were through another child, wouldn't the promise be nullified (Gen 17:19)?

I am not sure what Abram was thinking, but the gist is that he trusted God would provide for the necessary continuation of Abram's seed. The question is what did Abram think - if God is taking away the "child of the promise", surely, God would provide another means. But perhaps you are correct, and Abram knew all along that after the knife plunged into Isaac's neck, God would re-animate Isaac...? Certainly, Abram must have questioned "how is God going to do this?"

Anyway, in that sense, Abram believing God would simply mean that he was sure Isaac would not remain dead - he might have believed God to even bring him back alive from the dead, as you said - but Abram's act of obedience there was only playing out or evidencing his faith in God's ability to fulfill His promises, right?

In this case, we have an act of faith and a work that relies upon that faith as a motivation for it. Abram took his son to be a sacrifice - not because of any intellectual concepts, but because he trusted that God would provide. He was justified by what he did, according to James - which certainly includes that faith (and certainly doesn't exclude the act of doing it). He didn't merely state "I have faith" while (as James said regarding the hungry) doing nothing. THAT is James point. Having faith is not enough. It must be joined to an action based upon that faith and what is expected of us in a given situation. We believe that we are called to do God's Will.

My point is that a faith without a corresponding action cannot save.

If Abram had not sacrificed Isaac, or if he had sacrificed him for any other reason other than out of his faith in God's promise, he would have evidenced his lack of faith in God, right?

The act would not have a salvific meaning without faith, since NO ONE can please God without faith.

Is that how you mean that faith is made complete with works - as in a complete package of faith - beginning with the personal belief, that is then tested or proved or refined by God with works concerned with such faith?-

I think you are trying overly hard to "package" faith into one all-encompassing definition that includes a multitude of distinctive meanings. Conversion, repentance, love, hope - they are not faith, but all are required to be saved. They cannot be "lumped" into "faith" so easily. A life of faith takes into account that one is indeed LIVING their faith, which explicitly means they are "working their faith in love". They are converting, repenting of sin, hoping in the Lord, showing works of mercy and love towards others.

But James and Paul see that faith and love are not always part of the same action. One can have all the faith to move mountains, right? What good is it without love? And vice versus. Thus, we find nothing wrong with saying one is saved by faith and works (saved as in going to heaven).

In this sense, can faith and (its evidencing)works really be separable?

They are not the same thing. Clearly, one can have either without the other.

Another point to ponder upon - are God's promises dependent on man's believing them for them to be fulfilled? In other words, is there a possibility for God's word to fall based on the faithlessness of man? (Note, we're not talking about conditional covenants, just the promises of God.)

Whenver God makes an offer of Love to man - and man says "no", God opens another path, another initiative to offer that Love to man again. God foresees man's "no", and I think God's means of dealing with our rejection shows His great love for us. God's Word is given to mankind (Jesus), and that Word will never fail.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Dear Joe, you are doing a great job on this thread. I can't resist commenting and please excuse my semantics on the above. Your point is well said and accurate as to oppose apathy but not necesasarily vanity. It is my experience that there is a conveyor belt articulated as the unceasing needs of others in poverty and in need of help that are shall I say falling off this conveyor belt into ruin lest someone catch them in Godly Love. We all must put our money where our mouth is, me included.

Thanks,

Vanity and its opposite, humility, are covered elsewhere in Scriptures. Reading just this short section of James 2 certainly could lead one into thinking they have to "work out" their salvation - and that vanity could become an issue. But read as an entirety, the Word of God - charecterized by Jesus Himself - is of One who laid aside His Divinity, rather than grab for it, like Adam. The act of love is the act of self-giving, which SHOULD prevent pride from entering in, if the motives are pure.

I agree that God has a "conveyor belt" at the ready to provide daily instances of choices on whether to love or not. However, it is my experience that merely having an intellectual belief in God's existence does not lead to humble giving. It is the Loving act of the Spirit within us that moves us to desire to love (Phil 2:12-13). This movement by the Spirit is JUST AS MUCH a GIFT as faith!

Regards