Is belief "works"?

[dadof10]

Do I really have to show you this all over again? Really?

Faith in the Blood of Christ stands all alone on the side of that which justifies. Any other thing you can do or think is by simple definition not faith in the blood of Christ. It may be a manifestation of your faith in the blood of Christ, but it is NOT faith in the blood of Christ itself.

The Bible does not list anything else that can justify. It plainly says what does justify.

Let me respond to your contention from a previous post, because it fits here:

The mistake you're making is thinking that you can just substitute 'justify' in place of 'save' anywhere you want in scripture as if they mean exactly the same thing.

The two words have some differences and a lot of similarities. I could go back and copy a few of your posts which say "justification/salvation", so you obviously agree they are somewhat similar. Paul "substitutes" the two words in Rom. 10:8-10:

"But what does it say? The word is near you, on your lips and in your heart (that is, the word of faith which we preach); 9 because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved."

Please note:

"confess with your lips"= Salvation
"believe in your heart"= Salvation

"believes in his heart"=Justification
"confesses with his lips"=Salvation

Justification carries with it the connotation of legalism, and salvation doesn't, but for our purposes here we can use both words to mean having eternal life, or going to Heaven. This is what we are talking about here.

The two are similar in that there is no one who is justified and not saved, or saved yet not justified. They both mean getting to Heaven.

And if you insist that James says love for others justifies (the example of the work that 'justifies' that he uses) as Paul means 'to justify' then he is directly contradicting what Paul says, so we know by simple logic and rationale that he is not saying we are made righteous by fulfilling the work of the law to love others.

Again, no it doesn't, and this is NOT proof that the word "justify" in James means "shown to be righteous".

The seeming contradiction can be easily reconciled by simply looking at the meaning of the word "works" in Paul and James. Paul means "works of the Mosaic law", James means "good deeds". There, crisis averted, and we don't have to do backflips and sound ridiculous by claiming James means "shown to be righteous", when it's obvious he doesn't.

And then of course you'll want to argue that 'works of the law' has a connotation about it that refers ONLY to works of the law not done in faith. Then I will refer you to Hebrews 6 where we see that word does NOT automatically have that connotation attached.

I have never made this claim. You are arguing with yourself.

Just show me this verse that says Paul was just leaving out something on the side of faith in regard to what can/ can not justify. That's all you have to do. Do that and you win and we can all go home.

OK. I made the claim that "Scripture doesn't say they [Isaac and Jacob] WERE justified, but you are positive they were. Double standard."

You posted the verse:

11 I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 8:11 NIV1984)

It is obvious you believe from this verse, that Isaac and Jacob were in Heaven and are, therefore, justified, correct? You have made this claim in other places also, and you are right. Only people who are justified are in Heaven.

Here is your proof, so we can all go home:

"And a ruler asked him, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 19 And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 20 You know the commandments: `Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.'" (Luke 18: 18-20)

"For he will render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;" (Rom. 2:6,7)

In the first verse, we have Jesus Himself saying to inherit eternal life (enter Heaven, justified) we must keep the commandments. In the second, we have Paul saying eternal life (Heaven, justification) will be given "to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality".

Being in Heaven, like Isaac and Jacob, is the proof of justification. It only stands to reason that what GETS us to Heaven, justifies us. Jesus and Paul are saying that to be justified we have to keep the commandments and do good works, because obviously we CAN'T inherit eternal life without being justified.

So, I guess I "win", whatever that means to you. Is there any prize money attached???

 

[dadof10]

That's sort of the irony of it, right? For the sake of the rules of debate here, I cannot contrast such beliefs with our own, but it is nice to meet a fellow Catholic who holds the same sacred beliefs as my own

 

[veryberry]

The most common verse for a Grace basedChristian is:

Eph. 2: 8-9 - For by grace you have beensaved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.

This verse means exactly what it says. Paul writes in Romans 11: 6 – (And if bygrace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, itis no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work). There is absolutely nothing that we can do tosave ourselves but put our full faith and full trust in Jesus Christ alone, forhe is the only way to God (John 14: 6).



The most common verse for a Grace/Worksbased Christian is:

James 2: 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does nothave works, is dead.

Just looking at this verse, you can see howit seems to contradict Eph. 2: 8-9. What? Faith is dead without works? But I thought it was through faithalone!!! Actually this verse has nothingto do with gaining salvation. If youread all of James , you will see that James is talking about Carnal Christians (peoplewith dead faith or people who claim to be christian) and has nothing to do withneeding works along with grace to become saved.

So what is a Carnal Christian? They are:

a) A False Convert –Someone who has said a prayer asking Jesus into their heart, being baptized bywater but continuing to live there selfish/sinful lives. They continue to livefor themselves instead of putting their full faith and trust in Jesus Christ. Instead, they rely on their church, their pastor,teacher, etc for their comfort and thus their hearts remain as evil as theywere beforehand.

b) A False Teacher/Preacher/Pastor/Prophet– They pervert the gospel for their own selfish reasons whether it being : a)They don’t want to scare people away which is completely wrong, I don’t care ifyour building has 4 people in it, preach the darn TRUTH! Or b) They preach afalse gospel for their own personal gain, fame, etc… They only create and caterto False Converts leaving True Converts starving for Jesus.

c) Someone who says thatthey believe in Jesus Christ – They are much like False Coverts but don’t readthe bible or go to a church but simply rely on being a “good person†for theirsalvation.

Okay, so let’s look at the next verse.

James 2: 18 Butsomeone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.†Show me your faithwithout your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.

When someone sees the way you live, wouldthey be able to tell if you are a Christian? If so, how? How do you act and talk? What is your reaction when you encounter people in need? Are you letting the Holy Spirit guide you inlife? Your outward works show yourinward faith, but they do not save you.

Here is another verse that seems to contradict:

James 2: 21-24 - Was not Abraham our fatherjustified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with hisworks, and by works faith was made perfect? 23And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abrahambelieved God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.†And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, andnot by faith only.

James uses Abraham to show what True SavingFaith is. Was it Abrahams works thatmade him righteous? No, It was that he believed God. But it was his works that werethe outward showing of his inward faith and those works made his faithperfect. So what does it mean when Jamessays justified by works? Let’s substitute justified with “proved to be validâ€. Who was it proved to? God? No, because he wasaccounted for being righteous because he believed God (Roms 4: 1-3), but to thewhole world. Abraham was an example and the father of all believers.

Romans 4:1-3 - What then shall we say thatAbraham our father has found according to the flesh? 2 For ifAbraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but notbefore God. 3 For what does the Scripturesay? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted tohim for righteousness.â€

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The most common verse for a Grace/Worksbased Christian is:

James 2: 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does nothave works, is dead.

Just looking at this verse, you can see howit seems to contradict Eph. 2: 8-9. What? Faith is dead without works? But I thought it was through faithalone!!! Actually this verse has nothingto do with gaining salvation. If youread all of James , you will see that James is talking about Carnal Christians (peoplewith dead faith or people who claim to be christian) and has nothing to do withneeding works along with grace to become saved.

I agree with your post except that I would say James does has something to do with salvation. He asks the rhetorical question of whether or not the faith that is not accompanied by works can save (James 2:14). The answer to that question being what many of us in the church understand and agree with (that is, 'no').

The faith that justifies, all by itself, and which can save us, is the faith that can be seen in what it does, that work testifying on our behalf at the Judgment that we do indeed have the righteousness of Christ by faith in his blood apart from our works.

And you did point out the key to what James means by 'justified' in his teaching:

"...I will show you my faith by what I do." (James 2:18 NIV1984)

He uses 'justified' in regard to that particular meaning of the word--to 'show one to be righteous', not as Paul uses it--to 'make one righteous'.

The faith that fulfills the law 'love your neighbor as yourself' is the faith that saves. Upholding that law is how we know we have been justified in Christ and have his righteousness apart from our works, not how we get the righteousness of Christ.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Please explain how you could possibly be in brotherly, doctrinal agreement with EdenBorn who says baptism is symbolic, and a person can be save by works alone. He's even more in disagreement with your church and it's doctrine than my doctrinal affiliation is, lol!

 

[veryberry]

I agree with your post except that I would say James does has something to do with salvation. He asks the rhetorical question of whether or not the faith that is not accompanied by works can save (James 2:14). The answer to that question being what many of us in the church understand and agree with (that is, 'no').

Thank you, I should've put: has nothing to do with salvation through works.
Once we put true saving faith in Jesus, we are born again. Then he changes us & good works come as a result. It is those good works that show our faith.
"Faith alone saves, but, the faith that saves is never alone." ~ John Calvin

The faith that fulfills the law 'love your neighbor as yourself' is the faith that saves. Upholding that law is how we know we have been justified in Christ and have his righteousness apart from our works, not how we get the righteousness of Christ.

I like this! It's a good way of explaining it.

 

[dadof10]

Please explain how you could possibly be in brotherly, doctrinal agreement with EdenBorn who says baptism is symbolic, and a person can be save by works alone. He's even more in disagreement with your church and it's doctrine than my doctrinal affiliation is, lol!

Is that what the "salute" emoticon means, "brotherly, doctrinal agreement"? I though it meant "I have not read any of your posts, but you say you're Catholic, so I assume that means you are in union with the Magisterium, because 99% of people who call themselves 'Catholic' on these forums are."

I don't usually respond to more than one person at a time here, unless they post directly to me, so I don't see all the posts. I really don't have much time.

Would you care to address my points above, now?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I am totally amazed at this back-and-forth regarding the word ergon which is the Greek word translated "works." Here's a heads up for you who apparently haven't bothered to look it up in the Greek.

Ergon means "works," period, whether the translation calls for the English word to be "action, behavior, deeds, labor, task" or other synonym for "works." It only means "works of the Law" when it is specifically used in that phrase, "works of the Law," which is only six times in Paul's writings, which also happen to be the only six times in the entire New Testament. Ergon appears 158 tiimes throughout the New Testament, however, and Paul uses it separately from "of the Law" 63 times, clearly reflecting his concern about all "works" that are an effort to justify one's self before the Lord, not just the "works" specified in the Law.

 

[Eugene]

Faith will produce works of righteousness not of necessity but love. Saved by grace and works of righteousness are not opposites; they express the very meaning of 1 John 4:19, "We love him, because he first loved us."

Our works are judged now as we walk with the Lord and produce unfathomable eternal inheritance. The very context of James cannot conflict with scripture or negate work's purpose before man; Matthew 7:20 "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." James 2:18 says it this way: "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."

Be blessed in Christ Jesus.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Would you care to address my points above, now?

Yes. That's why I'm here. I can devote time to it now.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

"But what does it say? The word is near you, on your lips and in your heart (that is, the word of faith which we preach); 9 because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he confesses with his lips and so is saved."

Please note:

"confess with your lips"= Salvation
"believe in your heart"= Salvation

"believes in his heart"=Justification
"confesses with his lips"=Salvation

I see it clearly. Justification is by believing in your heart. He does not say confessing with your mouth, or anything else, justifies. He makes the point of saying believing does the justifying. This is perfectly consistent with what Paul said earlier in the letter.

Justification carries with it the connotation of legalism, and salvation doesn't...

Justification means 'to be declared legally righteous', as in 'made' legally righteous before God. Salvation does NOT mean to be declared legally righteous. We are not going to be declared legally righteous on the Day of Wrath. We are going to be saved on the Day of Wrath. Two different things.

...but for our purposes here we can use both words to mean having eternal life, or going to Heaven. This is what we are talking about here.

No, what we are talking about here is, among all the things that the Bible says 'saves', which actually secures a declaration of righteousness? The Bible says the 'work' of believing does that...all by itself. Sadly, some people misunderstand the argument to mean the faith that justifies has no obligation to now do anything else and attempt to take the argument completely to the other extreme and make justification by both faith and works.

The two are similar in that there is no one who is justified and not saved, or saved yet not justified. They both mean getting to Heaven.

No. One means to be declared righteous. The other means to be delivered from the wrath and curse of God.

The seeming contradiction can be easily reconciled by simply looking at the meaning of the word "works" in Paul and James. Paul means "works of the Mosaic law", James means "good deeds".

James' 'good deeds' ARE works of the law ("if you really keep the royal law of scripture" James 2:8 NIV1984). And, as he explains, to not fulfill the requirement of that law is to sin (James 2:9). Just as Paul explains that the law we don't keep, the law he says CAN'T justify, defines sin for us (Romans 3:20-22). IOW, Paul and James are talking about the same law--the law that shows us to be sinners if we don't keep it. So we see that Paul is NOT only talking about circumcision or other ceremonial works of the laws--laws that don't constitute sin anymore--but is referring to the same moral law that James says 'justifies' us, as in shows us to be righteous.

There, crisis averted, and we don't have to do backflips and sound ridiculous by claiming James means "shown to be righteous", when it's obvious he doesn't.

What do you mean by 'obvious he doesn't'? You're kidding, right?

"...I will SHOW you my faith BY WHAT I DO." (James 2:18 NIV1984)

OK. I made the claim that "Scripture doesn't say they [Isaac and Jacob] WERE justified, but you are positive they were. Double standard."

What double standard? The point of contention is if Abraham was justified before Genesis 15. You can no more prove that than prove when Isaac and Jacob were justified.

Here is your proof, so we can all go home:

"And a ruler asked him, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 19 And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 20 You know the commandments: `Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.'" (Luke 18: 18-20)

Where does it say these works of the law did the actual justifying? Show me.

We know from the whole counsel of scripture that it is the faith that moves one to keep the law summed up in 'love your neighbor as yourself'--'love does no harm to it's neighbor' (Romans 13:9-10 NIV1984) that does the actual justifying.

Paul said these works of the law--that define sin for us--do not, and can not, justify.

"For he will render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;" (Rom. 2:6,7)

...the testimony of our good works saving us on the Day of Wrath in that they validate the declaration of righteousness we gained by our faith in the blood of Christ apart from our works.

In the first verse, we have Jesus Himself saying to inherit eternal life (enter Heaven, justified)...

No. Justified means to be declared legally righteous.

...we must keep the commandments.

Genuine justification must be validated by keeping the commandments--the righteous work of the law. That doesn't mean the works do the justifying. Paul said the commandments, the works of the law can't do that. And we know he's not talking about circumcision because he qualified the law that can't justify as the law that convicts of sin, not the law that no longer convicts of sin.

In the second, we have Paul saying eternal life (Heaven, justification) will be given "to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality".

Yes. Being genuinely justified in Christ by faith apart from works is seen in what it does. That's how you know you are persevering in the faith that justifies. That does not mean the works justifying faith does do the actual justifying. Paul said that they can not do that. He plainly said faith in Christ's blood does that...plainly.


So, just show us the scripture that says we are justified by what we do. Not saved by what we do, or shown to be righteous by what we do, but the scripture that literally and specifically says we are made righteous by what we do (outside of the 'work' of believing in Christ, of course).

 

[dadof10]

I see it clearly. Justification is by believing in your heart. He does not say confessing with your mouth, or anything else, justifies. He makes the point of saying believing does the justifying. This is perfectly consistent with what Paul said earlier in the letter.



Justification means 'to be declared legally righteous', as in 'made' legally righteous before God. Salvation does NOT mean to be declared legally righteous. We are not going to be declared legally righteous on the Day of Wrath. We are going to be saved on the Day of Wrath. Two different things.




No, what we are talking about here is, among all the things that the Bible says 'saves', which actually secures a declaration of righteousness? The Bible says the 'work' of believing does that...all by itself. Sadly, some people misunderstand the argument to mean the faith that justifies has no obligation to now do anything else and attempt to take the argument completely to the other extreme and make justification by both faith and works.



No. One means to be declared righteous. The other means to be delivered from the wrath and curse of God.



James' 'good deeds' ARE works of the law ("if you really keep the royal law of scripture" James 2:8 NIV1984). And, as he explains, to not fulfill the requirement of that law is to sin (James 2:9). Just as Paul explains that the law we don't keep, the law he says CAN'T justify, defines sin for us (Romans 3:20-22). IOW, Paul and James are talking about the same law--the law that shows us to be sinners if we don't keep it. So we see that Paul is NOT only talking about circumcision or other ceremonial works of the laws--laws that don't constitute sin anymore--but is referring to the same moral law that James says 'justifies' us, as in shows us to be righteous.




What do you mean by 'obvious he doesn't'? You're kidding, right?

"...I will SHOW you my faith BY WHAT I DO." (James 2:18 NIV1984)




What double standard? The point of contention is if Abraham was justified before Genesis 15. You can no more prove that than prove when Isaac and Jacob were justified.



Where does it say these works of the law did the actual justifying? Show me.

We know from the whole counsel of scripture that it is the faith that moves one to keep the law summed up in 'love your neighbor as yourself'--'love does no harm to it's neighbor' (Romans 13:9-10 NIV1984) that does the actual justifying.

Paul said these works of the law--that define sin for us--do not, and can not, justify.




...the testimony of our good works saving us on the Day of Wrath in that they validate the declaration of righteousness we gained by our faith in the blood of Christ apart from our works.



No. Justified means to be declared legally righteous.



Genuine justification must be validated by keeping the commandments--the righteous work of the law. That doesn't mean the works do the justifying. Paul said the commandments, the works of the law can't do that. And we know he's not talking about circumcision because he qualified the law that can't justify as the law that convicts of sin, not the law that no longer convicts of sin.



Yes. Being genuinely justified in Christ by faith apart from works is seen in what it does. That's how you know you are persevering in the faith that justifies. That does not mean the works justifying faith does do the actual justifying. Paul said that they can not do that. He plainly said faith in Christ's blood does that...plainly.


So, just show us the scripture that says we are justified by what we do. Not saved by what we do, or shown to be righteous by what we do, but the scripture that literally and specifically says we are made righteous by what we do (outside of the 'work' of believing in Christ, of course).

All of this is really interesting, but moot to our point. We've gone past this. It's pretty simple.

1) When a person inherits eternal life, is he saved? Yes or no?
2) When a person inherits eternal life, is he justified? Yes or no?
3) If an action (which includes faith) leads to eternal life, is it a "justifying" action? Yes or no?
4) If an action (which includes faith) leads to eternal life, is it a salvific action? Yes or no?
5) If we do not perform the action, are we justified/saved anyway? Yes or no?

The rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (inherit justification). Jesus told him to keep the commandments. There is only one way to interpret this.

If Jesus would have said "believe in me if you wish to enter life" here instead of "keep the commandments", you would bring this verse up to PROVE JUSTIFICATION by faith alone.

Paul said God will give eternal life (justification) "to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality". There is only one way to interpret this also.

The James stuff and the salvation/justification stuff is just distraction.

The two verses I posted refer to justification, by your own admission (remember Jacob and Isaac and the "kingdom of God"?). If something leads to eternal life, it leads to justification, unless you're going to make the claim that somehow, somewhere there is someone who has eternal life, yet is not justified.

You said if I could show a verse that says we are justified by something other than faith, I "win" and we all go home. Well, there it is...Again.

 

[dadof10]

I am totally amazed at this back-and-forth regarding the word ergon which is the Greek word translated "works." Here's a heads up for you who apparently haven't bothered to look it up in the Greek.

Ergon means "works," period, whether the translation calls for the English word to be "action, behavior, deeds, labor, task" or other synonym for "works." It only means "works of the Law" when it is specifically used in that phrase, "works of the Law," which is only six times in Paul's writings, which also happen to be the only six times in the entire New Testament.

Are you sure you want to go down this road? Let's use the same logic with the word "faith".

The Greek word faith (pistis) means "conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man's relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it"

Keeping consistent with your logic, all instances of faith in the NT would have to mean simple belief in God unless "faith in Christ" was specifically mentioned. Let's look at a couple of verses with this in mind.

"As the outcome of your faith you obtain the salvation of your souls." (1Pt. 1:9)

Well, no mention of Jesus, so I guess Peter is saying that we obtain salvation by simple belief in God.

"But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe." (Rom. 3:21-22)

Here we have Paul stating that faith IN CHRIST makes us righteous. Does he carry this theme through as he writes, or does he switch to the less specific "belief in God"?

"For there is no distinction; since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus. (v. 23-26)

Well, so far so good.

"Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On the principle of works? No, but on the principle of faith. For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith.
Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." (v. 27-31)

Nope, he uses only the word "faith" here without the "in Christ" qualifier. So is he trying to confuse us or does he JUST NOT SEE THE NEED TO PUT "IN CHRIST" BEHIND EVERY INSTANCE OF THE WORD "FAITH" TO MAKE HIS POINT?

This is simply the way Paul writes. Keep in mind, he is writing letters to people who he taught and knew very well. When he writes the word "works" to these people, they know he means "works of the law" whether he puts the "of the law" qualifier after it or not, just like they knew he meant "faith in Christ" when he wrote "faith".

The context of Paul's use of the word "works" in ALL INSTANCES where he contrasts works to faith, SCREAMS "works of the law". There is no reason to believe that he means "all deeds" when, and only when, he contrasts works to faith. Context is king.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Are you sure you want to go down this road? Let's use the same logic with the word "faith".

I already went down that road, and posted the only relevant fact of the matter, i.e., "works." You start out talking about faith, which obviously has nothing to do with works, given that works can't save and only faith in Christ can. So I see no need to go any further.

 

[dadof10]

I already went down that road, and posted the only relevant fact of the matter, i.e., "works." You start out talking about faith, which obviously has nothing to do with works, given that works can't save and only faith in Christ can. So I see no need to go any further.

Huh? :

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This is simply the way Paul writes. Keep in mind, he is writing letters to people who he taught and knew very well. When he writes the word "works" to these people, they know he means "works of the law" whether he puts the "of the law" qualifier after it or not, just like they knew he meant "faith in Christ" when he wrote "faith".

The context of Paul's use of the word "works" in ALL INSTANCES where he contrasts works to faith, SCREAMS "works of the law". There is no reason to believe that he means "all deeds" when, and only when, he contrasts works to faith. Context is king.

Yes, context is king. That's how we know Paul's 'works of the law' does NOT mean only circumcision, as you insist, because Paul says the law that can't justify is what convicts us of sin (Romans 3:20). Circumcision is no longer a requirement of law that convicts of sin in this New Covenant.

And since James speaks of this same law--the law that convicts us of sin (James 2:8-9)--as that which does justify we know from simple logic that James does not mean 'justify' in the same definition of the word as Paul uses it. IOW, James is simply not saying the works he cites justify a person as Paul means that. And again--context being king--we can plainly see what James does mean by a person being "justified by what he does and not by faith alone" (vs.24) and that it is a different definition than what Paul uses:

"...I will show you my faith by what I do." (James 2:18 NIV1984)

Context is exactly how your argument is defeated.


Just show us the verse that tells us what work besides the 'work' of believing justifies so we can know Paul means only some work can't justify. Can't use James to do that. King context shows us he is talking about another definition of 'justified'.

 

[dadof10]

Yes, context is king. That's how we know Paul's 'works of the law' does NOT mean only circumcision, as you insist,

You know I don't believe that. I've told you about five times now. This is a clear sign of desperation. You know your arguments don't make Biblical sense, and the only recourse left is more distraction and straw-men.

because Paul says the law that can't justify is what convicts us of sin (Romans 3:20). Circumcision is no longer a requirement of law that convicts of sin in this New Covenant.

Never said it still was. Another attempt at distraction.

And since James speaks of this same law--the law that convicts us of sin (James 2:8-9)--as that which does justify we know from simple logic that James does not mean 'justify' in the same definition of the word as Paul uses it. IOW, James is simply not saying the works he cites justify a person as Paul means that. And again--context being king--we can plainly see what James does mean by a person being "justified by what he does and not by faith alone" (vs.24) and that it is a different definition than what Paul uses:

"...I will show you my faith by what I do." (James 2:18 NIV1984)

Context is exactly how your argument is defeated.

And an attempt to draw me into yet another discussion on James. This is off point, but you must feel like it's a strong argument for you. I'm not biting because it's another distraction. We've been over James before. Time to move on to the relevant point, which is...

Just show us the verse that tells us what work besides the 'work' of believing justifies so we can know Paul means only some work can't justify. Can't use James to do that. King context shows us he is talking about another definition of 'justified'.

I don't have to use James. Jesus and Paul will do just fine.

"And a ruler asked him, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 19 And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. 20 You know the commandments: `Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.'" (Luke 18: 18-20)

The rich man asks Jesus what he must do to be justified. Jesus answers that he must keep the commandments. To be justified, keep the commandments. I don't know how much clearer it could be.

"For he will render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;" (Rom. 2:6,7)

Paul says God will justify those who do well and seek glory, honor and immortality. This is not faith alone. Again, crystal clear.

Here are the questions from my last post which were ignored. I presume the reason they were ignored is that you have no answer. The two verses above PROVE beyond a doubt that justification is is not by faith alone, and that what we do effects that justification.

1) When a person inherits eternal life, is he saved? Yes or no?
2) When a person inherits eternal life, is he justified? Yes or no?
3) If an action (which includes faith) leads to eternal life, is it a "justifying" action? Yes or no?
4) If an action (which includes faith) leads to eternal life, is it a salvific action? Yes or no?
5) If we do not perform the action, are we justified/saved anyway? Yes or no?

The rich man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life (inherit justification). Jesus told him to keep the commandments. There is only one way to interpret this.

If Jesus would have said "believe in me if you wish to enter life" here instead of "keep the commandments", you would bring this verse up to PROVE JUSTIFICATION by faith alone.

Paul said God will give eternal life (justification) "to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality". There is only one way to interpret this also.

The two verses I posted refer to justification, by your own admission (remember Jacob and Isaac and the "kingdom of God"?). If something leads to eternal life, it leads to justification, unless you're going to make the claim that somehow, somewhere there is someone who has eternal life, yet is not justified.

The only way my above argument fails is if you can show how a person can have eternal life, yet not be justified. It would be kinda hard for you to do, since you have admitted justification equates with Heaven when you made the argument that Isaac and Jacob were justified because they were in the "kingdom of God".

Someone said (Churchill?) "Madame, when the facts change, so does my opinion". The facts of justification have changed for you, time for a change of opinion.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The only way my above argument fails is if you can show how a person can have eternal life, yet not be justified. It would be kinda hard for you to do, since you have admitted justification equates with Heaven when you made the argument that Isaac and Jacob were justified because they were in the "kingdom of God".

And I will ask again, "how does this mean the works themselves do the justifying?" Show us the passage of scripture that says this. That's all you have to do. I've shown you where the Bible says faith in Christ's blood does the justifying all by itself. So, stop avoiding the question and show us where it says our works do the actual justifying for the person saved and on his way to heaven. That's all you have to do.

Someone said (Churchill?) "Madame, when the facts change, so does my opinion". The facts of justification have changed for you, time for a change of opinion.

Unless you can come up with the passage that tells us our works do the justifying you yourself need to consider a change in your opinion. Really.

 

[heymikey80]

What does this [save] have to do with atone or justify?

What does "save" have to do with "atone"? One accomplishes the other, yes?

 

[dadof10]

And I will ask again, "how does this mean the works themselves do the justifying?" Show us the passage of scripture that says this. That's all you have to do.

"And a ruler asked him, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"

The ruler asked Jesus what should he do to be justified.

"And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments: `Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honor your father and mother.'"

Jesus tells him what he needs to do to be justified. He needs to not commit adultery, not kill, not steal, etc. in order to be justified.

"For he will render to every man according to his works: 7 to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;"

God will give eternal life (justification) to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality.

There. For the third time, there is my explanation of these verses. Now it's your turn. How would you explain these verses? And PLEASE, use the words of the verses themselves, not any other words that don't appear in the text, like "faith" or "alone" or "all by itself" or "whole council of Scripture".

You need to explain how these verses don't say what the words actually say. It is crystal clear to anyone with a fifth grade education what Paul and Jesus are trying to say. You have to do some pretty creative distorting to NOT come to the obvious conclusion that both verses teach justification by something other than faith alone.

I've shown you where the Bible says faith in Christ's blood does the justifying all by itself.

No you haven't. You have shown me where Scripture says faith justifies, but not where it, ALONE (or "all by itself", which means the exact same thing), justifies. That is taught NOWHERE in Scripture.