James 2 has no comparison between the person who apostatized and the person who has true faith. It is a contrast between the person who has a dead faith (one that does not save) and a person with true faith. The person with the dead faith cannot apostatize because he does not have true saving faith.
So then, yes, I would not see the two statements as mutually exclusive. The person with true faith (one whom the Spirit has regenerated them) has no desire to apostatize. The person with dead faith (unregenerate) cannot apostatize because he began as apostate even though he was within the institutional Church.
Dadof10, this is not meant to be derogatory in any way, and is not in the least an expression of frustration. I sincerely wonder if you do not have a blind side in your theology here because as a Roman Catholic you think of initial justification of all those brought into the Church. On the other hand, from your perspective, you might think I have a blind side to my theology because I do not think in terms of initial justification. The person in 1 John 2:19 that I mention below was a part of the institutional Church and if he were Roman Catholic, even thought he would be baptized, the text of 1John 1:19 says "he was never of us." In other words, the ceremony of Baptism did not justify or save him. So then, that person in 1 John 2:19 and the person who has a "dead faith" in James 2 cannot apostatize because their starting point is not salvation with a dead faith.
It is also not rare for some who show this faith, to revert back to their previous lives. Some people take years, others months, but there are those who perform all the "works" I listed above (and then some) then, after a certain amount time has past, revert to apathy, or worse, atheism.
To put it another way, most of the backsliders who "saved" Christians would consider "never really saved...", have, in the past, "showed" or PROVED they really were saved and simply lost this salvation.
I would just like to get some thoughts from those who hold this interpretation of James and OSAS. How can you reconcile a "shown to be righteous" interpretation of James 2 and the fact that some of the people who do show it, backslide?
Dadof10, I too have meet some of these people you mention who might say "I was once saved." Not long ago, there was a young girl in the office where I work. She went to Bible College, wanted to be a youth pastor, then after months or years, she fell away. She would have agreed with you that she was once saved. Yet when I discussed biblical, theological, and spiritual things, I would get these replies that demonstrated that she really did not understand the basic teachings of Christianity and God's grace.
I recognize that some of what we are saying here neither of us can prove. It is anecdotal. I am sure neither of us want to settle things on an anecdotal basis, but on the basis of scriptural exegesis. However, even youth pastors, protestant clergy (and Catholic priests), and many others who might look great in the faith will fall because they were never really of us. They started from the wrong point. If you start from the wrong point, 100% will fall. There was never really a chance in the first place. As they would say in OSAS, "they were never really saved."
So then the question is not, did they fall, but the question is did they start from a correct starting point. When James compares the person with a dead faith with the person with a true faith, how can you demonstrate from the context that the person with the dead faith ever had a correct starting point of true faith?
Again, I recognize that you will want to think in terms of initial justification, or some anecdotal situation, but we are doing exegesis of James 2, right?
If I can ask a question here, when James was speaking of the dead faith, was the person with the dead faith fellowshipping in a congregation in the early Church or not?
Yes, I think so. He starts out by calling them "brothers".
Was the term "brothers" for those of a dead faith and he was making a statement with theological intent, saying they were saved? Or on the other hand, was he just making a generic statement to his readers? Was he speaking of the readers as his brother, or the person with dead faith?
I am going to admit something to the shame of protestants. I hope this is not seen as too negative by some, or too shocking. Some people have drifted through some of the protestant Churches I have been in and they sound as Pelagian as can be. Some of these can be so far off the understanding of God's Grace that they cannot be considered real protestants. I am dead serious that they sound unOrthodox with their Pelagian theology. Some of these people get involved for a while, they look really good, and then they leave Church and some go to a different Church, some do not go to a Church at all. They might produce something that might even look like good works for a while. They might deceive some in the congregation that they are good Christian's on fire. When some of these people fall away, I am not shocked. Of course some of them go on, learn truth, and increasingly serve God.
I think of the parable of the seeds. Some of the seed grows for a time, but it does not take root.
Do these people "show" their true faith, in your opinion?
Hmmm, I can see that on an Anecdotal basis some people might think that they did some of the works that demonstrate a true faith. On the other hand, I would continue to disagree that they were the works which demonstrate a true faith.
I might be making an extreme illustration that is not realistic, but I hope it demonstrates the point. Lets say a Mormon (the most polytheistic religion known to man) came into your congregation. They believe in polytheism, have a completely pelagian theology, and from the beginning believe every unorthodox and heretical position known in the history of Christianity. Not one ounce of Orthodoxy. Then some priest baptizes them, (or some protestant preacher) and they begin to help the elderly, and do a few nice things. No will you accept this as true faith and their works as demonstrating their true faith? I know some Mormons. some Mormons are really nice people and do some really nice things. Can we throw a little water on one of them, and then quickly say they are saved, but then when the change their minds and leave the Catholic (or Baptist) Church can we say they lost their salvation? They never changed their minds on their polytheism or pelagianism, they believed those things all along. They just got baptized and did a few nice things and then a year or two later they left the Church.
Let me add that I see testimony's of people that leave my own faith and then go into all sorts of religions. Yet I have yet to meet one of these people that leave, that can properly represent the doctrines that we believe. They try, but badly misrepresent what my church believes.
I should make an effort to come back and see if you reply. I will not have time in the next week, and may loose this post in the shuffle. Good talking with you. Later.
You to. I really hope you can find the time to come back. I really enjoy your insights, even though I disagree with a lot of them. ;) I'm running out of time lately myself. I'll respond when I can. Nice talking to you too, chap...
Well, I came back briefly just too look and see if you made a reply. Take that as a compliment... : ). I have to go again now, my lunch break at work has been over.
