James 2:24

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,196
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
James 2:24

Ye see then - From the course of reasoning pursued, and the example referred to.

How that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only - Not by a cold, abstract, inoperative faith. It must be by a faith that shall produce good works, and whose existence will be shown to men by good works. As justification takes place in the sight of God, it is by faith, for he sees that the faith is genuine, and that it will produce good works if the individual who exercises faith shall live; and he justifies men in view of that faith, and of no other. If he sees that the faith is merely speculative; that it is cold and dead, and would not produce good works, the man is not justified in his sight. As a matter of fact, therefore, it is only the faith that produces good works that justifies; and good works, therefore, as the proper expression of the nature of faith, foreseen by God as the certain result of faith, and actually performed as seen by men, are necessary in order to justification. In other words, no man will be justified who has not a faith which will produce good works, and which is of an operative and practical character. The ground of justification in the case is faith, and that only; the evidence of it, the carrying it out, the proof of the existence of the faith, is good works; and thus men are justified and saved not by mere abstract and cold faith, but by a faith necessarily connected with good works, and where good works perform an important part. James, therefore, does not contradict Paul, but he contradicts a false explanation of Paul’s doctrine. He does not deny that a man is justified in the sight of God by faith, for the very passage which he quotes shows that he believes that; but he does deny that a man is justified by a faith which would not produce good works, and which is not expressed by good works; and thus he maintains, as Paul always did, that nothing else than a holy life can show that a man is a true Christian, and is accepted of God. (Cambridge Commentary on the Bible)

The comments in the commentary are interesting, do you agree with them?

My copy of the Westminster Confession of Faith appears to contradict what is said by the commentators.

CHAPTER 10
Of Effectual Calling


1. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by his almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

2. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

3. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

4. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess. And, to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to be detested. (Westminster confession of faith)

How far does human response go in your view of a person's salvation. Does it play no role whatever, a minor role that is purely responsive, a significant role that is both responsive and active, or some other role?
 
Last edited:

Brighten04

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 28, 2015
Messages
2,188
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Protestant
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
MC we already have a thread on this subject. Stop the circular arguments. I hope the mods can see this and combine the threads. This makes no sense.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Coffee,


ONCE AGAIN, we see your confusion.


Friend, you need to decide. It's critical. Is JESUS the Savior (and thus HIS works are the issue in justification) OR are YOU the Savior (and thus YOUR works are ultimately the issue in justification).




Josiah said:


WHO is the Savior? (in terms of justification, narrow sense)


IF you answer "Jesus" then Jesus is the Savior. Not you - not a bit, not at all, not now, not ever, not in any way or shape or form or manner. Salvation is entirely, wholly wrapped up in Jesus because He is the Savior. It's entirely HIS work. HIS heart. HIS love. HIS mercy. HIS gift. HIS blessing. His life, His death, His resurrection. His Cross, His blood, His sacrifice. His righteousness, His obedience, His holiness. Not you. Not yours. You may have some other role in some other matter, but not this. The "job" of Savior belongs to Jesus. Not you.

IF you answer "ME!"
then you are the Savior. Not Jesus. Not a bit, not at all. Not now, not ever. Not in any way, shape or form or manner. Salvation is all wrapped up in YOU. YOUR works. YOUR will. YOUR love. YOUR efforts. YOUR merits. YOUR obedience. YOUR righteousness. YOUR holiness. YOUR sacrifice. Not Jesus. Not Jesus'. Jesus may have some other role in some other matter, just not this one. The Savior is you.


Which is it?

Are you looking to the Cross or in your mirror?

Try answering that. If you give the Christian answer, a LOT of Christianity falls into place.




.




- Josiah
 
Last edited:

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,196
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
MC we already have a thread on this subject. Stop the circular arguments. I hope the mods can see this and combine the threads. This makes no sense.

Coffee,


ONCE AGAIN, we see your confusion.


Friend, you need to decide. It's critical. Is JESUS the Savior (and thus HIS works are the issue in justification) OR are YOU the Savior (and thus YOUR works are ultimately the issue in justification).

You are both welcome to engage with original post. You ought not attempt the derail the thread by addressing the original poster and avoiding the topic.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Coffee,

We're just noting your persistent confusion. Trying to help you.

And, we've already been through this thing you have of isolating James from the rest of the Bible, your obsession with forgetting that James is writing to CHRISTIANS, those who are "saved" (in this sense), writing what CHRISTIANS, the JUSTIFIED, should now, as a result, do. He is NOT undermining the rest of the Bible and insisting that Jesus is not the Savior, you are. Yes, James is using a word (justified) in a very broad (and unusal) sense of the WHOLE of things - becoming a Christian AND being a Christian. Yup. We all know that. Where Catholics err is forgetting the other 26 books of the NT and insisting that James is speaking of justification in the narrow sense, of BECOMING a Christian - which he clearly is not. This has been pointed out to you over and over and over and over but you always ignore it. In your confusion over who is the Savior. You seem very confused about that. And it shows. Most Catholics are.

I think you need to consider who is the Savior. Where are you looking, trusting: The Cross of Christ or your mirror? You need to decide. Which is it? When you do, a LOT of this will fall into place. And this confusion we see from you will end. IMO, it's important. And I'm sincerely hoping it happens.




BTW, to whatever your issue is in the OP (and honestly, I'm not sure), you are quoting from the Westminster Confession, which is Reformed, and thus as a Lutheran I can't comment on it. You'll need a Reformed person. Thing is, I'm not sure we have any Reformed at our community. I could refer you to someone at CARM but not here. But I think they'd probably note the same confusion in you as the folks here do. But you are asking a question about REFORMED (Calvinist) theology, so a Reformed (Calvinist) needs to answer.

BTW #2 (lol), friend, I PERSONALLY do not question your faith or salvation. I'm very confident we'll be spending eternity together in heaven. I just KNOW how CONFUSED Catholic teachers are on this point.... I KNOW the twisted, entangled, mixed-up, MESS they make of all this - and the result is that Catholics (in terms of understanding and explaining) echo this entangled MESS. I hear it from family members all the time, just as I did from my Catholic teachers and pastor and deacon. BUT I think..... in your heart...... you're no doubt Lutheran on this point, trusting in CHRIST. It's just SO hard to get Catholics to untangled the confused MESS that is presented to them.



A blessed Lenten season to you and yours...



- Josiah

.
 
Last edited:

psalms 91

Well-known member
Moderator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
15,282
Age
75
Location
Pa
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Charismatic
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
You are both welcome to engage with original post. You ought not attempt the derail the thread by addressing the original poster and avoiding the topic.
Ah the new tactic to keep your ideas front and center while hushing others. If the topic is the same then it needs combined, you could ask to do that
 

Alithis

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
2,680
Location
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
James 2:24

Ye see then - From the course of reasoning pursued, and the example referred to.

How that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only - Not by a cold, abstract, inoperative faith. It must be by a faith that shall produce good works, and whose existence will be shown to men by good works. As justification takes place in the sight of God, it is by faith, for he sees that the faith is genuine, and that it will produce good works if the individual who exercises faith shall live; and he justifies men in view of that faith, and of no other. If he sees that the faith is merely speculative; that it is cold and dead, and would not produce good works, the man is not justified in his sight. As a matter of fact, therefore, it is only the faith that produces good works that justifies; and good works, therefore, as the proper expression of the nature of faith, foreseen by God as the certain result of faith, and actually performed as seen by men, are necessary in order to justification. In other words, no man will be justified who has not a faith which will produce good works, and which is of an operative and practical character. The ground of justification in the case is faith, and that only; the evidence of it, the carrying it out, the proof of the existence of the faith, is good works; and thus men are justified and saved not by mere abstract and cold faith, but by a faith necessarily connected with good works, and where good works perform an important part. James, therefore, does not contradict Paul, but he contradicts a false explanation of Paul’s doctrine. He does not deny that a man is justified in the sight of God by faith, for the very passage which he quotes shows that he believes that; but he does deny that a man is justified by a faith which would not produce good works, and which is not expressed by good works; and thus he maintains, as Paul always did, that nothing else than a holy life can show that a man is a true Christian, and is accepted of God. (Cambridge Commentary on the Bible)

The comments in the commentary are interesting, do you agree with them?

My copy of the Westminster Confession of Faith appears to contradict what is said by the commentators.

CHAPTER 10
Of Effectual Calling


1. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by his almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

2. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

3. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

4. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess. And, to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to be detested. (Westminster confession of faith)

How far does human response go in your view of a person's salvation. Does it play no role whatever, a minor role that is purely responsive, a significant role that is both responsive and active, or some other role?

i have to say - you open the thread with the title of a verse reference .. then you present a commentary as if IT is authoritative .. ??

it is NOT-it is more like a beguiling misleading trickery a cult would use
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,196
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
i have to say - you open the thread with the title of a verse reference .. then you present a commentary as if IT is authoritative .. ??

it is NOT-it is more like a beguiling misleading trickery a cult would use

Did you miss the paragraph after the commentary quote?
How far does human response go in your view of a person's salvation. Does it play no role whatever, a minor role that is purely responsive, a significant role that is both responsive and active, or some other role?
 
Top Bottom