Is Faith Without Works Dead?

[Idolater]

This is from the late Bob Hill. His website was taken down by his son, from what I read here, after his passing. There is another one that specifically goes into the grammar. Which he in part repeats here. Aposticia is used in the NT a few times. They departed (apostasy) one place and went to another.

I think it's just talking about the Reformation. This is when all the millennial interpretation energy began in earnest, never really before the Reformation did anybody get too excited about whatever it meant, and then since the Reformation there's been a lot more interest in the topic. So I just think Paul's prophesying the Protestant Reformation, when all of a sudden in history, a thing never seen before, there were going to be a lot of Christians who weren't objectively committed to the Church anymore, but they're still Christians.

 

[Idolater]

You can also watch the video called "Departure or Apostacy"

Or Reformation. No longer did you have to commit to the Church, you could just be a "cowboy" Christian and do it your way, like Frank Sinatra (what a set of pipes).

If you've made a commitment to the Church, then you're stuck, like you're stuck in a marriage. But in Christ you don't have to get a divorce, you can just stop showing up, and that's what a lot of ex-Catholics do, they just don't show up, or when they do, it's just for Easter and Christmas.

It doesn't mean they're not Christians, that much is clear from the literature. John Paul's Catechism says it plainly. You don't have to be Roman Catholic to be saved, you don't have to not sin to be saved, you just need to believe in Christ.

That was not something that was admitted until the Second Vatican Council, as far as I understand. It wouldn't adjust the truth of the matter, this isn't new teaching, it is continuity, according to Benedict XVI. But nonetheless it wasn't quite so clear as at Vatican II and JP2's Catechism.

 

[Derf]

We would say His soul IS His divinity. He is not partite in His essence. Surely He like us is one simple, indivisible essence. (Which is why we're not Nestorians, we can just simply say Mary is His mom simpliciter.)



Yes.




$$ Joh 2:19
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
$$ Joh 2:20
Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
$$ Joh 2:21
But he spake of the temple of his body.

Yes, those are good ones, too. Maybe better than my quote. It even delineates who is doing the destroying. But I still think it could include the idea that when Jesus is raised (given new life), that He, like Lazarus, was responsible for getting up and coming out if the tomb on His own power, even though the call to be raised (and thus the power) came from another source (God the Father in Jesus' case, Jesus in Lazarus').

Your argument here is that under the theory that Jesus raised Himself from the dead, it's surprising how many Scriptures say that He was passively raised, rather than that He raised himself, intransitively. But there are Scriptures (above) which are consistent with the idea that He indeed raised Himself.

But you admit that none of the apostles said so afterward? That seems informative.

“ Suppose there are many Scriptures which indicate a distinction between the Father and Jesus.

“ Suppose there are many Scriptures which indicate some sort of equality between the Father and Jesus.

“ Only under Trinitarianism are both of these sets of Scriptures unsurprising. ”

What is your take on this? I think that if you start from trying to understand His death better, that it's much harder to worm your way toward Trinitarianism. I think you're just stuck in a ditch.

I don't think so. There are distinct roles the 3 play in their one-ness.

A possible defeater for the Trinity even based on the above, is Which Trinity? Modalism is defeated by the above, but what about Nestorian Trinitarianism, or Monophysitism?

Fortunately the first seven ecumenical Church councils save the day, and generate propositions consonant with what the Scripture and all the Apostles taught. They didn't generate words which are in the Bible, they generated words which are consonant with the Bible.

Do any of the councils conclude that Jesus raised Himself from the dead?

This is cosigned by most if not all Evangelical mainstreamers. So that's basically >90% of Christians. Maybe 99%.

It's not an appeal to popularity, I'm saying it's unsurprising that c. 99% of Christians all agree on the first seven ecumenical Church councils if Apostolicity is ontic. If it's not ontic, then that is surprising.

I guess I don't see how that follows. Surely Jesus gave authority over the church to the apostles, and through them to the church, but that authority is limited. An all-powerful genie can't make someone else all-powerful without losing some power himself (a la Disney's Alladin).

 

[Idolater]

Yes, those are good ones, too. Maybe better than my quote. It even delineates who is doing the destroying. But I still think it could include the idea that when Jesus is raised (given new life), that He, like Lazarus, was responsible for getting up and coming out if the tomb on His own power, even though the call to be raised (and thus the power) came from another source (God the Father in Jesus' case, Jesus in Lazarus').

OK.

But you admit that none of the apostles said so afterward? That seems informative.

But is it evidence that He did not raise Himself? It seems in order to be that, it'd have to be an argument from silence, no?

I don't think so. There are distinct roles the 3 play in their one-ness.

The specific distinctions I'm aware of are that the Father generates the Son, the Son is begotten of the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (Filioque).

Do any of the councils conclude that Jesus raised Himself from the dead?

I'm not aware that that was ever a controversy that a council was needed to resolve.

I guess I don't see how that follows. Surely Jesus gave authority over the church to the apostles, and through them to the church, but that authority is limited. An all-powerful genie can't make someone else all-powerful without losing some power himself (a la Disney's [Aladdin]).

Surely the Apostles were infallible at least when they wrote or authorized Scripture though, that is I think unlimited power, in the way you mean it? Re Aladdin, it wasn't as if Jesus gave His Apostles a part of His teaching authority, but He gave them the whole of it, that's what I'm calling Apostolicity, that's the only power I can see as being able to generate Scripture, the literal Word of God.

 

[Derf]

OK.



But is it evidence that He did not raise Himself? It seems in order to be that, it'd have to be an argument from silence, no?



The specific distinctions I'm aware of are that the Father generates the Son, the Son is begotten of the Father, and the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son (Filioque).

To dig deeper, what does "proceeds from" mean? And is "begotten" a term that applies only to the incarnate Son, so is it an eternally-past applicable term?

I'm not aware that that was ever a controversy that a council was needed to resolve.

It informs our idea of the eternality of man. If he was made such that he could live forever, but wouldn't necessarily live forever (I think you'll agree he was), then how can we talk about his eternality?

Surely the Apostles were infallible at least when they wrote or authorized Scripture though, that is I think unlimited power, in the way you mean it? Re Aladdin, it wasn't as if Jesus gave His Apostles a part of His teaching authority, but He gave them the whole of it, that's what I'm calling Apostolicity, that's the only power I can see as being able to generate Scripture, the literal Word of God.

But that apostolicity seems to have been limited to the time when the apostles were still alive. I.e., Apostolicity wasn't inheritable in terms of writing new scripture.

 

[Right Divider]

Would the posters here like to get back on topic?

Is Faith Without Works Dead?​

Rom 4:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.​

​

Jas 2:17 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:17) Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.​

​

Jas 2:14 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:14) What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?​

 

[Derf]

Would the posters here like to get back on topic?

Is Faith Without Works Dead?​

Rom 4:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.​

​

Jas 2:17 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:17) Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.​

​

Jas 2:14 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:14) What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?​

Maybe the reason we left the topic is that the options for the topic have all been explored without any movement from any party towards the other(s).

It goes back to presuppositions. If your presuppositions include the full dichotomy between two different salvation mechanisms, you support it with James and Paul opposed to each other. If, however, you see the Pauline and non-Pauline epistles as propounding the same gospel, you're going to see James and Paul talking about different aspects of the same faith (same gospel).

How do you propose that such different points of view come together?

 

[Bladerunner]

Would the posters here like to get back on topic?

Is Faith Without Works Dead?​

Rom 4:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.​

​

Jas 2:17 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:17) Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.​

​

Jas 2:14 (AKJV/PCE)​

(2:14) What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?​

If there is any 'work' that is done as part of Justification, it is that of the Lord.

 

[Derf]

If there is any 'work' that is done as part of Justification, it is that of the Lord.

I think that's a good way to say it. "Belief" would not be a work. Circumcision would be a work. Repentance (as a state of mind) would not be a work, but repentance leads to following the law, which would be a work (or a lot of works).
If the works (such as loving your neighbor as yourself) are as a response to the grace God has shown in giving us everlasting life, then it fits with what James is talking about. And what Paul is talking about.

Circumcision doesn't come into play with James. Nor does it make sense for Gentiles as they are already fellow heirs with the Jews. They can't gain anything by circumcising.

 

[Nick M]

No longer did you have to commit to the Church

This is what the Body of Christ is. Individual choice.

 

[Nick M]

"If you do the will of My Father in Heaven, you are My brother and sister and mother."

Nice try. The anti-catholic bomb is that Mary and Joseph had children after him.

 

[Nick M]

I just generally feel like it's bad form to take someone's word for it and for me, all it takes is for anything about the Greek

I think his reasoning with the letters is excellent. In the first letter as we all know, he says will be transformed and go to him. This of course is not prophecy. We know it is different. All acknowledge it. They don't accept the timing. And in his second letter he told them the timing because they were concerned. I had not thought of it that way, but that is exactly what it says.

 

[Right Divider]

If there is any 'work' that is done as part of Justification, it is that of the Lord.

James disagrees with you.

Jas 2:24 (KJV) Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.​

 

[Bladerunner]

I think that's a good way to say it. "Belief" would not be a work. Circumcision would be a work. Repentance (as a state of mind) would not be a work, but repentance leads to following the law, which would be a work (or a lot of works).

Circumcision was used by the Lord to in part accomplish His plans for both Jews and Gentiles.

If the works (such as loving your neighbor as yourself) are as a response to the grace God has shown in giving us everlasting life, then it fits with what James is talking about. And what Paul is talking about.

After salvation(justification)-> sanctification (Ones walk toward Righteousness)-> Glorifcation (Heavenly Bound), Yes, Works after ones salvation is what Paul was speaking of..Since the Holy Spirit is indwelling of the one justified, He will determine what, where and when, etc. work is needed......all one needs to do is listen.

Circumcision doesn't come into play with James. Nor does it make sense for Gentiles as they are already fellow heirs with the Jews. They can't gain anything by circumcising.

Agreed

 

[Bladerunner]

James disagrees with you.

Jas 2:24 (KJV) Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.​

This passage speaks of 'Faith without Works' is a faith that will not get one justified.' Rather only a true faith where good works are evident can one be seen as being justified. Too many in this world claim their faith in Jesus Christ but their works or lack-there-of gives them away as being 'justified in name only'

 

[Lon]

This passage speaks of 'Faith without Works' is a faith that will not get one justified.' Rather only a true faith where good works are evident can one be seen as being justified. Too many in this world claim their faith in Jesus Christ but their works or lack-there-of gives them away as being 'justified in name only' If one looks at Jas 2:18.."Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

Two points to consider:
1) Cart before Horse: Ephesians 2:8-10 says regeneration/indwelling, then works God prompts us to do.
2) James vs. Ephesians: Which is right? Both, but different audiences. James to Jews (even though in our 'gentile' Bibles). Ephesians (pair with Acts 15:17-20), says faith through grace is saving and then relegates works to that of only one who is indwelled to do them in Ephesians 2:10.

It may not suffice to change or inform your own theology, but it will help in conversation to see where another is coming from and why James doesn't apply directly in the theology of those who espouse this. In Him -Lon

 

[Right Divider]

This passage speaks of 'Faith without Works' is a faith that will not get one justified.'

Sorry, but you are an unsaved person that thinks that you will contribute something to your salvation.

Rather only a true faith where good works are evident can one be seen as being justified.

False... in this dispensation, God does not allow works for justification.

Apparently, you cannot read or your Bible is missing some pages:

Rom 4:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.​

Too many in this world claim their faith in Jesus Christ but their works or lack-there-of gives them away as being 'justified in name only'

Get saved. Your works will burn up in the lake of fire.

 

[Bladerunner]

Two points to consider:
1) Cart before Horse: Ephesians 2:8-10 says regeneration/indwelling, then works God prompts us to do.
2) James vs. Ephesians: Which is right? Both, but different audiences. James to Jews (even though in our 'gentile' Bibles). Ephesians (pair with Acts 15:17-20), says faith through grace is saving and then relegates works to that of only one who is indwelled to do them in Ephesians 2:10.

It may not suffice to change or inform your own theology, but it will help in conversation to see where another is coming from and why James doesn't apply directly in the theology of those who espouse this. In Him -Lon

It seems we are on the side of the stick. Yet, you keep denying it...Jas 2:24 simply says that Yes, it is faith and only faith for salvation but if one does not have good works in what should be; the Sanctification process, the you can bet they are justified in name only. In other words, they have not been saved. Many think that if they say the sinners prayer they are saved or if they simply say they believe Jesus is our savior, they are saved. Not so, for God. Good works is required (afterwards) of the person who is saved. James states this as well as Paul the Gentile Apostle.

 

[Bladerunner]

Two points to consider:
1) Cart before Horse: Ephesians 2:8-10 says regeneration/indwelling, then works God prompts us to do.
2) James vs. Ephesians: Which is right? Both, but different audiences. James to Jews (even though in our 'gentile' Bibles). Ephesians (pair with Acts 15:17-20), says faith through grace is saving and then relegates works to that of only one who is indwelled to do them in Ephesians 2:10.

It may not suffice to change or inform your own theology, but it will help in conversation to see where another is coming from and why James doesn't apply directly in the theology of those who espouse this. In Him -Lon

again. on your Act 15:17-20 comments, we are the same and James is saying the same thing.....Rem, GOD is the author of every word in the Bible....and He is not going to change in the middle of the stream. We are mostly on the same side, simply we differ in the start of the Church that Jesus built and a few other parts.

 

[Bladerunner]

Sorry, but you are an unsaved person that thinks that you will contribute something to your salvation.

Hmmmmmm

False... in this dispensation, God does not allow works for justification.

Agreed, yet He does required good works after justification....we are on the same side!

Apparently, you cannot read or your Bible is missing some pages:

Rom 4:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.​

Get saved. Your works will burn up in the lake of fire.

We both agree. so what is your beef? why are you so angry? why do you 'a saved person'
(supposedly) call out people and tell them they are not saved..or is that part of your theology? we are on the same side....Faith without works, yet Works after justification is required.