Dysfunctional Faith-Alone justification

[Proximus]

so visiting orphans an taking care of widows are the works we are to do? Jesus the works I do you will do also and greater Because he goes to the father. What works was he talking about ?

Not only that, but the whole spiritual-moral of the commandments is needed, and this not only with regard to its letter, but ideally even with regard to its spirit.

The Lord is explicitly stating what is needed to obtain eternal life, and so His words should not be eliminated through some expression of Paul misapplied or even crowds repeating those misapplications, following their old tradition.

Those things which are said about the hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, widows, orphans, those in prison, can be, and need be in simplicity performed, when they are understood in simplicity. But in the first place a man should shun evils as sins, for these are the first ways leading to life eternal. And also he is expected to take up a cross daily and follow the Lord. Those types of charity, mentioned, above, can also be more spiritually understood, if the spiritual sense of the Word is known.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

in part I read it but AI cannot understand the spiritual nature of the words within the bible. DO not rely on it, its great for grammar and to search the bible for cross references but it replies on interpretations from the web, if you ask AI to use ONLY the words from the bible without directing the text by a loaded question ( it wants to please you and will do as you ask) you will have a different answer,

Posting the question you send to AI is as essential as its answer, they go together or its meaningless, also try the same question in chat GPT, claude AI and Perplexity and see the different answers you would get.

In AI it is possible to have a permanent "filter" that you add yourself for instance like I did, in chat GPT for bible verse searches : 1- search the NKJV and KJV only, 2-do not use any interpretations from commentaties ot the web, but only the words as written in the bible, see if you can find similat verses with the same approximate meaning.

ect.....


these will completely change the answer you get, try it and see.

AI is a real noise generator on this forum. It's presented as authoritative, but it's an unattributed authority that can't be studied and checked for consistency, motive, agenda, bias, etc. It really should be banned here

 

[Roger316]

so visiting orphans an taking care of widows are the works we are to do? Jesus the works I do you will do also and greater Because he goes to the father. What works was he talking about ?

When James mentions caring for widows and orphans, he isn’t promoting “religious practice” at all; he’s actually undercutting the whole idea. It’s as if he’s saying, *“I don’t think anyone should be focused on practicing a religion — but if you insist on having one, try this: feed the widows and orphans.”* In other words, the only “religion” James will even tolerate is the kind that isn’t really religion at all, but embodied loyalty to God expressed in costly care for vulnerable people. He’s not elevating ritual; he’s exposing how empty ritual is unless it flows from genuine allegiance to Christ.

 

[Proximus]

When James mentions caring for widows and orphans, he isn’t promoting “religious practice” at all; he’s actually undercutting the whole idea. It’s as if he’s saying, *“I don’t think anyone should be focused on practicing a religion — but if you insist on having one, try this: feed the widows and orphans.”* In other words, the only “religion” James will even tolerate is the kind that isn’t really religion at all, but embodied loyalty to God expressed in costly care for vulnerable people. He’s not elevating ritual; he’s exposing how empty ritual is unless it flows from genuine allegiance to Christ.

James is calling faith-alone demonic, that is, those who think that can be saved just by having in memory a few statements, and some intellectual self-persuasion that they will be saved, this alone, without shunning evils as sins, which makes the faith living, are following, according to his paradigm, the faith of the devils, not the true faith.

But when it is seen that by faith he understood the living faith, thus united withe charity, then it is clear, that he implies that a person is saved by the Lord when a person both believes and shuns evils as sins, and thus, according is taking care for windows and orphans, etc, for those things are the types of charity, though in their externals, and yet if understood simply, they need to be practised as well as the charity towards the hungry, sick, thirsty, naked, strangers, those in prison. Without shunning evils as sins first, those acts are not pure, but contaminated by hypocrisy, but yet are helpful for children and simple. But when a man shuns evils as sins, loves justice and righteousness and equitability (atributing all the good to the Lord Alone, together with His Divine Merit), then his charity, which was purifiied from within, also covers those classes of the neighour (which also have the spiritual sense, but it is another subject of consideration).

 

[Roger316]

James is calling faith-alone demonic, that is, those who think that can be saved just by having in memory a few statements, and some intellectual self-persuasion that they will be saved, this alone, without shunning evils as sins, which makes the faith living, are following, according to his paradigm, the faith of the devils, not the true faith.

But when it is seen that by faith he understood the living faith, thus united withe charity, then it is clear, that he implies that a person is saved by the Lord when a person both believes and shuns evils as sins, and thus, according is taking care for windows and orphans, etc, for those things are the types of charity, though in their externals, and yet if understood simply, they need to be practised as well as the charity towards the hungry, sick, thirsty, naked, strangers, those in prison. Without shunning evils as sins first, those acts are not pure, but contaminated by hypocrisy, but yet are helpful for children and simple. But when a man shuns evils as sins, loves justice and righteousness and equitability (atributing all the good to the Lord Alone, together with His Divine Merit), then his charity, which was purifiied from within, also covers those classes of the neighour (which also have the spiritual sense, but it is another subject of consideration).

I don't think James was aware of our slogan "faith alone".

 

[Mem]

I'm sure you have a good point. But, I'll stick with the argument at hand. Thanks anyway.

The argument is driven toward our works within our faith, except it isn't necessarily our work that we have faith in.
For example, James 2:20-21 is generally presented as an example of Abraham's working out his faith through the sincere intention to sacrifice his son, but that's covers half of the issue. How was Abraham's faith justified by obey God's peculiar demand? Keep in mind that Abraham's faith was not in the sacrificing of his son but rather, scripture provides insight that his faith was in God's ability to raise the dead, and so he obeyed God instruction to do something that can isn't found anywhere in the law. In fact, isn't human sacrifice explicitly prohibited? Abraham's faith (his trust in God's undisclosed reason for instructing him to do such a thing) was justified when the ram appeared. That is, the moment that revealed Abraham's faith in God was exercised not in vain, the moment what he otherwise would perceive as loss was realized as great gain, joy, and gladness.

James 2:22 You see that his faith was working with his actions, and his faith was perfected by what he did.
Abraham showed his faith by obeying a direct command which wasn't found anywhere else in the law, so how could he have gone forward other than having faith in God's purpose for it?

And Rahab is provided as example in James 2:25-26. Welcoming the spies and sending them off in another direction, she had faith that God was with them, that He was their friend, and so would be with her if she received them as friends. And so, that her faith was justified in placing the scarlet string became evident when she and all in her household remained unharmed.

 

[Mem]

The argument is driven toward our works within our faith, except it isn't necessarily our work that we have faith in.
For example, James 2:20-21 is generally presented as an example of Abraham's working out his faith through the sincere intention to sacrifice his son, but that's covers half of the issue. How was Abraham's faith justified by obey God's peculiar demand? Keep in mind that Abraham's faith was not in the sacrificing of his son but rather, scripture provides insight that his faith was in God's ability to raise the dead, and so he obeyed God instruction to do something that can isn't found anywhere in the law. In fact, isn't human sacrifice explicitly prohibited? Abraham's faith (his trust in God's undisclosed reason for instructing him to do such a thing) was justified when the ram appeared. That is, the moment that revealed Abraham's faith in God was exercised not in vain, the moment what he otherwise would perceive as loss was realized as great gain, joy, and gladness.

James 2:22 You see that his faith was working with his actions, and his faith was perfected by what he did.
Abraham showed his faith by obeying a direct command which wasn't found anywhere else in the law, so how could he have gone forward other than having faith in God's purpose for it?

And Rahab is provided as example in James 2:25-26. Welcoming the spies and sending them off in another direction, she had faith that God was with them, that He was their friend, and so would be with her if she received them as friends. And so, that her faith was justified in placing the scarlet string became evident when she and all in her household remained unharmed.

James 2:26

If Raha had not faith, her spirit would have been eventually severed from her body, and she would've been dead. And likewise, even as Abraham most likely expected Isaac's spirit to be severed from his body, his faith was a living faith in God. But what if Abraham believed only that, in obeying God, Isaac would be dead forever?

 

[2Christ]

AI is a real noise generator on this forum. It's presented as authoritative, but it's an unattributed authority that can't be studied and checked for consistency, motive, agenda, bias, etc. It really should be banned here

its a good grammar corrector and good for quick searches but it really cannot understand anything, its a language MODEL and relies on texts that it was trained on to generate answers, it does not think by itself it, is incapable of it, imagine an soulless AI trying to understand spiritual matters, it simply cannot you are right it should be forbidden on this forum to generate posts involving anything biblical..

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

its a good grammar corrector and good for quick searches but it really cannot understand anything, its a language MODEL and relies on texts that it was trained on to generate answers, it does not think by itself it, is incapable of it, imagine an soulless AI trying to understand spiritual matters, it simply cannot you are right it should be forbidden on this forum to generate posts involving anything biblical..

For the reasons you mentioned it is anti-biblical and anti-spirit and really poisons the environment around here.

 

[ATG]

It is amazing to me what some can interpret from a few lines of text.

True. It's the only way anyone can find a gospel of faith alone justification without works. They must leave out the Scriptures of works justifying the person with faith. It's the common false teachings of separating Scripture from Scripture. Which disannuls the Scriptures that reject the false teaching.

Jer 26:2
Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD'S house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD'S house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word:

Deu 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

We see here that God's command against separating His words from one another, is so as to keep His commandments. If someone willingly disobeys that command, then they will disobey any commandment of the Lord by their own same will.

Jas 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

In any case, the challenge of that gospel's dysfunction remains the same and unanswered:

How can anyone be justified by their faith alone without any works, and yet be alive without doing any works? Only the dead have no works at all.

Jas 2:26
For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

And if only faith alone without works justifies a person, then how can they be justified by their faith alone, when they have works with their faith? They are then justified by their faith with works, and not by faith only.

James{2:22}
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

 

[decipher]

How can any person have faith-alone without works, and also have their faith with works? How can any person be justified by faith-alone without works, and also by justified by their faith, with works?

Faith alone justification is logical and practical dysfunction. I.e. It can only justify a person by having faith-alone without works, then how can it work to justify anyone, that is practicing their faith.

Let's look at the logical and practical malfunction of justification by faith-alone without works: 1) It cannot be for people living their faith, since their faith is with works. 2) It be for anyone without works, since no living person can be without works.

1). Since faith-alone is only without works, then no person can have faith-alone with works.

And so, a person can only have faith-alone, when not practicing their faith. Else, their faith is with works, not alone without works.

Therefore, no living person can only be justified by faith-alone with works, and live by their faith. Else they are justified by their faith with works.

Either a person is justified by their faith-alone without works, or by their faith with works, not both: Else alone is no more alone, and works is no more works. As Scripture would say:

For if justification be by faith-alone, then is it no more with works: otherwise alone is no more alone. But if faith be with works, then is it no more justification by faith-alone: otherwise work is no more work.

And so, we conclude that justification by faith-alone without works, is not practical, because faith cannot be practiced, and also justify without works.

The only practical justification for the living, is by faith and with works. Else no living person can ever by justified by faith and live by their faith.

Hab 2:4
Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

2). No living person can have faith-alone without works, since no living person can be without works. The living that do no works at all, is doing an evil work, by not doing good:

Jas 4:17
Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

Only the dead can do no works at all, and so only the dead can have faith-alone without works.

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

And yet, the dead can have no faith at all, else faith is no more faith, and dead is no more dead.

Conclusion: Justification by faith-alone without works, is so dysfunctional, that not even the dead can practice it, much less the living...

Those that call themselves Christians are either monergists or synergists. Monergists are those that believe that salvation is initiated and entirely concluded by God. God the Father chooses who to save and men's will has nothing to do with being chosen. God changes the person chosen by indwelling him with the Holy Spirit which allows for both Father and Son to enter the person's being and fill that person with the same divine love that they share. It is this love for God first and all other's as the person loves himself that results in good works when the person is lead by the Father and Son that reside in him through the Holy Spirit. Synergists are those that believe that salvation takes a combination of God's work and men's will to be saved. Christ died for everyone and the Father bestows His grace on everyone, but to be saved, you have to accept it.
I tend to believe the monergist because of the following scriptures:
Eph 2: 8-10 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it (faith) is the gift of God : Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Titus 3: 5-7 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration (by trusting that Jesus's death washes away our sins), and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Romans 3: 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh by justified in His sight; for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Romans 3: 24, 27-28 Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus... Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. By boasting is meant that no human can say in heaven: "I made it", "I made the right decision", " I did the right things", etc.
Even faith is a gift from God.
Sadly the road to damnation is wide and is paved with people who refuse to give all credit for their salvation to God. It was Jesus who, through the Holy Spirit, brought Lazarus back to life after being dead for 4 days. Lazarus had no part in being brought back to life because he was physically dead. We are spiritually dead, and can not bring ourselves to spiritual life without Jesus through the Holy Spirit.

 

[legion]

in part I read it but AI cannot understand the spiritual nature of the words within the bible. DO not rely on it, its great for grammar and to search the bible for cross references but it replies on interpretations from the web, if you ask AI to use ONLY the words from the bible without directing the text by a loaded question ( it wants to please you and will do as you ask) you will have a different answer,

Posting the question you send to AI is as essential as its answer, they go together or its meaningless, also try the same question in chat GPT, claude AI and Perplexity and see the different answers you would get.

In AI it is possible to have a permanent "filter" that you add yourself for instance like I did, in chat GPT for bible verse searches : 1- search the NKJV and KJV only, 2-do not use any interpretations from commentaties ot the web, but only the words as written in the bible, see if you can find similat verses with the same approximate meaning.

ect.....


these will completely change the answer you get, try it and see.

Yes and actually how you phrase the question for example if you ask AI please explain why red is most people's favorite color and then ask it to explain why red is most people's most hated color it will cater the answer to the direction of the question

He differentiate the law of the faith (including the spiritual moral commandments), and the law of the ceremonial works.

By the expression "law of the works" he understood in some contexts merely ceremonial law, including the circumcision, with which the Judaic Church was quite proud, and the works of the spiritual-moral commandments, such as Decalogue, and He was saying that men will be judged by it. Certainly, not by whether the christians followed judaic ceremonies of sacrifices and circumcision.

Understanding the words while eleminination the context can lead to the various conclusions, which are not sane and reasonable, and contrary to the words of the Lord Jesus Christ.

You're missing the point of the Mosaic law It's All or Nothing the Jews did not divide that into ceremonial, moral Etc divisions it was a complete package of which the failure to maintain any part of it was a failure to keep the Covenant

Obviously if you weren't a priest you didn't have to do the Priestly task however your presence at the result of those tasks such as the sacrifice was part of the law it was single body of people all doing their part for the system given to them by God

 

[legion]

True. It's the only way anyone can find a gospel of faith alone justification without works. They must leave out the Scriptures of works justifying the person with faith. It's the common false teachings of separating Scripture from Scripture. Which disannuls the Scriptures that reject the false teaching.

Jer 26:2
Thus saith the LORD; Stand in the court of the LORD'S house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD'S house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word:

Deu 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

We see here that God's command against separating His words from one another, is so as to keep His commandments. If someone willingly disobeys that command, then they will disobey any commandment of the Lord by their own same will.

Jas 2:10
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

In any case, the challenge of that gospel's dysfunction remains the same and unanswered:

How can anyone be justified by their faith alone without any works, and yet be alive without doing any works? Only the dead have no works at all.

Jas 2:26
For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

And if only faith alone without works justifies a person, then how can they be justified by their faith alone, when they have works with their faith? They are then justified by their faith with works, and not by faith only.

James{2:22}
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Pretty much your entire argument is screwed up because you are using the Old Testament law system to try to impose something on the New Testament Grace Covenant

And that is a Cherry Picked verse from James which has already been explained centuries ago if not millennia ask you how it is not supporting works-based face matter of fact this was the cause for it to almost not being included in the Bible because it is not clear leaves the whole issue ambiguous

No it's fine if you want to take the position that works has anything to do with salvation or justification or anything else but that is not part of the Christian belief system so you have to delineate who you're talking to it is this very reason why many do not consider the Catholic Church to be Christian

Again as you probably heard our Salvation is not up to us other than making a decision to follow Christ and believing him everything else beyond that anything that we do at best is the fruit of our conversion but it does nothing to gain or elicit favor from God in fact in numerous places he tells us things like are righteousness is as filthy rags..

Every aspect that is required to get us into heaven except for the decision to follow Christ and believe him has been taken care of by Christ on the cross justification righteousness forgiven all are done because Jesus did it not because of anything that we do

If you do not subscribe to this that is fine but then you cannot call it a Christian belief.

 

[legion]

Good. Neither did I before I heard it.



Not mine. I was a wiflful unrepentant sinner. I didn't even know about repenting from what I most loved to do.

Until by God's mercy I listened to Jesus Christ:

Mat 4:17
From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Acts{3:19}
Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:

Sinners stop sinning against God, by repenting for Jesus's sake. He then comes to stop the sinning with us:

Mat 1:21
And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sinning.

James is about people having dead faith without works. It's dead.

James{2:14}
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?...Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

Just believe the Scriptures, and leave out all the questioning among people.



Good works with living faith. No good works with dead faith.




No, Peter does that:

2 pet 1:4
And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

James preaches against having faith without adding works, which is dead, and Peter preaches adding works to faith, which is alive.

Haven't I already quote this Scripture to you?


There is no inner logic of faith. Only living faith with works, vs dead faith without works:

Hab 2:4
For the just shall live by his faith.

Heb 10:38
Now the just shall live by faith:



James is talking about giving things needful to the body, to brethren that have bodily needs. John too.

James 2:15
If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

1 John 3:17
But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?




Correct. Faith without works is dead. Faith with works is alive.




Works added to faith are not separate from faith. Only works not added to faith are separate from faith.

James{2:21}
Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?





2 pet 1:4
And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

Abraham was justified to man not to God by the work because we know that to God he was saved through his faith and then his faith promoted within him a work and that work he did so that man could see his justification from God

 

[ATG]

No. I mean your definition of "Faith Alone" is different from what we typically mean by faith alone.

Then you of course don't apply to the doctrine addressed. I certainly understand the difference between faith without our own past dead works, vs OSAS faith alone justification without any works justifying the person.

In any case, the challenge of dysfunction to the OSAS faith alone without works, is an open question. Anyone with sense can answer the obvious.

I think we may be using the word “works” differently than James does. You’re right that everyone does something — good, bad, or mixed. But James isn’t talking about generic human activity. He’s talking about the specific relational obligations that logically flow from receiving God’s mercy.

You mean, the works of faith.

OSAS faith alone justification allow no works at all to be justifying the person with faith. Their faith alone justification is indeed faith that is alone, without any works of faith to justify.

In any case, it's obviously about what the doctrine of faith alone without works. They are the ones saying that their saving faith is always alone, and never without any works to justify them.

That is the only understanding they for OSAS unconditional eternal security by faith alone without works to justify the person...

So when James says “faith without works is dead,” he’s not saying “faith is dysfunctional because humans always act.” He’s saying “faith is dead when it refuses to express the very things it claims to believe.”

Of course the dysfunction if not from Scripture, but from perverters of Scripture, who reject the plain words of James 2 in the first place. Though some do try to pervert James 2 also, but most OSAS justifiers by their own faith alone, just dismiss James 2 out of hand.

Does that distinction make sense to you? I’d like to hear how you see it.

As I said above: In Scripture faith in Christ is only without dead works. Not without any works at all. But, the OSAS unconditional security gospel by faith alone, does not include any works at all in their faith alone justification.

And so, we completely agree with the Scriptures' gospel of having faith without our old works of sin, and only justified by our faith with new works of God's righteousness...

The problem Luther and others have, is that for some reason they insist on inserting 'alone', where in Scripture it doesn't belong.

Nowhere in Eph2, the epistles of Paul nor Peter, is faith 'alone' ever preached to save and justify anyone. 'Alone' must be falsely inserted by personal will. Which then confuses the gospel of Christ, since the only place He does include 'alone' with faith, is to condemn it as dead faith alone, being without works of His grace and goodness.

Jas 2:14
If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

1Jo 3:16
Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?

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

Luther does not at all preach OSAS unconditional security. He preaches justification by faith alone, but not by faith that is alone. Although he wrongly and confusingly inserts alone with justifying faith, he immediately dismisses it being faith alone that is without good works in Christ Jesus.

The gospel of Jesus Christ by Scripture alone is simple and clear: Man is only justified by faith in Jesus Christ without past dead works. Those dead works included all works of man without Christ: Works of man's own righteousness, works of the law alone, and works of iniquity against God and man.

 

[legion]

When I use Scripture to thoroughly support my position and you take a position that is contrary to what is stated in Scripture, then you show that you are the one who has not understood the Bible, the Law of Moses, grace, the New Covenant, and Christianity. Christianity is about following Christ.

There it is, just as I said. You come to the table with a presupposition. "When I use scripture to...."

The Bible nowhere expresses that Jesus or his Apostles taught the Mosaic law other than to use it as a basis to propagate the lesson into the New Covenant of Grace

Nowhere does the Bible ever suggest that the Mosaic law is binding beyond the cross that is to say there is nothing in the Mosaic law that has anything to do with Christianity Beyond an example of how mankind failed and needed a teacher a Schoolmaster a savior

It is complete heresy to suggest particularly to the Gentiles that they follow anything to do with the Mosaic law and is not anywhere found in the Christian belief system

This is not my dreamed up view this is an established Christian view from the first century you are arguing against the theology which you clearly do not know about because you have been taught it incorrectly

 

[Roger316]

Then you of course don't apply to the doctrine addressed. I certainly understand the difference between faith without our own past dead works, vs OSAS faith alone justification without any works justifying the person.

In any case, the challenge of dysfunction to the OSAS faith alone without works, is an open question. Anyone with sense can answer the obvious.

I understand the ORIGINAL doctrine associated with the phrase "Faith Alone." I don't know anyone who uses your definition. Who is using the definition you are critiquing?

You mean, the works of faith.

OSAS faith alone justification allow no works at all to be justifying the person with faith. Their faith alone justification is indeed faith that is alone, without any works of faith to justify.

Works of faith don't justify. James would agree with Paul. We are justified by faith. James simply wants to see evidence of faith. In his view, certain behaviors demonstrate who has genuine faith.

In any case, it's obviously about what the doctrine of faith alone without works. They are the ones saying that their saving faith is always alone, and never without any works to justify them.

That is the only understanding they for OSAS unconditional eternal security by faith alone without works to justify the person...

To me, it sounds like your actual complaint is against eternal security.

Eternal security teaches that God is faithful to His promise: those who are united to Christ by faith are kept by His power, not by their own performance. It does not deny the necessity of repentance, obedience, or perseverance; it simply locates the believer’s confidence in God’s reliability rather than in human consistency.

This is not “unconditional security” in the sense of “no response, no repentance, no obedience.”
It is relational security grounded in God’s covenant faithfulness.

Eternal security does not dismiss James 2; it depends on it. James teaches that genuine faith expresses itself in allegiance, obedience, and costly love. Eternal security teaches that God keeps those who truly belong to Him. These doctrines fit together: the works James describes are the evidence of a living faith, and the perseverance those works express is the very thing eternal security promises God will sustain. James is not contradicting security; he is describing the visible shape of the faith that God secures.

Your objection isn’t really about James 2. It’s about a version of OSAS that claims a person can be saved without repentance, obedience, or allegiance. But that’s not what historic eternal security teaches. The doctrine doesn’t deny works; it denies that works *cause* justification. James 2 fits perfectly because it shows that genuine faith is never alone — it always expresses itself in action.

Eternal security doesn’t dismiss James 2; it assumes it. The doctrine teaches that God keeps those who truly belong to Christ, and James teaches that genuine faith always expresses itself in works of allegiance. These are not competing ideas. James is describing the visible evidence of the faith that God secures. So the issue isn’t “faith-alone with no works”; the issue is whether the works James describes are the *basis* of justification or the *evidence* of a living faith. Eternal security affirms the latter, not the former.

 

[CS1]

Not only that, but the whole spiritual-moral of the commandments is needed, and this not only with regard to its letter, but ideally even with regard to its spirit.

The Lord is explicitly stating what is needed to obtain eternal life, and so His words should not be eliminated through some expression of Paul misapplied or even crowds repeating those misapplications, following their old tradition.

Those things which are said about the hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, widows, orphans, those in prison, can be, and need be in simplicity performed, when they are understood in simplicity. But in the first place a man should shun evils as sins, for these are the first ways leading to life eternal. And also he is expected to take up a cross daily and follow the Lord. Those types of charity, mentioned, above, can also be more spiritually understood, if the spiritual sense of the Word is known.

I am not sure i agree here. You are saying Paul misapplied some expression? Let me ask you this. I do not know what works you personal do, but for the sake of argument you feed the orphans and take care of the widows daily. Yet you have adultery in your heart and hate those who do not agree with you. Are your works still accepted by God when you are a adulterer an hate your brother which Jesus said it murder in your heart?

 

[CS1]

When James mentions caring for widows and orphans, he isn’t promoting “religious practice” at all; he’s actually undercutting the whole idea. It’s as if he’s saying, *“I don’t think anyone should be focused on practicing a religion — but if you insist on having one, try this: feed the widows and orphans.”* In other words, the only “religion” James will even tolerate is the kind that isn’t really religion at all, but embodied loyalty to God expressed in costly care for vulnerable people. He’s not elevating ritual; he’s exposing how empty ritual is unless it flows from genuine allegiance to Christ.

I asked what a work was and that was the example provided. Please tell me what a work is that you do that God accepts.

 

[Inquisitor]

AI is a real noise generator on this forum. It's presented as authoritative, but it's an unattributed authority that can't be studied and checked for consistency, motive, agenda, bias, etc. It really should be banned here

I do disagree.

The main problem on this forum is people cannot read the text and understand the text, on it's own.

Because they are taught to read the text by the church institution that they attend and emphasis is placed
on key verses.

For example, consider someone raised in the Seventh Day Adventist church.

What word will appear in the majority of their posts?

You know this and AI will explain why they are wrong.

Here is how AI will explain why sabbath obedience for a Christian is incorrect.

Most mainstream Christian denominations view churches that rigidly enforce the fourth commandment (Sabbatarianism) as being in theological error because they believe the Sabbath was a shadow of the Old Covenant fulfilled by Christ, and that imposing its literal observance compromises the message of grace. [1, 2, 3]

Theological arguments against the necessity of keeping the fourth commandment include:

• Christ as the Fulfillment: Christians believe the Old Testament Sabbath was a symbol of deliverance and rest, which was entirely fulfilled by Jesus. By resting in His completed work on the cross, believers experience a spiritual "Sabbath rest" every day, making literal observance unnecessary. [1, 2, 3]
• The New Covenant: The Sabbath was a specific covenant between God and the ancient nation of Israel (Exodus 31:17). When the New Covenant was established, the Sabbath was omitted from the specific moral requirements given to Gentile believers (Acts 15). [1, 2]
• Freedom of Conscience: The Apostle Paul specifically addresses the issue of special days in the New Testament. In Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-6, he warns believers not to judge one another regarding festivals or Sabbaths, asserting that Christians are free to esteem all days alike unto the Lord. [1, 2]
• Justification by Grace: Enforcing Sabbath-keeping or any other Old Testament law as a requirement for righteousness is often viewed as "legalism." The New Testament warns that adding the law to salvation diminishes the all-sufficiency of Christ's grace