Dysfunctional Faith-Alone justification

[ATG]

I think the difficulty here comes from treating “works” as any human action whatsoever and treating “faith alone” as if it meant “faith existing in total isolation from all human activity.”

Correct. That's the dysfunctional problem with OSAS unconditional eternal security: Salvation and justification is only by a person's faith alone. That faith alone is always alone without works: They are never justified by faith with works.

The dysfunction therefore is that they must be dead with their faith alone, lest they ever have works with the faith, and so cannot be justified by their faith alone.

They cannot have their faith alone justification without works, and ever live by their faith and be justified.

But neither Paul nor James uses the categories that way. Paul contrasts faith with works of the law — covenantal boundary‑markers. James contrasts living faith with a refusal to act in ways that logically follow from believing the gospel.

Correct. Paul rebukes works of law without faith: Works alone. And James rebukes faith without works: Faith alone.

Paul preaches justification by faith without past dead works, and James preaches justification by faith with new good works.

The Scriptures' gospel of Jesus Christ is justification by faith with good works in Christ, and without evil works against Christ.

No man is justified by any faith that is with evil works, and especially not by a faith alone that is without any works at all..

So “faith alone” describes the instrument of justification, not the total content of a believer’s life.

You (and Luther) can insist on redefining faith alone for whatever purpose you have, other than what Scripture plainly says is dead.

But to only preach Scripture, we simply say what Scripture says: Faith is the beginning of justification by good works.

Faith alone is only the beginning and ending of death without works.

With those categories in place, “faith alone” is not dysfunctional at all

That's not the argument. faith alone is just dead.

Justification by faith alone without works is a dysfunctional gospel, that can't be practiced by the living, but only the dead...

— it simply answers a different question than the one you’re raising.

correct. You are answering a different answer for a different gospel.

How do you define “works” in James? Are they just “any action,” or something more specific?

Works in James are either good or evil works. And faith in James is either saving and justifying, or dead.

Jas 2:1
My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.

If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

Them that have the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ with keeping His commandments, and without doing evil, are saved by faith and justified by works.

Them that have faith with transgressions are unsaved and unjustified with Jesus Christ the righteous.

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.

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

And them that have faith alone without good works, are them that have dead faith without loving our neighbor.

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?

The gospel of Jesus Christ has nothing to do with being saved and justified by any faith alone, since all people are either keeping the commandments of God and doing good, or are transgressing against God's commandment and our neighbor.

They only way to have faith 'alone' with either of those works, is to redefine it from strange reason.

 

[Inquisitor]

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?

CSI you are a sinner just like everyone else.

Don't even go there.

 

[CS1]

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

That is the issue today. To many are using AI instead reading the word of God and praying. Church History is clearly seen IF ones studies. Frankly many can get a degree that is in under water basket weaving and call it a doctorate of Theology.

Online and Ai has established legal Christian theological plagiarism.

 

[CS1]

CSI you are a sinner just like everyone else.

Don't even go there.

I am and If works are not accepted because of the issue of you own heart what should God ? Yes I am a sinner saved by Grace through faith not of works why? Because just like your works are filthy rags in HIS sight so are mine. Just answer the question. Or better yet testify to me of your works God accepts that even if you have adultery in your heart it ok.

 

[ATG]

You are assigning a meaning to the Phrase "Faith alone" that is not correct.

Alright. enough's enough. I'm giving scriptural definition of faith alone. You're giving your own.

I'll not continue with this part of the argument.

 

[ATG]

Just do all the works I do........you will be safe and have no questions then.

The challenge remains unsanswered still.

And if your works are all good by Jesus Christ, then I'd love to do the same with you.

If you're still doing any works of the flesh without Christ, then i've repented of them. You can keep them for yourself alone, or for whoever else enjoying them with you.

 

[ATG]

New Covenant, new life, new law. The Law of Moses has a job. For those who are born again, the Law of Moses has been superseded. Now that is true replacement theology!

Very true.

"For through the law I died to the law so that I might live to God." Galatians 2:19. What laws apply to dead people?

But now, having died to what bound us, we have been released from the law, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code." Romans 7:6.

"All who rely on works of the law are under a curse. For it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Now it is clear that no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.” The law, however, is not based on faith; on the contrary, “The man who does these things will live by them.” Galatians 3: 1-12

When you follow the law, you are not living by faith. That means that you are not pleasing God.

"Before this faith came, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian." Galatians 3:23-25

The law does not save us and neither does it make us righteous. "Whoever keeps the whole law, but stumbles at just one point, is guilty of breaking all of it." James 2:10

"But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law." Galatians 5:18

"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

I live in Australia. I moved here nearly 60 years. I am subject to the laws of Australia, not the laws of the place I was born. I live spiritually in a new "nation". I am not subject to the Law that was given to Israel through Moses.

All true enough again. Works of the law without faith are as guilty as works against the law.

Only by the faith of Jesus Christ can we be justified doing the law of Christ.

Some Christians seem to think that people like me want to make easy on myself.​

Only unbelieving OT Jews, and Judaizers of the NT. Christians only do the law of Christ for His NT saints.

I can assure you that obeying the law, ticking the boxes, is much easier than being led by the Spirit, especially at first.​

You can't tick off any boxes of the law by doing it, since the law is only written against what not to do.

Rom 4:15
Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

The only boxes of the law, that can be ticked off, are transgressions against the law. Anyone ticking those needs to repent and be saved from transgressing against God's law.

And so, if we only love God from the heart and our neighbors as Jesus, and are led to do good by the Spirit, then we have no occasion to tick off His law.

And of course there are the unwritten Christian laws.​

The commandments of Christ are still written for Christians, excepting the Sabbath. But not committing adultery, thefts, bearing false witness, etc... are still the law of Christ.

When I was first saved, you went to church twice on Sunday if you wanted to make a good impression.​

Don't read any such law of Christ. Those 'unwritten' laws are rubbish of man:

Mat 15:9
But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

All who are born again are led by the Spirit. The question becomes, are we following that leading? Too often, intellect, emotion and self-will override the inner witness of the Spirit. Law leads people to try to do what is right. The Spirit leads us to do what pleases God. (Judges 17:6)
​

The law doesn't lead anyone to do anything, other than not to transgress it.

The Spirit leads to do good by faith, which doesn't include transgressing the law of the Christ.

Rom 8:2
For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

 

[Roger316]

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.

James is talking about works that naturally flow from believing the gospel, not generic moral effort. His point is that certain actions are the logical implications of trusting what God has done. If I truly believe that God’s forgiveness is good, then forgiveness becomes part of my own moral universe — I will forgive others. If I believe God’s mercy toward me is beautiful and necessary, then mercy becomes something I extend. If I desire God’s patience, I will practice patience. If I depend on God’s grace, I will show grace.

These are not random “good deeds.” They are gospel‑shaped responses — actions that match, mirror, and embody the very things we claim to believe about God. For James, these works are the visible evidence that faith is alive because they are the relational expressions that make sense only if the gospel is actually true to me.

James’s point is that belief and action are inseparable realities. They are not two different things that must be glued together; they are one thing expressed in two dimensions. If someone claims to believe something, the only way to know whether that belief is real is to watch what they do when the belief should matter.

It’s like someone insisting that a meteor will strike their house tonight. If they truly believe it, they will pack up, get in the car, and drive to the next city. If they stay home, watch TV, and go to bed, we don’t need to argue with them — their actions have already revealed the truth. Their claim and their conduct contradict each other.

James applies that same logic to the gospel. If I claim to believe that God forgives, shows mercy, gives grace, and loves His enemies, then my life will begin to reflect those same realities. Not perfectly, not instantly, but genuinely. If those gospel-shaped actions are absent, James says the belief being claimed is not the belief being lived.

 

[Soyeong]

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

That was not a presupposition.

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

The Bible frequently calls for repentance from sin and it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20). God is gracious to use by teaching us to obey the Mosaic Law (Psalm 119:29) and the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law (Jeremiah 31:33).

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

Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example and Christianity is abut following what Christ taught. Jesus saves us from our sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of the Mosaic Law (1 John 3:4), so Jesus graciously teaching us to be a doer of it is intrinsically the way that he is giving us his gift of saving us from not being a doer of it. There is nothing in the Bible that suggests that Jesus went to the cross for the purpose of nullifying what he spent his ministry teaching, but just the opposite. In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law.

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

It is completely absurd to suggest that it is heresy to take the position that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to what God has commanded or to suggest that it is not heresy to take the position that followers of God should rebel against what He has commanded. The Christian belief system has nothing to do with refusing to follow what Christ taught.

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

You taking the position that followers of Christ shouldn't follow Christ shows that you have not been taught correctly.

 

[Inquisitor]

I am and If works are not accepted because of the issue of you own heart what should God ? Yes I am a sinner saved by Grace through faith not of works why? Because just like your works are filthy rags in HIS sight so are mine. Just answer the question. Or better yet testify to me of your works God accepts that even if you have adultery in your heart it ok.

You must be a new creation in Christ before you can perform a good work.

Better still is bearing the fruit of the Holy Spirit which is the direct reflection of Christ.

The traditional church allowed people to hold to a type of Godliness but deny it's power.

1 Corinthians 4:20
For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power.

 

[Gideon300]

It is completely absurd to suggest that it is heresy to take the position that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to what God has commanded or to suggest that it is not heresy to take the position that followers of God should rebel against what He has commanded. The Christian belief system has nothing to do with refusing to follow what Christ taught.


You taking the position that followers of Christ shouldn't follow Christ shows that you have not been taught correctly.

You and your ilk have ignored the fact of the New Covenant. It's the Covenant sealed in the Blood of God's Lamb, but you prefer the covenant of the blood of animals.

New Covenant means New Law, the Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ and New Life, only found in Christ.

Your argument that Lord Jesus taught His followers to obey the Law of Moses is false. Read the sermon on the mount again. If all that is necessary to be saved is to obey the law, Lord Jesus died for nothing.

Of course, you know all this. You refuse to accept the truth. You put grace under law. What I say is intended for those who might be persuaded by your legalism.

"For through the law I died to the law so that I might live to God." Galatians 2:19. What laws apply to dead people?

But now, having died to what bound us, we have been released from the law, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code." Romans 7:6.

"All who rely on works of the law are under a curse. For it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Now it is clear that no one is justified before God by the law, because, “The righteous will live by faith.” The law, however, is not based on faith; on the contrary, “The man who does these things will live by them.” Galatians 3: 1-12

When you follow the law, you are not living by faith. That means that you are not pleasing God.

"Before this faith came, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law became our guardian to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian." Galatians 3:23-25

The law does not save us and neither does it make us righteous. "Whoever keeps the whole law, but stumbles at just one point, is guilty of breaking all of it." James 2:10

"But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law." Galatians 5:18

"For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God." Romans 8:14

The law is the shadow. You can live in the shadows if you wish. I choose to walk in the light of Christ.

 

[CS1]

You must be a new creation in Christ before you can perform a good work.

Better still is bearing the fruit of the Holy Spirit which is the direct reflection of Christ.

The traditional church allowed people to hold to a type of Godliness but deny it's power.

1 Corinthians 4:20
For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power.

are you exempt from the sanctification process ? Or you do not sin ? If you do not sin what is your work that testify of what God will accept ? Is not one a new creation the moment they are born again ? Or does that happen after the works are established in the life of the believer ?

 

[Proximus]

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?

No, Paul stated correctly, speaking about the ceremonial Judaic law, that the faith is saving without the works of the law. But that he did not meant the spiritual-moral commandments, is evident from many of this other expressions, when he says that the men will be judged by their deeds, thus, according to how they shun evils as sins against God, and so on.

The point about helping orphans and widows, and the rest of similar actions, can be done as simply as duties, as one does help one's relatives, or himself alone, attributing all good to the Lord. But in the first place, one has to look to the Lord and shun evils as sins. However, if he can take the water when thirsty, there is nothing preventing him to give the water to a thirsty person, etc, as well as to the naked and other types of the neighbour, listed in the Word. But it is not to merit anything, it is simply to follow the commandment, out of charity. And so that the charity be genuine, the evils have to be shunned first. Yet those simple activites of helping those in need, in case they are in true need, not just misusing the help, are introductory to the charity as well.

 

[Proximus]

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

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

We are talking here not about the Judaic customs and attitudes, but how the Lord differentiated those things, teaching about the commandments leading to eternal life, and about baptism and holy supper, and how the disciples also taught, teaching the repentance, thus doing the law, namely, shunning evils as sins, which is the changing of one's mind, its will and its understanding, and faith in the Lord. In that regard, when the Lord glorified His Human, to which the ceremonials of the Judaic Church pointed, and which it prefiguresd, the ceremonial law was then no longer of any use, everything having be gathered in the Holy Supper, and circumcision replaced with baptism, but the spiritual-moral law was even more deepened, not abrogated, thus the Lord is teaching it together with the faith in Him in the Gospels, and similarly, the disciples. Thus, it was not longer sufficient to simply avoid the formal evils, but the inward ones were to be dealt with, and the neighour was not simply those, whom the Judaic Church believed according to the letter, but was then a more comprehensive concept.

 

[ATG]

The whole issue about merit, perhaps, arose from misunderstanding the Paul's words about being proud by the works/deeds,

The use merit, as in 'meritorious works, is at times misused, as though to separate all our works from justification with God.

Eph 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

Paul only excludes from saving faith, the works that man can brag of without Christ; Certainly not the works that bring glory to God by faith in Christ:

Mat 5:16
Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Jhn 5:44
How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

And so we see in these two verses, the clear difference between our meritorious works by merit of Jesus Christ, and meritorious works that only bring merit to men: Self-meritorious works.

Gal 2:20
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Only 'self-meritorious' works are excluded from justification with God, not a blanket exclusion of all meritorious works men do; otherwise, no man does any works they bring merit and honor to God by Jesus Christ.

The effort to exclude all 'meritorious' works of honour from being saved and justified with God, would exclude our works that shine the light of Christ before God and men on earth;

Phl 2:15
That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world; Holding forth the word of life;

The self-meritorious works excluded from justification are these: The dead works of the flesh without faith toward God and Jesus Christ; Works of our own righteousness, and of the law without faith, and of show for men alone...

Tit 3:5
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

Rom 9:31
But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

Mat 23:5
But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,

that the whole "works"- thing, is meritorious, and that the Lord gives the status "justified" by looking into those meritorious works.

James 2 Scripture is not justifying and glorifying any proud works of men, but only the works of faith that justified Abraham and Rahab.

We see how trying to exclude all works of merit from justification by God, can even go so far as to speak directly against Scripture, and say that Abraham and Rahab were not justified by works, but by faith only...

 

[ATG]

The whole issue about merit, perhaps, arose from misunderstanding the Paul's words about being proud by the works/deeds,

Also, here is another dysfunction of faith alone justification apart from works:

If man has nothing meritorious to justify us with God, including meritorious works, then it must also exclude faith, else men do have something meritorious to justify us with God: Meritorious faith. Or, faith is not meritorious with God at all, and cannot save nor justify with God.

At least, we do know one faith, that certainly is not meritorious with God nor man: faith alone that is dead to God and man, being without works.

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

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?

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

And so, why is it that some Christians (not Scripture) preaches a faith without meritorious works, that saves, but is the one known unmeritorious faith in Scripture?

In any case, to avoid the dysfuntion of having nothing meritorious to justify us with God, and yet having meritorious faith to justify us: either faith and works of faith are meritorious to justify with God, or neither is meritorious without the merit of God, and cannot save nor justify any man.

 

[Inquisitor]

are you exempt from the sanctification process ? Or you do not sin ? If you do not sin what is your work that testify of what God will accept ? Is not one a new creation the moment they are born again ? Or does that happen after the works are established in the life of the believer ?

There are two gospels.

One is based on the gospel plus the law (Exodus, Matthew, Acts, James).

The other gospel is based on Paul's letters and no law.

1 Corinthians 4:20
For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power.

Then there are different subgroups in each version of these two primary gospel versions.

I will elaborate some more after I score my first cappuccino of the day.

 

[Inquisitor]

Also, here is another dysfunction of faith alone justification apart from works:

If man has nothing meritorious to justify us with God, including meritorious works, then it must also exclude faith, else men do have something meritorious to justify us with God: Meritorious faith. Or, faith is not meritorious with God at all, and cannot save nor justify with God.

At least, we do know one faith, that certainly is not meritorious with God nor man: faith alone that is dead to God and man, being without works.

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

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?

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

And so, why is it that some Christians (not Scripture) preaches a faith without meritorious works, that saves, but is the one known unmeritorious faith in Scripture?

In any case, to avoid the dysfuntion of having nothing meritorious to justify us with God, and yet having meritorious faith to justify us: either faith and works of faith are meritorious to justify with God, or neither is meritorious without the merit of God, and cannot save nor justify any man.

The problem is Paul taught justification by faith.

Romans 3:28
For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

Romans 4:2
For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.

Romans 5:1
Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Romans 5:9
Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.

Galatians 3:24
Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.

Galatians 5:4
You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

 

[Inquisitor]

are you exempt from the sanctification process ? Or you do not sin ? If you do not sin what is your work that testify of what God will accept ? Is not one a new creation the moment they are born again ? Or does that happen after the works are established in the life of the believer ?

Here is a brief overview below of the core difference in the two distinct gospel versions (Interpretations).

It is not as simple as the explanation below but it is a simple introduction into this division.

Strictly speaking, there are distinct versions and theological interpretations of the gospel in the New Testament, particularly when looking at the writings of the Apostle Paul compared to the Jerusalem leadership (like James and Peter). [1, 2]

While traditional Christianity ultimately harmonizes these into one overarching narrative, early Christian history reveals two primary interpretations of the core message: [1, 2, 3]

1. The Gospel of the Circumcision (Led by Peter and James)

• The Focus: This interpretation viewed the gospel primarily through a Jewish lens. Jesus is the long-awaited Jewish Messiah who fulfills the Law of Moses. [1, 2, 3, 4]
• The Message: Salvation requires belief in Jesus as the Messiah, and this faith must be actively demonstrated by obedience to the law and practical good works. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• Where to find it: This perspective heavily informs the Epistle of James, which emphasizes that "faith without works is dead" (James 2:26). [1, 2]

2. The Gospel of the Uncircumcision (Led by Paul)

• The Focus: Paul was specifically called to take the gospel to the Gentiles (non-Jews). He deemphasized Jewish customs, such as circumcision and dietary laws, arguing that they were no longer required. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
• The Message: Justification (being made right with God) is by God's grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ, entirely apart from "works of the law". [1, 2]
• Where to find it: This is the cornerstone of Paul’s writings, especially the Epistle to the Romans and Galatians. [1, 2, 3]

The Interpretation Clash: Faith vs. Works
These differing emphases created a famous tension in the early church. Because Paul and James used the same words (like "faith" and "justified") but applied them differently, their gospels can easily appear contradictory to a casual reader: [1, 3, 4, 5]

• Paul argued against legalism—the idea that you could earn your salvation through keeping Jewish laws.
• James argued against empty claims—the idea that you could simply say you believe in Jesus but live a selfish life without helping those in need. [1, 2, 3]

Scholarly Consensus
Most modern biblical scholars view these variations not as two entirely different religions, but as different theological responses to the same core message of Jesus, tailored to the specific audiences the apostles were addressing.

 

[legion]

That was not a presupposition.


The Bible frequently calls for repentance from sin and it is by the Mosaic Law that we have knowledge of what sin is (Romans 3:20). God is gracious to use by teaching us to obey the Mosaic Law (Psalm 119:29) and the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law (Jeremiah 31:33).


Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example and Christianity is abut following what Christ taught. Jesus saves us from our sin (Matthew 1:21) and sin is the transgression of the Mosaic Law (1 John 3:4), so Jesus graciously teaching us to be a doer of it is intrinsically the way that he is giving us his gift of saving us from not being a doer of it. There is nothing in the Bible that suggests that Jesus went to the cross for the purpose of nullifying what he spent his ministry teaching, but just the opposite. In Titus 2:14, Jesus gave himself to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people of his own possession who are zealous for doing good works, so the way to believe in what Jesus accomplished through the cross is by becoming zealous for doing good works in obedience to the Mosaic Law.


It is completely absurd to suggest that it is heresy to take the position that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to what God has commanded or to suggest that it is not heresy to take the position that followers of God should rebel against what He has commanded. The Christian belief system has nothing to do with refusing to follow what Christ taught.


You taking the position that followers of Christ shouldn't follow Christ shows that you have not been taught correctly.

I'm done arguing with you because you are so stupid with your theology it is impossible to actually make a point you are stuck on something that will send you to hell good luck