The lynchpin verse is verse 14 in James 2: if a man SAYS he has faith but does not have works. James is clearly dealing with a person who has no evidence at all of obedience, meaning there is no saving faith. St Paul addresses this as well (Romans 6:1). And Luther himself agrees with this and says in the Book of Concord that “if good works do not follow, faith is false and not true.”
@huntsman528 Жыл бұрын
Didn't Luther want to rip James out of his Bible?
@radarashwood5397 Жыл бұрын
@@huntsman528 No he did not
@radarashwood5397 Жыл бұрын
@@huntsman528 he included the book of James in his German translation of the New Testament.
@huntsman528 Жыл бұрын
@@radarashwood5397 just cause he included it doesn't mean that he didn't want to rip it out.
@thuscomeguerriero Жыл бұрын
Emphasizing "says" doesn't help elucidate the text. Suppose we play it this way and say "If a man says he has faith but doesnt have WORKS.." I think James' epistle represents an argument the early Christians were having about justification..with Paul onnthe other side
@joneill3dg Жыл бұрын
Yes please do the hour long version, would love to hear what the fathers said about this
@sf4323 Жыл бұрын
Be careful what you wish for.
@Scoma19 Жыл бұрын
Looking through the Church Fathers interpretation of James and Paul would be really interesting. Definately looking forward to that video!
@solochristo491 Жыл бұрын
There is such a video, two parts to be exact, by Scroll Publishing entitled How Do We Harmonize James and Paul?
@DamirVidovic-pf2pk7 ай бұрын
"Little children make sure no one deceives you; the one who PRACTICES righteousness is righteous" First John 3:7
@andrewl3939 Жыл бұрын
Yes, please one hour long version!
@travist7777 Жыл бұрын
1. Justify can mean "vindicate", and that is how James is using it. 2. Faith can mean "trust" (Paul) or "ascent to facts" (James.) (Ah, definitions.)
@arthurbrugge2457 Жыл бұрын
If a man reads the Bible, it's clear that James and Paul do not contradict or contrast. I never saw the problem, even in the old timey Bibles I grew up reading.
@christianchaidez Жыл бұрын
They do brother. James was a leader of a sect called the Ebionites, they were judaizers and believed in keeping the law, they didn't believe in Jesus' divinity. James did not believe in Paul's teachings. we need to look at historical evidence too
@stevenlindsey205611 ай бұрын
@@christianchaidezJames most certainly did believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. He was taught by and given the gospel by the resurrected Jesus Christ. If James were leading such a group they would not be denying the divinity of Christ nor would they be teaching a false gospel.
@christianchaidez11 ай бұрын
@@stevenlindsey2056 before giving out any opinions, i would rather you study dude. Opinions are like asses, everyone has one and they usually stink. Do real research, why would i need to lie or make something up?
@MichaelVarcade6 ай бұрын
I feel like there are several clear instances where James seems to be directly arguing with Paul. SOME COMPARISONS Galatians 2:15-16 vs James 2:14-180 Romans:3:30 vs James 2:19 Romans 4:1-3 vs James 2:20-23 A CLEAR REPRIMAND OF PAUL Acts 21:15-26
@ProfesserLuigi2 ай бұрын
@@christianchaidez Yeah, why would someone do that? Lie on the internet? That never happens.
@petermartin3259 Жыл бұрын
Excellent and enlightening point on the theological categories regarding "justification" and "faith"! While many are asking you to do a one hour presentation on this subject, I have to say that I like it when you treat subjects in this 15-20 minute format. No criticism of others, but I have a full-time job and family and house. An hour plus often doesn't work for me. I also like the main-point summary these shorter videos present. It's just more practical, something I can wrap my small mind around.
@Mygoalwogel Жыл бұрын
I agree. But you know, whenever I have to do some mindless task like dishes or hanging laundry, I pop in my earbuds and put on something lengthier from Dr. Cooper, Pr. Wolfmueller, or Pr. Weedon. Makes the work less onerous. Just wish I could do it when I'm grading kids' notebooks. Can't think about both.
@vngelicath1580 Жыл бұрын
I think it's significant that even while the Protestant reformers sought to differentiate faith from works (generally) in their interpretation of Paul, love flowing from faith was still a category in the Ordo in a way that the ceremonial law was excluded from. So even if they use a broader definition of "works", we still end up with roughly the same result as the Catholic understanding of placing the division not between faith and "works" but between works of the law and the virtue of charity in the heart. We also have to remember that Catholics and Protestants have different definitions of "faith" as well (so "sola fide" is going to ring differently)... We have a distinction between saving/living faith and _dead faith_ ... Catholics have only one understanding of "faith" (doctrinal ascent) and use the infused presence of "hope and charity" to acheive roughly the same result as what we mean by active/living/saving faith. All that to say, while I don't think the JDDJ resolved all that it claimed to.. I do think there's a ton of talking past each other.
@AD-in6qp Жыл бұрын
John 3:36 “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.” The opposite of belief isn’t disbelief, it’s to not obey because like said above, the biblical word belief had deeper meaning that just to believe one existed
@j.g.4942 Жыл бұрын
@@AD-in6qp Lutherans take belief/faith as primarily trust, in German there isn't faith, belief and trust, there is glaube, glaube, glaube. Also in the Greek of that verse it's "whoever is not persuaded to/by the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God." The word isn't obey, or 'under-hearing' "really listening" (interesting that in English obey is active yet the Greek seems more passive)
@boxingfan82749 ай бұрын
can a person obey God 100% of the time, i say they cant do that because that would make them sinless. I think on this topic God weighs up the efforts and knows who is the real deal and who is faking it. @@AD-in6qp
@eddie3961 Жыл бұрын
16:39 - _"So we condemn what James is condemning too just as clearly here. So then he goes on to say in verse 18, _*_Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works."_* Those words in verse 18, as well as the words of verse 19, aren't being spoken by James. They're being spoken by *the hypothetical objector* whom James introduces in verse 18 ('Yea, *a man* may say...'), and whom James _rebukes_ in verse 20 as being a "vain man". The biggest reason that people don't realize this is because every modern "Bible" version that employs quotation marks ends the objector's quote way too soon...which means that 100% of these modern versions take the foolish words of a vain man and portray those words instead as the wisdom of God being communicated via the writer James. James is not the one saying _"I will shew thee my faith by my works."_ Good works don't prove _anything_ about one's faith, because _anyone_ can do good works. The one who's saying _"I will shew thee my faith by my works"_ is *the hypothetical objector,* who is _boasting_ that his works are proof of his faith. But his boasting in verse 18 is vain, as is his foolish argument in verse 19. So in verse 20, James rebukes him: "O vain man". The modern versions' failure to end the objector's quote in the proper place makes it easier for "Salvation By Faith Plus Works" heretics to prop up their false doctrine.
@andriaswiatek6400 Жыл бұрын
its easier than all that , read James 1:1 ! then ask yourself am I one of the 12 tribes ????
@jammer45789 ай бұрын
Could speak about this relates to Abraham and Rahab being justified by works? Thanks
@faithalonesaves5 ай бұрын
why would he rebuke him saying "faith without works is dead" though? I hope you are right, but I don't understand right now
@thegracecast40 Жыл бұрын
I do want you to go more in depth eventually :)
@platospaghetti Жыл бұрын
Exactly the thing I've been wrestling with! Do the hour long version! 😄
@richardwolverine64472 күн бұрын
Excellent discourse …..absolutely unbiased and meticulously explained…
@vngelicath1580 Жыл бұрын
On the last judgement, the idea that if Christ forgives your sin than all that remains is your sanctification -- does sort of open the door to us speaking of God "crowing his grace" by rewarding us for the works done by His power. This should definitely be studied more. I'm honestly not sure whether the Roman perspective is that Christ achieves for us the gift of salvation (works are toward degrees of glory), OR if He merely removes from our path the impediment to earning it ourselves (forgiving us, returning us to blank slate, so that our works count toward something).
@salty_commuter819 Жыл бұрын
".....And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. ...." Rev. 20:12
@Koceila. Жыл бұрын
Very interesting teaching, thank you pastor ! Would you mind dealing about the topic of offices and functions inside the Church (what is a bishop, an elder, a pastor, a deacon) ? what a church structure should be according to the Bible ?
@geoffrobinson Жыл бұрын
If you look at Aquinas's commentary on Galatians 3, he gives a good explanation on how they don't contradict. Granted, Aquinas's view of justification is wonky pre-Reformation, but he pretty much gives the James 2 harmonization that Reformed & Lutherans do.
@Erick_Ybarra Жыл бұрын
There are some earlier commentators that follow your interpretation, Dr. Cooper. However, I do think the incorporation of Genesis 15:6 does give a great deal of weight to James using "dikaioo" in the very sense of Genesis 15:6. However, James sees the calculation made by God in Gen 15:6 to be a sort of foresight and a quality-statement of the faith itself, namely, that it is formed by love and hope. This is also the interpretation of some Church Fathers. In this way, Abraham's justification in Gen 15:6 is workless but with a foresight of Abraham's future love for God in light of the quality of that faith at the moment of Gen 15:6.
@Dilley_G45 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for a video under 30 minutes!
@AJMacDonaldJr Жыл бұрын
Yes! 😺
@SantoSaint1 Жыл бұрын
Please go in depth on this! God bless🙏🏽
@fixpontt8 ай бұрын
as it turns out, if you are allowed to redefine words however you want or replace words in a text however you want you can bend the meaning of the text however you want... who would have known, this mental gymnastics is actually no different than _"what is a woman"_ debate, if i can define, re-define and re-re-redefine words however i want and serve my purpose... it eventually will
@Skanderbeg_777 Жыл бұрын
For me the key passage to understand James was Galatians 2:7-9. St. Paul is saying there that Peter, James and John acknowledged that Paul and Barnabas preached the SAME Gospel, so James understanding of justification must have been the same as Paul’s.
@brianetheredge7323 Жыл бұрын
Dr. Cooper: Yes, your input to this would be invaluable. Regards, a former Roman Catholic, saved by grace thru faith in Christ (Eph 2:8-9)
@renlamomtsopoe24 күн бұрын
Alone!
@jordantsak7683 Жыл бұрын
James is a perfectly clear book in perfect harmony with Paul. The main concept is ''Faith saves, but salvation ( i.e. God make us full human beings, fulfilled human beings, people of love) always reflects the love of God to the neighbor''. Let's not forget that in James 2, before verse 14 and on, there is a very vivid image of a church in which people who call themselves ''faithful'' (in the way the demons are ''faithful'', i.e. they have a knowledge of who Jesus is) have no interest for the poor and the naked, they devide people according to their wealth and social position and they don't care about people without wealth and with a lesser social position. For James (and Paul) this mentality, this way of treating people IS NOT real and genuine faith, but just an empty thing, a dead thing. Faith is the vessel which is put in us in, i.e. in contrived sinners, in order God send us His grace and this grace is always full of love for the neighbor. You are not saved doing love, but a saved man always is a man of love.
@jonathanredden2483 Жыл бұрын
I agree, people often read James 2 on its own. It should be read in light of James 1 where so called believers abused poor people who attended worship services.
@justfromcatholic Жыл бұрын
Why Protestants try to reconcile what Paul and James wrote comes from Reformers' teaching of faith-alone justification. According to the Reformers our justification is completed at once through faith alone. Luther even added the word "alone" in Rom. 3:28 in his German translation of NT. Does NT support faith alone justification? NT was written in Greek and the phrase "justified by faith" appears four times (Rom. 3:28, 5:1, Gal. 2:16, 3:24). The one in Rom. 3:28 was written in Greek passive present tense while the rest are in Greek passive aorist tense. Both present and aorist tenses do not indicate a completed justification by faith alone and the person remains justified ever since. If Scripture teaches faith-alone justification, then inspired by the Holy Spirit Paul would write the phrase "justified by faith" in Greek passive perfect tense - it is the tense that captures precisely one time justification by faith alone. Catholics, who consider justification to be a process, will have no problem with both what Paul and James wrote. Both use the same Greek verb and James 2:24 was written in Greek passive present tense.
@anthonypolonkay26813 ай бұрын
The problem is several places nkevthe distinction that the grace we are saved by cannot include works. They are mutually exclusive. And yes the old catholic standby is "no that only refers to works of the law, not works in general". Well firstly even if granting that (which I don't cause its nit true) you run into the problem that the 10 commandments fall under "the law", and you also have the fact that it is stated "the whole of the law is captured in the one, thou shalt love thy nieghboor as thyself" Just these two factors in conjuction, and honestly the second one on its own automatically captures everything you could ever do as a "good work" into "the law" So even with granting this artificially restricted defintion of it only pertaining to "works of the law" specifically you are still kinda screwed. You can't include pretty much anything as a good work, because it would all fall under "the law". But in the real world scripture makes no such restriction to "works". Yes some passages do specifically mention it as "the law", or "works of the law" But there's Many others that make the works/grace mutual exclusion without any such distinction such as Titus 3 versus 5 - 7 I think. The only qualifier "works" is called there is "works of righteousness" And it still makes the clear distinction that it is not by those which we are saved, but only through God's mercy, and grace provided through Jesus. You would have to externally pretend that that he actually means works of righteousness (of the law) for the whole Good works /works of the law distinction to hold up in that chapter. Because any plain unmotivated reading does not give any sort of inkling that paul is refering to the law specifically here. A fair unmotivated reading just makes the distinction that effort of any kind on our behalf is divorced from our receiving of salvation.
@justfromcatholic3 ай бұрын
@@anthonypolonkay2681 grace is not work but moved and enabled by grace through Christ we do what is right, through which we are made righteous (Rom. 5:19, 1 John 3:7). To do what is right includes to have faith, to repent and to love one another as Christ commanded in Luk. 10:28.
@cirotraters Жыл бұрын
A follow-up question I have is how do you explain that we should not be looking to our works for assurance that we are going to heaven, in light of what James says? As I have been slowly moving from non-denominational to Lutheran, this is a question I still struggle with. Lutherans teach that us anxious Christians should look to our baptism and the lords supper for our assurance (which I love and has brought me so much comfort), and not our imperfect works, but James seems to say we should look to our works. Is it that others should look to our our works, but not ourselves?
@Catholic-Perennialist Жыл бұрын
Lutheranism is incoherent. They will spill an ocean of ink only to dodge your honest question.
@IAmisMaster Жыл бұрын
Lutheranism cannot solve your problem. There is an inherent logical contradiction. When pushed into the corner with James 2 and other obvious teachings from the Bible that we are to examine our own works as the only basis of assurance (Matthew 7:15-20; 1 John 3:7-10; 2 Corinthians 13:5-9), they admit that good works are evidence of faith, but then when they actually put things to practice, they actually find their assurance in "Christ's righteousness alone," whatever that means, and negate what they just said by ignoring all their willful sin which the Bible says disqualifies one from Christ's atonement (Hebrews 10:26-31). It is double-mindedness through and through, giving Luther the excuse to brag we can "murder and commit fornication 1000 times a day and not endanger our salvation." I recommend you listen to David Bercot and other Christians who take the Bible and and early church teaching seriously and do not fall for 16th Century rubbish.
@J-PLeigh8409 Жыл бұрын
We abide in Christ & only through faith in Him do works of love, w/out which our faith is dead as we are not saved by faith alone, James 2:24. We participate in this holy faith & partake of the grace offered
@J-PLeigh8409 Жыл бұрын
@Michael Staggs belief in scripture is a pregnant word w/ obedience. The easy believism is heterodox nonsense. Also even Lutherans hold to, the sacraments are works of obedience & necessary for salvation even as Luther held such as baptism...so sola fida doesnt hold up. Btw im not saying this against you as I dont know what you believe
@travist7777 Жыл бұрын
It would be helpful if, when you conclude, to include a summary, please. Thanks, Pastor!
@lutheranshorts Жыл бұрын
Thanks so much!! I would love an even deeper discussion of this!
@StephenJahn Жыл бұрын
This has been a question I've previously struggled with, and appreciate the very clear description of how James can be understood as speaking of "vindication" as opposed to "justification as we commonly understand it. Would the same mode of thinking apply to passages such as the parables of judgement of Matthew 25?
@Jeronimo_de_Estridao Жыл бұрын
Dont know why prots fight so hard to say the Catholic interpretation of Paul is "inadequate", when it is their interpretation that leave all kind of holes in the plain teaching of Jesus in the Gospels, like Matthew 25.
@DM-xy9gd Жыл бұрын
This all fits within the protestant view as well. Speaking about Matthew 25. How can one claim to know Christ but then not help those in need? How can you call Jesus, Lord but then not do what He says? The difference between protestants and catholics is their definitions of the theological terms of "justification" and "sanctification". Protestants and catholics agree that 1. A person must have true faith to be saved 2. This person who has true faith will produce good works Questions for a catholic would be- Are we saved at a moment in time? Or is it a process? Are we justified in a moment of time or are we justified at the end? Protestants would say you are justified and saved right now at this moment if you believe and trust in the crucified and risen Savior Jesus Christ our Lord. And they would also say we are being saved and will be saved at the end. Do catholics state they are ever saved right now? Or is it not until salvation is fully justified at the end that they are saved? Jesus even talks about in Revelation a church that is lukewarm, He'll condemn. They "believe" sure but like the demons they aren't actually "believing" in the salvific sense because Christ will spit them out
@StephenJahn Жыл бұрын
@@DM-xy9gd This is very well put: thanks for stating the matter so clearly. I'd of course welcome further input, but I thing you've set things forth between the two general approaches on the topic fairly well. God bless today, D M
@DamirVidovic-pf2pk7 ай бұрын
"Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who PRACTICES RIGHTEOUSNESS is Righteous " First John 3:7
@danjoconway Жыл бұрын
Thanks, Dr. Cooper! A couple of times you referred to being saved by faith and vindicated by faith as though they are synonymous in the James passage. How would that work? If James' "justified" is not salvific, but more vindication, as you say, I follow that. But if the passage is dealing with the kind of faith that "saves" and the justification part is explaining this primary question about what sort of faith "saves," doesn't it need to - for the the logic of the argument to hold throughout - be a salvific use of "justified"? Thank you!
@johnborden9208 Жыл бұрын
Excellent. This issue is suddenly much clearer to me, and yes I would like to see a longer in-depth treatment of this someday. Thanks, Jordan!
@voyager7 Жыл бұрын
I've understood the James passage and usage of "justified' there as being synonymous with "validated" or "proven". The usage differs from Paul, speaking about the forensic justification of Abraham (and us!) in Christ alone through faith alone; in the forgiveness of sins and reckoning as righteous before God.
@Mygoalwogel Жыл бұрын
In the [edit: Defense of the] Augsburg Confession, the Reformers pointed out that if "not by faith alone" really does contradict them, then a much bigger problem for every denomination would be that James is actually contradicting himself. "By His own will he gave birth to us by the word of truth that we may be a certain firstfruits of his creatures." So anybody who believes that the Bible is even one of several inerrant authorities must honestly seek an explanation, such as "validated" or "proven." It's not only a problem for Protestants.
@jackcrow1204 Жыл бұрын
I actually would love an in depth work
@IAmisMaster Жыл бұрын
"Let us now consider the question of faith. In the first place, we feel that we should advise the faithful that they would endanger the salvation of their souls if they acted on the false assurance that faith alone is sufficient for salvation or that they need not perform good works in order to be saved. This, in fact, is what some had thought even in the time of the apostles. For at that time there were some who did not understand certain rather obscure passages of St. Paul, and who thought therefore that he had said: Let us do evil that there may come good [Rom. 3:8]. [….] When St. Paul says, therefore, that man is justified by faith and not by the observance of the law [Rom. 3:28]. he does not mean that good works are not necessary or that it is enough to receive and to profess the faith and no more. What he means rather and what he wants us to understand is that man can be justified by faith, even though he has not previously performed any works of the law. For the works of the law are meritorious not before but after justification. But there is no need to discuss this matter any further, especially since I have treated of it at length in another book entitled On the Letter and the Spirit. As we have said above, this opinion originated in the time of the apostles, and that is why we find some of them, for example, Peter, John, James, and Jude, writing against it in their epistles and asserting very strongly that faith is no good without works. [….] We can see, then, why St. Peter in his second epistle urges the faithful to live good and holy lives, reminding them that this world will pass away and that they are to look for new heavens and a new earth which the just will inhabit, and that, consequently, they ought to live as as to be worthy of such a dwelling place. He was aware of the fact that certain unrighteous men had interpreted certain rather obscure passages of St. Paul to mean that they did not have to lead a good life, since they were assured of salvation as long as they had the faith. He warns them that, although there are certain passages in the epistles of St. Paul which are hard to understand - which passages some have misinterpreted, as they have other passages of Sacred Scripture, but to their own ruin - nevertheless, St. Paul has the same mind on the question of eternal salvation as have all the other apostles, namely, that eternal salvation will not be given except to those who lead a good life." - Augustine, on Faith and Works (circa AD 413)
@solochristo491 Жыл бұрын
This is a very common misunderstanding, even especially by Luther himself. That's why he called the book of James an epistle of straw and relegated it to second-class status. Luther clearly did not understand the book of Romans. This is born out especially by looking at how the early Christians understood it. In Romans chapter 4, Paul is talking very specifically about works of the Law of Moses. That is the whole entire theme of the book of Romans, and it's very clear from reading the entire chapter, and more especially the entire book of Romans. In fact, if you consult a 1611 KJV, the translators specifically capitalized the word Law in reference to the Law of Moses. James is referring to works of obedience commanded by God. That is also very clear. James even states exactly that. It's directly comparable to John 6:28-29: "Then they said unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." The whole entire New Testament clearly distinguishes in many important places works of the old law that was done away with by Christ, and works of obedience commanded by God, which are not works in the sense commonly understood. Paul is saying Abraham was not justified by works of the Law of Moses, and James is saying Abraham was justified by works of obedience. The two statements are not in conflict whatsoever. It's a misunderstanding from a misunderstanding of what Paul is actually saying in the book of Romans.
@anthonypolonkay26813 ай бұрын
So the whole "works of the law: distinction falls away in light of the boom of Titus. Specifically in chapter 3. The same grace apart from works mutual exclusivity is restated, except here there is no qualifier restricting is as law based works only. It is only called "works of righteousness" You have to completely import the concept thag he only means works of the law into Titus 3. And if it wasn't clear enough that he didn't mean works of the law, but instead just general works of righteousness in general the later parts of the chapter still encourage everyone to do said works of righteousness, not because it says we are saved, or anything like that because of them, but it only says that we ought to do them because they are profitable unto men. It also calls said same good works as "being fruitful" So in Titus 3 there really is no wrangling the defintion of "works of rightousness" into somehow actually meaning that it's just refering to the mosaic law.
@richardwolverine64472 күн бұрын
Wow
@coachmarc2002 Жыл бұрын
I enjoyed this. Thanks for your efforts and insights.
@sf4323 Жыл бұрын
This is not meant to be mean but no the Catholic church does not have any difficulty with Romans. The Protestant perspective is what has led to the modern critical perspective that assumes contradictions. The Protestant perspective is the novel one that creates the false dichotomy between Paul and James. There are no errors in scriptures because there are no errors in Scripture, one can test the scriptures themselves to see if there are any contradictions, historical, theological or logical. It's not that the scriptures are without error because one presupposes that there are no errors in scriptures and merely waves away anything to the contrary. That's one of the reasons why we have so many atheist in our age because of asystematic obtuseness that comes from the Protestant perspectives. One of the reasons the Catholic explanation makes so much sense, that Paul is dealing with initial justification and James is dealing with ongoing justification, is because it takes seriously the issues presented by both the Protestant perspective and the consequent atheists perspective It is not scriptures that are in error, it is the Protestant systematic that forces and assumes several key definitions and alien concepts into the scriptures themselves.
@sf4323 Жыл бұрын
Something also to be asked is by what right or authority does a Protestant prioritize any texts of scripture above another? Merely because it seems clearer to them? It wasn't the whole point of the Reformation that anybody can interpret the scriptures? It's not just contradictions within protestantism there are meta contradictions with protestantism and history and logic.
@joelreinhardt2084 Жыл бұрын
Definitely do an in depth one! The other thing I have heard Roman interlocutors say which would be interesting to hear you address is that Paul is talking about 'works of the Levitical law', specifically, and James is talking about 'good works' apart from conformity to the Levitical law.
@heavenbound7-7-7-7 Жыл бұрын
This is not just Roman argument there is an increasing number of protestants who say the same thing.
@IAmisMaster Жыл бұрын
@@heavenbound7-7-7-7 Because it is true and even Calvin admits in his Romans 3:20-21 commentary that the learned early church writers Origen, Chrysostom, Jerome, and Augustine all agree that "works of the law" Paul says do not justify are only works of Mosaic law or (for Augustine) good works done prior to union with Christ.
@heavenbound7-7-7-7 Жыл бұрын
@@IAmisMaster " For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:" Romans 2:14 "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin." Romans 3:19-20 It says that the law makes all the world guilty even Gentiles who don't have the law, so it cannot be talking exclusively about Mosaic law which was only to the Jews.
@IAmisMaster Жыл бұрын
@@heavenbound7-7-7-7 Your argument makes no sense. Paul literally tells you in Romans 2:14 that Gentiles do not have this law that he speaks of. They didn't have the Law of Moses. That's the law he is speaking of in Romans 3:19, and this Law of Moses condemns the Jews as well, completing the condemnation on the Jews as well. So Paul is speaking of both the condemnation that comes by natural law (the law of conscience and the "law unto themselves") in Romans 2 and then moving on to the condemnation that comes on Jews as well through Moses in Romans 3. We haven't even gotten to the juicy part where Paul introduces the Law of the Spirit, the third law in his discussion. But if you insist Paul is only speaking of one law in Romans, you won't understand a word Paul says.
@IAmisMaster Жыл бұрын
"Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, *be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish , and at peace. 15And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote* to you according to the wisdom given him, 16as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are *some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 17You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people* and lose your own stability." - 2 Peter 3:14-17
@reformatorpoloniae Жыл бұрын
Great video, Dr. Cooper! Thank you, especially for the point about hermeneutics, which was quite original and refreshing to me. Here are my short questions for clarification: 1. You've said that Paul gives his definition of "faith" in Romans and Galatians. Which passages do you have in mind? 2. Do you know of more places in Scripture where the word "justification" equals "vindication"?
@samuelrosenbalm9 күн бұрын
The fact that James is even talking about faith at all in the context of justification is proof that his audience understood that we are justified through faith. He was correcting those who misapply that truth. The reality is that we are not saved BY faith alone. We are saved by grace alone, THROUGH faith alone. There is a difference. Faith is the catalyst, and faith and works are, in such a context, two sides of the same coin James was saying that if you don't have works, you do not have faith. Paul was dealing with the root - James was dealing with the fruit. But the tree is the same..
@boxingfan82748 ай бұрын
i previously wrote "can a person obey God 100% of the time, i say they cant do that because that would make them sinless. I think on this topic God weighs up the efforts and knows who is the real deal and who is faking it.". I've reflected and now believe that obedience, is us normal human beings living in a fully sinless state but doing our utmost to live up to the high standards God sets for us which includes recognizing our shortcomings when they inevitably happen i.e sinning; AND repenting and asking for God's forgiveness. If that repenting process doesn't happen then that person is unrepentant and is not saved. The saved will be clothed in the blood of the lamb so God only sees goodness and righteousness in those people.
@Shevock8 ай бұрын
The central difference between Lutheran and Catholic theory on this is Lutherans make a distinction between the words Justification and Sanctification, whereas in Catholic theory these are both one idea, Justification. That is the word Sanctification would be part of the word Justification, and therefore Catholic Justification is a lifelong process involving Sanctification (fide and caritas in concert through gratia) . To my understanding of the Lutheran distinction, Justification happens (fide through gratia/grace) and then Sanctification is a process involving loving works (caritas).
@Shevock8 ай бұрын
BTW, both those solutions resolve both Romans and James without calling either canonical text as less than.
@Shevock8 ай бұрын
Also, if I can't wrap my head around the distinction between Justification and Sanctification, how much more can't I get my head to make sense of a distinction between Justification and vindication.
@blizzardblaise Жыл бұрын
Great video. I'd like to see more about this.
@josecorpus5767 Жыл бұрын
Paul is referring to the Mosaic Laws - Works of the law James is referring to works of love! Works of Charity Paul & James referring to Abraham as his justification was a process - a life time of faith & obedience
@Mygoalwogel Жыл бұрын
James 1:18 Of his own will he gave birth to us by the word of truth. This is precisely justification and salvation by faith alone. Later when he says, "a man is justified by his works," he is not contradicting 1:18, but means something different.
@anthonypolonkay26813 ай бұрын
Titus chapter 3 dispels the idea that paul soley refers to the mosaic law when talking about works apart from grace, because in that chaoter he refers to it only as "works of righteousness" abd later on even still encourages Christians that they should still do them as that is how they are fruitful. So yeah you really can't pull off the whole "paul only means the mosaic law " idea once including his address to Titus.
@surafielabetew9147 Жыл бұрын
Great video! You talked about inerrancy for a little bit, so how do you respond to different critiques about inerrancy?? Or can you make , if possible, a video about inerrancy, and discussing or reviewing Greg Boyd’s book ‘Inspired Imperfection’?? Thanks! Keep up the good work.
@MrLeadman12 Жыл бұрын
A better question that we don’t often ask is did Paul contradict Paul? Romans 2:13 one chapter earlier says that it is the doers of the law that will be justified and not those who hear the law only. Many see Paul as talking about a category of hypothetical people. In other words, if someone could do the law then they would be justified but since no one can then no one is justified by doing the law. Hence Romans 3:20. But I think this is a wrong way of understanding what Paul is doing in Romans 2-3. I actually think that conversation is more interesting and more fruitful than the conversation about the alleged contradiction between James and Paul. And if you get Paul right In Romans 2-3 that clears up James and Paul.
@origamitraveler74256 ай бұрын
Dr. Cooper, what do you think of the argument of secular biblical scholars like Bart Ehrman, who argues that Paul and James do not contradict because Paul and James mean different things by "faith" (pistis)? Ehrman contends that St. Paul means faith as belief in the promises of Jesus Christ, while St. James means faith as a mere belief in God or theism. Different from your idea that they mean different things with justification, but I wonder what a theological opinion on this reading is.
@josephbarr4468 Жыл бұрын
Please keep going with this topic. Thanks
@beowulf.reborn Жыл бұрын
Paul speaks of *_Living_* Faith, and *_Dead_* Works, whereas James is talking about *_Dead_* Faith, and *_Living_* Works. The two are in complete agreement. *_Dead_* Faith, is "faith without works" (Jms 2:26) *_Living_* Faith is "faith made perfect [by works]" (Jms 2:22) *_Dead_* Works, are "works of the Law" (Rom 3:20) (see also Heb 9). *_Living_* Works, are "work[s] of faith", (1 Thes 1:3) indeed it is "Faith working through Love". (Gal 5:6)
@antonioromano8816 Жыл бұрын
This is so great. Thank you. Extremely sound argument.
@richardsaintjohn8391 Жыл бұрын
Faith that is not expressed outwardly in action is void of fruit. That's what James is in saying. Language often fails in translation.
@dmoffitt19146 ай бұрын
17:00 I disagree with you difference in definition argument. Both are using faith as trust. I think you may be stuck on Works, and requiring it to be an action when works also include inactions aka not sinning. example I show my faith/trust by not committing adultery, or hating brother. Doing said actions show you lack faith. Thus Ezekiel 18
@Subdood04 Жыл бұрын
Dr. Cooper, my understanding of chronology of the NT is such that James precedes Romans by a number of years. This may be wrong, so I will defer should that be the case. But with that in mind, contextually they are addressing different audiences and thus different specific issues in both timing and audience. While this does not itself negate the possibility of their being at odds, I think it actually adds weight to tue position of their being complimentary when understood in light of your other arguments. In the 1689 London Baptist Confession (which is in large part parallel with the Westminster Divines) Chapter 13 on Sanctification (often commingled with Justification in these kind of discussions) states the following: 13.3. In which war, although the remaining corruption for a time may much prevail, 10 yet, through the continual supply of strength from the sanctifying Spirit of Christ, the regenerate part does overcome; 11 and so the saints grow in grace, perfecting holiness in the fear of God, pressing after an heavenly life, in evangelical obedience to all the commands which Christ as Head and King, in his Word has prescribed to them. 12 Thank you for the concise summary of primacy and hermeneutics! Thank you!
@DamirVidovic-pf2pk7 ай бұрын
Of course they DON'T DISAGREE ! Apostle Paul said God "WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS WORKS...." Romans 2:6
@villarrealmarta6103 Жыл бұрын
You can’t have one without the other. If you have works but not coming through faith they are not “good works”. Like when a unbeliever feeds someone it’s not a good work since it wasn’t done with the intention of showing someone God’s love. Both faith and good works are God’s gifts to us. Ephesians 2 also adds that the works we do are prepared in advance by God.
@beowulf.reborn Жыл бұрын
Abraham was counted righteous (i.e. Justified) because he believed God; this Justification (and by extension, Abraham's faith), was shown to be true, through the works that followed. We are justified by faith, when we believe, this same faith (and by extension the end result of our justification) is then perfected by our works ... this is *_not_* saying that we _add_ works to faith to perfect it, but rather that when our faith is perfected it brings forth works, just as when a fruit tree is perfected (i.e. fully grown) it results in fruit, and so the fruit tree is made perfect by the fruit. James and Paul are teaching the exact same thing, but whereas Paul is emphasizing the beginning, or root of Justification, James is emphasizing the end, or fruit, of Justification. If there is no root, there can be no fruit, and if there is no fruit, it is because there is no root.
@gandalfthegreatestwizard7275 Жыл бұрын
so if James is allowed to use justification and mean something else without being wrong, why assume the Council of Trent is anathematizing the Gospel rather than think they mean something different by justification?
@radarashwood5397 Жыл бұрын
Because the council of Trent is clearly talking about the article of justification. They also clearly articulate the protestant understanding of justification so we know there is no confusion. Also, the council isn’t inspired so we are under no obligation to interpret it the way we would a divine text.
@gandalfthegreatestwizard7275 Жыл бұрын
@@radarashwood5397 My position is that there are a number of ways one can speak about justification, and a number of ways that it is described in the Scriptures. I don't think that there is an issue with talking about an increase or preservation of justification caused by good works, as long as we don't think our initial justification is caused by some good works prior to the grace of God. I'm not sure what part of the Gospel that is anathema to. And while you might not think the council of Trent was inerrant, the virtue of charity would still suggest giving it the most favourable interpretation possible.
@SantaFe1948418 күн бұрын
Good works are the result of being saved, not the source of salvation.
@Steve-wg3cr Жыл бұрын
Well done again Dr. Cooper. Lutherans believe in justification by faith alone but also believe a person can lose his/her salvation. How might you reconcile these two? If a person can lose his/her salvation couldn't it be said that , in some sense, works play a part in a person maintaining and keeping their salvation?
@heavenbound7-7-7-7 Жыл бұрын
Faith is the only thing that keeps us saved, but faith without works is dead.
@st.martinlutherofwittenber18 Жыл бұрын
Lutherans have no problem admitting this. “Do good works that you may persevere in your heavenly calling, that you may not fall away again, and lose the Spirit and the gifts, which come to you, not on account of works that follow, but of grace, through Christ, and are now retained by faith" (FC SD IV: Good Works)
@Steve-wg3cr Жыл бұрын
@@st.martinlutherofwittenber18 Seems like this is splitting hairs. The statement could be described as justification received by faith alone but preserving justification is by faith and works, albeit works generated through faith in Christ.
@lorenzomurrone2430 Жыл бұрын
Please do the 1 hr vid! :)
@AJMacDonaldJr Жыл бұрын
James says there was a synergy (συνήργει) of faith and works. They work together.
@Catholic-Perennialist Жыл бұрын
Very good point. It is ironic that the proponents of Sola scriptura spend so much time and energy avoiding the plain words of the text.
@Edward-ng8oo Жыл бұрын
I think very few protestants would disagree that there's a synergy of faith and works. Scripturally it's beyond dispute that faith which doesn't produce good works is a dead faith which can't justify. However the assumption that therefore works are necessary for justification is false. God only accounts us righteous through faith alone in Christ and His atonement for sin. If we trust in Him as our Saviour our sins are forgiven and we are counted righteous and justified in God's sight. The good works that follow are confirmation that we possess true faith, not a means to be acquitted and declared righteous before God. This is what Paul teaches for instance in Ephesians: For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. (Eph. 2:8-10 ESV)
@Catholic-Perennialist Жыл бұрын
@@Edward-ng8oo "Blessed are they that _do His commandments_ that they might have right to the tree of life." Revelation 22:14
@Edward-ng8oo Жыл бұрын
For protestants a person is righteous in God's sight (i.e. justified) because he has had Christ's righteousness credited to him through faith, and therefore he's in a saved state from the point of his conversion onwards, whereas with Catholicism salvation is dependent upon whether one has done enough good works and lived his life righteously enough in response to grace being poured into him. Protestants make a distinction between justification and sanctification and believe that it's necessary to grow in holiness throughout one's life but that this doesn't actually save one because one has already been saved through having had Christ's righteousness imputed to him. Since Christ has atoned for our sins on the cross, faith alone receives this forgiveness of sins, and the commandments no longer hang over us in an accusative manner condemning us but rather are now viewed as simply God's will to be gratefully followed. This is what Paul is referring to when he said: For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. [20] I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. [21] I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose. (Galatians 2:19-21 ESV). In essence Catholics believe that righteousness is through the law by keeping God's commandments and therefore to protestants Catholics don't believe the true Gospel. They have another gospel which isn't the true one.
@Catholic-Perennialist Жыл бұрын
@@Edward-ng8oo There is more than one gospel in the Bible. Even Paul couldn't be bothered to be consistent on this point. Maybe it's all bunk.
@paulblase3955 Жыл бұрын
The other, concurrent explanation, is that Paul is speaking to new Christians and how one is Justified before God for your salvation. James, on the other hand, is speaking to established Christians about how they are to act in their everyday lives. You can claim to believe in Christ, but unless your faith is shown in how you love your neighbor, than your "faith" is useless.
@isaacmarshmallow8751 Жыл бұрын
Whenever Paul talks about works, he's talking about Works of Jewish law. Legislated actions. The freedom under the Christian system let's people do actions from the heart, and not from an enforceable law with punishment of death. Actions by choice, not by compulsion. James is talking about Works of faith (works that affirms ones convictions), Paul is talking about Works of Law.
@Athabrose Жыл бұрын
No James doesn’t contradict Paul. Thanks Dr. Cooper.
@brianbucher1313 Жыл бұрын
Paul said no one would be justified by works "of the law". James is speaking of works motivated by faith in and love of Christ. No contradiction whatsoever
@ric_gatewood Жыл бұрын
It is the Theologians who have created this confusion.
@blackoctopus5182 Жыл бұрын
I can believe how this even needs to be defended or explained, bcuz both teachings are clearly opposing each other. This is dishonest, it's like saying welp I get why people say it is, but I'm just gonna say that it's not, and it could be "harmonized" without even explaining how it's not contradictory. And I don't even know how this is still in the bible but there's no going around of this topic, it's important since billions of people depend their salvation on it (Matthew 7:21-23) "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness." It's not just faith, but works as well, stop lying to yourselves, I know that it feels better to believe that and life gets much easier, but things doesn't always go our ways
@Robert-vv6qp Жыл бұрын
A longer video would be very helpful 👍
@AmericanShia786 Жыл бұрын
It doesn't matter because The Epistle of James isn't canonical, right? Just Kidding! 😁 Yes, please do an hour on this topic! This video is excellent.
@ChaplainAcosta3 ай бұрын
Paul talks against those who thought that they could earn salvation. James talks about the difference between genuine faith and counterfeit faith and speaks against those who merely profess (say) they have faith. James corrects those who misinterpreted Paul. Paul clearly speaks against those who have "a form of godliness" but deny "its power" (2 Tim 3:5). One more thing, when in doubt (and always), Paul, James, and all the NT writers must be interpreted in the light of Jesus' teaching. Jesus is the ultimate interpreter of Scripture.
@theservant7527 ай бұрын
so his conclusion is works-salvation 15:08
@StoicHippy Жыл бұрын
As many reasons there are to admire Augustine and the other Fathers, they are still ascetic interpreters of scripture, and that faith is 'thinking with assent' was difficult to shake off in the Reformation. I don't think it is possible to interpret Paul any other way beyond the Lutheran perspective, however.
@anglicanaesthetics Жыл бұрын
Hi Dr. Cooper, I'd be interested in your take on the following construal. It seems to me that James is still using justification to denote imputation of righteousness and friendship with God. But there might be another way to reconcile James and Paul. Paul in Romans 4 seems to be talking about receiving justification as a wage for works in any sense (and that rules out the Roman concept of merit). So Paul is identifying the fact that works --even works wrought by the Spirit in faith--are not the grounds of God's giving us a righteous status. But suppose James is using the word "works" differently--namely, works as a synodoche for faith embodied. Works, for James, are faith's embodiment. And since faith always and ongoingly unites us to Christ, works *as* faith embodied unites us to Christ and justifies us. That justification isn't, per se, *grounded* in our works as though works are the basis of God's verdict. Rather, works (as faith acting bodily) unite us to Christ, and justify us instrumentally as faith-embodied. Thoughts?
@raykidder906 Жыл бұрын
This is from Romans 4 (NKJV): 1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works: 7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.” This is from James 2 (NKJV): 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. Romans 4:2 does NOT say that Abraham was NOT justified by works. James 2:21 says that Abraham WAS justified by works. Romans 4:2 only says that he could not BOAST about his works of justification BEFORE God. It seems to me that Abraham’s faith caused him to produce works that were pleasing to God, such that Abraham could then boast before men of his good works. These good works (as per James 2:21) were a result of God’s grace which precluded his boasting before God. It is like saying that a worker of Christian miracles such as Smith Wigglesworth could boast before men of his miracles. He could not boast before God of such miracles because they were produced by God, and Smith Wigglesworth was just a channel of these miracles. So it was with Abraham when considering his good works, wrought through God as a result of his faith. It reminds me of certain Lutheran who wrote to me that it is better to say that salvation is through faith first, rather than through faith alone.
@drcrisafi2320 Жыл бұрын
Very helpful, thank you
@ChristianCombatives Жыл бұрын
I feel like this is one of those videos that I will end up spamming to my friends.
@SantoSaint1 Жыл бұрын
Lol it’s definitely a good one. God bless brother!
@JooJingleTHISISLEGIT11 ай бұрын
To interpret one verse in light of another this way, holding one as true and the other as 'true if interpreted', seems short-sighted if not completely faulty. Who's to say it's not more right to use James to interpret Romans? Who's to say there's not another book which interprets both James and Romans more rightly? Who's to say one's understanding of Romans, which is what one is using to interpret another book like James, is even accurate in the first place? Raw belief? "I believe and so it must be true"? James 2:14-17 says "What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? **Can such faith save them?** Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead." He asks, "Can such faith save them?", or "Can this workless-faith, this dead faith, bring salvation?" How can one interpret away this question? Look to the greek, "μὴ δύναται ἡ πίστις σῶσαι αὐτόν", word for word it reads "Not is able the faith to save him" '?' To say, "Well clearly, since my understanding of Romans is to say works are unneeded for salvation (to be saved), I will understand this verse in James to be talking about vindication instead." is to say "My understanding I've had before now is more important than what may be true, so I will use any means at my disposal to be able to hold consistency with it. Even if that means hearing a different word in one place or in another place arbitrarily." But also Romans 4:1-3 says "What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about-but not before God. What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”" Beyond those verses, Paul elaborates on this idea of faith being needed for salvation, and not works. Like in Galatians 3:10-11 "For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.”" There can be no question that Paul is saying faith is needed for justification and therefore salvation. Nor can there be any question that Paul is saying relying on the Law (or Torah) cannot lead one to salvation. Those who follow the Law are under a curse, so he says. So what am I saying, that Paul and James contradict? By no means. Paul says following the Law leads to a curse. Where does James say, "Following the Law will justify you"? But James talks at length about works. In James 1:19-25 he writes "My dear brothers and sisters, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires. Therefore, get rid of all moral filth and the evil that is so prevalent and humbly accept the word planted in you, which can save you. Do not merely listen to the word, and so deceive yourselves. Do what it says. **Anyone who listens to the word but does not do what it says is like someone who looks at his face in a mirror and, after looking at himself, goes away and immediately forgets what he looks like.** But whoever looks intently into the perfect law that gives freedom, and continues in it-not forgetting what they have heard, but doing it-they will be blessed in what they do." This reminds one of the parable of the sower, Matthew 13:3-8 "Then he told them many things in parables, saying: “A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. **Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root.** Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop-a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown." The seed is the word. In some places, the word is scattered on the path and is rejected. In other places, the word springs up quickly, but it had no root, and withered away. Anyone who listens to the word is having it sown into them, but like James says, if you hear the word but do not practice it, you will lose sight of it like a man who forgets what his face looks like after seeing a mirror. There can be no doubt that works are important in our lives. Without them we are hardly Christians. We even will lose our Christianity if we don't practice the things the Word teaches. There can also be no doubt that faith is important in our lives. Abraham's belief was counted to him as righteousness, and it's by our belief that we are counted as righteous. Galatians 3:14 "He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit." Faith is not belief alone, as James said, faith without works is dead. Faith is not works alone, as Paul said, those under the Law are under a curse. Faith is both belief and works in tandem. In Joshua 6, if the Israelites attacking Jericho believed God was with them, but did not circle the city and blow their horns, they would not have had faith. If they had done the action, but not believed God was with them, they would not have had faith. You cannot separate one part of faith from the other, or you suffer consequences. But the works of faith are not the Law. While Paul says those **under the Law** are cursed, James says those **without works** have a dead faith. When Paul says "the Law" he means Torah, or the 619 laws of the old testament. One can pursue works of faith without keeping Torah, and this is the statement all Christians make whether consciously or unconsciously, unless they do keep Torah. So why did Paul and James focus on one side of faith or the other? Paul was preaching to the Gentiles, who had never had Torah, he was focused on making sure these new Christians didn't fall prey to the old Way. James was preaching to the Jews, who had Torah, he was focused on giving understanding to them. All they had was Torah, they had a Law to follow. But James and Paul were preaching the same truth. James 2:9-13 says "But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers. For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. For he who said, “You shall not commit adultery,” also said, “You shall not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker. Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment." James says here what Paul says elsewhere, if you break any part of the Law you are guilty of breaking all of it. He urges the Jews to "Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom", that is, faith. That's what I wanted to say. You might read this and say "Well look, you didn't hear me, I agree with you. Describing faith as both works and belief is what I meant by saying justification vs vindication. The belief justifies you, and the works are the fruit of that belief." But I say that the belief can be the fruits of the work, or the work the fruits of the belief, but one without the other is not faith; without faith there is no justification, and there is no salvation.
@jacobemmanuel4772 Жыл бұрын
The argument about justification being vindication is interesting, I’ve never heard that one before. I have a question though I think I remember you saying something in this vid about Revelation and I heard Luther had said some things like “Christ is neither known or taught in it” and “I can in no way tell it is produced by the Holy Spirit” and I was wondering did he ever change his mind on that and do we know what the reasons were? Also if someone were to come saying that today or claiming that any canonical book of the NT is actually uninspired by what authority could we tell them they’re wrong?
@bethanyann1060 Жыл бұрын
You’re onto something. I think the bigger question is, by what authority did Luther himself have to claim Revelation and others were uninspired?
@jacobemmanuel4772 Жыл бұрын
@@bethanyann1060 Besides himself (“I miss more than one thing in this book, and it makes me consider it to be neither apostolic nor prophetic.”, “My spirit cannot accommodate itself to this book.”, “Therefore I stick to the books which present Christ to me clearly and purely.”, etc) Luther also cited the church fathers as his authority for rejecting Revelation, he said “Many of the fathers also rejected this book a long time ago.” I found online that he may have been referring to Caius of Rome, Dionysius of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, and the synod of Laodicea in AD 360.
@santtuhyytiainen7 ай бұрын
Paul talks of works of law and James talks of works of faith.
@br.m8 ай бұрын
Anyone who thinks that looking is work? How much work is it to look at a bronze snake? Did you break a sweat lifting your eyelids?
@harrygarris6921 Жыл бұрын
I was under the impression that Lutherans reject the doctrine of perseverance of the saints. In other words, you can fall away from God and lose your faith. If that's the case why is the maintaining of your faith throughout your lifetime not considered a "work"? Anyone who's been a Christian for some time can attest to the experience of feeling distant from God and struggling to hold to their faith at points during their life and having to engage with the scripture and prayer and with the sacraments to maintain it.
@gregolson7499 Жыл бұрын
But isn't the proof that Abraham believed God in what Paul is talking about in Romans 4 that Abraham obeyed God by going to a different land? How do we know that Abraham believed God if he never obeyed him?
@I12Db8U Жыл бұрын
Clearly not. Gen 15: After these things the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision: “Fear not, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great.” 2 But Abram said, “O Lord God, what will you give me, for I continue[a] childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?” 3 And Abram said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.” 4 And behold, the word of the Lord came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son[b] shall be your heir.” 5 And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” 6 And he believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness.
@aidanmcmanus2752 Жыл бұрын
Abraham's faith can be traced back to Gen. 12 way before Gen. 15:6 as is testified in Heb. 11:8; "BY FAITH Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to the place which he would receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going." That was saving faith in Hebrews 11. Yet, Heb. 11 is talking about Genesis 12. I don't think you understand what the term "works" are in Romans. Faith is not at odds with ALL works (Gal. 5:6) but in Romans 4 it is put in contrast with a certain kind of works. "Works" in Romans does not refer to every sort of human activity, but to the sinless life which would ELIMINATE the need for grace and forgiveness and make justification a debt owed to one due to his perfect record. Since these "works" eliminate the need for forgiveness, they certainly cannot include anything set forth in the scriptures as a condition of forgiveness --for example (Acts 2:38). Such conditions are included in the term "faith" --not in the term "works." Even Psalm 32, quoted in Rom. 4:7-8, shows in verses 3-11 that GRACE does not rule out "conditions" of pardon. Paul is dealing with works of the law (or law), while James is dealing with "works of faith." Two completely different subjects altogether.
@HeavenFace5 ай бұрын
We need to remember letters were written to specific situations facing specific churches. Paul wrote to churches where people were tempted to trust in their works for salvation, while James wrote to those who were disposed to think intellectual assent could save them. Paul counteracts legalism while James corrects Antinomianism and of course Paul rejected antinomianism (Gal 5:21) he also believed in good works were necessary for eternal life but both Paul and James believed such works were the fruit of saving faith ... not the root. The Beauty and completeness of GOD'S word Paul and James teaching complementary NOT contradictory truth, They teaching to different situations I could be saved in my last day by fully being accountable for my sins and asking for forgiveness by heart which GOD knows and declaring JESUS is LORD and will be saved by Grace and on the other hand knowing JESUS is LORD and denying him while am living caring not and in my last day I come to the Lord declares he LORD and not be saved only GOD judges the ungodly who's the ungodly we are a man will do many good works outside but sins internally greatly who can buy their way to heaven by works that's Paul and James combined works comes from love being transformed by GOD the Holy Spirit believing in GOD makes us live like him his ways brings prosperity in our lives our works be reward while we live but it cannot be counted as a payment to get into heaven works is because we care as Christ cares for us through love while we were sinners Romans 3:23 We all fall short of his glory so do works not because of its payment but of love with faith we will be rewarded for good works with faith but we still sinning... that's what Paul saying it's not works but Grace in believing in JESUS CHRIST is LORD and GOD raised him from the dead which is faith your declaring he's who he is with belief like the guy who was on the cross with him who was saved that instantly so Paul and James just complementing the different aspects to different situations but not contradicting each other in JESUS name hope you understand clearer bless 🙏
@ThreeQuartersCrazed Жыл бұрын
Eastern Orthodox here. Let me show why, using James 2 and other passages, the way that protestants consider sola fide is incorrect. James 2:14-26 cannot be divorced from James 2:1-13. Read verses 1-7 then skip down to verses 14-17. They are about the same thing; and this is NOT vindication. Verse 14 says, "can that faith SAVE him?" This about saving faith, not justification before men, as many contend (though perhaps not Dr. Cooper, if I understand his argument correctly). If anyone needs further proof that this is not about justification before men, I will point out that St. James uses the example of Abraham and the Binding of Isaac. In Genesis 22:12, the Angel of the Lord (that is, the pre-incarnate Son of God) says, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me." Abraham is clearly justified before God in this passage. No man is here to see this. In that passage is is GOD who sees that Abraham fears God, because Abraham has not witheld his only son. In Genesis 15:1-6, Abraham believes God's promise, and IT (?) is credited to him as righteousness. God's demand for Abraham to offer up his only son does not shake his belief in God's promise. Faith IS intricately tied to trust, just as Dr. Cooper says. It is the trust that God will fulfill his promises even when we don't see it (Hebrews 11:1-2, 13-16). Abraham's trust is God is so great that he believes God will fulfill his promise even if he needs to offer up Isaac (Hebrews 11:12, 17-19). But notice what it is that justifies Abraham. Under protestantism, one is actually NOT considered to be justified by faith, strictly speaking. Rather, one is justified by the imputation of their evil works to Christ and the imputation of Christ's good works to them. Is that what the "it" refers to in Genesis 15:6? Of course not. The "it" that justifies Abraham is FAITH ITSELF, not an alien righteousness that is imputed to Abraham and which has nothing to do with his own works. Faith, a quality that Abraham actually posesses (not by imputation), is what justifies Abraham. Abraham believed God's promise and was justified, but his faith was completed by his works (James 2:21-23). Without works there is no saving faith, but not because faith produces works like an assembly line manufacturing a product. It is because without works, faith is incomplete and therefore not saving. Faith is the means by which one does what is necessary to take hold of the promises of God, which is why faith (faith ALONE, even!) is what saves. When God makes a covenant, it often as the form of doing X to receive Y. Faith is HOW you do X, and is the only way of doing X. So faith is what saves, but not without works ("X"). So while it's not necessarily wrong to say that we're saved by faith and works, which is common in Roman Catholicism, I find that language to be obtuse and misleading. There is a perfectly Orthodox way of saying that we are saved by faith alone, it's just not how protestants understand it. Hebrews 11:13-19 actually tells us what the Faith of Abraham is. He hoped in the promise of a better country (v16) and he believed that God could bring life out of death (v19, see also Romans 4:16-21). Christ's faith in his Father was exactly like this. He too hoped in the promise of a better country (John 18:36) and he believed that his Father could bring life back to his dead body. This too is our faith, to hope in resurrection and an inheritance of eternal glory with the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 8:16-25). The nation of Israel lacked this faith when they were brought out of Egypt, they constantly moaned that they were better off in their old country of Egypt and that Moses brought them out into the wilderness to die (see, for example, Exodus 17:3, Numbers 11:4-6, and Numbers 14:1-4 though I'm sure there are others) , which, figuratively, he did. So, they failed to enter the land of promise, and died in the wilderness instead. They believed in God enough to begin the Exodus, but not to finish it. They didn't have faith, so they did not do what was necessary to receive the promise. They had a dead faith, so they died in the wilderness. One of the mistakes that Protestants make is to ask when justification happens as though it must be at one, and only one, moment in time. If you read passages like Genesis 15:6 and Romans 4:1-3 on the assumption that justification is a one-time event, you will be forced to conclude that it happens at the moment that faith occurrs in a instant. But this makes passages like Genesis 22:12, James 2:22, and Revelation 20:12-13 incomprehensible. There can't be a judgment by your own works if you're justified by the imputed works of Christ long before. Justification is not a one-time event, it begins with faith and ends with (or is completed by) works. If faith produces works which take hold of God's promises (Hebrews 11:6), then those works play a part in final justification. But the works are not deserving of justification or salvation. All of our works are like filthy rags before God, but if they are performed in faith, they are counted as righteous before God. But without the works, faith is incomplete and useless (James 2:14-17).
@wisconsinwoodsman1987 Жыл бұрын
Would love to see an exhaustive analysis of this.
@ryangoss6213 Жыл бұрын
Go more in depth please sir. I appreciate this topic.
@SunwardTerror Жыл бұрын
I would appreciate you going more in depth. I know many arguments as to how James should be interpreted according to both sides and I would love to hear some distinctions and arguments from you.
@boxingfan82749 ай бұрын
Are there any saved Christians reading this who can honestly say they are 100% obedient to God ?
@joetaylor1976 Жыл бұрын
Yes is the simple answer
@frjamesbozeman53755 ай бұрын
As an Orthodox Christian, it just seems that most of what is being said here is attempting to draw a line between two things that have no life without the other and ought not be taken apart and disconnected, as if each has specific merits apart from the other. Not to be dismissive! It feels too formulaic when it ought to simply go without saying that if faith without works is dead (St James), and if works without faith is similarly dead (St Paul), then faith and works share one life in the Christian, like body and soul together fulfill the divine mandate to be a human, living and active. Apart, faith and works are like a body in death, with the soul ripped out of it, needing resurrection.
@fab7an75820 күн бұрын
My issue with your logic is that you do not summarize Paul’s point correctly. Paul says we are saved through Faith APART from works. You claim we shouldn’t divorce Faith from works but Paul himself does that in this passage. Sola Fide (and this verse) simply put states that a Christian cannot merit his salvation by his own works. It does not deny however, that saving Faith does not do good works, Paul himself says we are made to do good works, these works however do not merit your salvation nor make you better than anyone else.
@frjamesbozeman537520 күн бұрын
@@fab7an758I can’t help but notice that you haven’t addressed St James’ words here. Nevertheless… St Paul is specially addressing issues relating to Jews and Gentiles worshipping and coexisting in Rome during a very difficult time for the Jewish people. Those Jews kept on insisting that they could fall back on their “works”: namely circumcision and supposedly strict adherence to the Law, only adding Christ in as some sort of some secondary reality. This erroneous belief system led to problems between the Jews and Gentiles within the Christian community, and St Paul is taking them to task for this specifically. They were still doing as the Pharisees did, trusting only/mainly their “works” of Jewish persons of the circumcision and adherent to the Law. Both of these things have the potential to work in concert with the saving grace (I.e. presence) of God in our lives, considering that God gives both to His chosen people. Abraham is presented in this context as someone equivalent to a gentile, as he demonstrates that his “saving” faith comes before the Law or circumcision, showing the Jews that their basis for “assurance” is misapplied. Does the Orthodox Church teach that we can be saved by works? Well, no, and yet it is impossible to ignore the part/role/essentiality that specifically “works of righteousness” (which St James is talking about in his epistle, and St Paul is NOT talking about in Romans 4) play in the working out of our salvation, as seen in St James epistle or in Matthew 25. Without works, our faith is dead and merely a concept or idea. But we cannot hold God over a barrel and say, “look at my works! You owe me!” I think that the difference here is reading St Paul, and seeing this as contractural and as an either/or proposition in which God takes some *thing* called “imputed righteousness” (a noun or object, and not a biblical phrase) and then places it on us. The Eastern Orthodox view would suggest that God actively imputes or reckons or (better) makes us righteous according to His will and the active, living faith (trust, faithfulness) of us, both demonstrated by and working through works of righteousness. Christ when He comes, fulfills the Law, but nowhere do we see Him abolish it. What we do still is a part of our salvation. Sola Fide wants to deconstruct faith in order to find out what it’s made of, and then wants to discard what it thinks are not essential, without realizing that just because we are more able to grasp the function of our faith in terms of salvation over and above our pitiful works, that doesn’t mean that we are then free to discard them as mere icing on the cake or some sort of side dish. The Jews were making out the side dish to be the whole meal.
@fab7an75820 күн бұрын
@@frjamesbozeman5375 I think you have a caricature view of what Sola Fide is so I will explain it to you again. Only GENUINE faith in Christ saves. Your works cannot merit your salvation and importantly EASY BELIEVEISM IS NOT SAVING FAITH. Saving Faith yields good works naturally. The emergence of Sola Fide is due to some both Protestants and Orthodox agree. Rome would put people in purgatory for thousands of years and the relatives of those dead people had to send stupid high amounts of money and do awful works such as climbing stairs with their knees in order to merit the salvation of those relatives.
@fab7an75819 күн бұрын
@@frjamesbozeman5375 hey dude, it is clear your understanding of Sola Fide is lacking and you think us as Protestants simply ignore James’ passage. I think you believe in principle with what Sola Fide actually states which is simply: our works cannot merit our salvation, only genuine saving Faith is able to save you. In this context, Saving Faith is NOT easy believism (aka I accept Jesus once in my heart and I am saved independently of what works I do). No Protestant on their right minds claim that saving Faith is NOT accompanied by good works. Sola Fide is however a strong statement that works do not make you a superior Christian and at the end of the day, outside of Faith they are filthy rags to the Lord (Isaiah 64:6). This doctrine arose not due to imputed righteousness as you ascribed (since Catholics also believe in imputed righteousness but not in Sola Fide) but rather in the Roman Catholic belief of purgatory, where people in the Middle Ages would be put in for 1000s of years, and the laity was made to believe that if they paid indulgences or did good works such as pilgrimages/ penances etc. their dead relatives would be taken out of this terrible state.
@beowulf.reborn Жыл бұрын
What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, but, Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back. You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”-and he was called a friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. ~ James 2:14-17; Romans 4:1-5; James 2:21; Hebrews 11:17-19; James 2:22-24, 26
@blackoctopus5182 Жыл бұрын
But still paul teaches, that alone with faith you'll gain salvation, no works needed but just by faith alone!
@gwilson314 Жыл бұрын
Excellent point about James and Paul using the terms in a common way, not a (systematic) theological way. But this begs the question, what use is systematic theology to us? Should we not discard it and just read the plain meaning of scripture as was intended? So I agree in principle that James and Paul could have been using dikaioutai differently--but then again they could have been using ergon (works) differently. Paul is clearly referring to works of the law in Romans 4 (for better context, the passage begins in Rom. 3:21). The Mosaic system--legalistic as it was--could not save (nor can the legalistic Catholic system). But is James referring to works in this legalistic sense? Well, his two examples regarding faithful works are of obedience apart from the Mosaic Law. Abraham is pre-Sinai and Rahab is a Gentile. It's true James cites Genesis 15:6, but he references Genesis 22. Here is Genesis 22:15-18: And the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven and said, “By myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.” Abraham is justified because he did not withhold Isaac (v. 16), and again, because he obeyed God (v. 18). Again, read this without systematic theological presuppositions. The Lord is indicating that it was Abraham's righteous deeds that earned him the blessings; blessings he had already been promised because of faith back in Genesis 15. What if justification is not a one time thing? This would also solve your dilemma in John 5. The redeemed are saved from judgment through belief (5:24) and righteous (not legalistic) deeds (5:29). You can't have one without the other, you must have both.
@heavenbound7-7-7-7 Жыл бұрын
"What if justification is not a one time thing?" You have a wrong understanding of justification it isn't a one time thing, we are justified before God when we keep on believing the gospel so it isn't a one time thing. "Abraham is justified because he did not withhold Isaac (v. 16), and again, because he obeyed God (v. 18). " Nowhere does the bible say that Abraham was justified again, he demonstrated his faith (through which he was justified) when put to the test. "By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” Hebrews 11:17-18 When God tests your faith if you fail do you lose your justification?
@richardmclaughlin83452 ай бұрын
Paul vs James is a false narrative. It assumes, incorrectly, that the Apostle Paul had been redeemed. from the Law when James wrote his epistle. Actually, the Crucifixion that would accomplish that redemption was still in the future. Both James and Paul talk about faith but from two drastically different perspectives. James from his day to day experiences with Jesus before the Crucifixion, and Paul, decades later, from his supernaturally derived lessons from the Ressurected Savior.
@collin501 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for this video. I'm glad that there is discussion on what a living faith is. I've never questioned the doctrine that we receive grace through faith apart from works, but my struggle is that there is SO MUCH in the NT about works in the final judgment. Even the passage mentioned from Revelation about washing our robes clean in the blood, says layer in the book that the white robes are the righteous deeds of the saints (Rev 19). So this drives me to question what it really means to wash the robes. I find many of the references to the blood of Christ in the NT refer to our conduct and way of life. For example, 1 Pt 1:18-19, "knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers... with the precious blood of Christ..." We were ransomed from ways of life so that we would live differently. Doesn't it harmonize better by suggesting that we are actually redeemed to live righteously, and that kind of life is actually in accordance with a real and living faith? In James 2, what do you think about Abraham's faith being completed by his works? Wouldn't this be consistent with all of the examples of faith in Hebrews 11, as well as the testing of faith in James 1? Doesn't our faith need action to grow strong and become perfected?
@Edward-ng8oo Жыл бұрын
Yes we are redeemed to live righteously and to do good works. Unless love and good works flow from our faith then our faith wouldn't be genuine. Paul in Ephesians says: "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. (Eph 2:8-10 ESV). You ask, doesn't our faith need action to grow strong and become perfected? Yes unless our faith produces in us the desire to live righteously and love others, and to continue like this through life then it wouldn't be genuine and also it wouldn't grow but just shrivel and die. God will eventually judge us at the end of the world on the basis of our works because our works will reveal whether we have true faith or not. I've a copy of What Luther Says and frequently consult it to find out what he has to say about different topics as he had such amazing insight into numerous things. The following quote will no doubt be helpful: You are to interpret all passages of Scripture which treat of works to mean that God would have us let the holiness we have received in faith shine forth by such good works, to prove itself, and be of benefit to others that false faith may be recognized and rooted out. God grants no one His grace that it should lie still and be of no further use. Rather He grants it in order to have it profitably employed and to have it attract everybody to God by its confession and public manifestation, as Christ says Matt. 5:16: "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven." Otherwise grace would be like a secret treasure and a hidden wisdom. Of what use are both of them? In fact, by its activity piety becomes known not only to others, but you yourselves become certain that it is genuine, as St. Peter says (2 Peter 1:10): "Give diligence to make your calling and election sure." For when works do not follow, a man cannot know whether he really believes; nay, he is certain that his faith is a dream and not real. So Abraham became sure of his faith and his fear of God by offering his son, as Scripture says: "Now I know that thou fearest God (that is, now it is evident that you fear God) seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from Me" (Gen. 22:12). (WLS 2023) With respect to James it depends how one understands his assertion that a person is justified by works in addition to faith. If one understands James to be meaning that people are justified before God through works and faith then that would contradict Paul's teaching and would be clearly false. This is how Luther initially understood James but later on he interpreted him differently as in the following quote also taken from What Luther Says: Before Men Insist on it, then, that inwardly, in the spirit, before God, man is justified through faith alone, without all works, but outwardly and publicly, before the people and himself, he is justified through works, that is, he thereby becomes known and certain himself that he honestly believes and is pious. Therefore you may call the one a public justification, the other an inward justification, but in this sense that the public justification is only a fruit, a result, and a proof of the justification in the heart. Accordingly, man is not justified by it before God but must previously be justified before Him. Just so you may call the fruits of the tree the obvious goodness of the tree, which follows and proves its inner, natural goodness. This is what St. James means in his Epistle when he says (2:26): "Faith without works is dead," that is, the fact that works do not follow is a certain sign that there is no faith, but a dead thought and dream, which people falsely call faith. (WLS 3921) I think once one appreciates that justification through faith alone doesn't imply that faith is actually alone as it's always found in conjunction with good works, then the difficulty will be overcome.
@collin501 Жыл бұрын
@@Edward-ng8oo Thanks Edward. It would seem, from your quotes of Luther, that if faith alone without any works is merely a dream, then a person would need to have some understanding within themselves that faith includes some kind of obedience, and that without that obedience their faith would shrivel up and die. So faith alone will bring you justification and salvation, but it will fail you if not accompanied by works, even before God, because it's merely a dream and will not justify you before God. That would be true of Luther's statements and true of the Bible, would it not? Now where does that leave a person who is genuinely considering their own salvation? It's a bit confusing. I'm trying to find out what I'm supposed to think of my own salvation. It is by Jesus Christ but includes the life we live, since the branches that don't produce good fruit are cut down and thrown into the fire. I know that some protestant theology treats good works as an automatic result of true faith, and I get the picture that the good works just start bubbling up in the life of someone with true faith. I do see some support for that idea in Ro 8 with those who are led by the Spirit, but many other places in the NT command us, exhort us, encourage us, to obey. Even Ro 6 says to present ourselves as obedient slaves, which is something we are asked to do. Even Ro 4:18-22 describes Abraham living out faith in a particular life situation when it was contrary to what made sense, and Paul says, "that is why his faith was counted as righteousness." You can even find, in v19-20 reckoning himself dead and giving glory to God (service) which are both elements found in Ro 6. Abraham actually lived out his faith. So if an active faith is a necessary element of true salvation, should our definition of faith be broad enough to include not only what Christ did for us, but also what He said and taught and told us to do? Not that a person would know all Jesus taught when they come to faith, but is it enough to only say, "Christ died for your sins, believe in Him"? Don't we need to say, "Christ died for your sins and God is commanding everyone to turn from their sins(repent) and receive forgiveness"? That way our faith is prepared for action, for service, for obedience, for trusting our Savior by doing what He says, rather than the mere dream of calling Him Lord, Lord, but not doing what He says. Thanks for sharing. I liked those portions from Luther. I appreciate his insights. I'm not sure if his entire system makes sense, but maybe I just don't know enough.
@Edward-ng8oo Жыл бұрын
@@collin501 It isn't that faith includes obedience but rather that true faith always produces obedience. Faith is simply trust in Christ as one's Saviour but unless this trust actually results in a changed life and the love of others then one doesn't in reality have true faith and trust in Christ. The Holy Spirit is responsible for giving one faith, and He always inspires one to live a Christian life so that if one doesn't do so this would be evidence of possessing a false faith - one which was simply a creation of one's imagination. We do however need to be exhorted to live a Christian life of obedience because it's easy to backslide without realising it as the devil is constantly trying to lure us away into sin. Repentance is of course a requirement because Christ has saved us from the consequences of sin so that if we continue deliberately living in sin that's not compatible with claiming to believe the Gospel. It would mean that one wasn't understanding the seriousness of sin and making light of Christ's atonement on the cross. You say "where does that leave a person who is genuinely considering their own salvation? It seems that you've not yet actually come to faith because if you had faith you'd be aware of it. I can only suggest that you continue reading the Bible and ask God to give you the Holy Spirit and faith. It's through the Word that God regenerates by the Holy Spirit and gives faith.
@Edward-ng8oo Жыл бұрын
@@collin501 Here's a couple more entries from What Luther Says which may prove helpful: 4886 But you may say: How is it, then, that Scripture so frequently says that those who do good will be saved? Thus Christ says (John 5:29): "They that have done good shall come forth unto the resurrection of life, and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation." Again, St. Paul says (Rom. 2:7): Honor and glory to all who do good; indignation and wrath to all who do evil. And there are very many similar passages. Answer: How should this take place? In no other way than the words read, without any comment: He who does good will be saved; he who does evil will be damned. The misunderstanding is caused by the fact that we judge good works according to external appearances. Scripture does not do this. It teaches that no one can do good unless he himself is good first. Therefore he does not become good through good works, but the works become good through him. But he himself becomes good through this washing of regeneration, and in no other way. This is what Christ means in Matt. 7:17: No corrupt tree brings forth good fruit, and no good tree brings forth evil fruit. Therefore the fruits will share the nature of the tree, whatever it is made to be, good or evil. 4887 But here a question arises: Since we say that God saves us by faith alone, without regard to works, why does St. Peter say that He judges, not according to the person but according to works? The answer is this: What we have taught with regard to the fact that faith alone justifies before God, is true beyond a doubt; for it is so clear from Scripture that it cannot be denied. That here the apostle says God judges according to the works is also true. But we must certainly hold that where there is no faith, there can be no good works; and, on the other hand, that there is no faith where there are no good works. Therefore join faith and good works so that all Christian life is summed up in these two. As you now live, so it will be with you hereafter; for God will judge you according to your life. Therefore although God does judge us according to our works, it still remains true that works are only the fruits of faith by which we perceive where there is faith or unbelief. Consequently, God will sentence and convict you in the light of your works. These will reveal either that you have or have not believed. Similarly, you cannot more effectively convict and judge a liar than by his words. Yet it is evident that he is not made a liar by the words but became a liar before he spoke the lie, for the lie must rise from the heart into the mouth. Therefore very simply understand this passage in this way. Works are fruits and signs of faith, and God judges men according to such fruits. These must certainly follow faith that men may publicly see whether there is faith or unbelief in the heart. God will not judge by your name, whether you are called a Christian or have been baptized. But He will tell you: If you are a Christian, tell Me where the fruits are by which you can prove your faith.
@collin501 Жыл бұрын
@@Edward-ng8oo Edward, so would you (or Luther) say that the judgment according to works is when we receive our inheritance of eternal life, but that the works themselves are the fruit of faith? That seems consistent with scripture. As far as I can tell, salvation is something that is worked out, or lived out, in our lives, as well as a confidence in the grace of God. The beginning of Hebrews, chapters 2 through 4, likens our salvation to the Israelites crossing the wilderness. They were progressing on the way and then they were told to go onward and not drift from their salvation. I guess there is a balance where the promise of salvation is powerful enough to bring us safely to the end, just as it was for the Israelites to the promised land, provided they not stop short. But they stopped short due to sin and unbelief. So there is some sense in which I say I have salvation now, and I have to be able to say that I have it now to make it to the end. But there is another sense that I say, I have to continue in that walk of faith to complete the journey to receive the promise, just as the Israelites had to do. Salvation is to know the one true God by the grace and mercy of Christ and to have our sins forgiven, and to live by faith in Christ which crucifies the world to us, and by that faith and grace we serve Him. That's all included in salvation. See Galatians 2:19-20, Ephesians 2:1-10, and the end of Titus chapter 2. All of these passages speak of being delivered from one way of life and living another way of life as a part of salvation. I do think I have this grace from God and I am learning better how to live in light of it.
@budzbudz90136 ай бұрын
The verse of james and paul are connected, they do not contradict, remember they must come together, true love of God is by grace, when your heart is full of love by God, then the works will always be there, Faith = loving God, If you have this two then that is called true faith If one is missing it is called hypocricy
@Phoenixspin7 ай бұрын
You are jumping through a lot of hoops to say there is no conflict. It is clear, there is a conflict and I'm going with James on this one.
@christian3692 Жыл бұрын
1)The Catholic Church teaches that you cannot earn your salvation, it is given to you by baptism when the holy spirit infuses in us faith, hope and charity which are necessary for salvation, and for that you only need to be properly predisposed (not to actively resist it) because sacraments work ex opere operato 2) For that initial justification which we are given in baptism, we can do absolutely nothing to earn it 3) After that initial justification, this faith must work through charity and do works in Christ not apart from Christ ( that’s why before baptism we can do no meritorious works because we were separated from Christ, but after baptism it is no longer us who are working, but Christ working in us, so the works that are done after baptism through the virtue of charity are supernatural and therefore we cannot do them by our own efforts, but only by the grace of God 4) The Catholic Church does not teach salvation by works alone but by faith and works 5) The Catholic Church beleives that if our faith does not work through charity it is dead as it is made clear in the 2nd chapter of the epistle of St James 6) A lot of Protestants hold without knowing, a belief that is accepted by the Catholic Church if they teach that salvation is by faith working through charity and therefore there is no need to hang up on words, because the issue is becoming one of semantics, because the vocabulary of the Catholic Church is different from the vocabulary of Protestant theologians 7) Let’s say a person dies after receiving the initial justification in baptism without doing any works, he will go to heaven, because his faith did not have the opportunity to work. However if a person is baptized, and he does have the opportunity, his faith MUST be translated into works by charity. 8) The Catholic Church teaches that we are not only declared holy but made holy by God, because after baptism we are regenerated again and it is not us who work anymore but Christ who works in us. 9) Justification is divided into 3 distinct categories : Initial justification ( in baptism), Sanctification, and Glorification which means that we are saved and we are being saved and we will be saved ( past, present and future) 10) The purpose of life is to become Christ-like, Christ wants to perfect us and that is what we call the process of Sanctification ( remember that Christ said that nothing imperfect enters into the kingdom of God and therefore he wants to perfect us, if it’s not done in this life then there is purgatory to complete the process) 11) Martin Luther added the word “alone” in his german translation of the bible particularly in Romans 3:28 when it speaks about justification by faith, and he was proud of it. 12) Martin Luther rejected the epistle of James, because of its teaching on justification by works also and not only by faith, he also said that we should burn it. 13) The Church teaches justification by faith and also justification by works but not justification by faith alone neither justification by works alone. And the reason is that we believe that justification is not limited to the moment of baptism but continues till the end of the life of the believer and even afterwards. There is a synergy between faith and works : our faith helps us by grace alone do supernatural works of charity and supernatural works of charity make our faith grow. 14) by works, The Catholic Church does not mean efforts, it means supernatural works of charity which are done only by the grace of God and not by our own efforts. 15) Therefore the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church teaches that salvation is by GRACE ALONE THROUGH FAITH AND WORKS. I hope this was helpful, for a more detailed explanation see jimmy akin’s book : the drama of salvation or you can watch his videos on KZbin. See also Catholic Answers on KZbin or Radio
@dane20303 ай бұрын
The "salvation" of James is a physical salvation and it refers back to the previous verse. Did you not know that just because the bible has the word "saved" or "salvation" that the surrounding context is what gives its meaning? That the bible talks of spiritual salvation of the soul and also physical salvation of the body here on earth? 2 different things! James is NOT a book on how to be spiritually saved (whereas Romans 4 is). James is a book written to Christian believers to exhort them to do works for God. Are you a master of the bible and not know these things? The context of James is based on the previous verse: James 2:13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment. What is the salvation of James 2:14 referring to? PHYSICAL salvation from the fierce judgement of God to those saved Christians that do not help another brother in need when they could have. God chastens (on this earth) every son he receives. James is saying what good is it that your spiritually saved but do no work for God? (which reaffirms the Romans 4 "to him that worketh not") Its just that simple folks. Saved Christians are supposed to do work for God or they have a "dead" faith - which means they are still going to heaven but will get no rewards. Don't buy into this false preacher who does not understand the gospel and is not saved himself.
@nickynolfi833 Жыл бұрын
I think that it should be understood that luther truly thought that james meant at least a faith formed by charity. Luther thought james contradicted paul