Theo1689
Well-known member
A particular Mormon loves to quote James 2:24 as the "be-all-and-end-all" verse of Scripture, even using it to try to "veto" far clearer passages, such as Eph. 2:8-9, Tit. 3:5, 2 Tim. 1:9, Rom. 4:1-6, Rom. 11:5-6, etc. etc. etc.) When a Mormon interprets a verse in a way that contradicts multiple verses in Scripture, that is a problem.
Indeed, at the very least, we have an issue which necessitates further study.
Rom. 4:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar?
Was Abraham justified by works?
Rom. 4:2 seems to say he wasn't.
James 2:21 seems to say he was.
So either one of those verses is wrong, or else one of these is being misinterpreted. And the position of our Mormon friend seems to be vehemently that:
(1) it is IMPOSSIBLE for individual Mormons to misinterpret Scripture, like James 2:21;
(2) Rom. 4:2 (which this poster keeps RUNNING AWAY from) MUST be wrong, and he doesn't have to prove it, he simply has to claim it.
This is why it is CRUCIAL to properly exegete Scripture, in its proper context, rather than simply ASSUMING a meaning simply by reading an isolated verse once. So let's look at James 2.
James 2:8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. 9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it.
So James starts by referring to "the whole law" (ie. the Mosaic Law). Not just the Ten Commandments, but (and I quote) "the whole law". God is holy, and He demands PERFECT obedience. If one obeys 612 of the commandments, but fail on the other commandment, you are guilty of ALL of it. Perfect obedience is required. This is an INCREDIBLY high standard. And maybe this is why Paul wrote:
James 2:11 For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.
This goes back to James' comment back in James 2:1 about showing no partiality, and not treating a rich man differently than a poor man. At the end of the day, every one of us is guilty of some sin or other, and so (according to James 2:10 is guilty of the WHOLE law). That's why it is impossible to keep the Law. And James' point is that we should be judging or "evaluating" others when even we can't hold ourselves up to those same standards.
James 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?
Remembering that James was just writing about keeping the law, he asks the (rhetorical) question of what if someone CLAIMS to have faith, but doesn't have works? Notice that this is not saying the man actually HAS faith, but only that he CLAIMS to have faith. This is not an instance of "having faith but not works", since it hasn't been demonstrated that he actually DOES have true faith. But James will address that shortly. Then he asks, "can THAT faith (the merely claimed faith, which has no works) save him?" And of course, the answer is "no". If someone only CLAIMS to have faith, but doesn't ACTUALLY have faith, he isn't saved, because he doesn't have faith.
James 2:15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 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? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
So James gives an example, that if someone sees another in need, and only gives them good wishes, "be well", but doesn't ACTUALLY help them, then that is evidence that such a person doesn't have faith at all. Because from true faith springs the fruits of the Spirit, such as charity and love. So this is what James means when he says that such a claimed faith is "dead". It doesn't exist.
And please note, the "works" James suggest don't benefit the man who claims to have faith (so as to "complete" any "requirements" for salvation), but they benefit OTHERS, as God has decreed.
James 2:18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.
We will recall that James gave an example of a "claimed" faith in v. 14. How do we know whether the claim of faith is authentic faith, or a lie? We can't read minds, so there must be another way to tell. The original person who claimed faith had no works. So James asks rhetorically, "Show me your faith apart from your works", which is of course impossible.
But then he says, "I will show you my faith by my works".
And this is key.
Works are not something to be "added" to faith to "complete" salvation.
Works are fruits of the Spirit, designed to DEMONSTRATE (or "show") a faith that actually exists.
The purpose of works is to demonstrate a living, active faith.
James 2:19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!
Now James comments on the meaning of "believe", and what might or might not be suggested by use of the term. It can be used to simply denote what earlier Christians referred to as "notitia" in Latin, basically just a recognition of what is accepted as truth. It is accepted that one God exists, so even the demons accept that. But this shallow level of "believing" doesn't save. Full-blown saving faith includes:
"notitia" (recognition);
"assensus" (accepting the truth claim); and
"fiducia" (trusting);
(to be continued...)
Indeed, at the very least, we have an issue which necessitates further study.
Rom. 4:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar?
Was Abraham justified by works?
Rom. 4:2 seems to say he wasn't.
James 2:21 seems to say he was.
So either one of those verses is wrong, or else one of these is being misinterpreted. And the position of our Mormon friend seems to be vehemently that:
(1) it is IMPOSSIBLE for individual Mormons to misinterpret Scripture, like James 2:21;
(2) Rom. 4:2 (which this poster keeps RUNNING AWAY from) MUST be wrong, and he doesn't have to prove it, he simply has to claim it.
This is why it is CRUCIAL to properly exegete Scripture, in its proper context, rather than simply ASSUMING a meaning simply by reading an isolated verse once. So let's look at James 2.
James 2:8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. 9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it.
So James starts by referring to "the whole law" (ie. the Mosaic Law). Not just the Ten Commandments, but (and I quote) "the whole law". God is holy, and He demands PERFECT obedience. If one obeys 612 of the commandments, but fail on the other commandment, you are guilty of ALL of it. Perfect obedience is required. This is an INCREDIBLY high standard. And maybe this is why Paul wrote:
James 2:11 For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” If you do not commit adultery but do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.
This goes back to James' comment back in James 2:1 about showing no partiality, and not treating a rich man differently than a poor man. At the end of the day, every one of us is guilty of some sin or other, and so (according to James 2:10 is guilty of the WHOLE law). That's why it is impossible to keep the Law. And James' point is that we should be judging or "evaluating" others when even we can't hold ourselves up to those same standards.
James 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?
Remembering that James was just writing about keeping the law, he asks the (rhetorical) question of what if someone CLAIMS to have faith, but doesn't have works? Notice that this is not saying the man actually HAS faith, but only that he CLAIMS to have faith. This is not an instance of "having faith but not works", since it hasn't been demonstrated that he actually DOES have true faith. But James will address that shortly. Then he asks, "can THAT faith (the merely claimed faith, which has no works) save him?" And of course, the answer is "no". If someone only CLAIMS to have faith, but doesn't ACTUALLY have faith, he isn't saved, because he doesn't have faith.
James 2:15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 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? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
So James gives an example, that if someone sees another in need, and only gives them good wishes, "be well", but doesn't ACTUALLY help them, then that is evidence that such a person doesn't have faith at all. Because from true faith springs the fruits of the Spirit, such as charity and love. So this is what James means when he says that such a claimed faith is "dead". It doesn't exist.
And please note, the "works" James suggest don't benefit the man who claims to have faith (so as to "complete" any "requirements" for salvation), but they benefit OTHERS, as God has decreed.
James 2:18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.
We will recall that James gave an example of a "claimed" faith in v. 14. How do we know whether the claim of faith is authentic faith, or a lie? We can't read minds, so there must be another way to tell. The original person who claimed faith had no works. So James asks rhetorically, "Show me your faith apart from your works", which is of course impossible.
But then he says, "I will show you my faith by my works".
And this is key.
Works are not something to be "added" to faith to "complete" salvation.
Works are fruits of the Spirit, designed to DEMONSTRATE (or "show") a faith that actually exists.
The purpose of works is to demonstrate a living, active faith.
James 2:19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!
Now James comments on the meaning of "believe", and what might or might not be suggested by use of the term. It can be used to simply denote what earlier Christians referred to as "notitia" in Latin, basically just a recognition of what is accepted as truth. It is accepted that one God exists, so even the demons accept that. But this shallow level of "believing" doesn't save. Full-blown saving faith includes:
"notitia" (recognition);
"assensus" (accepting the truth claim); and
"fiducia" (trusting);
(to be continued...)
