Why James 2 Refutes Sola Fide

[newglof]

Great explanation, I never thought of it this way. Thank you

[BanJe]

Justification has 2 meanings. The context determines what the appropriate definition of justification is. Paul says we are justified (acquitted) by faith apart from works. Our works do not acquit is from our guilt of sin before the face of God, only our faith in Christ sacrifice does that. James says we are NOT justified (vindicated) by faith alone. Our faith alone does not prove that we truly believe in Christ, our works, accompanied by our faith does that. This parsing of the term is not a novelty by the way. Cyril of Alexandria did the same in his commentary on James 2.

[matthewkay]

A good tree produces good fruit a bad tree produces bad fruit.

The fruit is inevitable.

Thoughts?

[TommyGunzzz]

Saw a great video years ago by a Catholic guy asking the question "can incomplete faith save you?" In reference to Protestants. Such a perfectly worded question

[looqo]

I've heard, from a Bible scholar, that "faith" is more accurately translated "faithfulness". Is this accurate in this context?

[stevegoldson]

How do you read Romans 4 and Ephesians 2:8-9 and come away thinking faith alone cannot save?

[AnUnhappyBusiness]

When we speak of faith alone with regards to justification what we are speaking of is forgiveness of sins. Does James teach your sins are forgiven by works?

[NickReyob-ukos]

I like this guy's logic in Scripture. Check out this portion of Scripture

Matthew 13:36Then Jesus dismissed the crowds and went into the house. His disciples came to Him and said, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field.”

37He replied,  “The One who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38The field is the world, and the good seed represents the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one,  39and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.

40As the weeds are collected and burned in the fire, so will it be at the end of the age. 41The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will weed out of His kingdom every cause of sin and
👉all who practice lawlessness.👈 42And they will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father.

[StripedCheeseBread]

We cannot even talk about faith vs works if we cannot even get the fundamental doctrines down. The following are the first principles according to Hebrew 6 in this order:

1)Repentance from Dead Works
2)Faith in God
3)doctrine of baptism
4)laying on of hands
5)resurrection of the dead
6)eternal judgment

Notice what is first. Secondly, the example given by James is giving the things for the body of another suffering person rather than simply tell that hungry person to be satisfied. John also touched on this in I John 3, talking about him that has the worlds good and sees his brother in need, yet shuts up compassion, how dwell the love of God on him? And further states not to love only in word but also in deed and truth. This is the reiteration teaching of James.

The works specific are love in deed and not word only. I know of no widely accepted Protestant teaching that denies this teaching on works.

Jesus clears this up in Matthew 25:31 about works and it’s necessity.

Every example is something to do with the work of ministering to others. When Protestants reject the Catholic teaching on works, it is not the rejection of their free clinics, English classes for immigrants, counseling services, shelters etc. In fact, many Protestants have just as many similar programs as do Mormons. What is rejected is this crazy notion that atonement for sin can be done by one’s own work, which would be a dead work.

[ninjason]

The question I ask to a person who forcefully pushes "faith alone" is, "Why are you so against the idea of doing good works for the God who saved you?" No true Christian who has a childs level knowledge of theology knows that our good works don't save us. The argument is immature. If you put your faith in Christ you will desire to do good works. Paul talks about it all over his epistles. Stop making excuses for not loving your neighbor.

[anthonym.]

Prots do mental gymnastics with James while the Catholics/Orthodox do it with Paul. I can reconcile it for myself that since I put my faith in Jesus, my heart has softened and I desire to do good works.

[juandoming]

You mean to say why James refutes all of Paul's writings?

[matheusmotta]

Faith without works does not save.
Works without faith do not save.
Faith working in love saves.

It's simple as that.

[KentEdinburghUK]

How much works is required to get saved (or no of works) ?How much of the law must you follow in order to be saved? 100%, 90%..etc. Type of works that is acceptable for salvation..?

You see it creates a total confusion over salvation.

Romans 4:5
However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

James was talking about faith that will not benefit other fellow believers if without our good works . It is not about having a false or invalid faith, if without works .

[mememe]

Hey ! Love your stuff 😊

I was wondering:
I've been studying the chronology of NT books. It's shocking to see that, if you order the books a certain way, you get a clearer picture of whats going on .

Now, in Galatians Paul writes against circumcision. In acts 15 the council of Jerusalem meets to definitively abolish the practice.

If Galatians came before the council: the issue wasn't settled by scripture, pauls epistle, and so required a conciliar agreement of bishops and leaders to solve it.

If galatians is written after the council: it seems Paul might be arguing that the agreement of the council vindicates his writing.

Either way this council serves as definitive and leaves the question answered.

What do you think is the correct ordering of the NT? Or, specifically, Galatians and the council? Also, would this be a another proof for tradition as authoritative?

[lilbruh]

How do you reconcile your interpretation of James 2 with Paul’s statements regarding justification apart from works? This is a topic I’m very interested in.

[josiahalexander]

Protestant here. You got a good point.


Protestantism doesn’t take the implications of the incarnation to its logical conclusion. We lack incarnational theology, a theology of the body, a theology of the church, a theology of Mary, a theology of the Eucharist. We have abstracted the gospel into the realm of pure imagination wherein we rest our hope but so often are left feeling hopeless, unsatisfied, and perpetually getting stuck in the cycle of sin, we consistently look forward to the second coming. I think Protestants have sola fide so mixed up with the concept of the gospel that we think to denounce sola fide is to denounce the gospel, but I think the point of disagreement is that sola fide isn’t actually _good news_, it isn’t actually a part of the gospel.
What you do in this life matters. Who you are matters. What you do with your body matters. God does not care only for your mind or your soul but also for your body. Remember? The body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. It was because of His Grace that the Lord took on flesh by giving himself to the world through the womb of the Virgin, by taking on flesh He made Himself known as the Saviour - “for God so loved the world…”.
To be honest, I think a lot of us have grown bitter towards the world and consistently think of it along with “the flesh” and “the devil”, but we neglect the love of God and the value of the temple, of the Body, and of the Church, none of which we can have without the world. The church is the world experiencing the saving grace of God.

[frederickanderson]

What fruit it also says that if we say we without sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.

[reformedcatholic]

I agree with you and I believe faith alone, so i don't see the issue.

[ionut-daniel-iosifmalita]

It is interesting to me how Roman Catholics use a passage in the NT to reject justification by faith alone, which in my view is the very essence of the gospel, instead of finding a way to reconcile Paul and James on this issue. What eisegesis can you think of to nullify Paul's entire message?