Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Another Perspective on "DEAD FAITH FILES"

  1. #1
    Suspended / Banned katoikei is an unknown quantity at this point
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Africa
    Posts
    642
    Real Name
    Eric
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Another Perspective on "DEAD FAITH FILES"

    Greetings Predestinarians,

    I am in regular correspondence with a friend who greatly enjoys the pages here at Predestinarian.net and after he read the introduction to "Dead Faith Files" as I choose to call that 39 page discussion that fizzled out. Whereas it is often hard for us to accept certain books that are in the Bible; be they Ecclesiastes, or Mark, or James; and in this case it seems the book of James is the one that has sparked a controversy. I have always been firmly convicted that it is never the Scripture that needs changing but us.

    Here is the opening post by Darth (A): (From the original "DEAD FAITH FILES") , followed by the response of my correspondent (B).

    (A)
    What is "Dead Faith?"

    A lot of people in their profiles answered: "No, there is no such thing as a "dead faith" because those who give mental assent to the truth will undoubtedly perform good works. " Yet, they affirmed that James is inspired.

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

    Jas 2:20, (KJV), But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

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

    So if there is no such thing as "dead faith", then obviously James is talking about another type of faith. Some for example wrote that it is possible for men to believe the truth but not have good works. Yet, I think this is way off. Those who believe the truth will almost certainly walk in good works. It is impossible for a person to believe the truth without walking in good works.

    I think those who answered that there is no such thing as "dead faith" and hold to James being in the canon are contradicting themselves.

    So, in very simple words - tell me what James means by "dead faith" if you believe there is no such thing as "dead faith."
    (B)
    When James says, "17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone."

    He is speaking in the mood of unreality. Faith can never be dead. It can only be alive and active. "and I will shew thee my faith by my works."

    Otherwise James would have said "and I might shew thee my faith etc."

    Works of compassion show if you have faith, but those works of compassion must flow from faith, "26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."

    The meaning is not, that works are to faith what the spirit is to the body, for that would make works to be the life of faith, the reverse of the fact; but the meaning is, that faith having no works is like a dead carcass without life.

    Therefore James is showing the difference between "dead faith" which is really no faith at all, but the "faith" of boasters who claim to have faith and faith that is real. How can I explain it, its almost as if James is saying, "Ok, this is what you think faith is, lets take your faith and put it to the test. Then I will show you what genuine faith involves. Abraham followed this rule and others after him."

    Calvin's commentary,

    "That we may not then fall into that false reasoning which has deceived the Sophists, we must take notice of the TWO FOLD MEANING(very important, also context!) of the word justified. Paul means by it the gratuitous imputation of righteousness before the tribunal of God; and James, the manifestation of righteousness by the conduct, and that before men, as we may gather from the preceding words, "Shew to me thy faith," etc. In this sense we fully allow that man is justified by works, as when any one says that a man is enriched by the purchase of a large and valuable chest, because his riches, before hid, shut up in a chest, were thus made known.

    22. By works was faith made perfect.2 By this he again shews, that the question here is NOT respecting the cause of our salvation, but whether works necessarily accompany faith(this is also very crucial!); for in this sense it is said to have been perfected by works, because it was not idle. It is said to have been perfected by works, not because it received thence its own perfection, but because it was thus proved to be true. For the futile distinction which the Sophists draw from these words, between formed and unformed faith, needs no labored refutation; for the faith of Abram was formed and therefore perfected before he sacrificed his son. And this work was not as it were the finishing, or last work. Formerly things afterwards followed by which Abraham proved the increase of his faith. Hence this was not the perfection of his faith, nor did it then for the first time put on its form. James then understood no other thing, than that the integrity of his faith then appeared, because it brought forth that remarkable fruit of obedience.

    23. And the Scripture was fulfilled. They who seek to prove from this passage of James that the works of Abraham were imputed for righteousness, must necessarily confess that Scripture is perverted by him; for however they may turn and twist, they can never make the effect to be its own cause. The passage is quoted from Moses. (Genesis 15:6.) The imputation of righteousness which Moses mentions, preceded more than thirty years the work by which they would have Abraham to have been justified.(I think this is the whole crux of the arguement and demolishes the argement that the Catholics use.) Since faith was imputed to Abraham fifteen years before the birth of Isaac, this could not surely have been done through the work of sacrificing him. I consider that all those are bound fast by an indissoluble knot, who imagine that righteousness was imputed to Abraham before God, because he sacrificed his son Isaac, who was not yet born when the Holy Spirit declared that Abraham was justified. It hence necessarily follows that something posterior is pointed out here.

    Why then does James say that it was fulfilled? Even because he intended to shew what sort of faith that was which justified Abraham; that is, that it was not idle or evanescent, but rendered him obedient to God, as also we find in Hebrews 11:8. The conclusion, which is immediately added, as it depends on this, has no other meaning. Man is not justified by faith alone, that is, by a bare and empty knowledge of God; he is justified by works, that is, his righteousness is known and proved by its fruits.

    25. Likewise also was not Rahab. It seems strange that he connected together those who were so unlike. Why did he not rather choose some one from so large a number of illustrious fathers, and join him to Abraham? Why did he prefer a harlot to all others? he designedly put together two persons so different in their character, in order more clearly to shew, that no one, whatever may have been his or her condition, nation, or class in society, has ever been counted righteous without good works. He had named the patriarch, by far the most eminent of all; he now includes under the person of a harlot, all those who, being aliens, were joined to the Church. Whosoever, then, seeks to be counted righteous, though he may even be among the lowest, must yet shew that he is such by good works.

    James, according to his manner of speaking, declares that Rahab was justified by works; and the Sophists hence conclude that we obtain righteousness by the merits of works. But he deny that the dispute here is concerning the mode of obtaining righteousness. We, indeed, allow that good works are required for righteousness; we only take away from them the power of conferring righteousness, because they cannot stand before the tribunal of God."

    "Thou sees that Abraham was aided by his faith to do his remarkable works." Excellent!

    I must admit that I have never really given a thought to going through the book of James, it seems like quite a challenging book to grapple with. I feel that there were men who boasted of faith and were unloving, like alot of the teachers these days who boast that they have this incredible faith to heal people or speak in tongues of angels etc. James is speaking against that poisonous "faith" that the hypocrites have that will not produce love, but only self-love.
    I have often read James and discovered though there are apparently contradictory passages. With everything in God's Word --> there is need for illumination and often Scripture is set by the Holy Spirit to stop us on purpose until the time that the Lord is ready for His body to grow into the fullness of that stature we so hungrily desire. I have often considered the matter of the fruit in Hebrews and the Gospels and James to make a strong case for retaining James. If anything I am convinced that there is a very strong conneciton between what James wrote and what is brought to us in the Gospels as the teaching of Jesus. (You don't live with a guy for thirty years and not get influenced by the way that he lived....ofcourse one needs to include the three years teaching as well as the fourty days prior to the ascension and the ongoing ministry of the Holy Spirit, and the teaching of Paul to James and visa versa...)

    Anyhow that is just my reasoning though rather impractical; would ye all be so kind as to respond instead to my friends response to the opening post that spawned the earlier gigantic consideration.

    Bringing forth fruit in due season,
    Katoikei.
    Last edited by katoikei; 05-18-2006 at 04:22 AM.

  2. #2
    Mean, Harsh, and Arrogant Administrator Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft is just really nice Brandan Kraft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Saint Louis, Missouri
    Age
    37
    Posts
    5,841
    Blog Entries
    115
    Real Name
    Brandan Kraft
    Thanks
    210
    Thanked 30 Times in 17 Posts

    Re: Another Perspective on "DEAD FAITH FILES"

    Closing this thread... We've already discussed this to death...
    Ditch the Garbage! - Too many people are proud of their humility - I, on the other hand, am not humble - and am proud of it!

    "Luther's New Testament was so much multiplied and spread by printers that even tailors and shoemakers, yea, even women and ignorant persons who had accepted this new Lutheran gospel, and could read a little German, studied it with the greatest avidity as the fountain of all truth. Some committed it to memory, and carried it about in their bosom. In a few months such people deemed themselves so learned that they were not ashamed to dispute about faith and the gospel not only with Catholic laymen, but even with priests and monks and doctors of divinity." - A complaint by German humanist Johann Cochlaeus.

    Follow me on Facebook:
    http://www.facebook.com/kraftb
    Follow Predestinarian Network on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/predestinarian
    Follow Predestinarian Network on Twitter: http://twitter.com/predestinarian

Similar Threads

  1. What is "Dead Faith?"
    By Brandan Kraft in forum Noteworthy Discussions
    Replies: 382
    Last Post: 05-10-2006, 11:44 PM
  2. The "made sin" or "infused sinfulness" Heresy
    By Brandan Kraft in forum Noteworthy Discussions
    Replies: 191
    Last Post: 08-30-2005, 05:30 PM
  3. The Ultimate "Anti-Duty-Faith" Thread
    By wildboar in forum Noteworthy Discussions
    Replies: 325
    Last Post: 08-06-2004, 08:56 AM
  4. faith "vs" works
    By countrymouse in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 121
    Last Post: 03-08-2004, 10:09 AM
  5. Is the final resurrection "bodily" or "spiritual"?
    By Kings Kid in forum Old Miscellaneous Archive
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 11-13-2001, 05:14 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts