Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.
Revelation 22:12
Justice rewards good for good and evil for evil. In the Bible salvation isn't directly associated with works, but rather as a consequence of a relationship with Elohim.So are you insinuating it is works which saves, and not faith?
Justice rewards good for good and evil for evil. In the Bible salvation isn't directly associated with works, but rather as a consequence of a relationship with Elohim.
The schism is evident from James calling Paul a "vain man"in relation to faith, works, and Abraham.
Please explain how it is possible to keep the Law without obeying it.The remedy for sin from Matthew 1:21 and 1 John 3:4 simply involves keeping the law, again you have added the idea of obedience when it isn't present in your source text.
The Pauline doctrine of obedience is illustrated by his letter to the Romans:
Let every soul be subject (ὑποτασσέσθω) unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Romans 13:1
ὑποτασσέσθω conveys the idea of obedience:
- to arrange under, to subordinate
- to subject, put in subjection
- to subject one's self, obey
- to submit to one's control
- to yield to one's admonition or advice
- to obey, be subject
No, beliefs can be true, false, or irrelevant. If there's no working relationship with deity then salvation isn't likely to happen. Such relationships typically involve acting on true and relevant belief or knowledge.So are you then saying it is belief (faith) which saves?
What is collectively called "law" has different forms in this context:Please explain how it is possible to keep the Law without obeying it.
What is collectively called "law" has different forms in this context:
Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.
Genesis 26:5
While it's reasonable to think of מצות (commandments) as being obeyed, חקות are more descriptive of customs which are kept, and תורת (torah) is a more like teachings which are observed.
Of these only torah is significant for the new covenant of Jeremiah 31:33
You're ignoring the context of the OP #1No mention of James referring to the Apostle Paul as being vain here in
James 2:20.
My point is that the essential part of the relationship is doing what deity desires, not what is explicitly asked for. For example, paedophilia isn't explicitly forbidden, but would deity condone it?As far as I can tell, you are using terms that are synonymous and are splitting hairs. When God has said to do something, then we should do it, and that is all that is being conveyed by "obey".
You're ignoring the context of the OP #1
My point is that the essential part of the relationship is doing what deity desires, not what is explicitly asked for. For example, paedophilia isn't explicitly forbidden, but would deity condone it?
In what way do you think that the OP supports your position that Paul and James taught the same principle of faith?I’m actually discussing the OP.
Not really. Illicit sexual activity is clearly described (eg incest, adultery, bestiality), but paedophilia isn't mentioned.It could certainly be argued that paedophilia is prohibited under illicit sexual activity.
In what way do you think that the OP supports your position that Paul and James taught the same principle of faith?
Straw man. My question was about your position, not the truth.I didn’t say the OP supports the truth that Paul and James taught the same principle of faith.
You failed to mention the two verses from the OP which evidence Paul acting vainly.No mention of James referring to the Apostle Paul as being vain here in
James 2:20.
The works mentioned in verse 21 is obedience.
Not the works of the law.
Not work that earns a wage.
Not good works.
The work of obedience.
That's absurd, James could not have known about my interpretation.No, James is calling your interpretation of Paul a vain man.
You haven't identified any error on my part.You, however, have gotten both James and Paul wrong.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?