Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | So is the book of Romans 4 a contraditio | Gen 12:1 | The Bible is Right | 57482 | ||
Is there a such thing as "obedient faith"? I ask that, because in the book of Heb 11 that's all you see, that by faith so-and-so did this or that. And Romans 4:1-5 says " not to him that worketh" And James saids, 2:17 Even so faith, if hath not works, is dead, being alone. vs.20-26 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altat? Gen 22:1-18 vs.18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice. That's "obedient faith" that James is talking about. Jame 2:22 Seest thou how by faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? 23 And the scripture was Fulfilled which saith, ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS IMPUTED UNTO HIM FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS: and he was called the Friend of God. Obedient faith is what justified Abraham. vs. 25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? Hebrews 11 gives us all the people of faith, and what they did, and not one person was with faith alone. So is the book of Romans 4 a contradition to Hebrew and James? |
||||||
2 | So is the book of Romans 4 a contraditio | Gen 12:1 | kalos | 57514 | ||
Does James 2 contradict Romans 4? ------------- "Paul declares that we are saved by faith without the deeds of the law. James declares that we are saved by faith, which shows itself in works. Both James and Paul view good works as the proof of faith--not the path to salvation." ------------- 'The most serious problem these verses pose is the question of what James 2:24 means: "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone." Some imagine that this contradicts Paul in Romans 3:28: "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." (...) 'James is not at odds with Paul. "They are not antagonists facing each other with crossed swords; they stand back to back, confronting different foes of the gospel." [The New International Commentary on the New Testament] In 1:17-18, James affirmed that salvation is a gift bestowed according to the sovereign will of God. Now he is stressing the importance of faith's fruit--the righteous behavior that genuine faith always produces. Paul, too, saw righteous works as the necessary proof of faith. 'Those who imagine a discrepancy between James and Paul rarely observe that it was Paul who wrote, "Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be!" (Rom. 6:15); and "Having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness" (v. 18). Thus Paul condemns the same error James is exposing here. Paul never advocated any concept of dormant faith. (...) 'James and Paul both echo Jesus' preaching. Paul's emphasis is an echo of Matthew 5:3: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." James's teaching has the ring of Matthew 7:21: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven." Paul represents the beginning of the Sermon on the Mount; James the end of it. Paul declares that we are saved by faith without the deeds of the law. James declares that we are saved by faith, which shows itself in works. Both James and Paul view good works as the proof of faith--not the path to salvation. 'James could not be more explicit. He is confronting the concept of a passive, false "faith," which is devoid of the fruits of salvation. He is not arguing for works in addition to or apart from faith. He is showing why and how, true, living faith always works. He is fighting against dead orthodoxy and its tendency to abuse grace. 'The error James assails is faith without works; justification without sanctification; salvation without new life. 'Again, James echoes the Master Himself, who insisted on a theology of lordship that involved obedience, not lip-service. Jesus chided the disobedient ones who had attached themselves to Him in name only: "Why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?" (Luke 6:46). Verbal allegiance, He said, will get no one to heaven: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 7:21). 'That is in perfect harmony with James: "Prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves" (1:22); for "faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself" (2:17).' [Excerpted from Faith Works] www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/james2.htm |
||||||
3 | How do these points relate to the Great | Gen 12:1 | The Bible is Right | 57520 | ||
"'James could not be more explicit. He is confronting the concept of a passive, false "faith," which is devoid of the fruits of salvation. He is not arguing for works in addition to or apart from faith. He is showing why and how, true, living faith always works. He is fighting against dead orthodoxy and its tendency to abuse grace." "'Again, James echoes the Master Himself, who insisted on a theology of lordship that involved obedience, not lip-service. Jesus chided the disobedient ones who had attached themselves to Him in name only: "Why do you call Me, 'Lord, Lord,' and do not do what I say?" (Luke 6:46). Verbal allegiance, He said, will get no one to heaven: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 7:21)." How do these points relate to the Great commission in Mark 16:15-17? By the way these are good points. |
||||||
4 | How do these points relate to the Great | Gen 12:1 | kalos | 57527 | ||
"...not originally part of Mark's gospel." "Mark 16:9-20. The external evidence strongly suggests these verses were not originally part of Mark's gospel. While the majority of Gr. manuscripts contain these verses, the earliest and most reliable do not. ... Further, some that include the passage note that it was missing from older Gr. manuscripts, while others have scribal marks indicating the passage was considered spurious. The fourth-century church fathers Eusebius and Jerome noted that almost all Gr. manuscripts available to them lacked vv. 9-20. "The internal evidence from this passage also weighs heavily against Mark's authorship. ... "While for the most part summarizing truths taught elsewhere in Scripture, vv. 9-20 should always be compared with the rest of Scripture, and no doctrines should be formulated based solely on them. ...(The MacArthur Study Bible, 1997, Word Publishing)." |
||||||
5 | How do these points relate to the Great | Gen 12:1 | The Bible is Right | 57621 | ||
There are alot of other scriptures that back up what is said in Mark 16:15-16 so when I here statements like "The internal evidence from this passage also weighs heavily against Mark's authorship." I think someone has something to hide, and remember 2 Tim.3:16 Says, ALL SCRIPTURE IS GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD, so I don't think man can make that distinction. | ||||||
6 | How do these points relate to the Great | Gen 12:1 | kalos | 57624 | ||
That the ending of the book of Mark is widely considered by reputable Bible scholars to be spurious has been argued, documented and explained before on this forum. You may look it up, using the search function. I will not attempt to explain it to you. It seems to me that you are not interested in reading an explanation or in listening to anyone else. Apparently your only interest is in arguing (which you have done) and proving that you are right (which you have never done). |
||||||
7 | How do these points relate to the Great | Gen 12:1 | The Bible is Right | 57632 | ||
"That the ending of the book of Mark is widely considered by reputable Bible scholars to be spurious has been argued, documented" Isn't this statement an attack on the bible, which is against Lockman Foundation rules? |
||||||
8 | How do these points relate to the Great | Gen 12:1 | kalos | 57635 | ||
No, this statement is not an attack on the Bible. If you have to ask this question, then you neither know nor understand the issues involved where the ending of the book of Mark is concerned. If you had looked up the information provided on the forum, using the search function, you would know this statement is NOT an attack on the Bible. The fact that you didn't bother to look it up confirms that I made the right choice when I said to you: "I will not attempt to explain it to you. It seems to me that you are not interested in reading an explanation or in listening to anyone else. Apparently your only interest is in arguing (which you have done) and proving that you are right (which you have never done)." |
||||||
9 | How do these points relate to the Great | Gen 12:1 | The Bible is Right | 57685 | ||
Apparently your only interest is in arguing (which you have done) and proving that you are right (which you have never done)." I do not wish to argue about anything, I just want to know what is right, and to know the whole truth about any subject of the bible. So I take offence to your statement above, we might have different points of veiws but you don't have to be nasty about it. And your statement about Mark, I'll just write the Lockman Foundation and see what they think. |
||||||