Let us use some reverse logic then... no works ....no salvation?
if you saw /cut wood, you will see sawdust. But the sawdust had no part in cutting the wood.
Not By Works
- Thread starter dcontroversal
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
if you saw /cut wood, you will see sawdust. But the sawdust had no part in cutting the wood.
James was definitely not doing that, if you read Acts 21:20-25 carefully. He distinguished between Jews and Gentiles who believe.
E
EleventhHour
Guest
context determines meaning .... the vocabulary of the day was far smaller than our vocabulary today
This in and of itself does not make the English language better, however, we must be aware that the word "dead' in Greek must be understood within context.
James was writing to believers.... and he is making a case to show our faith to men through works so that our faith is visible.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
I have already said if he said the things he is purported to have said he is in error.
Let us use some reverse logic then... no works ....no salvation?
If you cook a hamburger, you will smell it, but the oroma plays no role in cooking it.
If you cut wood, you will see sawdust, but the sawdust had no part in cutting the wood.
If you set a fire, you will see smoke. But the smoke did not produce the fire.
then why would there be a contradiction if they weren't 'different groups of believers' ?
I see different customs there, not a different gospel
There is nothing wrong with circumcision. Only if you add it to salvation. There is nothing wrong with observing Jewish feasts, unless you make that part of salvation.
Jewish Christians can keep their customs. I have participated in Passover seder. I am circumcised. I might decide to adopt a kosher diet. But if I make them a gospel requirement, that is error
For I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.
(Acts 21:13)
Paul was ready to be bound & die at Jerusalem. it is why he went there.
when he arrived some men were taking a voluntary vow and ordered him to do the same.
so he also submitted himself to bondage, willingly even to death.
going to Jerusalem in order to be subjected to bondage, and acquiescing to coercion to voluntarily take an uncommanded vow once he arrived there, does not mean Paul considered himself under the law. it's a testimony.
Why don't you quote Acts 21:20-25 instead if you are replying to that post?
verse 25 is not Paul speaking. it's the Jews who wish to subject Paul to bondage who are speaking, the same bondage they subjected themselves to.
converted pharisees -- the same voices that in Acts 15 thought all believers must be commanded to be subject to Moses.