The relationship of faith and works, is a construct many struggle with and the fallacy of it has become Easy Believism, understood as "all I need to do is believe in a point of time and I'm good". We need to analyze these propositions about faith and works carefully!
Here is the propositional construct: True faith results in faith based works I have faith. Therefore, I have faith based works. We can also affirm:
True faith results in faith based works
There is no faith Therefore, there are no faith based works
Many do confuse this especially in James when he asserts “faith without works is dead” and they then conclude I must have works to be saved. No, that is the fallacy of affirming the consequence! And it is an incorrect conclusion. Let me illustrate.
If I can prove that in a wide-open field that the grass always gets wet when it rains, then the below propositions can be affirmed.
The need for saying a “wide-open field”, is to eliminate all possible objections to the major premise of the proposition, like there is a carport roof over the grass, which of course would mean when it rains that grass under the carport will not get wet. So, if all objections, dependencies, and obstructions to the truth of the major premise be removed, so that the proposition is irrefutably true, then I can assert the following and make the following conclusion.
When it rains the ground is wet
It is raining
Therefore, the ground is wet.
If the major premise is irrefutable then the conclusion logically follows as also irrefutable of necessity and is therefore axiomatic. Can we reverse the minor premise and conclusion and come to a 100% true conclusion that is of necessity and is therefore axiomatic and irrefutable? The answer is a resounding NO!
Here is why:
When it rains the ground is wet.
The ground is wet.
Therefore, it must have rained.
It does not follow logically to be true since there are obstacles and objections that can be asserted and brought to bear on the minor premise that would prohibit the conclusion from being true of necessity. One such objection would be that someone has proof that someone turned on the sprinklers to make the ground wet, so that it does not follow of necessity and is not axiomatic that it rained for the ground to be wet.
The same is true in James.
True faith results in faith based works
I have faith.
Therefore, I have faith based works.
It cannot be affirmed:
True faith results in faith based works
I have works.
Therefore, I have true faith. This is the fallacy of affirming the consequence "I have works", as the consequence of having faith is works, as stated in the major premise. So the proposition in James is “True faith results in works”. We cannot propound the fallacy of affirming the consequence to come to an irrefutable conclusion about the relationship of faith and works. Affirming the consequence does not lead to a sound conclusion of necessity. But we can negate the consequence and lead to a sound conclusion of necessity, as follows.
When it rains the ground is wet.
The ground is not wet.
Therefore, it did not rain.
This follows of necessity and is axiomatic. It would also follow that not only did it not rain, but indeed no one also turned on the sprinklers.
So, we can make the same assertion that James does, faith equals work’s, therefore, no works equals no faith, unassailably so and axiomatically . So, in Hebrews 11, we can apply this also. If Noah did not have works, we can know that he did not have faith or as James says, “faith that is dead”, and would of necessity be not saved, i.e., he too would have drowned (not saved). This is where James is true when it says, “You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was matured”.
So, we can also affirm with certainty, that if one does not have works or a consequence from faith, they do not have faith, unless of course you think James is wrong. James of course uses the phrase “dead” faith, “faith also, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself.” Hard to think of this “faith only” or “faith by itself” as being faith that justifies and leads to imputed righteousness. Since James also puts this idea to bed by saying, “For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.” This is not saving faith since it is equivalent to “death”, as James asserts.
These verses are usually totally ignored by modern day easy believism, masquerading in the guise of Sola fide, as it seems many do. The relationship of faith and works is, as we have seen a delicate balance, but faith does always come first as it affirms in Hebrews, “that without faith it is impossible to please him”. So salvation is never based on works, ever. But if one has saving faith, they will produce works and it can be affirmed that if there are no faith based works in ones life, including repentance from sin, there is no saving faith, hence no salvation. But never get the cart before the horse it is saving faith that comes first, always!
But Hebrews also shows what James means when he says, “You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was matured”. This verse in James cannot be ignored, as Hebrews makes clear. And a note. The justification mentioned by James is not forensic justification unto salvation, it is only an example given that, after Abraham was confirmed as already justified by faith, “we SEE that he was justified. The key word in James is “see”, i.e., faith is an intangible that I cannot pull out of my pocket and “show” someone, nor can anyone else. But we can “see” it, as James asserts and Hebrews 11 abundantly illustrates.
Comentários