 So what we'll deal with next is James 2. So in this video that we were discussing a moment ago that justification is it by works or faith alone. And obviously James 2 is there classic. And his argument point is that if I believe in faith alone for salvation, I can't then explain James 2 to somebody. I can't use that because James 2 seems to be going against what I said. Whereas he can say John 3.16 somebody who believes in him. Well, actually, you can't say that because if that's all he gave, he's giving him complete gospel. But Jesus never told Nicodemus to get baptized in this, that and the other. Okay. So, yes, we can actually use James 2, but we need to understand the difference between being justified by faith plus works and being saved by faith plus works because there is a difference between salvation and justification. Okay. So just to show you yet another concept he absolutely fails to grasp. In this, he did this video in an interview with this her shattered guy who I've never heard before, but this video came out after I started doing some of the footage for this refutation. So this is what they're talking about and about two minutes and 44 seconds in he's explaining how people are misrepresenting his position, I suppose, but people will say to him that it's faith alone that saves. But then he goes on to say, even though James even plainly and unambiguously states that man is not justified by faith alone. Yet there's so many that are zealous to this faith alone position. Well, the thing is the key word there is that it's faith alone that saves. What did, did James say that was saved by faith plus works? That's not what James said. James said that a man is not justified by faith alone. He didn't say that a man is not saved by faith alone. He said that a man is not justified by faith alone. But you see, he's put those right together there because he just, he does not grasp the difference between those words. Again, he just, he hears the word justified and he automatically thinks in his head the word saved. But that's not true because just like saved can have different contexts in what you're being saved from like you could be saved forever lasting life or you could just be saved from some sort of earthly disaster or like when Jesus saved them from drowning, for instance, in the waters. So just as saved has different contexts, well, justification can have different contexts as well in terms of what a person is actually justified by or for. Okay, let's have a look at the definition of, of saving the dictionary. So it gives a few definitions of here. Now, obviously, this first one to deliver from sin, that's obviously a Christian spin on the word. It's not what the word would natively mean if it wasn't for Christianity. So that's obviously a Christian is definition of save there. But just in the English core language, it means to rescue or to deliver from some sort of danger or harm. So like saved from drowning, for instance, or you can say it means to preserve or guard from injury or destruction or loss. So, you know, your house was flooded. Oh, but somebody saved the TV from being or something like that. You can obviously say that it means to store something. So like when you save something on a computer, well, you're preserving it. There's the keyword you're preserving as per the previous definition. So it can either mean to reserve or preserve or to deliver from some sort of undesirable consequence of some sort. So obviously for eternal life, that means saved from hell or saved from the condemnation, essentially. Now, justified on the other hand is a different word. And it means to to have or to show a just right or reasonable basis for doing something. So a justified punishment is one that's not too harsh, not too leaning. It's the right punishment for the right crime, if you like, or a justified, it says here, justified reputation for toughness. So it's having the right amount of something or the right reason for something. So you can be justified in one sense and not justified in another sense. So let me give you an illustration to explain that. Now, I'm not really an expert in legal matters, especially not in the United States. So do excuse me if I make some mistakes here. But in the US, you have something called the Castle Doctrine. And this is essentially your that it defines your rights to defend your property. And bearing in mind that the United States also has lenient freedoms on gun ownership that you can possess a firing weapon. Now, in my country in the United Kingdom, laws on gun ownership are very restrictive. The common citizen cannot legally own fire arms. Now, some exceptions might be given to farmers or if it's something like an air rifle or a paintball gun, but not a conventional dangerous weapon. So we do have some freedom to defend our home, but probably not the same extent of leniency as the US has. So even a thief who's trying to steal something, if it's not evident that he's actually trying to cause me any danger, even if I don't necessarily know what his intentions is, I'm probably not justified to just kill him or beat him to death when there's no obvious threat to my person. Now, the Bible actually gives you the right to defend your home, even to the point of killing a thief who breaks in during the night. And that's in Exodus 22, 23, and it doesn't even say that the thief has to steal something or threaten you just by breaking in. You have that right. So the Bible is actually even more lenient than the laws of the land. Okay. Now then, if a thief breaks into the night in my house as a British citizen, I cannot necessarily cause harm to the thief if it is not clear that the thief intends on causing harm to me physically. And even then the relinx, I can't just take it to the absolute extreme and just take a knife to his throat when it might not be necessary. Okay. I'm certainly not legally entitled to own a firearm, especially not as a self-defense weapon. Okay. So picture a scenario where I in Britain actually use a firearm to defend my home from a thief that has broken in during the night and is attempting to steal my property but has not explicitly tried to cause me or my family any physical harm. Okay. So under the British legal framework, I'm not legally permitted to own a gun. So I acted with unreasonable force and I was not justified in defending my home. So if the threat would be then if I could be potentially taken to prison, well, I would not be saved from being taken to prison most likely. I would probably go because I was not justified in doing that. Now, I've put the US law in italics because it wouldn't apply to me. But if I was in the United States, well, I might actually be justified to use a gun depending on how the circumstances played out on what the perceived threat was. So, you know, that would be for the court to examine. So with the US, it's a bit more ambiguous. I may be saved from prison. I might not be saved from prison. That would depend on whether it was decided that I was justified. So if I was justified, I would be saved from prison. If I wasn't justified, I wouldn't be saved from prison. Now, in biblical law, biblical law justifies me in defending my home from an intruder during the night, even to death. So and that's kind of separate from salvation anyway, but I still have my eternal salvation. So I'm still eternally saved regardless of what happens under these laws. So I as a Christian, I uphold biblical law. I believe that the Lord is right. So I'm current, I'm currently living in the land of British law, though I'm not living under the Millennial reign of Christ or the Old Testament nation of Israel. So I could potentially be in a situation where I'm justified in the sight of God, while not being justified in the sight of the Lord of the land. So you can see that in different contexts, I could be both justified and not justified at the same time. So I could be biblically justified. But in a British court, that's not going to give me a pass because I'm not justified according to British law. So I could still be eternally saved, but not necessarily be saved from prison. Okay, whatever other consequence would follow from my lack of justification there. But you can see that in one aspect I'm justified, in another aspect, I'm not justified. Okay, so the justification and even the salvation can vary in the context. Okay. So in order to deal with James too, I'll just skim through some points in James one really quickly because that will obviously, that's James building up his letter to what he goes on to say. So he introduces the letter. It does say it's to the 12 tribes of which are scattered abroad. So it is more of a Jewish audience, you might argue. But the fact that it's in our Bible in our New Testament means it's just as relevant for Christians as well. And I put that little disclaimer in there because I know APUC own has probably been confronted by dispensationalists and they'll just say that this is a dispensation for the Jews. Of course what they do is they just invent a dispensation every time something's too difficult for them to explain properly. And guess what? Salvation's always been by faith. It's never been by works, even in the Old Testament. So we don't need to invent a dispensation for this. We can explain it without inventing a dispensation. Okay. So it's introduced to his brethren. So this is not a letter that's like the Gospel of John where it's intentionally written that you might believe and have everlasting life. It's not written for that purpose. He's written to encourage his brethren because he's going on to say, count it joy when you fall into diverse temptations. So, you know, you're my brethren, you're going to fall into temptation, but count it a joy. So it's an encouragement. James is trying to encourage them. Okay. It's not written to tell them how to be saved. It's written as an encouragement. And he just further emphasizes that that knowing this, yes, your faith is going to be tried, but the trying of your faith works patient. So it's building your patience. That's why these things are coming to you and let patients do its work that you can be perfect and entire and, you know, not lacking anything, not being in need of this or in need of that because the patience of your faith will build what you need. So it's an encouragement. Okay. James is encouraging them. And then it goes on to say in verse 12, after he's just discussed about asking in faith for things, that blessed is the man that endures temptation for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to them that love him. So people like Epeucian, they're going to take that verse as well. So you must go through this temptation and endure it otherwise you won't get the crown of life. But the thing is though, he's not saying you must do this that you can have the crown of eternal life. It's not using the absolutes. You must have this or do this in order to have this. But again, it's an encouragement. Blessed is whoever happens to be going through this because the Lord has promised he shall receive a crown of life. Okay. So, you know, it's an encouragement that the Lord has already promised this. So keep enduring the temptation. Okay. It's not that's not written like an instruction. It's written as observation. Okay. Then another verse that they want to bring up then is in verses 14 and 15. It says, So this is another one that they want to bring up that if you were, if you don't resist the temptation, the sin will work death in you. Okay. Well, again, look at the words that James uses. Look at how he phrases the sentence. He doesn't say in verse 14, If you don't resist temptation, then you will be drawn away by your lust and enticed. He's not even directly addressing you, the people that he's talking to. He's just giving a hypothetical and he says every man. Okay. Every man is tempted and he's tempted when this happens. Well, they're going to have to endure this temptation. This is going to keep happening. It says he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed. When he's enticed by his lust, that's when he's tempted. So that, that happens every man that's tempted. Okay. So this is not, this is not a case of this will only happen if you don't enjoy the temptation. You're already tempted because this happens. Okay. And so then when lust has conceived, it brings forth sin and sin when it is finished, it brings forth death. Well, we already know that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. So regarding salvation, that's already been a problem. You've already been tempted. Okay. And that's why he's using things like every man and he instead of saying you, the people that I'm talking to, because he could have just worded it like that if that's what he meant. And if he meant to say that you, my brethren who I'm talking to can lose your salvation if you don't do this. Well, he ought to have phrased his words a little bit better, better than how he's doing it because he should have said, if you don't enjoy temptation, you will be drawn away and enticed. And then sin will bring forth eternal death or eternal damnation. That's what he could have said, if that's what he meant. And this is the thing with Epiucion. They make the apostles sound like crazy people who write convoluted language. When you could have just said this so much more directly, you know, he could have just said, you, my brethren, you could be tempted. And if you don't resist, you will go to hell. But he didn't use those words, folks, and that's not how he phrased his words. So be very careful about people who use these somewhat ambiguous and difficult to understand questionable verses that use questionable language to make absolute statements over and against the absolute statements that we do have. Okay. And even sin, if it could bring forth death in the believer, well, we've already seen an example of that much earlier in this video. We looked at the example of Saul. He felt died falling on his own sword. Sin brought forth death in that regard. But he didn't change the fact that Samuel said, you shall be with me wherever Samuel was when he died. Okay. So again, that even words like death can mean different things. So be very careful about people like Epiucion who use unclear language to make clear doctrines and then just stick the things in their ears and use this to try and explain all the clear verses and clear language that we actually have in the Bible. Okay. And then he goes on to say every good gift and every perfect gift is from above. So the Father gives us gifts, perfect gifts. And then in verse 18, obviously will begat he us with the word of truth. So the words, and you could, you could say, for example, the words that Christ gave, the words of eternal life, whosoever believeth in me shall not perish. Well, he begat us present tense. Okay. So, sorry, past tense, excuse me, past tense, he begat us. So begat regenerated. So we know that Jesus is the first begotten, the only begotten son of God. And then we are begatten of him. Okay. So that's when he regenerated us. And how did he regenerate? Well, it was with the word of truth. It wasn't because we turned from all of our sins to be saved. We should be the first fruits of his creatures because he begat us. Okay. So then he goes on to say lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness and receive with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save your souls. And so again, this is another one that Epiucion and people like him will love to jump on because it's it is able to save your souls and see he says lay apart this and do this. Okay. Well, he does say, you know, lay apart your wickedness, leave it aside, reject it, reject the superfluity, if you like, or the pointlessness of naughtiness because it filthiness or wickedness, it serves no real purpose. Okay. It might look enticing, but it's superfluous. It doesn't actually do anything good for you, even if it looks enticing. And then receive with meekness the engrafted word which is able to save your soul. So it's still the word that's able to save your souls. Okay. Now, we just say it's able to save your souls. Obviously, that might mean then that maybe it won't save some people's souls. But remember that he's dealing with a plural audience. Okay. This is not addressed to one person. This is addressed to a multitude. And this is the problem with a lot of their go to you can lose your salvation versus is that some of them are addressed to large groups of people. They're not addressed to one person. Well, you can't expect that like all the all the 12 tribes which are scattered abroad can all lose their salvation in one moment. Okay. Because salvation is about is individuals, it's not groups of people. So it's writing to a group of people. So, you know, there may be that some people that receive this may be aren't safe. So they need to receive the engrafted word. Okay. So again, it's this encouragement. It's this, you know, keep on doing this. Don't give up this. Okay. You can't really use that as a salvation verse because James is not using clear enough language to understand. You see, when the Gospel of John is written to tell us how to have eternal life, Jesus is using plain language that a child can understand. There is nothing complicated about whosoever believeth in him should not perish. But verses like this really leave more questions than answers if you want to use this as your salvation versus. Okay. And remember that we haven't demonstrated that James's letter was even written to tell us how to be saved. Okay. And then so it goes on to say, but be you doers of the word and not hear us only, deceiving your own selves. Again, another one they love to jump on is that you must work your way to heaven. But first of all, it's the receiving of the word with meekness that's actually able to save your souls. It's not the doing of the word. It's the receiving which saves yourselves. But having received the words that is able to save your souls, don't just be hear us though. Be doers as well. Okay. So it's not, this is what a PUCM just doesn't understand. It's not that works help you get saved. Okay. But now that you save, well, now that you've received the word, well, now that you've believed on Christ, well, now that we've got this, also do this, do still do with the works. Don't just use salvation as a free gift as an excuse to not do any work. You've got salvation. You've heard the word with meekness. Now do something about it. Okay. Be a doer as well. Okay. Because why? Why would you do it? Well, if anybody is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like. So it says he's like, this means it's a simile. Okay. This is not a proof text that a man is going to lose his salvation after this. This is a simile. It's like this scenario that he's going to paint. A man beholds his natural face in a glass. So he sees what he looks like. Okay. And he should look like somebody like this. He should look like somebody who's laid apart all filthiness and has received the word, being grafted word, which is able to save his soul. That's what he should look like. This is the appearance that he's supposed to have when he looks in a mirror. So he beholds his natural face in a glass. So that's, if he's done this, that's what he naturally looks like. Right. But then if he's not a doer of the word, he looks away, he goes his way and straight away, sorry, this keeps obstructing the text, straight away forget what manner of man he was. So it's not that well, he just loses his salvation because he didn't do the stuff that, you know, was a few verses earlier. Look, he should look like this. This is what he should look like. He should look like somebody who's received the word and is laying apart all filthiness. But he forgets what he looks like the moment he turns away from the mirror because he's not doing the stuff in the word. He's just hearing it only. Okay. So this is the simile that he's using. You should look like a saved person. As saved people, we are not supposed to look like the world. But if you're not doing the stuff in the word, you're immediately forgetting what you look like. You look like somebody who's a Christian, but you're forgetting what you look like when you don't do the stuff that a Christian is supposed to be doing. Okay. This has got nothing to do with, this is what you must do to be saved. It's got to do with, you're not looking like a saved person when this should be your natural face. Okay. This is the point that James is trying to get across. But whosoever looks at the perfect law of liberty and continues in his liberty, therein, perfect law, he, but he's not a forgetful hearer, but he does the work. Okay. He's a doer of the work. This man shall get his salvation back, shall recover his salary. That's not what he says. He said he shall be blessed in his deed or his work. Okay. Deed his work. So he shall be blessed in the work that he does. So if you want to be blessed in your work, be a doer of the word. Okay. God is not going to be impressed by you running a marathon for charity. Okay. He's going to impressed by you did the, well, he's not even going to be impressed really, you know, in salvation context. Why would God be impressed? But, you know, you shall be blessed in the work you do if you are a doer of the work. Don't expect God to bless you in life if you're constantly disobeying this and disobeying that and you're not laying apart filthiness. Okay. Well, look, we've already dealt with this much earlier in this video. We dealt with people in the Bible who were believers and still sinned. And we saw what happened to them. And guess what? I don't want to end up like some of the things that happened to David. I don't want to end up like some of the things that happened to Abraham and the things that happened to Samson and Saul. But that's got nothing to do with eternal life though, folks. It's just I don't want those things to end up on me even in this life. Okay. So if I want to be blessed in my work, I better be a doer of the work and I better be a doer of the word and not a hero only. That's the point that James is getting across. Okay. That's going to set everything that is going to start telling this in James chapter 2. Okay. Now, some people might listen to what I've just explained there about James chapter 1 and say that, well, you didn't really explain that very well. I think you're playing word games there. You know, I think maybe you're trying to dance around this kind of stuff. But the thing is though, folks, this is this kind of thing is the reason why a POC on apologetics has to do videos like how do I know if I've lost my salvation and how do I know if I'm really saved because the people that listen to him can listen to as many hours of footage as they want. They're never going to know really because their salvation is only ever as good as your opinion of your own works. Well, I think I'm on the right track today. So I must be saved. And then tomorrow, well, I don't think I've done so well today. So maybe I've not saved. And these people constantly need telling how to be saved because they constantly don't know. And the reason why they don't know is because they use books like James one, which uses difficult language, which is not even clear, and it's not even explicitly talking about how to be saved. And they run to that as their go tos instead of starting with something simple like John's gospel, which is actually written to tell us how to be saved. And Jesus use a simple, easy to understand language. Okay. Now, yeah, I concede that some of what we've read in James one is a little bit difficult to explain when you do believe in faith alone and one saved always saved. It's probably easier to explain when you don't when you do believe that works are a part of salvation. But here's the thing about that, though, folks is since we have the Gospel of John, which is written specifically for the purpose, and it uses clear language, let's start with that first. And then let's reexamine what we actually believe about James one, because the thing is with passages like James one is, well, when you say sin works death, does that mean eternal death? Or does that mean physical death? James didn't say either way, and he could have just thrown that in there. He could have just said sin works hell or sin works damnation. If that's what he meant, he could have used better words. Okay. What does crown of life mean? Does that mean eternal life? Or does that mean that a crown that can be given to some people that have eternal life anyway? Again, it's too open to interpretation. So let's start with what's simple. Let's start with what's clear. Let's start with the Gospel of John and use that. And then let's reexamine what we believe about James one. Now that we're saved, now that we've believed, then let's get on to some of the more difficult passages in the Bible and understand it a bit better. Okay, rather than just trying to go with all these convoluted difficult to explain chapters, and then you have to explain away the Gospel of John. Because Epi Euseon would probably say things like, well, I can say John 3.16. I can say that whosoever believes in him, you can't say this verse right here in James chapter 2. Well no, actually you can't say John 3.16. Because according to your Gospel, Epi Euseon, Jesus preached a false gospel to Nicodemus because Jesus never told Nicodemus to do the commandments to be saved. Jesus never told Nicodemus to get baptized and to do this and to start doing that and this, that and the other. That's an isolated conversation that Jesus had with Nicodemus only specifically about eternal life, and Jesus never mentioned those things. So no, you can't say that whosoever believe within him. Because it's not true according to your Gospel. That's not enough to be saved. Okay, but you know, I've tried to the best of my ability to explain explain James one and explain that this is not clear enough language, and it's just you have to accuse the apostles of writing such complicated convoluted junk that nobody can understand. But James is written to his brethren. He wrote to his brethren. He wrote to people that in theory are already believers. Okay, so let's start with what's simple. Let's start with what's written to tell us how to be saved. And then when we've sorted that out, when we've sorted our eternal life out, then let's go to the difficult chapters. Okay, because eternal life is far too important for us to be wrong about this. So we better be right about this. We better not be using obscure passages to teach the most important thing in the Bible, whether your eternal soul is going to end up in heaven or hell. Now I can handle somebody not understanding end times and the, you know, revelation and Daniel more complicated. Fine. Okay, you've got all of you save life to deal with that. But for eternal life, you better know what you're talking about. And the people that listen to EPUC don't ask these questions, because they don't know if they're going to make it or not. They could just make the wrong choice tomorrow and lose their salvation and dying a car crash for all they know. They don't know. They've got no way of knowing. And so it just goes to show that their gospel has absolutely no power to save anybody whatsoever. So with all that ran out of the way, let's get on to James chapter two and finish where we left off. So then introducing James chapter two before we get to the justification by works plus faith. He introduces the chapter saying have not faith with respect of persons. So this is key to introducing everything that James is talking about in this chapter. Okay, so it gives an example. I probably should have highlighted this actually, but it gives an example of these people showing special respect to somebody that's got lavish clothing, giving them a special chair and saying to the poor, you know, you sitting that rubbish chair over there. So it's dealing with people that have extra respect for rich or well dressed or reputable people over the lowly people of the faith. Okay, so this is what he's dealing with. And then he goes on to explain it has not God chosen the poor who are rich in faith to be heirs of the kingdom. You know, he's getting across the point that people who were poor, as long as their believers, they're just as respectable if not more respectable actually in the kingdom of heaven. Okay, they're just as equal. They're just as important. God is not a respecter of persons. He doesn't have special respect for people of high reputation and rich people. Usually, actually, God has less respect for those people. And so he's saying you and again, this is plural because it's not the or thou it's plural, but you collectively and really specifically the people that have done this, the people that have shown special respect to rich or important people, you have despised the poor. Okay, is it not the rich people that oppress you and draw you before the judgment seat? So you're paying special respect to these rich people when they're the ones that oppress you. And to give an example of this, a few years back at a church that I was attending at the time, they had the mayor coming to give some kind of a speech in place of a Sunday sermon. So we didn't have a sermon and said it was having the mayor coming and preach. This mayor wasn't even a Christian, he was a Muslim in fact. And so everyone's all excited like, yeah, we're going to have the mayor come in our church and it's going to be such an honor. Oh, the mayor, the mayor and everybody's fussing about the chuffing mayor. I didn't turn up to the service on that day, I'll have you know, because I don't have special respect for the mayor. And actually, is it not people in government seats, especially in my country and in European countries, people in government or the people legislating against Christianity? Now the mayor reminds me, he doesn't really probably have a lot of political power really, but he's not a Bible-believing Christian. And the council in the city where I live is not remarkably pro-Christian. Okay, they endorse a lot of things which are against Christianity. So this church is showing all this special respect to people of political importance when it's politicians that are legislating against Christianity in this country. And yet you show them special respect and it's disgusting to be honest. And so that's the kind of thing that James is dealing with in this chapter. It's people that are just respecting the people who they shouldn't be respecting and they're disregarding and despising the people that are actually very rich in faith and in the kingdom of God are far more important than, you know, the people that they want to respect. So that's the point that James is getting across here. Okay. So moving further and further into the chapter then, verse 8, James says, if you fulfill the royal law according to scripture, now it's quite an unusual term, royal law. What does he mean by that? Well, the thing is he goes on to go out in that same verse, Old Testament law. So that's the royal law, okay, that you shall love your neighbor as yourself. You do well. So you do well if you fulfill the royal law. Now remember that he was trying to pit the works of the law against the Mosaic law against the New Testament works of Christ, that we have to follow the New Testament law. We don't follow the Mosaic law. But once again, James is quoting Old Testament law before he then goes on to tell us how we're justified by works as well as faith. So it just goes to show once again how he just completely debunks himself because this is not talking about works of faith or works of Christ. He introduces this with the royal law, the Old Testament Mosaic law. So you do well if you love your neighbor as yourself. Well, that's an Old Testament law, bearing in mind that Epi Euseo news Luke 10, which quotes the same verse because Jesus said, well, you've answered correctly, you must do these things to live. You know, that's how he was interpreting that verse, which is just completely bizarre with what we're reading in James. So it goes on to say, if you have respect of persons, you commit sin, you are breaking this law that you shall love your neighbor as yourself if you have special respect of persons. And then key point, whosoever shall keep the whole law yet in one point, offend in one point, he is guilty of all. Okay, so you only have to offend one point of the law and you've broken the whole law. Okay, so you can start to see why we're not justified by works of the law. And parallel passages, what Paul talks about in Galatians, that Epi Euseo and himself already referred to in some of his videos, Galatians 3.10, for as many as all the works of the law are under a curse, under the curse, for it is written, cursed is everyone that continues not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. So later in Galatians 5.3, he says, for I testify against every man that is circumcised that is a debtor to do the whole law. So Epi Euseo was trying to create this false framework where, well, we don't obey the law to be circumcised, but we do need to obey the laws about loving your neighbor and loving God. Well, if that's the case, you have to obey the law to be circumcised then because you have to obey the whole law. And if you've even broken one point in the law, you've broken all of them. So if he's not circumcised, well, he's broken the law then. So again, he's trying to create a false dichotomy that doesn't exist. And so James further emphasised this. He who said, do not commit adultery said also do not kill. Now, if you commit no adultery yet if you kill, you are a transgressor of the law. So again, it only takes one single sin and you've broken the whole law. That's all it takes. So you can't ask stupid questions like, how many sins does it take for me to lose salvation? If you've broken one thing, you've broken the whole law. OK, that's how it's worded. And so then James goes on to say, so speak you and do so as they that shall be judged by, well, how will they be judged by the law? Well, not by the Mosaic law, not by the royal law, by the law of liberty. And again, Paul talks about our freedom in Christ, our liberty in Christ. We're at liberty, we're free because we're free from the judgment of the law. See, the law, the, the Old Testament law is that sin brings death and by extension of that eternal death as well. So we are set free from that law, therefore we will be judged by the law of liberty. And so that if we're under the law of liberty, well, how do we speak it and do as those who shall be judged by the law of liberty? Well, we don't have respect of persons, OK? And if you have respect of persons, you're breaking the royal law. So what he's saying is here, well, you will be judged by the law of liberty, but guess what? Love thy neighbour as thyself, OK? Don't have respect of persons. So what the gist of it here is, yes, you should be doing the, the works of the law, essentially, you should be loving God, loving your neighbour as yourself. But understand that if you've broken one, you've broken them all. So you're not going to get to heaven by following the law, OK? But nevertheless, having the law of liberty still obey these precepts, OK? Obey them, but not for salvation. And we already saw that earlier. If you love me, keep my commandments, but it's not if you want to be saved, keep my commandments, separate those two things. So he then says, for he shall have judgment without mercy, that has shown no mercy, and mercy rejoices in his judgment. So God will judge those who have respect of persons. But if they are saved, then they are judged by the law of liberty, no less, OK? So that's why Paul says things like, if any man's work be burned up, he himself shall be saved, but he shall suffer loss, he, you know, he shall have loss of reward. And Jesus says, there are those who are great in the kingdom of heaven, and there are those who are least in the kingdom of heaven, OK? Because that's how those under the law of liberty shall be judged. But sin itself cannot take hold of them. They cannot be condemned under the royal law. Whereas for the unsaved world, that's not the case. So I'm just moving across to the tablet for this, so it's a bit easier for me to circle things and point certain things out. So now that we've disproven his false dichotomy between works of the law versus works of Christ, we can now put James to and will also put Romans for together, OK? Because these are good parallel passages to have side by side. All right, and it will really explain this point. So let's just zoom in to James and continue where we left off. So all the stuff that he's going to say about being justified by works, this is how he's introducing it. Verse 14, What does it profit my brethren? Though a man say he has faith and has not works, can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, destitute of food, and one of you say unto them departing peace, be ye warmed and filled, not withstanding, you give them not those things which are needful for the body. And again, he asks that same question, what does it profit? So between what does it profit in verse 14 and verse 16, we can kind of see these as bookends, if you like. And what this is defining for us is the context. So this is what James means by the righteousness, sorry, not the righteousness, sorry, the justification by the works, OK? So notice is not saying, what does it profit my brethren if a man wants to enter into heaven and hath not worked to show for the kingdom can he enter there in? That's not how James introduces this, is introducing profiting of the brethren, OK? That's what he's talking about. So that's the justification that he's going to talk about. Now he asks this hypothetical question, though a man say he has faith and has not works, and then he asks the crucial question here, can faith save him? OK? Now, bear in mind, James asks a closed question, but he doesn't give a closed answer, he doesn't give a yes or no answer to a yes or no question. He goes on to give an open answer, and that means there's some degree for interpretation. Now, can faith save him, question mark? Well, obviously, the substance of what James is saying would cast doubt on this that, well, no, he probably isn't saved if he doesn't have these works, but we only have an open answer to a closed question, we don't specifically have a yes or a no. So it's a hypothetical question that doesn't have an absolutely explicit answer, we just have an explanation that would at least cast doubt on the faith of a man who has no works even though he says he's saved. The next thing to point out is that James said, though a man say he has faith and have not works. So this doesn't ex- that the hypothetical man being explained here, it doesn't absolutely say that this man had faith, it just says that he says he has faith. So he claims to have faith, but he just seems to have no works to show for it, and works in the context of what? Well, again, profiting my breath. And what does it profit? What are you profiting my brothers or sisters? If you don't help their needs as it goes on to explain in verses 15 and 16. So then if you wonder why he doesn't have the works, well the problem stems from his faith. The problem is not with his lack of works in of themselves, it's that those lack of works stem from his faith. His faith is doubtful here because he says he has faith, but how can we look at him and know that he has faith? We can't. Okay? The next thing to point out is that when he asks, can faith save him? Well, he only says he has faith, doesn't say that he has faith. So can faith save him if he only says he has faith and doesn't actually have faith? But save him from what? Because if you look at the verses that we saw earlier in James just before 14, well James does speak about judgment without mercy. Now again, people want to make that about judgment in hell and that kind of thing, but James hasn't really mentioned condemnation. He hasn't mentioned hell. We don't want to put words in James's mouth that he didn't actually say. So this is too open to interpretation and he's already pointed out that the people he's speaking to will be judged by the law of liberty as opposed to the the royal law. Okay? So that they're under the judgment as according to the law of liberty, not as according to the to the mosaic law. Moreover question of can faith faith save him on this particular issue? Not necessarily hellfire because we haven't got enough background context here to say that hell or damnation is the specific issue being addressed. James hasn't mentioned it so you have to make James say that when James could have just said that if that's what he really meant. Now let's just say that it does mean eternal salvation. Well it still only says that he says he has faith, not that he actually has faith. And James says can faith save him? And he asks a question. That's a question. It's not a statement. It's a question. Okay? Now then he'll go on to verse 17 to explain that even so faith, if it has not works, is dead being alone. Now they want people like Epeucian will take that statement and they'll say well see your faith doesn't work. You have no faith if you don't have works. But the thing is it doesn't say that faith without works doesn't exist. It says that it's dead. Okay? Now when something's dead that means it was once alive. Otherwise it doesn't make sense. Again if you're just going to say well if you don't have works you don't have faith or you have faith well then you're making James look like a crazy person who uses weird words and can't string a sentence together. It says that the faith is dead. It doesn't say that the faith doesn't exist. So for faith without works to be dead it still has to exist by definition. Okay? If you want to ask the question if faith is dead can it really save? And obviously because we've got this kind of a question here it does look skeptical at best. But once again it still only says say. I'm just going to keep pointing that out until people get it. And we've still got our context. What does it profit my brethren? What does it profit if this in verse 15 and 16? So that's still the context of a dead faith. There is no mention of whether eternal salvation is affected by this. It's only what it profits a brother or a sister that's naked or destitute. That's the only context that we've got to go on here for this dead faith that's alone. Okay? Now then verse 18. Yeah a man may say. So again this is only say. So this doesn't prove the heart of a man explicitly by the narrator. It's only if a man says well well then we can only go on what a man says to us we can't know for sure. Right? Otherwise it's it's pointless to say this. James could have just said yeah though a man has faith and has not works. He could have worded it like that but no it's all about saying. So again it's profiting. What does it profit the brethren? And though a man say. So this is only how brethren can identify each other. Again that's the best that we've got to go on from what James actually offers us in the text. Okay? So he asks this hypothetical question. A man may say you have faith and I have works. Show me your faith without your works and I will show my faith by my works. Okay? So that's that's verse 18. Now what's interesting about this in verse 18 is that James has flipped a hypothetical man here because in verse 14 the hypothetical man had faith and not works. Yet in verse 18 the hypothetical man it's the other way around. He says well you have faith but I have works. So this hypothetical man in verse 18 is completely flipped from the hypothetical man described in verse 14. Right? And this man says to this other man well you have your faith and I have works. Okay? So you show me your faith without your works and I will show you my faith by my works. So this is not evident that this is an eternal life exchange between man and God or man and Jesus or anything like that. This would be like you and me sat with each other. Me talking to you you were talking to me. So you might say to me well well you have faith and I have works and then you know show me your faith without your works and I will show you my faith by my work. Excuse me. So the point here is that in this man-to-man relationship one man is saying to the other man look look at my works to show for my faith. So this is a this is a brethren encouragement. This is between brethren and what's James addressing. What does it profit my brethren? So this is all about the brethren. This is not about your eternal life or your salvation. It's profiting the brethren and it's well you okay you have your faith without your works but look I have the faith with works. So brethren encouraging one another to have faith with works. Okay? We should be striving to to encourage one another to get works and of course that that is the duty of the brethren to encourage one another to edify one another to promote each other to good works. There are other passages in the Bible that talk about stuff like that. Okay? So it's perfectly consistent with what James is saying. Now then verse 19 you believe that there is one God you do well the devils also believe and tremble and a lot of unsafe people use this as a proof text that it's not enough to believe for salvation because the devils also believe and of course devils are not saved. Well the problem is with using this verse to to say that is that this is actually somewhat of a red herring because first of all what does it say? It says you believe there is one God. So it doesn't say you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ that thou shalt be saved. It just says that you believe in one God. Well guess what there's a billion Muslims who believe that there is one God. There's a bunch of Catholics who believe that there's one God. That that in itself is not what saves a person because they have to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. So this is again this is all we've got to go and is that they you believe there's one God. That's all we've got to go on. Okay? That's not in itself evidence of salvation. Now it says you believe there is one God and guess what you actually do well. So you do well for believing that there is only one God. So if you believe that you are doing well by believing that. However having said that the devils also believe and tremble. Now what does tremble mean? You might say it means to fear. So you could say that the person that James is addressing and again this is not James addressing the people that he's talking to directly because he's not using ye or you. It's thou which is singular and that's this man here that's saying that. So a man may say thou and so it's this man that's saying to the other man you believe there is one God and you do well to believe that the devils out there also believe and tremble. Okay in fear. So this man is getting crossed to the other man. Look you have faith. I have faith. I have works. So you show me your faith without your works. I'll show you my faith by my works and you believe there is one God. Well the devils also believe that and tremble. So it's kind of like a man is rebuking another man saying hey you're showing a lack of fear for God here. You need to start doing some works. You know you need to have these works. Okay so it's got nothing to do with being saved. This is a man to man exchange where one man is exhorting is sort of encouraging another man to have works and have this fear for God. And the thing is when it says devils also believe and we know that devils are obviously not saved. This is still a red herring. It's a straw man because Jesus didn't come to die for devils. Okay Jesus came to die for man. Now man was born in sin. Man needs to get saved and pass on to life. The angels there are the angels that kept their first estate and the angels that departed from their first estate and that's described in like 2 Peter and Jude for example. So with the angels the angels don't get saved in the way that you and I get saved. They're not born in sin and then they believe on the Lord Jesus Christ that they shall not be saved. That's not how salvation works for angels. Okay with angels it's just there are those who kept the first estate and there are those that left the first estate and that's all there is and that there is no reversing from that. That's the difference between man and angel. So that that is a red herring. It's got nothing to do with whether faith alone can save. Okay. James says but will thou know so again it's this thou. This is the the man here that's speaking to the other man. This is not James the narrator writing to the brethren directly. He's giving an analogy between two men here and one man is saying to the other oh vain man that faith without works is dead. Well why is it dead because what does it profit my brethren? What does it profit? It's not profiting the brethren. What if our sister or our brother is naked destitute with daily food and you would say well depart and be warm but you don't do anything to give things which need your faith is not profiting the brethren. Your faith and so that's the context of your faith is dead and you could say well salvation. There's no evidence that this is salvation related. You haven't got enough to go on when it comes to profiting the brethren. That's the context that James gives us. So if you have a problem with it you need to take it with James because that's what he said. Okay. He could have talked about righteousness and eternal life here. He didn't talk about it so you can't just put words in his mouth to prop up your wicked false doctrine. All right. And then so it goes on to give the example of Abraham. So was not our father Abraham justified by works. So there it is. There's that word justified when he offered Isaac his son upon the altar. The thing about how faith wrote his works and by works his faith was made perfect. Now sometimes often when we think of perfect we mean absolutely without any fault but perfect can also mean complete as well. Okay. So that's somewhat open to interpretation between those but the scripture was fulfilled. Abraham believed God and it was imputed onto him for righteousness and he was called a friend of God. So that's the scripture that was fulfilled by Abraham doing these things. And so you see then that how by works and man is justified and that not by faith only. So Abraham kind of gives us gives us a key here to sort of understanding exactly the point that James is making here. So this would be a good time to bring in Romans 4 as a cross reference because Romans 4 Paul talks about Abraham's justification and the same scripture is quoted as well. So let's compare the two together. So I apologize if this won't be very clear for people to read but on the left we have Romans 4. So Paul introduces this saying what shall we say then that Abraham our father has pertaining to the flesh has found for if Abraham were justified by works he has were of to glory but not before God. For what says the scripture Abraham believed God and it was counted onto him for righteousness. Now to him that works not is the reward not reckoned of grace but of debt but to him that works not and but believes on him that justifies the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness. So I'll start with the first five verses but perhaps come back to those other ones later. So then starting at verse two Paul gives us an if. If Abraham were justified by works well either Abraham's justified by works or is not justified by works it's really yes or no. So if it's true so if the answer is yes well according to James that is that is the case according to verse 21 in James 2 Abraham is justified by works so we see the connection there okay. Well according to James it is so yes Paul you say if Abraham were justified but yes he is according to James. So carry on Paul what what what's your point well he has were of to glory so Abraham has glory in his works but and this is the key bit not before God. So Abraham can't go to God and say well look at my works God I've I've you know I'm justified because of my works look at my works he can't glory in his works before God. So if he can't glory in his works before God if he's not what who is it who is he glorying in front of well me personally I think the only option left is man okay so you could argue he has glory before man and as men we would all agree that we we think Abraham was a righteous man we think that Abraham showed his faith he did a lot of good stuff we would say yeah he is justified in terms of how he lived his life for the most part. Well what's the entire premise of what James has been talking about well it's what does my what does it profit my brethren what does it profit so it's all about profiting my brethren a brother or a sister that's naked yeah a man may say so one man is saying to another okay in this exchange so we see men talking to each other in James we see what does it profit my brethren well we see Abraham has glory before man before his brethren before a sister or a brother but not before God. So what this will lead on to and you might think well I don't quite agree with what you're saying here well we'll get on more to this about what the difference is between the the justification in Romans 4 that's without works and the justification in James 2 that's with works okay now then in verse 3 Paul quotes the Old Testament from Genesis and he says Abraham believed God and it was counted on to him for righteousness okay now James also says that Abraham believed God and it was imputed on to righteousness so both James and Paul quote the same scriptures you can see how these these passages are really good parallels to put side by side next to each other okay now in James's case James goes on to quote another scripture from Isaiah that he was called a friend of God well Paul doesn't quote that scripture only James quotes that okay so that that's also being fulfilled in what James is talking about now then in both of these cases because they are obviously quoting from the scripture we see Abraham believed God so that was his faith okay and what what was that counted towards what did his faith or his belief in God count towards okay so we can ask that question in Romans we can ask that question in James because it's the same scripture being quoted well it was counted on to him for righteousness okay and again so that's that's what James obviously quoting the same thing his belief his faith in God counted on to him for righteousness and there's the key word there for the justification being spoken of all right now then in Romans 4 5 Paul goes on to say but to him that works not but believes on him that justifies well who does he justify he justifies the ungodly doesn't justify those who have turned from all of their sins to be saved he justifies the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness and again what did the quote from the old testament they both quoted that it's Abraham's belief in God that counted for him for righteousness okay so then Romans 4 is going to go on to explain this in a bit more detail so even David so it's not just Abraham okay even David and the point here is that old testament believers were not saved by doing the works of the law they were saved by faith in the old testament were saved by faith in the new testament okay so Abraham also described the blessedness of the man onto whom will God will impute righteousness without works so righteousness there is without works now according to James were justified by faith plus works but according to Romans righteousness is without works it'll hold that thought because that is going to be mega important sorry i know my scribblings getting everywhere but that is going to be mega important okay and so further emphasizing what david already said uh blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven whose sins are covered now when it says are covered that ties in with what we read more towards the beginning of this refutation when we looked at Hebrews 10 and our epucion just completely misquotes Hebrews 10 so yes there is ongoing forgiveness as we see from other passages like the Lord's Prayer and so on and so forth but sins are covered as far as as far as Christ's blood is concerned blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven why because blessed are is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin so he has righteousness which by the ways without works and the sins are covered and the Lord will not impute sin so it's not he does not impute the sins up until now it's he will not impute sin future tense okay so then it then goes on to explain in nine to ten that blessedness is not just on those who are circumcised it's on those who are uncircumcised why because once again repeating what Paul has already said perfectly clearly just in case you missed it the first time faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness so you see how his righteousness ties in with his faith without works his works are not involved for this righteousness and then it goes on how's it reckoned when he was in circumcision or uncircumcision not in circumcision but in uncircumcision so his righteousness was apart from his circumcision had nothing to do with him being circumcised and it goes on to explain circumcision was just the ceiling of the the covenant it's like signing a contract if you will but that wasn't the actual reasoning for his righteousness okay now then do we have a contradiction here because in Romans 4 5 it's to him that works not but believes on him that just vows in God that his faith is counted for righteousness so according to Romans 4 5 him that works not but believes can still have righteousness okay now James 4 asks this question though a man says he has faith and again he only said he has faith doesn't mean he has faith and have not works can faith save him well are these statements in opposition to each other do they contradict each other well James is asking a question okay it's a yes or no question and although what James goes on to say does seem like he's saying a no he doesn't just say no even though he asked the yes or no question and he is again emphasizing the fact that he's asking a question Paul is making a statement so if we're going to go between well is it James 2 14 or is it Romans 4 5 if a man has faith and not have works can faith save him well according to Romans 4 5 he will be justified for righteousness so the answer is yes okay and again James is only saying a man says he has faith that doesn't mean he actually has faith and again what is James talking about the profiting of the brethren okay so then if righteousness is by faith without works what is James talking about right well Paul has mentioned righteousness multiple times in these few verses James only mentions it once and when he's mentioning it it's in his quote that Abraham believed God and it was counted on to him for righteousness that's when James quotes the righteousness okay but what Paul doesn't do that James does do is that James also goes on to say he was called the friend of God now Paul didn't point that one out and the verse that James quoted for Abraham's righteousness only mentions his belief it doesn't mention his works okay and then so the justification in Romans 4 that Paul's talking about how we're justified by faith without works is for righteousness when James is pointing out righteous sorry when he's pointing out justification by faith plus works it's not specifically for righteousness it's for profiting a brother or sister and as he said earlier in the chapter it's not having faith with special respect of different persons like having respect for the rich men over the poor men so it's it's how it profits your brethren and again a man may say so it's one man talking to another this is a man to man brethren to brethren relationship where there is justification by works as well so then when James is quoting Abraham's faith and works and it's that it's made perfect here in verse 22 okay we then see in verse 23 two parts to this his belief for righteousness and while we're at it he was called a friend of God okay you see how faith wrought his works and by works was faith made perfect so his faith well that fulfills the scripture Abraham believed God and it was imputed on to him for righteousness then his works is fulfilling the scripture he was called a friend of God that's what's being fulfilled by his works and it's for the profit of the brethren okay now you might ask the question am i inventing a connection between his works and being called a friend specifically where there's no connection between that exclusively well the thing is when when he's quoting the scripture Abraham was called a friend of God it's from Isaiah 41 verse 8 and that chapter if you go back and read it it doesn't actually specifically explain why Abraham is called a friend of God so we don't know quite exactly how James would have known that from Isaiah 41 itself but we could have a clue as to why James would know that and make a connection between those two and I think the best place to go to to explain this would be from John's gospel so in John chapter 15 Jesus is having a private intimate conversation with his own disciples so his disciples again already believers they don't need to be told how to be saved they're already his believers just as James was dealing with my brethren okay his brothers and his sisters so jesus is talking to his closest disciples and he goes on to say in verse 13 greater love has no man than this that a man lays life for his friends lays down his life you are my friends and there's a condition here if you do whatsoever I command you so by your works by obeying Jesus's commandments you are his friends so this doesn't say you are saved if you do this it doesn't say you will have eternal life if you do this but you are his friends if you do what he commands you henceforth I call you not servants for the servant knows not what his Lord does but I have called you friends for all things that I have heard of my father I have made known on to you so from this point forward Jesus is not calling them his servants only he's now calling them his friends this is his closest disciples they've stuck with him all the way up until this point they've been following him around they've been listening to his teachings he's sent them out to do this that and the other he's now calling them his friends so he's elevating their status from being mere servants and then he goes on to say to them these these things I command you that you as my friends love one another so you your Jesus friends and you need to I want you to love one another as well don't just love me but love one another and again James talking about profiting a brother a sister okay so you see how this all ties in with your works you obeying Jesus commandments is what makes you a friend it's me being his friend and so Abraham's faith for his righteousness his works for his friendship okay so then why is Romans four five faith without works because it's believing for righteousness that's the justification of faith without works and likewise James also for righteousness quotes a verse that only deals with Abraham's faith but for friendship or fellowship that's works that's where the justification of works comes in okay so then what what why is that justification by faith plus works and that's justification by faith without works well it's because of the context of being justified by so in Romans four we're dealing with justification for righteousness before God in James chapter two we're dealing with justification for friendship with God and before the brethren that's the difference between those justification so you cannot use James to prove that you need works to be safe because you might as well just say that the gospel sorry that the the bible contradicts itself if you're going to say that now back in his faith alone interview with this guy he they were trying to refute this difference between justification before God in Romans four and justification before man in James chapter two because he's heard that before I'm you know I'm not introducing this as some new concept that he's not heard of so in the transcript that's what he points out about 12 minutes in that you know he hears this all the time that Abraham was justified in front of other people but he wasn't justified before God and then how he refutes that is by saying that when Abraham was sacrificing his son there wasn't anybody else there so then how is he justifying himself before other people if if nobody else was present that that's the argument that he's making again this is just where people put their own corner logic over and above what the bible actually says because Romans flat out tells you that Abraham couldn't glory before God so there's really only man left anyway and whether or not other people were present there we don't really know about that and and the fact of the matter is whether anybody else was present or not we know about that story that story is in the bible for all eternity that's eternally part of God's word and Genesis wasn't even written by Abraham it was written long after Abraham so one way or another we know about that story and that story in the bible has been used to influence millions of believers for for hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of years okay and so was was not Abraham our father well Abraham is the father of all that believe as Romans also explains what when Paul explains that so we can look at Abraham and we can look at his life and say yeah that was a faithful man he looked like somebody that was faithful now to play devil's advocate although i've attempted to defend one saved always saved let's pick a character in the bible that's sometimes one of the token sort of poster children for characters who lost their salvation well usually people think of Judas but i've already argued that Judas was already false but let's think of soul okay because soul is another character that's often used as a suggestion for somebody who lost their salvation right well we already saw scripture that refutes that because Samuel said you would be with me but but why would they pick soul well they picked soul because if we're justifying his faith by his works soul lived the life of what looks like a very unfaithful person and so he's like that person that James talks about in chapter one where he sees himself in the mirror but then looks away and immediately forgets what he looks like forgets that he looks like the king of god's chosen nation because he is just acting and behaving like all the pagans out there consulting a witch okay so there's a perfect example is that we we look at soul and we think he was unfaithful because of how he lived his life we look at Abraham and think he is faithful he lived his life faithfully soul didn't but Abraham wasn't perfect though Abraham made mistakes Abraham told porcupines Abraham had more than one wife Abraham had concupines so this idea that bad people only do bad stuff and good people only do what the good stuff is not biblical and it's really that's about as much character depth as you'd see in a cartoon or you know a kid's book so you know it just shows that these people have about as much understanding as a children's book really you know there were bad people in the bible who did good stuff and there were good people in the bible who did bad stuff as well okay just to get a balancing view and just as the sort of let's let's put some icing on the cake for James chapter two so in verse 25 James is going to end this chapter saying likewise was not Rahab the harlot justified by works now was she justified by works from turning and being a harlot and turning from all of her sins because she was such a harlot that's not what james says James still calls her a harlot he could have just called a rahab and we still figure out who he was talking about but he still calls her a harlot and then explains how she was justified by works it wasn't from turning all of her sins and believing all of the commandments it was just that she received the messages and sent them another way and if you read the story of rahab in joshua chapter two it doesn't mention her faith it doesn't mention her belief it doesn't mention whether we whether she went to heaven or hell so what's james's point here well we would judge rahab as a good person obviously she was still a harlot but why do we judge her as someone who probably made it to heaven well because her works make it look like she did seem to receive the message that was given to her she acknowledged that the israelites were on the good side essentially by by doing these things and so that's how rahab was justified her story proves that she was probably a faithful person because she did this for the israelites so we would look at rahab as a good character despite the fact that she's still rahab the harlot and she's going to be remembered as rahab the harlot forever because that's how the bible records that's what we also know about her and there's there's no mention of a turning from being a harlot in this bit that james is talking about and if we have to turn from our sins as epi-uteo thinks you'd think that would be a pretty important detail for james to mention and so here we see then this context that the body without the spirit is dead and so faith without works is dead also well the body the body was once alive it wasn't forever dead it doesn't not exist it was once alive but it just becomes dead when the spirit departs from it but believers also have a future resurrection so the body is coming back and it will be a new body okay so yes faith without works is dead also it was once alive but it's not benefiting the brethren and so now it's died but that that doesn't change salvation where the person will be resurrected anyway okay and they will be faithful in their resurrected body and so you can say that well i don't like that i still think it's talking about salvation well well the problem is folks you know we've got the context that james gives us it's brethren to brethren related it's man to man related this is all we've got to go on okay we haven't got eternal life to go on here we haven't got righteousness to go on here we haven't got your right standing with god to talk about this justification it's not there this is what we've got so yes james too is justification before the brethren romans for is justification before god for righteousness so that's why salvation is by grace through faith without works but if i look at you and i think you look like the world you sound like the world you talk like the world you have the same opinions of the world well my natural inclination is to think that you're not saved because you look like the world but if you are of the world it's because of what you believe it's not because of what you do and that's the thing when people have these rotten works it's because of what they believe it's not because of it's not the works themselves the works are just reflecting what they already believe okay and so here's the thing folks is that you know these people with wicked works like right ravie zacherize why did he have the rotten fruit of sexual perversion well it was because he was a false believer who cares if he did so much work in christian apologetics god is not a respecter of persons he was never saved why did joseph smith write his own bible and make up his new own new testament because he was a false prophet with wicked beliefs and he was never saved why does kenneth copeland preach false doctrine and milk his flock for billions of dollars because he is a false prophet he has always been false and he was never saved he wasn't right one time in his life these people were never justified by faith for righteousness they're certainly not justified by works before the brethren and so wrapping this all up then that let's let's just look at justification by faith without works and faith with work so justified by faith without works well before god you are justified as in you have good reason for righteousness by faith because your works do not justify your righteousness why because all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of god that's that's Paul's entire premise in the in the first half of romans and so we see why as well when he wrote to the Ephesians he said that salvation is by grace through faith and not of works because for salvation we require righteousness well it's christ right righteousness imputed on to us therefore it's by faith not of works you cannot be justified for righteousness with works you cannot be saved with works okay works must be apart from salvation consider the fact that if it helps god god knows everything okay so god already knows whether you actually have faith on it you can't prove anything to gods you can't say well you're not proving your faith to god because your faith is not producing works god already knows whether i truly believe or not he already knows whether somebody has the faith he doesn't need anything to be proved okay whereas justification by faith with works well that's before the brethren because that's what james was dealing with your brethren what does it profit your brethren if a brother or a sister is naked don't show respect of persons with your faith to the brethren so before the brethren you are justified as in you have good reason for showing your genuine faith because your faith profits the brethren being alive okay and why well consider the fact that man cannot see your faith he can only justify you by your works i've probably not phrased that right rather you can only justify yourself before man with your works but you see someone can tell me well i am a bible-believing christian you know i believe god all that kind of thing but then me not knowing absolute with absolute certainty whether they really believe or not well you know if we as christians if we see a man who looks like the world sounds like the world has the same opinions of the world well obviously we we generally going to conclude that he is of the world okay that that because that's what he looks like so that's all we can that's all we've got to go on but the problem with his salvation does not stem from his works though okay his works are really only the symptom the root cause is that it's his faulty belief the faith is the problem and if someone has no works or evil works all that is it's just a reflection of their faith okay but it's still the faith itself that ultimately determines whether whether they are saved or not and so regardless of whether we think a christian's faith is justified by his works or not ultimately he either is or not justified before god for righteousness onto eternal life based on what he believes not on what he does so if you know like the bible says if any man's work be burned up he shall suffer loss but he himself shall be saved that's in first Corinthians but in that same book Paul deals with throwing people out of the church who calls himself a brother yet he's doing some of these wicked sins because he's supposed to be one of us but he's acting like one of them that okay that's that's why Paul says it throw out from among yourselves that wicked person give him over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh so that his spirit may be saved that's why also Paul says in Romans to him that works not but believes on him that justifies the ungodly his faith is countered for righteousness well we can say that if if salvation doesn't require any works you can't say that if salvation requires works to justify it and so I'm that's really all I'm going to say about James 2 now but in this interview they also talk about Martin Luther and how he couldn't answer James 2 so he wants to take it out of the bible and then people resisted all that kind of thing you've got the dispensationalist view where they just say it just applies to the Jews only but the thing is though folks we've answered James 2 now and we've never had to refer to Martin Luther we've never had to refer to John Calvin we've never once had to refer to what some random theologian in history said okay we haven't had to make up a fictional dispensation that doesn't exist to just say it applies to the Jews only we've answered it from the bible the bible stands up for itself and so they can straw man and say that you know I'm just following a doctrine that some man invented in the 1500s while I reject Martin Luther and I reject John Calvin anyway so what they believe doesn't really concern me we just went to the bible and we just let the bible answer for itself okay you know need I say anymore so that's James chapter 2 wrapped up I'm going to pick on something else next to to deal with