Of many Reformed Dogs and one Old School Cat(I put here a little amusing exchange that took place on a Facebook group recently)
A 'Reformed' theologian quoted Beza:
"Man, being freed from the bondage of sin, that is to say, from his natural corruption, begins, thanks to the power of Jesus Christ who dwells in Him, to produce the good fruits, which we call 'good works'. This is why we say, and with good reason, that the faith of which we speak can no more exist without good works than the sun without light or the fire without heat."
sing commented:
If Beza be correct in his conclusion that "the faith of which we speak can no more exist without good works than the sun without light or the fire without heat", THEN we must conclude that James was dealing with a mere hypothetical and imaginary problem that does not exist, as insisted by Beza.
However, we know that James was dealing with a real problem: he was dealing with a real people whom he addressed as brethren in the faith, but whose faith is fruitless, i.e without works. These brethren have faith, real faith; but their faith was fruitless, i.e. dead. These brethren have dead faith, i.e. their faith was fruitless.
It makes no sense to expect works from those without faith. So the brethren James dealt with are men with faith... but their faith was without works.
Given Beza's firm conclusion, he must necessary conclude that the brethren in James who are without works DO NOT HAVE faith, are not even brethren, but are faithless aliens.
So Beza was misguided in his notion. He did great injustice to James.
The 'Reformed' theologian replied:
You are coming to some false conclusions.
The clear expectation of the scripture is that those saved by God will experience an increasing abundance of good works in their lives. Beza was not misguided.
Beza is spot on, if you have not experienced an increase in your sanctification from the time prior to your regeneration, you need to do some introspection to see if you are indeed in the faith.
sing responded:
Whatever, I will choose James over Beza. Both can't be correct at the same time, since they are advocating diametrically opposite ideas. And both can't be wrong at the same time, since James is divinely inspired and must be inerrant.
(Do not confuse the clear expectation of Scriptures with the muddy reality of God's children that James was dealing with! Distinction is the essence of sound theology.
The 'Reformed' theologian denied:
Beza does not contradict James anymore than Paul does
sing demonstrated:
A mere denial is no more than a mere denial.
I will show you that Beza DID contradict James.
Beza said with great pathos and confidence, "This is why we say, and with good reason, that the faith of which we speak can no more exist without good works than the sun without light or the fire without heat."
He said that "faith can no more exist without good works" (o.k., he qualified that it is the kind of which he speaks, even the faith of believers).
Perhaps you may want to DENY that James was dealing with real brethren with real faith THAT REALLY EXISTED that were not manifesting good works. Beza with confidence dismissed that the brethren James dealt with CANNOT EXIST. Yet we read James dealing with such real and living BRETHREN!
One may disagree with James but one should not misrepresent the fact. And the fact is: there EXISTED brethren whose faith is not accompanied with good works. Beza declared that it is impossible for such creatures to EXIST! So, you decide whether Beza contradicted James or not.
The Reformers were not infallible. When they were wrong, there is no sin admitting or pointing out that they were wrong. There is no virtue defending the error of even the most venerable Reformers. We must not be blind followers.
The 'Reformed' theologian replied:
First, yes, there are indeed tares among the wheat. Even then.
Second, you are missing the point. James is dealing with the same type of people that Paul dealt with in Romans who claimed Paul was saying we are saved by faith, so do as we please. And the response is the same, No! Our faith is to produce the fruit of works, and without the evidence of those works our faith is considered dead. James :2:26, For as the body apart from the Spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.
James was encouraging them to produce works *because they have been saved. And Beza is saying, without the evidence of works, your faith is dead. Maybe not all the time, maybe not right away, but your faith will be evidenced by works, it is part of the Spirit working in you.
Dead faith is no faith at all.
(* emphasis added)
sing commented:
Your statement "dead faith is no faith at all" - is terribly unsound and erroneous! This statement is true ONLY if "dead body is no body at all" or "dead man is no man at all" are also true!
Dead faith is the faith of BRETHREN that is not accompanied with good works - that's how James use the term 'dead faith'. Let us stick to Scriptures. If you can't represent Scriptures correctly, then it is difficult to discuss theology conformed to Scriptures - though it may go by the name of "reformed theology"!
The 'Reformed' theologian replied:
James 2:19-20
You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the Demons believe and shudder. Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless?
Useless faith is just that useless, it does not save.
And with your tone in the last post, we are done.
(with this the 'reformed theologian' who moderated the FB group restricted my posting. So, I took liberty to post it here!)
sing replied:
That's a poor and deficient translation!
The Bible I study from has this translation: "19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead (nekros)?"
Now, your "dead faith is no faith at all" is most certainly quite different from James' 'faith without works is dead'. James did not give the slightest hint that dead faith is no faith at all. That is your own imagination!
Also, your 'faith apart from works is useless' and James' 'faith without works is dead' do convey vastly different meanings! A faith that is dead (without works) is real faith found in brethren that have been saved [you admitted as much, "James was encouraging them to produce works because they have been saved"]; it can be exhorted to become alive (i.e to have works).
It is something very useful to have to begin with. The dead faith in the brethren is something precious that James could work with! But you have dismissed this faith as USELESS! How misguided to dismiss the faith that the Holy Spirit have worked in those that have been saved!
A faith without work is still a real faith that is without work. A faith that is dead is still the faith of those that have been saved. And a vain man is a man still. I guess, according to your reformed understanding, you would say that a foolish person is no person at all
A faith that is dead, i.e. without works, is incomplete. Faith alone is insufficient to evidentially justify a person. A person with faith alone does not have enough evidence to convince others of his claim to being a believer in Jesus Christ.
"Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."
Evidential justification REQUIRES BOTH faith and works.
Experiential justification requires faith in Christ alone.
Distinction is the essense of sound theology!
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
