tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post4730358477770915362..comments2023-09-01T16:11:44.564+08:00Comments on Daniel's Place - (Reformata et semper reformanda): Misquoted verses: James 2:23-24 (Bonus!)Daniel Chttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00678184721218949112noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post-48341384316009331282009-05-23T13:31:24.735+08:002009-05-23T13:31:24.735+08:001) Utterly irrelevant. Tenses are to be interprete...1) Utterly irrelevant. Tenses are to be interpreted in context also. <br />2) That's what you have yet to prove. Fact is, James is talking to professing believers <br />3) It is not absurd, since we are talking about professing believers, who may or may not be true believers <br />4) Nope, you miss the entire context. You insist on reading your RC beliefs into the text - a practice called Daniel Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00678184721218949112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19775846.post-50448569317927797072009-05-23T13:30:29.045+08:002009-05-23T13:30:29.045+08:00Here are some issues I have with your exegesis:
...Here are some issues I have with your exegesis: <br /><br />(1) The term "save" is used in the future tense in v14. The context is soteriological, and the answer to his question in v14 must be as well. <br /><br />(2) James is talking to believers who turned to lives of sin (James 2:1, 6a). Thus good works are not guaranteed, nor is he talking to people with a "fake faith." <br /><br />(3) It's Nicknoreply@blogger.com