In the book AND THEN THE END SHALL COME, I spoke to this verse and others like it at some length. I used it yesterday in writing to Terry James. Why? — because the very souls of our brethren may depend on our pointing out the truth that they ignore. How can I say that with so much confidence? — read on and you will then need to judge.
My brethren, if any among you strays from the truth and one turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins. (James 5:19-20 NASB).
My brethren, If anyone among you — what does that imply? Brethren certainly must mean that they were once with the Apostles (the brethren) in the Truth, but have strayed from that truth. Today men from all brands of Christianity claim their own “truth”. On this one verse itself there are many views, the plain truth of the verse itself is lost in the many interpretations of it. And this straying exists for many reasons. One view cannot accept it because it contradicts “once saved always saved”.
So the question becomes: When Jesus stated that “no man can pluck you out of the Fathers hand”, did He by so stating mean that you cannot remove yourself? Did He in fact remove your free will from you for all time with that statement?
Jesus who made this statement also stated to His followers Abide in Me, and He placed a consequence on not abiding. Read it it’s not good. He stated to these same Jesus followers: “if you deny Me, I will deny you before My Father in Heaven”, do these statements sound like the removal of free will? He also said: “He who endures to the end shall be saved”.
Now it is true that there are those who would tell us that these things were not written to us in the Church, they were written to Israel. These followers of Jesus were still under the Old Covenant. They could still fall, but you cannot. Seems a good argument. But, why do they then point to Jesus statement: no man can pluck you out of My hand or the Fathers hand” as their proof for “once saved always saved”?
And if these things that Jesus stated under the Old Covenant are not for New Covenant Believers — why did Paul state to us? — Now these things happened to them (Old Covenant Believers) as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed that he does not fall.
1 Corinthians 10:11-12
Notice it is “him who thinks he stands” who Paul says needs to take heed. Why? — “that he does not fall”. So our conclusion must be that Jesus who stated these things could not have meant to take away our free will by His statement. Had He done so He would have contradicted His own Word, His own truth. Remember He is truth, the very word of God. So why did He leave this question open for debate rather then adding to “no man can pluck you from My hand” a simple (except you yourself)? Perhaps for the same reason I did not give you the Scriptures references for all of His above statements. You are to study to show yourself approved a workman who needeth not be ashamed. You have a choice you can believe everything that someone else tells you is truth, or you can dig out the Gold for yourself.
But let me also say this to you the reader, using verses like this to condem your brethren who stray to hell is not your proper response when dealing with them. We are to love our brethren; yes, we are to point out their straying from truth, but it is not my job or yours to condemn them to the losing of their soul. The word of God is the judge, and He does not command us to be the judge, in the above verse He calls on us to attempt to turn our brother back.
And thus I say to you — you be the judge Not of my salvation but of what I teach. Why do I say that? — because you are responsible to work out you own salvation in fear and trembling, not mine. Did you pay for your own salvation? Did you pay for mine? — what you do with what is given you is your responsibility. If you stray from the truth in so doing, you must pray to God that someone will help you find your way back. Straying from Truth is straying from Jesus Himself. Twisting truth is equivalent to creating a new Jesus, one which does not exist.
May God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit bless you in your study, and in your interactions with your fellow man.
That’s a good article Jerry.
Also, what happened with your correspondence with Ken Legg about making your book available free with one click?
LikeLiked by 1 person
And this topic of eternal security (or not) is a paradox to me. I can see scripture that supports both points of view. So since I can’t positively prove one to the exclusion of the other…I’ve gotten to where I don’t even want to go there publicly anymore brother.
I’ll just leave that to y’all who know more than I do. ☺
LikeLike
Lee, thanks, and onKen He has not gotten back. I’m sure he’s busy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lee when dealing with these tough questions I try to incorporate what we know about God. Eg. He is no respecter of persons – so how does that fit? For example Israel was a chosen nation, but were individual members exempt from falling? And if one falls what is the difference in the one who gets back up or reestablishes his dependence on God’s and one who does not? Digging further Saul Vs David is an interesting contrast. Humility vs pride. Faith in God Vs self. It is very possible that we are supposed to struggle with these questions as the struggle forces us more into the word. The fact that you are not just buying what I or someone else believes when you are not comfortable doing so I think is a good thing. We really need to get there on our own depending on the Teacher the Holy Spirit. We can help each other with these questions hopefully, but God is our ultimate Teacher. God bless as you study Lee.
LikeLiked by 1 person
God bless you too my friend ☺
LikeLike
James’s words here are reminiscent to similar instructions by Paul and Jude. They instructed spiritual believers to attempt to bring carnal believers back to the Lord (cf. Gal 6:1; Jude 23).
James emphasized the gravity of the matter by pointing out that the believer who turns a sinning saint back from the error of his way will save a soul from death. James is saying that this is a matter of life and death.
As a matter of fact, the Greek word psyche, here translated soul, has within its fields of meaning both life and person. For example, the Lord Jesus said, “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life [Gk psyche] a ransom for many” (Matt 20:28). Clearly Jesus Christ did not give up His eternal soul.
We could translate the clause in question, “he will save a life from death” or “he will save a person from death.”
Dr. Charles C. Ryrie writes, “The reference is evidently to Christians, and the death is physical death which sin may cause (1 Cor. 11:30)” (The Ryrie Study Bible, p 1863n). Others who hold this view include Warren Wiersbe, Be Mature, p. 173; Ronald Blue, James, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, NT Edition, p. 835; H. A. Ironside, Expository Notes on James and Peter, p. 63; Lehman Strauss, James, Your Brother, p. 226.
Of course, there are some who suggest that eternal salvation from hell is in view here. That suggestion, however, flies in the face of clear Gospel teaching all through the Bible. The sole condition of eternal salvation is faith in Christ, not moral reformation.
The wanderer who is brought back to the truth avoids premature death (cf. 1 Cor 11:30;1 John 5:16-17). He is also blessed to have his many sins covered, that is, forgiven in a fellowship sense (cf. 1 John 1:9).
James’s reference to “soul salvation” in James 5:19-20 refers to deliverance of erring Christians from premature physical death.
We can not only be soul winners by leading unbelievers to Christ. We can also be soul winners, so to speak, if we lead fellow Christians back to the Lord.
The very Grace of God by which we are saved eternally opens the door for the possibility that we might abuse the wonderful gift given to us. If this happens the wandering saint will be disciplined by the Lord, possibly even taken home early by Him. That is why it is vital that if any of us spots a fellow believer who is AWOL we should endeavor to turn them back to the Lord. A life is at stake.
LikeLike
Thanks Mariah, you obviously are in agreement with the Calvinist camp. This verse can also be translated and is by Armenians to correspond to other Scriptural statements eg. “abide in me” and if you deny me I will deny you. The point however is not one to be argued if we want the answer, it will come through our teacher the Holy Spirit, and through the Spirit lead study of scripture. But I do consider this fact to be indisputable truth — two opposing truths cannot exist as the truth. Jesus is The Truth. To leave truth for error as I said Has as its end denying truth and creating another Truth as in (Jesus). Just saying. By the way I want you to see that I accept posts that are opposed to my own understanding of truth otherwise how can any of us as brothers help others who may have strayed from the truth. Thanks brother for your comment.
LikeLike
Thank you for posting my comment. However, I take issue with your labeling of me as a “Calvinist.” My theological perspective is actually dispensational. This theology is the only model that makes sense to me when one takes the Bible in the literal sense as it relates to hermeneutics.
The literal interpretation gives each word the meaning it would commonly have in everyday usage. Allowances are made for symbols, figures of speech, and types, of course. It is understood that even symbols and figurative sayings have literal meanings behind them. So, for example, when the Bible speaks of “a thousand years” in Revelation 20, dispensationalists interpret it as a literal period of 1,000 years (the dispensation of the Kingdom), since there is no compelling reason to interpret it otherwise.
There are at least two reasons why literalism is the best way to view Scripture. First, philosophically, the purpose of language itself requires that we interpret words literally. Language was given by God for the purpose of being able to communicate. Words are vessels of meaning. The second reason is biblical. Every prophecy about Jesus Christ in the Old Testament was fulfilled literally. Jesus’ birth, ministry, death, and resurrection all occurred exactly as the Old Testament predicted. The prophecies were literal. There is no non-literal fulfillment of messianic prophecies in the New Testament. This argues strongly for the literal method. If a literal interpretation is not used in studying the Scriptures, there is no objective standard by which to understand the Bible. Each person would be able to interpret the Bible as he saw fit. Biblical interpretation would devolve into “what this passage says to me” instead of “the Bible says.” Sadly, this is already the case in much of what is called Bible study today.
Dispensational theology teaches that there are two distinct peoples of God: Israel and the Church. Dispensationalists believe that salvation has always been by grace through faith alone—in God in the Old Testament and specifically in God the Son in the New Testament. Dispensationalists hold that the Church has not replaced Israel in God’s program and that the Old Testament promises to Israel have not been transferred to the Church. Dispensationalism teaches that the promises God made to Israel in the Old Testament (for land, many descendants, and blessings) will be ultimately fulfilled in the 1000-year period spoken of in Revelation 20. Dispensationalists believe that, just as God is in this age focusing His attention on the Church, He will again in the future focus His attention on Israel (see Romans 9–11 and Daniel 9:24).
Dispensationalists understand the Bible to be organized into seven dispensations: Innocence (Genesis 1:1—3:7), Conscience (Genesis 3:8—8:22), Human Government (Genesis 9:1—11:32), Promise (Genesis 12:1—Exodus 19:25), Law (Exodus 20:1—Acts 2:4), Grace (Acts 2:4—Revelation 20:3), and the Millennial Kingdom (Revelation 20:4–6). Again, these dispensations are not paths to salvation, but manners in which God relates to man. Each dispensation includes a recognizable pattern of how God worked with people living in the dispensation. That pattern is 1) a responsibility, 2) a failure, 3) a judgment, and 4) grace to move on.
Dispensationalism, as a system, results in a premillennial interpretation of Christ’s second coming and usually a pretribulational interpretation of the rapture. To summarize, dispensationalism is a theological system that emphasizes the literal interpretation of Bible prophecy, recognizes a distinction between Israel and the Church, and organizes the Bible into different dispensations or administrations.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like your response because it is exactly what I was before I determined that Dispensationalist could not be supported by the whole cloth of literal scripture. For example you point out the seven church age theory, yet I’m sure that you as a Dispensationalist also believe that the Apostles as well as the early church believed in and taught the imminent return of the Lord. You probably also believe what most dispensationalists teach on the Pre-Trib Rapture which allows for the return of the Lord at any moment and therefore needs no further fulfillment of prophetic Scriptures. So the church could have been Raptured 1700 or 1800 years ago before most of your theoretic church ages ever came about thus making what most pre-Trib scholars teach a total contradiction.
And why do they teach the seven church age theory, because without it they cannot claim that the message to the Philadelphia church to escape the hour that is coming for the whole earth is for the entire Endtime church. This hour which Dispensationalist interpret to be the entire seven year Tribulation.
And your literal interpretation also ignores the timing of Orge wrath which we are promised to escape but which is not poured out until the Lord returns post-Tribulational. I could go on with the contradictions to the literal scriptures committed by the Dispensationalist, but I will end with this one last example.
Dispensationalists often argue that there will be no one to rapture at the end of The a Tribulation because the Antichrist will be given power to kill anyone who does not receive the mark of the beast and who does not worship him, yet at the same time they say that it will be the saved who did not receive this mark and worship the beast who they will rule over in the coming Kingdom
So what am I a literalist who is premillennial and post-Trib. I believe that dispensational Theology was introduced in the early 1800 by John Nelson Darby as a twist to what Darby did not understand from Paul’s writings, and as Peter says concerning them they are difficult to understand and can’t be understood without unbiased study and many twist them to their own destruction.
LikeLike
Mariah, I’m posting this not only for you but for anyone else who might visit this in the future. But, The Greek word psyche is translated 58 times as soul, which is used more than any other definition. Second to it is life which you pointed out and is used 40 times. Soul is the translation in James 5:20 not life as you suggest. If one looks up the meaning for soul listed under Psuche, central to its meaning is the eternal nature as opposed to the body dissolved by death. I realize that your argument needs to be considered, however how many brethren do you know who have strayed from any of God’s truths and had their lives cut short for so doing. I can think of many who don’t teach the truth today and who lead millions astray but who are living to ripe old ages. Those teaching once saved always saved would seem to be some of those based on this verse and the other verses I mentioned in this article. But I am not the judge I just believe the scriptures as they fit together without contradicting one another.
LikeLike