Christian VS Protestant: Why is @MikeWinger ADDING so much to the Bible?

[Music] Please hit me with your best shot, your most rational, reasonable challenge. And calling me names doesn't count. That just, that's the big baby head thing. I'm looking over there. There's my big baby head on the wall, just a reminder. Don't be the baby. Don't be the baby. Don't be the baby. Don't be the baby.

Mr. Winger, if you happen to see this video, we would like to help you out. You seem like a well-intentioned guy. You seem like you actually want to teach Christianity correctly, and I don't think that you're intentionally teaching things falsely. As reddish brown horse puts it, Mike Winger seems very genuine and fairly knowledgeable, but obviously misinformed on a great deal. We watched Mike's whole video. We watched a bunch of Mike's videos. Mike, you don't seem to understand what the Catholic Christian Church actually teaches, and you do seem to have your own interpretation of the Bible. And sometimes your interpretation just doesn't even make logical sense. And sometimes your interpretation just doesn't even make logical sense.

Some of you guys might know this, there's a Catholic gentleman who made a video, uh, trying to refute my teaching on Galatians 1, this exact passage. Um, I'm not really responding to that. Uh, he was, his, he just distorted my, my perspective. I would spend my whole time saying, "That's not what I said. That's not what I said. That's not what I meant." And he was snarky and rude and mocking and and arrogant. Mike Winger, again, seems like a really nice guy. He seems like a dedicated Christian. He was snarky and rude and mocking and and arrogant and a bunch of other things that I just don't like responding to. So I'm, I'm not interested in all that. Just a reminder, don't be the baby. Don't be the baby.

So I don't have a Catholic to debate here today. Although I would be open to doing that if somebody wants to volunteer who's, who's a rational, reasonable person, not just an internet cook. I'm just being real here. I don't want to debate a cook. Don't be the baby. Let me explain to you what we're doing today. Um, this is the topic of whether or not Christians are saved by faith alone, specifically what the Bible teaches in regards to James chapter 2. You've got to hear this, and you've got to get it solid in your life. Um, there's a reason why James 2 is in the Bible, and even though it made Luther mad, it's, it's good that it's there, and we need to understand it carefully. And I'll say this, when I, when I first heard James 2, especially, uh, dialoguing with Catholics, I was like, "Oh yeah, you know, I don't really know how to refute that." But when I sat down and I studied the passage in context, it was like the light went on.

All right, so that was Mike Winger. He is a Protestant. And he says that when he first heard James 2, he was like, "I don't really know how to refute that." But then he claims to have sat down and studied the passage in context, and it was like a light went on. Now, I watched this video here from Mike, and which he does what he's referring to as studying the passage in context, and I don't actually think that he's studying the passage in context. But that's fine. Because Mike also said this: "Please hit me with your best shot, your most rational, reasonable challenge." And calling me names doesn't count. Cool. So we here at Hadb Christian have no interest in calling people names. I'm offering a rational, reasonable challenge to Mike. I'm a Bible-believing Christian, and our Protestant for today is Mr. Mike Winger of Bible Thinker. This is Christian versus Protestant on James chapter 2.

So before we get to James chapter 2, it's best to understand why we're going to see Mike do what he does to James chapter 2. Because this is what James chapter 2 looks like on the Christian side, and this is what it looks like on the Protestant side when Mike Winger is done with it. In order to understand how Mike goes from this to this, let's start in Galatians. Paul writes, "I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. For the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other to keep you from doing the things you want to do. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law."

Now, the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such things there is no law. And those, those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.

So Paul wants them to walk by the Spirit. He says, "If we live by the Spirit, let us also keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another." So there's works that Paul wants them to do, and there's also works that Paul does not want them to do. Now, Paul uses a label here that covers certain types of works. He talks about works of the flesh. So there's an overall category of works. That category covers all works. Anything that one can do is a work. But Paul specifically talks about a subcategory of works: works of the flesh. The works of the flesh are evident. It's these things and things like these. And Paul warns the Galatians, as he warned them before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. So these kind of works, you do not want to do.

But notice, there are works here that Paul wants the people to do. He says, "Walk by the Spirit. Keep in step with the Spirit." Now, we're going to call this category good works or works of love. And the reason why we're calling it that is because Paul says, "Be watchful, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong. Let all that you do be done in love." So we've got some more works here that Paul is telling people to do. And he says, "Let all that you do be done in love." So, yeah, the works that Paul wants you to do are works of love. We'll see that Paul also refers to these as good works. But love is the key. Paul even says, "If I have all faith so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body to be burnt, but have not love, I gain nothing." So if he has all faith but not love, he's nothing. And if he does these works but has not love, he gains nothing. Love is the key. Paul even says that of faith, hope, and love, the greatest of these is love. And Paul even tells the Galatians that, "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love."

So in Christian versus Protestant, the Christian side is represented by the Bible. So the Christian side can say, "In Christ Jesus, the only thing that counts for anything is faith working through love." Now, if Mike Winger agrees with this, then that's great. That means he's chosen the Christian side for this part of the argument. He's going with the word of God as opposed to the word of man. But is this what Mike is saying? Let's find out. "I can be fully assured that I can say I'm saved by faith alone apart from works." That's definitely biblical teaching. That is definitely not biblical teaching. That is the word of man.

All right, so Mike's first problem is he's adding the word "alone" to Ephesians chapter 2. Just like it says in Ephesians chapter 2, "faith alone." We believe that we're saved, justified by faith alone apart from works. All right, so the word "alone" is not really there. There is absolutely nothing in the Bible that says we are saved by faith alone. Paul talks about having all faith but not love, and he says if that happens, I'm nothing. So there's Paul, who has letters that are in the Bible, and there's Mike, who has YouTube videos. And they're both talking about having faith but not love. Now, Paul is being less restrictive than Mike because Paul is talking about having faith but not love, which doesn't mean the faith is alone. It just means it doesn't have love. Mike, on the other hand, is talking about faith alone. So not only does it not have love, it also doesn't have hope, mercy, works of any kind. It's alone. But that being said, they are both talking about having faith but not love.

Now, according to Paul, whose letter is in the Bible, this means "I am nothing." But according to Mike Winger, who has a YouTube channel, this means "I am saved." So they're both talking about having faith but not love, but one looks at that and says, "I am nothing." The other looks at that and says, "I am saved." Mr. Winger preaches faith alone, and Paul preaches faith working through love. And Paul also tells the Galatians, "Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. For if anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. But let each one test his own work, and then his reason to boast will be in himself alone and not in his neighbor. For each will have to bear his own load. Let the one who has taught the word share all good things with the one who teaches. Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap. For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap if we do not give up. So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith."

So, yeah, these good works here, Paul clearly wants people to do good works. He says, "Let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap if we do not give up." He says, "The one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life." So in the category of works, we have the subcategory of good works, which you should do. And we have the subcategory of works of the flesh, which you should not do. They came with a warning, not just once, but at least twice. But what other subcategories of works are there? Let's go to Ephesians 2.

Paul tells the Ephesians, "You were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ by grace you have been saved and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace, and kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

So we've got some more works here. Who is it that makes people alive together with Christ? God does. That's God's work. Who saves people? God does. So we're going to come back to this list in a few minutes. But right now, let's talk about Ephesians chapter 2. In verses 1-9, Paul is talking about the first time that the Ephesians were saved. This is what Christians believe, and Protestants also believe this. Now, the difference is, some Protestants would say this is the only time they were saved. So still the first time, but also the only time, because they don't need to be saved anymore. Now, there is nothing in the Bible that actually says that. So the most you can say is that this was the first time the Ephesians were saved. If you go to the passage, you can clearly see that Paul is talking about an event that took place in the past. He's saying they were dead in their trespasses, but God made them alive together with Christ. By grace, they have been saved. So all of this is in the past tense. It has already happened, and Paul is talking about it. He says, "By grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing." So this, this thing that happened in the past, them being saved by grace through faith, this is not their own doing. That first time they were saved, that was not their own doing. It is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Now, notice it says, "this is not your own doing." It does not say, "this is not your own doing, and neither is anything else that will be related to your salvation in the future." But this is what Mike Winger and a lot of Protestants are adding to this passage. That's how they come to this faulty conclusion that this is the first and only time that the Ephesians were saved. Because while Paul is talking about being saved by grace through faith and saying this is not your own doing, Protestants like Mike Winger are saying, "Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's all true. And also, nothing else related to your salvation is your own doing." That's clearly not what the Bible says. So this is the word of God, and this is the word of man. What Paul says in Ephesians chapter 2 leaves open the possibility that something about our salvation could be our own doing. Protestants like Mike try to close down that possibility using the word of men. But according to what's actually in the word of God, something about your salvation could be your own doing. But that first time, that initial saving, that's not your own doing. That is a gift.

Now, I'm going to guess that all of you have received a gift before. Usually, the bow is not so disproportionate to the box, but you've gotten gifts, right? Well, just like God's gift to the Ephesians was not their own doing and it was not a result of works, my producer's gift to me, this tiny box with a big bow, was not my own doing and it was not a result of works. Now, when you get a gift, you can either hold fast to it, you can maintain possession of it, or you can reject it. Was that glass? You knew what I had to do. Why did you put glass in that, anyway? My, my producer gave me a gift, and it was not my own doing. It was not a result of works. But holding fast to the gift, rejecting the gift, those things can still be my own doing. Likewise, God gives people a gift, and it's not their own doing, not a result of works. But holding fast to the gift or rejecting the gift can still be their own doing. The Bible never closes off this possibility. Certain Protestants will add the word of man to the text to try to close it off, but the Bible doesn't actually close it off.

And if you go to Paul's letter to the Philippians, he even says, "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." He says, "Do all things without grumbling or disputing, holding fast to the word of life." And he tells the Corinthians, "I remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you, unless you believed in vain." So when he talks about the first time the Ephesians were saved, he says that's a gift. But then he's talking to the Corinthians and he says, "You are being saved if you hold fast to the word." So that first time, not your own doing. But after you get that gift, remember, you are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, which you should walk in. And why is it that they should walk in those good works? Because now that they've been saved, they are being saved if they hold fast to the word. Holding fast to the word is yet another good work.

As Paul says, "The one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life." God will render to each one according to his works. To those who by patience and well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury, there will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek. But glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality. So first, God saves people, and that is not their own doing. But after that initial saving, certain things can be the person's own doing. Paul says, "God will render to each one according to his works." If you do good, if you obey the truth, God will give eternal life. If you do evil, if you obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury, there will be tribulation and distress. So being saved is a process, and it starts with God. The first time that you are saved, it is because of God's great love. It is by God's works. God makes people alive together with Christ. It is by God's grace. It is through faith, and it is not our own doing. So our works don't cause this to happen. Happen, but God's works do.

[Music] Now, notice here that even the first time you're saved, when it's not your own doing, it's still faith in works and love and mercy and God. So it's not faith alone. It's never faith alone. If all you've got is faith alone, then according to Paul, you are nothing. But yeah, that's step one. That is how the process starts. And then step two is where our works play a role. We're being saved if we do this work of holding fast to the word. God will render to each one according to his works. If you do good things, you get good things. If you do bad things, you get bad things. It's a pretty straightforward and reasonable process. And even Jesus says, "The one who endures to the end will be saved." He tells his disciples, "You will be hated by all nations for my name's sake, and then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another, and many false prophets will arise and lead many astray." For instance, Mike Winger here has arisen, and he's leading many astray. Jesus continues and says, "And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold." Remember, love is what we need. Faith working through love. So Jesus says, "Because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come." So, yeah, this is the biblical teaching on being saved. The one who endures to the end will be saved.

But currently, Mike Winger does not believe in all of this. He does, however, believe in some of it. So step one, Mike's cool with that. It's the second step that Mike doesn't believe in. Mike believes that you're saved, and that's not your own doing, and then nothing else involving your salvation can be your own doing. Mike is aware that Paul said this, and Mike even agrees that it says exactly what it sounds like it says. But Mike says that doesn't apply to me. Let's, let's look at it, and we'll see what it's really saying. "We render to each one according to his deeds: eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath." It looks like it's saying if you're good enough, you'll get immortality, you'll get heaven, and if you're not, you won't. Now, let me say this, that is what it's saying. This is talking about the judgment a person goes through who does not have Jesus. If you do not have Jesus, you have a works-based judgment. You get tested on how good you are. Meaning, everybody who dies apart from Christ will be judged by one standard: are you good enough? This is not describing the type of judgment a Christian goes through when they die. When a believer stands before God, they do not go through the judgment mentioned in verses 6 through 11.

So, yeah, Paul says, "God will render to each one according to his works." And Mike says, "No, Paul, God will render to each one who has not been justified by faith alone, according to his works." So on the Protestant side, here's what we say: we say *sola fide*, faith alone. We believe that we're saved, justified by faith alone apart from works. I am free from the future wrath of God because I've been justified. The Bible says, "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life. Whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him." So we should be obeying the Son. We should obey the truth and do good. Because if we obey unrighteousness and we do evil, there will be wrath and fury. Mike Winger is saying, "Hey, that's not for us, guys. That's for somebody else." But the Bible clearly says, "Whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him." And Jesus even told his disciples to make disciples, baptizing them and teaching them to observe all that he commanded them. What Jesus commanded them to do was to love one another. He says, "You are my friends if you do what I command you." He commanded them to abide in him, abide in his love. And he says, "If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love." See, the Bible says if you don't obey the Son, the wrath of God remains on you. But Mike Winger is saying, "If you're justified by faith alone, then you are free from the future wrath of God."

Faith equals salvation plus works. Ah, if I'm really saved, works will come. How do I prove that, that, that real faith is there? Well, are there real works here? Because it will result in works. Works are a result, they're not the cause, they're the effect. It says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." So I'm saved by grace apart from works, but that results in works. The Bible does not say that. If you get rid of Mike's stuff and you just go by what's in the Bible, you can learn that Paul tells them they were saved by grace through faith. That was not their own doing. That was a gift. And then after they got the gift, he's telling them, "Hey, you should walk in good works." And if you keep on reading his letter, he even explains why. He says, "Be imitators of God as beloved children, and walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and a sacrifice to God. But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be Thanksgiving. For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous, that is an idolater, has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not become partners with them. For at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light, for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true. And try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them."

So, yeah, what Mike Winger is teaching just doesn't work. Paul isn't saying that you're saved by grace apart from works, but that results in works. He's saying you were saved by grace. Now you should do some work. And here's why you should do it. It's the same thing he told the Romans: if you do bad stuff, bad stuff will happen. Paul tells the Ephesians, "Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, making the best use of the time, because the days are evil. Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. Don't do this. Be this. Do this. Do this. Do this. And do this."

Faith equals salvation plus works. Ah, if I'm really saved, works will come. How do I prove that, that, that real faith is there? Well, are there real works here? Because it will result in works. Well, if that's true, then why is Paul telling the saved people that they should walk in good works? Shouldn't he say, "Hey, you've got faith, so now you're going to walk in the good works"? That's what Mike is saying. So why doesn't Paul say that? The answer is because Mike made this up. Paul is writing his letter to the saints who are in Ephesus and are faithful in Christ Jesus. He says, "I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus." So Paul believes he's writing to people with faith. So why does he never say, "Your faith will result in works"? Why does he say, "You should walk in them"? Why is he telling the people with faith to do works, specifically good works? Well, it's because God will render to each one according to his works.

Now let's get back to works. We've talked about a few different groupings here, but there's one more to talk about in today's video, and that is works of the law. In Galatians, Paul writes, "We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners. Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law, but through faith in Jesus Christ. So we have also believed in Christ Jesus in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified." So a person is not justified by works of the law. By works of the law, no one will be justified.

In Romans, Paul writes something similar. "What becomes of our boasting? Is it excluded? By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law." So again, we're saying that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. But what the heck are works of the law?

Well, you may have noticed here that Paul was talking about circumcision. In fact, we already saw that Paul was mentioning this topic. He said, "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love." Well, if you go to the start of that passage, it says, "I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. You are severed from Christ, you who will be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. You were running well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion is not from him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump. I have confidence in the Lord that you will take no other view, and the one who is troubling you will bear the penalty, whoever he is. But if I, brothers, still preach circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case, the offense of the cross has been removed. I wish those who unsettle you would emasculate themselves."

So Paul tells the Galatians, "You were running well." But he wants to know, "Who hindered you from obeying the truth?" So something is going on here, and it has something to do with circumcision. Well, if you go to the book of Acts, you can read that some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, "Unless you were circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders about this question. So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria. I'm pretty sure I messed up the first one, so I figured why not just mess up the second one too. They passed through those places, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles and bringing great joy to all the brothers. When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God had done with them. But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses."

So this is what Paul was dealing with back then. So once you know that, you can go back to these circumcision things, these "not being justified by works of the law" things, and be like, "Oh, he's addressing these people. The people who are saying, 'Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.'" Now, if you read the full chapter, you can read that there had been much debate. Peter talked, Paul and Barnabas talked, James talked. And then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders with the whole church to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent these guys with the following letter: "Greetings. Since we have heard that some persons have gone out from us and troubled you with words unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, it has seemed good to us, having come to one accord, to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas. Silas, these guys who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these things, you will do well. Farewell."

So notice what was not in the list of requirements here: circumcision. The church did not give instructions for this. Circumcision stuff. There was some confusion, there was a debate, and it was settled. They came to one accord. So as Paul was saying, "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love." Now, circumcision is the topic a lot when Paul is talking about the works of the law. But if you go to Galatians, when Paul says, "A person is not justified by works of the law," that was actually in response to certain eating rituals. So, Peter, Peter came to Antioch, and Paul opposed him to his face because Peter stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles. But when they came, he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when Paul saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, he said to Peter before them all, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?" "We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners. Yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law, but through faith in Jesus Christ. By works of the law no one will be justified."

So this is very important to remember. There are works, and there are different categories of works. Some of them were warned not to do. Some of them don't justify. But there's still other types of works. Mike Winger doesn't seem to realize that. We believe that we're saved, justified by faith alone apart from works, not of works. "I can be fully assured that I can say I'm saved by faith alone apart from works." That's definitely biblical teaching. Mike, it's faith apart from works of the law. One is justified by faith. That's the Christian teaching. That's what's taught in the Bible. Mike Winger agrees with that teaching, but then he adds stuff to it. None of these verses say "faith alone." There's only one time when the Bible uses the phrase "faith alone," and it's in James chapter 2, to say that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Now, what kind of works are being talked about here? Well, we know it's not works of the law, because a person is not justified by works of the law. And we can rule out works of the flesh, because again, we're not supposed to do those. Let's see here. Paul says, "Let all that you do be done in love." And looking at the works that are being talked about in this passage, we've got James talking about giving clothes and food to those in need, obeying God's commands, helping to keep people safe. These are all works of love. So as Paul taught, "In Christ Jesus, the only thing that counts for anything is faith working through love." If you go at the Christian side, and you're not adding the word "alone" where it doesn't belong, this makes perfect sense. One is justified by faith, but it's not faith alone that justifies. Paul talks about having all faith and how without love he's nothing. So one is justified by faith, but not, not by faith alone. A person is justified by works and not by faith alone, but not just any type of work. A person is not justified by works of the law. What they need is faith working through love. So the works that justify are works of love. See, on the Christian side, this is super easy. But on this side, since Mike has added the word of man to the word of God, he's got the word of God saying, "A person is justified by works and not by faith alone," but the word of man saying, "A person is justified by faith alone." And Protestants like Mike have no idea what to do with this verse. As Mike said, when he first heard James 2, he was like, "I don't really know how to refute that." "When I first heard James 2, especially, uh, dialoguing with Catholics, I was like, 'Oh yeah, you know, I don't really know how to refute that.'" Mike, you don't need to refute it. Just accept them all. Pay attention to the fact that they're talking about different works, and then you're good.

As Paul said, "The one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life." God will render to each one according to his works. To those who by patience and well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, "so if they do this work instead of this work, there will be wrath and fury, there will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek. But glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality." See, at this point, Mike should be able to see, "Yeah, that makes sense. Let's do that. I should have paid attention to the different groupings." But yeah, let's go with the Christian side. But since Mike does offer the Protestant side, we're going to run through James 2 and see what he has to say.

So James writes, "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, 'Go in peace, be warmed and filled,' without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, 'You have faith, and I have works.' Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 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? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works. And the Scripture was fulfilled that says, 'Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness,' and he was called a friend of God. You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead."

All right, so now we're going to listen to Mike's take on this passage. Now, as I said before, I think he's a well-intentioned guy. I think he actually does want to teach Christianity correctly, and I would just like to help him. I think he's wandering from the truth, and I want to see him be brought back. So let's do this. The passage starts off by saying, "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?" And here's Mike's response: "But what the person does is he says, 'I have faith.' It doesn't actually say he has faith. It says he says he has faith. That's an interesting differentiation, isn't it?" So that's a good point. If you look at this part of the verse, it doesn't actually say that he has faith. It says, "if someone says he has faith." So in this part of the verse, we don't know whether or not the guy has faith. Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't. But if you go to the next sentence, James clears it up for us really quick. He says, "Can that faith save him?" So here, James is saying what the guy says, and now James is verifying that the guy does have faith, and he wants to know, "Can that faith, that faith that does not have works, save him?" That's the question. That's what the Christians believe. But what does Mike believe? "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? Can the faith that he, where you, where you go, 'Well, I claim to believe,' but you're like, 'not believing'?" Um, can that faith save?

All right, so the Bible says, "Can that faith save him?" And Mike Winger is saying, "Can the faith where you, where you go, 'Well, I claim to believe,' but you're like, 'not believing'?" Can that faith save? So Mike just decides on his own that this guy does not believe. Now, according to the Bible, the guy says he has faith. So that could be a person who's telling the truth and they actually do have faith, or it could be a person who's not telling the truth and they don't actually have faith. Now, James verifies that the guy does have faith. But Mike Winger says, "No, that guy doesn't have faith. He's just saying he does." And James isn't really asking, "Can that faith save him?" He's asking, "Can that claim that he has faith save him?" That's the question. Claimed faith without obedience. Mike, you said you were looking for rational, reasonable challenges to your position. So how about this? How about we take this verse, but instead of talking about faith, we talk about a remote. Instead of talking about works, we talk about batteries. And instead of talking about being saved, we talk about turning on a TV. If I said, "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has a remote but does not have batteries? Can that remote turn on his TV?" What is it that you think that means, Mike? Do you think we're asking, "Can that claim of possession of a remote without actually having a remote turn on his TV?" I'm going to guess no, that you don't actually think it means that, because nobody in their right mind would think it means that. They would say, "The guy's saying he has a remote and no batteries. So the question is, if that's the case, if he has that remote with no batteries, can that remote turn on his TV?" The only reason Mike is doing this is because he did this. And if he got rid of this, then he wouldn't have to do this. He could just accept the passage as it is.

Now, back to James. He says, "If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, 'Go in peace, be warmed and filled,' without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." Now, I don't know about you, but to me, this sounds a lot like what Paul wrote: "In Christ Jesus, the only thing that counts for anything is faith working through love." Paul says, "Let all you do be done in love." And he talked about having all faith, faith and not love, and he was nothing. This all fits perfectly with what James is saying: "Faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." But let's go to Mike again. "So what kind of faith do you have? That's the question. Do you have this faith that saves or that faith that doesn't?"

So Mr. Winger keeps saying, "That's the question." But he's not actually telling us the question. What he's doing here would be like reading this and saying, "So what kind of remote do you have? That's the question." "So what kind of faith do you have? That's the question. Do you have this faith that saves or that faith that doesn't? Do you have this remote that turns on your TV or that remote that doesn't?" What Mike is doing here is he's trying to create two different kinds of faith. Now, we're going to listen to more about that in a minute. But this passage right here, in no way, indicates that there are two different types of faith. James is just saying, "Faith, faith, faith, faith, faith, faith, faith, faith, faith, faith." James talks about faith in two different situations: one situation is faith without works, and the other situation is faith with works. In the situation where faith is without works, it can be called dead. And in the situation where faith is along with works, it can be said that the faith is completed or perfected. But Mike doesn't like this idea. Mike wants there to be two separate faiths: a dead faith and a living faith. Let's listen. "Faith apart from works is dead. The issue here isn't you..."

have to have this thing called faith. And if you have faith without works, you're lost, or faith with works, you're saved? No, no, no. He's describing two different kinds of faith. Faith that's alive, faith that's dead. And how does one tell which faith you have? Well, faith with works, that must be the faith that's alive. Faith without the works, that's faith that's dead.

So, Mike does not believe that you can have a faith that can either be living or dead. Mike thinks that they are two separate things. Faith equals salvation plus works. Ah, if I'm really saved, works will come. How do I prove that, that, that real faith is there? Well, are there real works here? Because it will result in works. Works don't take dead faith and turn it into living faith. You still need to get living faith. Works are a result, they're not the cause, they're the effect. So I'm saved by grace apart from works, but that results in works.

All right, so according to Mike, there is living faith and there is dead faith. And works don't take dead faith and turn it into living faith. You still need to get living faith. Where do you get it? Walmart? JC Penney? Sears? I don't know. But according to Mike, works don't take dead faith and turn it into living faith. So you have two types of faith, and works can't turn this one into a living faith. Works are the result of a living faith. They are not the cause of the faith becoming alive. They're the effect. So you either get a dead faith that has no works, or you get a living faith which results in works.

Now, again, this is Mike Winger's belief. None of this is actually taught in James chapter 2. Real saving faith is living faith, and it results in works. Works are a result, they're not the cause, they're the effect. So James writes, "Faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." But Mike Winger has to look at this verse and say, "If, what are you talking about, James? There's no 'if.' A dead faith does not result in works, and it also cannot turn into a living faith with works." Mike is also saying that works are the effect of a living faith. He says a real saving faith is living faith, and it results in works.

So when James talks about Abraham offering up his son Isaac on the altar, James says, "You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works." See, if Mike were correct about all this, then he would have to look at these verses and say, "Okay, so the faith was completed by his works. But remember, those works are a result of the faith, and it's a living faith. It's not a dead one, because there's works." But seeing as this faith is being completed by the works, I guess I have to say that these works were a result of an incomplete, though living, faith. See what James is saying is, "You see that his incomplete, though living, faith was resulting in works and was active along with his works, and his incomplete, though living, faith was completed by his works."

And here's another thing James said: "As the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead." So, Mr. Ringer, I've got a question for you. When James says, "The body apart from the spirit is dead," do you think that James is talking about two different kinds of bodies? A dead body and a living body, where the dead body doesn't have a spirit, but the living body does? Where the spirit cannot take a dead body and turn it into a living body? So you still need to get a living body. Do you think this is what James is talking about? Or do you think he's talking about the body in two different situations, one of those situations being apart from the spirit, in which case it could be called dead?

I don't think Mike's going to try to say there's two different types of bodies. I think he's going to say there's the body, and there can be different circumstances surrounding that body, one of which leads to it being considered dead. So, follow-up question: Since James is clearly comparing the body to faith, and we can all agree he's not talking about two kinds of bodies, he's talking about the body in a certain situation, then wouldn't you think he'd compare that to faith in a certain situation? Doesn't this comparison make a whole lot more sense than this comparison? Or are you still sticking with this story that there's two different kinds of faith, and this is what the comparison was between?

I would love to hear Mike's response to that, or Jeff Durbin, because Jeff does the same thing. The question for James is, "What kind of faith saves?" It's a question of what kind of faith saves. No, that's not the kind of question this is, Jeff. You see, if it was a question of what kind of faith saves, then the author wouldn't have asked, "Can that faith save him?" referring to the faith that does not have works. Instead, he would have asked, "What kind of faith saves him?" James's point is turning to living faith versus dead faith, real faith versus mere professions of faith. James never makes any mention of real faith versus anything. Jeff Durbin just continues to add his own stuff to the text.

I love how, as a Christian, I could just read the Bible and let it say what it has to say. Meanwhile, Durbin's over here on the Protestant side just trying to rewrite the thing. We have a video on Jeff as well, that's actually a three-part video. Jeff is aware of these videos, but so far, he has not responded. So yeah, hopefully, one of these Protestants can explain why they're adding so much to the Bible. But yeah, this whole theory here where there's two different kinds of faith, that makes no sense.

Verse 17, he says, "So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." And this is really the main point. He gave an intro, he gave an example, and now he kind of hits with a main point in verse 17. "Faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead." Works indicate something about the quality of your faith. Do you see that? The quality of the works isn't the thing in question. The quality of the faith is what's in question. The quality of the faith. Like, what are you talking about? The quality of the faith? There is nothing written here about the quality of the faith. You're adding all of that. James just says faith. He doesn't say, "This is high-quality faith right here. This is not good-quality faith." In fact, I don't even know why I'm calling it faith here, because it's not faith. It's just somebody saying that they believe, even though they don't.

Mike is changing this entire passage because Mike is trying to protect this word "alone" that he added to the Bible. That's the reason why he won't just read this like a normal person. "Works indicate something about the quality of your faith." Mike, go back to this example. Would you read this and say, "Hey, look, guys, batteries indicate something about the quality of your remote"? Do you see that? Do you see that the quality of the works isn't the thing in question? The quality of the faith is what's in question. The quality of the batteries isn't the thing in question. The quality of the remote is what's in question. The quality of the faith. This is not talking about the quality of anything, batteries or remote.

Now, maybe it's stuff like this that Mike sees as snarky and rude and mocking. But Mike, I'm mocking your teaching here, not you. I still think all the good things about you. But as I've said before, you're teaching something that is not logical. You're coming to this conclusion, but it's not the rational, reasonable conclusion. You're trying to change what James is talking about because you added the word "alone" where it did not belong. And instead of getting rid of it, you're doing the Protestant thing where you say, "Oh, let's let scripture interpret scripture." Except what you're taking as scripture isn't actually scripture. You're taking what you put into scripture and letting that interpret what's actually in the scripture. So you end up with this mess.

Now, this here is Leon Flowers. He's a friend of the channel. He's also a friend of Mike Winger. Leon is a Protestant, and he thinks I'm wandering from the truth on certain issues, and he tries to bring me back. But I think he's the one wandering from the truth on those issues. So I try to bring him back. Now, recently, Mr. Flowers had some comments about this Christian versus Protestant series. "Look at Leon over there, and look at those guys over there. Look at all the Protestants. They're just adding this, this, and this to the text. They're just putting all this stuff in there." No, we're giving you a translation, just like the Catholic Church did. "It's because you say so. It's because the Catholic Council said so." See, that's so unfair.

I don't know if Ferris is going to watch this or even stick around for 54 minutes. That is so unfair to Ferris. And I'm not just saying this because I'm bias or partial, okay? I'm not. But Ferris did not quote councils. His whole channel is "How to be Christian," and he's a little inconspicuous because he wants to just have people realize what the Bible teaches as what the Bible teaches, regardless if you're a Protestant, Muslim, Catholic, whatever. Notice this channel is not like "How to be Catholic" or "How to listen to the Council of Trent" or whatever. It's "How to be Christian" using the Bible. "How to be Christian" uh is basically a, basically a reading comprehension channel. That's really what Ferris is doing. He's teaching reading comprehension because so often Protestants read the Bible and they read into the scripture what's not actually there. And so Ferris looks at what the scripture actually says, and he doesn't imprint Catholic theology onto it. He reads out of the text what is written there. And if there are multiple ways of reading it, uh, Ferris will absolutely say, "Now, this could mean this, but this doesn't have to mean this."

Well, to be fair, there are videos, and I almost went back and pulled some of them up, where he will say, "This is the Christian teaching versus this is the Protestant teaching," which implies that the Protestant isn't a Christian. Now, he's clarified that's not what he really means by that, and he's acknowledged that I'm a Christian, which I appreciate. But there are ways in which he does prop up the Catholic interpretation of the scripture over and against the Protestant interpretation of the scripture. So, Leon accused me of of propping up the Catholic interpretation of the scripture over and against the Protestant interpretation of the scripture. Now, he doesn't actually give any examples for this. He says, "I almost went back and pulled some of them up," but he didn't actually go back and do that. So, Mr. Flowers, if you could, could you go back and pull some of them up and give us some actual examples of what you're accusing me of here? Because unless I missed something, which is possible, I can make mistakes, but the "Christian versus Protestant" episodes, that's just the Christian side, which is being represented by the Bible. If it appears in the word of God that is found in the Bible, we can say it. And we can also list the possibilities that are left open by those teachings. So when a Protestant comes along and they give us the word of man and they try to close down a possibility that is left open by the Bible, then we just say, "Hey, we're Bible-believing Christians over here. The Bible leaves the possibility open that we could be justified by faith and something else. So why are you closing off that possibility and saying faith alone?"

So yeah, to our friend Mr. Flowers, if you could please provide some examples for your accusation that we prop up the Catholic interpretation of the scripture over and against the Protestant interpretation of the scripture, that would be great. Because what I actually think is happening here is you're hearing us read from the Bible, and you're thinking, "Dang, that book sounds Catholic." But hey, if you think you got examples of this, fire away.

Anyway, James says, "But someone will say, 'You have faith, and I have works. Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 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? Oh, so it seems like James is getting a little sassy here, saying, "You foolish person." Man, I wonder what Mike's going to say about about that. I mean, after we said all these nice things about Mike, he called us snarky and rude and mocking. And we didn't even call him foolish. So I can just imagine the stern talking-to that James is in for. Give it to him, Mike. He, he, uh, he decides to further, further shake the person out of their slumber and says in verse 20, "Do you want to be shown a foolish person that faith apart from works is useless?" He calls him a fool, um, not because he's trying to be insulting, but because he's trying to help them see it. Um, what the heck, man? James calls people foolish, and you're okay with that? But I compliment you, and you throw a hissy fit? Mike Winger, again, seems like a really nice guy. He seems like a dedicated Christian. He was snarky and rude and mocking and and arrogant and a bunch of other things that I just don't like responding to. So I'm, I'm not interested in all that. Just a reminder, don't be the baby. Don't be the baby. You say he calls him fool not because he's trying to be insulting, but because he's trying to help them see it. Mike, I literally said I'm trying to help you. I'm not trying to insult you. But Mr. Winger, if you happen to see this video, we would like to help you out. You seem like a well-intentioned guy. You seem like you actually want to teach Christianity correctly, and I don't think that you're intentionally teaching things falsely. Now, don't get me wrong, I make jokes at the expense of stupid teachings, but I'm not insulting you, Mike. I'm just talking about how dumb this teaching is. Anyway, I just found the irony here immensely entertaining.

But let's finish the passage off. James said says, "Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works." And the scripture was fulfilled. It says, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness," and he was called a friend of God. "You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone." And in the same way, was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.

All right, so James is clearly talking about people being justified by works. Abraham was justified by works. Rahab was justified by works. James puts it in writing: "A person is justified by works and not by faith alone." So how is Mr. Winger going to try to get around all of this? When James says that we are justified, the question is, does he mean the theological definition of justification, or does he just mean justification like you're justified? It can just mean to quit. Um, so if someone's, "Oh, you didn't commit the crime, now you're justified," they'd use it for that. It could mean to be, to declare someone and treat them as righteous, or it could just mean to show or prove that someone is right. That's it. To vindicate them. That's an entirely fair explanation or definition of that word. Do you get the point? I, I hope so. I think it's, I think that makes it pretty clear, and I think I've really just made a really solid case for this.

So Mike says, "I think I just made a really solid case for this." Mike, are you talking about the fact that words can have different meanings? Because you didn't have to make a case for that at all. Everybody everywhere already agrees that words can have different meanings and be used in different ways at different times. But yeah, if that's the case you were trying to make, I think you did it. You didn't need to do it, because again, everyone already knew that. But this is Mike's master plan. He's going to come here and say, "Hey, justification can mean this or this. So I think it means this." Let's watch.

So when we come back to James 2, we can come with this context of "justified" sometimes just means it's been made evident, made clear, or has been proved right, not necessarily given a like salvific righteousness. Everything so far, James is not talking about how you get saved. That's assumed. It's by faith. James is talking about how you show you have faith. Get this, he's not talking about how salvation is accomplished. He's talking about how salvation is demonstrated.

So Mike Winger is now claiming that James is talking about how salvation is demonstrated. If you go to what James actually wrote, it says, "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?" But Mike Winger is saying, "James is not talking about how you get saved." Again, James is literally asking, "Can that faith save him?" And Mike says, "James is not talking about how you get saved. This is not about how you get saved. It's how you show you have saved to someone else." See, yeah, what Mike is doing here is just getting pathetic. And I don't even think that Mike believes everything he's saying. Because first, he tried to change this question so it's not about a guy who actually has faith, it's just a guy claiming that he has faith. So the question is, "Can that claim of faith save you?" The issue in James 2, starting in verse 14, is that faith, "Can that faith save him?" Let me read it again. Get it in your heart and mind. "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has Faith but does not have Works? Can that Faith save him?" Can the faith that he, where you, where you go, "Well, I claim to believe," but you're like, "not believing." Um, can that faith save? But now Mike's like, "You know what? It's not about saving at all. Everything so far, James is not talking about how you get saved. He's actually talking about how salvation is demonstrated." Yeah, that's what this is about. "Can that claim that he has faith demonstrate that he has been saved?" This passage is not about how you get saved. It's about how you show you're saved to someone else. So he's just changing things as he goes. And the reason why he's adding this in now is because he's going to use this to tie into the justification. Let's watch.

So, um, I think we have clear indicators in James 2 that the term "justified" is not being used in the theological sense. It cannot mean that theological sense. What Mike is referring to as clear indicators is just this stuff right here that Mike Winger added to the passage. But it's not justification in the salvific sense. How do I know that? Let's read verse 21 again. "Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar?" So this justification of Abraham happened at a specific moment, according to James. And that justification, whether it was salvific or if it just meant proven to be true, you know, proven that he had real faith, whichever one he meant, it happened when Isaac was offered on the altar. And that's what rules out the salvific meaning, because Abraham was justified in a salvific sense decades earlier in Genesis 15. So when was Abraham justified or accounted righteous? It was in Genesis 15, decades, years and years before the Isaac incident that James talks about in James chapter 2. So what justification happened when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? He was just demonstrated or shown to be true in his faith. That's the justification. Not even possible that the theological meaning is meant there. It's ruled out by the context of Genesis.

So why is Mike saying that the theological meaning of justification is not even possible in James 2? Well, that's because, as we looked at earlier, Mike Winger thinks that justification is a one-and-done deal. The Bible teaches that justification is a process. But Mike says, "Nah, that's not for me. That's for someone else." So since Mike Winger thinks that justification only happens once, then when Mike learns that Abraham was justified twice, Mike has to say, "Whoa, hold on. Only one of those justifications can be the saving type. Any other justification has to be a different type of justification." So that's how he's coming to his faulty conclusion here. He's saying, "Look, Abraham was justified here." To which Christians could say, "Yeah, who cares? Because according to the Bible, justification is a process."

"For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life. And let us not grow weary of doing good, for in due season we will reap if we do not give up." So they will reap eternal life if they do not give up. So don't grow weary of doing good. As we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone. Paul is teaching the importance of works, just like James. Jesus even said, "The one who endures to the end will be saved." Mike is the one trying to insert his man-made doctrine of faith alone into the Bible. So since justification is a process, then when Christians learn about Abraham being justified twice, they could say, "Both of those could be the saving justification." After all, James is asking, "Can that Faith save him?" The topic of discussion is about being saved. Winger's trying to change the topic, saying, "No, no, it's about how do you prove that you, uh, that you got the faith that's, you had the good one, the top quality, not dead faith. That's what it's about. It's about how do you prove you have that." And yeah, that's your Protestant interpretation. But if you go with the Christian interpretation, you could just say, "Well, it's talking about, can that faith save you?" So it kind of makes sense that the guy would go on to answer the question that he was asking, you know, instead of answering just some phantom question that, you know, is here because you said it's here, even though nobody else can see it.

There the light went on for Mr. Winger, and apparently this is what the light showed him: a big old hidden message in James chapter 2. This is the theology of James. It's beautiful. Mike, what you just talked about was not beautiful at all. You butchered this passage. This is not the theology of James. This is the theology of Mike Winger. I would wager most people arguing about justification, most of them have not done a careful study of James 2 verse by verse. You need to know this passage. That's why I thought, uh, studying it together thoughtfully, carefully, would, uh, produce, hopefully, um, an army of people who know how to use James 2 properly. Um, so, "What kind of faith do you have?" That's the question. "Do you have this faith that saves or that faith that doesn't?" It's not the question, Mike. The question is, "What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has Faith but does not have Works? Can that Faith save him?"

Now, listen, real, real quickly, to what I did not do. I did not rely on quotes outside the Bible just now to subvert a simple study of the text, right? We just studied the text. Like, are you kidding me? The overwhelming majority of your argument relies on quotes outside of the Bible. None of this stuff is actually in the Bible. You made it all up. And you definitely did subvert a simple study of the text. Um, I did not rely on misrepresenting anybody. Mike, you clearly misrepresented James. You also misrepresented Paul.

Anyway, let's close this off with Hebrews. It says, "Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast to the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the day drawing near."

I'd love to see the Catholic view on Galatians, Romans, Ephesians, um, and even interact with someone if, if, if they're, you know, put up a video or two, me that you, you can interact rationally on the issue. And I'd love to talk with you about it openly because I think people learn a lot from those kinds of conversations. All right, so Mr. Winger said he would love to see this. And if he watched this video, then he would have gotten to see it. Now, again, as I said before, I think Mr. Winger is a good guy. I think he wants to teach correctly about Christianity, but he definitely has some teachings that don't make sense. And I feel like we presented a rational, reasonable challenge to his position. And hopefully, he can now put up a video or two showing us that he can interact rationally on the issue. Hopefully, we don't get a repeat of last time, where what he did was just talk about me as a person and then completely misrepresent what I said. But I guess time will tell. Mike, if you want to have a private conversation, you can always message us on X. I have conversations with Mr. Flowers on X, and Mike, I would have conversations with you, but you blocked us after that first video, I guess because all these awful things that I said about you. Anyway, we consider Mike a brother. We consider all Protestants our brothers. We just think you're wandering from the truth, and we want to bring you back. We want there to be no divisions among us. So, Mike, we have no interest in making fun of you or any Protestant, because in the end, we're hoping that everyone just drops the Protestantism and keeps the Christianity. This is that to be Christian. You all have a great day.

And if anyone's curious about what Mike is adding to the Last Supper account and what Mike is doing in John chapter 6, saying that a discussion started here when it actually started here, then please grab your Bible and follow along with those videos. Now, I have got to go. I've got some plans today. You know how it is, busy, busy.

[Music]

[Music]