Featured Justification versus Eternal Redemption

For 500 years we have seen Catholics and Protestants dispute how one is justified. By faith alone as Paul teaches, or, as James teaches, by faith and works.

There is a simple solution: both are, in the critical passages, speaking about justification...not Eternal Redemption. Abraham was justified by faith alone, but, he was also justified by faith and works. And as long as you do not impose an eternal aspect to that justification you will have no problem maintaining the proper distinction between passages dealing with Old Testament Saints being justified in a temporal context and men being eternally redeemed through the shed blood of Christ.

When Salvation is in view, we are told how that is accomplished:



Ephesians 2:8-9 King James Version (KJV)

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

There is no contradiction to be found in James' statement, because he isn't stating how Abraham was eternally redeemed, but, how he was justified. That there is a Temporal Justification in Scripture and that this is the issue discussed by both James and Paul is something we must take into consideration. Let's take a look at a few passages dealing with justification that clearly speak of Temporal Justification:


Luke 18:11-14 King James Version (KJV)

11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.


Romans 2:13-15 King James Version (KJV)

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another


James 2:24-25 King James Version (KJV)

24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?


Most would acknowledge that James is teaching from a temporal perspective, rather than an eternal. If he were not...would we not have to conclude that one could be saved/eternally redeemed by giving food to the hungry and clothing to those who are cold? We would. So the suggestion I make for those who have struggled with the seemingly contradictory statements between James and Paul is to simply maintain these passages in their proper context and there is no problem. The problem arises when, as many do, there is an equation between the justification of men in a temporal context and Eternal Redemption which can only be accomplished through the death of Christ in the stead of the sinner. Men can be justified by faith only, as well as by faith and works, but, men can only be eternally redeemed by grace through specific faith in Jesus Christ and His death in our stead.

Paul makes a distinction between Jew and Gentile in Romans 2-3, but brings both under condemnation despite justificationby obedience to the revealed will of God:


Romans 3:9-12 King James Version (KJV)

9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.


Unless we maintain a proper context between the eternal and the temporal, one might find a contradiction between the righteousness mentioned here (which no man has) and the righteousness imputed to people like Abraham, Rahab, and the Publican sinner. It's a fact: Abraham was declared righteous because he believed God (concerning God's promises, in particular that his wife-beyond the age of bearing children-would produce him a son). So does v. 10 contradict that declaration of righteousness? Not at all, because Abraham was Justified according to his temporal existence...not on an eternal basis. Paul will go on, again, to make a distinction between the previous economies and the one in which he writes:


Romans 3:21-26 King James Version (KJV)

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.


How many people placed faith in Jesus Christ prior to the Cross? Not one.

Abraham was justified by belief, faith, and works, so including him, Rahab, the Publican sinner, and anyone else you would like to include, how many were righteous?

10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:


So again, I suggest this to those who, as I said, have struggled with what is argued as contradictory between Catholics and Protestants. Hopefully the simple truth of the distinction we must make between the justification of the Old Testament Saint and Eternal Redemption through Christ our Lord will be just that...simple to understand.

I will leave you with another statement that has an eternal context and points out, as does Romans 3:25, that the sins of the Old Testament Saints were never forgiven on an eternal basis during their lifetimes:


Hebrews 9:12-15 King James Version (KJV)

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.


God bless

 

That is what the OP states.

 

So no Protestant or Catholic interested in discovering why both are wrong?




God bless.

 

Hello NC, glad to see you still making the rounds, and hope all is well with you and yours.

We must go with the definitions that Scripture provides through implicit and explicit teaching. The Lord Himself said this man was justified...


Luke 18:13-14 King James Version (KJV)

13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.


Now, was this man "made Justified" or shown to be righteous?

Or both?

WHile I would agree there is certainly truth to what you say, what the Op focuses on is the type of Justification in view. Most Protestants argue, and rightly so, that the context of James 2 is obviously speaking of Temporal Justification (which is the first definition used in the OP). But what about Romans 4? One argument, In the Baptist section, is that Romans 4 is before God and James 2 is before men. But the fact is...both are written to men. In other words while at the time of Abraham's declaration of righteousness (as well as the Publican sinner and Rahab) this was known to God only, that becomes moot when we are given these as examples.

My suggestion is that both Romans 4 and James 2 speak of Temporal Justification and that Romans 3 is speaking of Eternal Justification. The difference being between the two is that the former is based, without controversy...on what men do. The latter is based on what Christ did.

So if you would, please take a look at the OP again, then consider that we must interpret Romans 4 based on Romans 3, for it is given as an example that justification by grace apart from works (despite the facts that the Law demanded works) has a precedent. It is like the serpent being lifted up in the wilderness gives an example of looking to something for salvation.


God bless and thanks for the response.

 

I think more pointedly the "type" of Justification should be understood between that which has an eternal value and that which applies temporally. Consider those James speaks about: when they are "justified" because they do give clothing to those needing warmth and food to those who are hungry we would not impose a salvific quality to that justification, it is temporal. They were justified on an eternal basis through the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus...

The object of the OP is to discuss whether those who do place an eternal value to the justification spoken of in James 2 and Romans 4 do so erroneously. I would suggest they do, and that though Abraham was justified by faith alone, and, by faith and works, neither should be considered as the means of His Redemption. He died not having received the promises (Hebrews 11:13; 39-40), nor was he made complete in regards to remission of sins and (The) Atonement. It is often taught by many that the Atonement was applied to his behalf (as well as all other men and women of faith in the Old Testament) yet not only do we see no justification (no pun intended, lol) for that teaching...we have numerous passages (most of the New Testament in fact) that teach the direct opposite (in both implicit and explicit teachings).

Hope that helps clarify the goal of the OP, and thanks again for joining in!


God bless.

 

Be glad to:


Luke 18:14 King James Version (KJV)

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.


Now here, as a Catholic, is the problem you have (and I am not making fun of you, just pointing out the obvious): If you say this man was justified on an eternal basis...you have just denied what your religion teaches.

And if you say that he was justified in a temporal context...you have just verified the point of the OP.

So...which is it?

And I will point out that at this point Christ had not died, risen again, returned to Heaven, and sent the Comforter. Why is that important? Because his sins were not yet redeemed (Hebrews 9:12; Hebrews 9:15), thus he was not yet eternally redeemed by the blood/death of Christ in His stead. It is not until Christ dies that we see, by the grace of God, men justified freely through the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus:

Oh, and by the way, before asking for the exact words for "Temporal Justification," I would first ask you to provide the exact word Trinity in Scripture. We call this implicit Doctrine.


Continued...

 

The first error you are going to need to come to grips with is the fact that men are not saved by faith, they are saved by grace through faith.

Catholics and many Protestants, apparently, have a hard time understanding this distinction. If you go back to the passage I quoted in the previous post you will see that men are justified on an eternal basis by grace as well, and this freely, because salvation is the Gift of God, and works have nothing to do with it.

So how does faith arise? Glad you asked:


Romans 10:14-17 King James Version (KJV)

14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.


Faith is a result of the intervention of God in the life of the natural man, who, as Paul makes clear...cannot receive nor perceive the spiritual things of God...these are revealed to men by the Holy Spirit:


1 Corinthians 2:10-14 King James Version (KJV)

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


Show me one person in Scripture that came into relationship with God where we do not first see God reveal Himself and His truth to them. You won't find an example.

But more directly we are concerned with the Gospel of Jesus Christ...which was not revealed to men in past Ages, buyt is now revealed to men by the Spirit:


Ephesians 3:3-5 King James Version (KJV)

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;


It is not a coincidence that the disciples did not begin preaching the Gospel until Pentecost, and it is by His Revelation to us that we are first saved...


John 16:7-9 King James Version (KJV)

7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;


...and in turn ourselves go out and preach the Gospel...


1 Peter 1:10-12 King James Version (KJV)

10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.


So you err greatly in saying...

The reason you are wasting so much time trying to defend salvation by faith and works goes directly to the Reformation itself, which was flawed in that Martin Luther clung to the Catholic error that when James in Chapter Two and Paul in Romans 4 is speaking of men being justified that it has an eternal and salvific context..

...and it does not.

Romans 3 does. Ephesians 2 does. But the former are speaking of Temporal Justification, just as the Publican sinner was temporally justified. When he returned home, he would again have to come before God, offering up sacrifice for his sin. But for those of us that have been freely justified through the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus by the grace of God...


Hebrews 10:14-18 King James Version (KJV)

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

15 Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before,

16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.



Continued...

 

I did so, in the OP, and you have gone completely off the rails, avoiding what is actually stated there. But that's okay, I am used to people who simply talk at other people without trying to engage in discussion or debate.

Nowhere is "temporal salvation" spoken of in the OP. That temporal salvation is a legitimate Biblical Doctrine is evident, though, because not only do we see men physically saved from physical harms and dangers, we too await Temporal Salvation, to wit...the redemption of our bodies.

Agreed. A good example might be mortal sin.

Agreed.

It should have been Grace Alone.



Of course they did teach that as well, however, at this point in time, due to the constant debate over errors introduce by Catholicism in the first place, many at this point have come to believe in salvation by faith through grace. I had an antagonist recently say (in the Baptist Forum) that our faith is why God gives grace. That is error, and almost as bad as teaching salvation by faith and works. James did not teach that, he taught justification by faith and works. And the Justification in view is temporal, because it is obvoius that men cannot be saved by giving food and clothing to those in need.

Then explain...

Luke 7:50
And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.

Luke 18:42
And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: thy faith hath saved thee.


I can explain it: the salvation is temporal in nature, that is the context. These two would still need to be redeemed by the Cross of Christ and reconciled to God through His Work.

I agree, they taught salvation by grace and mercy...alone:


Ephesians 2:8-9 King James Version (KJV)

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.


Titus 3:4-5 King James Version (KJV)

4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;


Not sure why you cannot (1) understnd that the context here is of Eternal Salvation and not justification and (2) an explicit statement that we are not saved by works of any kind.


Continued...

 

You simply need to start understanding...context.

James is temporal, as is Romans 4. Here is an eternal context in regards to Justification:

Galatians 2:16
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Now, I ask you again: how can you not see the explicit statement that by no works of the Law shall anyone be justified?

I ask you...how does faith arise?

Continued...

 

You would do well to see the division between Romans 1-3:19 and Romans 3:20-16:


Romans 3:20-26 King James Version (KJV)

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.


Paul makes an explicit statement...


Romans 2:13-15 King James Version (KJV)

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)


...that "...the doers of the Law shall be justified."

You want to argue with Paul and deny that this is true?

It's not that hard to accept, as long as you understand that this is a temporal context, not an eternal. Look back at the first quote and see that it is at this time, now...that men are, by grace...freely justified by the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus.

Abraham was declared righteous, right? In Romans 4 because he believed God would give him a son, and in James Two because he offered up Isaac.

Right?

So explain...


Romans 3:10-11 King James Version (KJV)

10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.


I can explain it: Temporal Justification versus Eternal Salvation through Jesus Christ.


Continued...

 

But...he didn't. lol

You forget that He just stated that Gentiles did the works of the Law, and were thus justified, which is contrasted with Jews who were hearers only:


Romans 2:13-15 King James Version (KJV)

13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)


And it is the same thing as I spoke of before...God revealing HIs Law, His will...before they can obey. He wrote it on their hearts...they did it.

That makes no sense at all, lol. His point is simply that He is saving Gentiles also, lol.

No, actually there is quite a bit more to Romans than that. You ignore that Paul makes the point that keeping the Law does justify, but this in a temporal context. One cannot be eternally redeemed by keeping the Law, but men will be judged according to their obedience to what has been revealed to them:



1 Peter 1:15-17 King James Version (KJV)

15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;

16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

17 And if ye call on the Father, who without respect of persons judgeth according to every man's work, pass the time of your sojourning here in fear:


Those who teach works-based salvation might not understand that this is a temporal context. Those who are born again believers still have a responsibility to obey God and to keep His will, that hasn't changed. Our works will be judged, as Paul teaches in 1 Corinthians 3, but our sin has already been judged...and paid for by Christ.

Christians can still come under the penalty of sin, again, in a temporal context, because they can become sick and even be put to death for their sin (1 Corinthians 11).


Continued...

 

Sola Scriptura is not negated because the Apostles did in fact still maintain the Scripture they had: the Old Testament. The recommendations (not commandments) they give are...

...based on Scripture alone:


Acts 15:19-21 King James Version (KJV)

19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:

20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.


When they refer to Moses they are referring to the Law.

That they follow these recommendations is that they not offend Jews, not that they might be saved.

So in fact instead of denying Sola Scriptura you actually give a passage that affirms it.




Continued...

 

You shouldn't be, because we are not saved by faith, we are in fact saved by grace.

Again, faith is a result of God's intervention. He must first reveal truth to the natural man and then natural man must believe. Thus is faith established.

Actually...no-one means that. It's a false argument raised by you, and you cannot even win an argument you contrive.

For two reasons: the first already stated, and secondly...I have never once stated men are saved by faith alone.

True faith demands love.

Depends on the context:


2 Peter 1:4-7 King James Version (KJV)

4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;

7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.


This is a depiction of adding to faith expressions of love. But the context is not salvific, but temporal.

Faith reports to knowledge? Faith is the result of knowledge, specifically the knowledge of the Gospel. One can have faith with very little knowledge. I speak to people all the time who have great faith in Christ but are very ignorant of what Scripture teaches. They understand the Gospel but have a hard time with the meat. Many remain nursing the bottle.

That is actually the state of every natural man and woman, as well as many among those who are religious.

I hate to say it but you are more devoted to defending Catholicism than you are in defending...The Faith.

And I think I will end this response with this: You have completely missed the point of the OP. I would ask you to read it again with a little more attention paid to what is said, that we not have to debate an entirely different issue.


God bless.

 

It's a fairly simple question: does the faith that has no consequence save?

In other words, the faith that is assumed is The Faith of Christ, and those to whom he writes are making a claim to have faith in Christ. His point is this: just saying "I have faith" or "I believe" yet no evidence to that effect is as valid as one saying "...be warmed and filled" and not actually giving them the necessary items required to legitimize the statement.

I would disagree, but not for reasons you might expect. Because of the debate between Catholics and Protestants there are many Protestants that have gone so far as to embrace a view that men are saved by faith...through grace. Why that is error is because salvation is by grace...alone. One can point out that GOd saves by grace through faith but we have to remember that faith cometh by hearing, and hearing...by the Word of God. Which again places faith as a result of the grace of God...not something that men achieve of themselves.

Absolutely no credit goes to men in regards to salvation, it is by His grace and mercy...alone.

"Temporal Salvation" would be in regards to one being physically saved from harm or danger, and has no relevance to the topic of the OP.

The OP, again, deals with the idea that James 2 and Romans 4 refer to salvation, when in fact the issue at hand is justification. Would you admit that Abraham's justification, in both chapters...are based on what he did?

It is only in Romans 3 that we see, "at this time," justification based on what Christ did. Romans 4 gives an example that men can be justified by belief and faith alone, it doesn't teach that Abraham was eternally redeemed because he believed God would give him a son through a presumably barren wife and that all nations of the earth would be blessed through his seed. He did not even understand that the Seed in view was Jesus Christ.

The "salvation" spoken of is, in your estimation (presumably), an eternal salvation. The context, however, deals with physical needs of others, so there is a double edge to this particular sword. The first being the idea that the "faith" he is railing against is not salvific. The second being that we must contrast this "faith" with what should be obvious (James implying true faith would actually give food and clothing on the heels of the statement), that the "faith" that is not salvific must have a counterpart, faith that is salvific. I do not say "Faith that saves," because it is not, after all...faith that saves. It is the grace of God that saves, and it is the Cross of Christ, not man's efforts, that actually accomplishes that. Simply do a study on "The Blood of Christ" and it doesn't take long to see that salvation is by His blood/death and nothing else.

We wouldn't apply an eternal context to this...


James 5:14-15 King James Version (KJV)

14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

15 And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.


...would we?

It is the result of...study.

There are a few basic truths that few understand that have brought about an understanding of James 2 and Romans 4 that differs from the mainstream teachings of all Systems of Theology.

For example, the basic truths that men did not receive eternal life prior to Pentecost. They were not reconciled to God prior to Pentecost. They did not receive the Comforter prior to Pentecost (Who is the Spirit of God performing a specific Ministry that is distinct to this Age). Men did not receive remission of sins in an eternal context until the Cross. That is why under the Law those sacrifices were repeated over and over. That was the only means of remission of sins and Atonement available, and it was like that from the Garden until the Cross.

When we look at these basic truths we then turn our attention to Justification, and if we can conclude that Abraham died not receiving the promises God gave him, as well as the promises made after that (as the Mystery of the Gospel was revealed progressively in more detail (though the understanding of the Gospel still withheld)) then we see it is quite impossible to equate Abraham's justification with Eternal Redemption.

Let me ask you this: when did men begin to be placed in Christ?


God bless.