Justification by Faith and Justification by Works

[J. Jump]

But you see all believers as having their tears wiped away AFTER the end of the kingdom.

This may or may not be the case. I think we can only use ALL believers if those that are faithful are shedding tears of those that they know that were found to be unfaithful. Other than that I don't know why they would be shedding tears. But we just aren't given enough information to be real dogmatic on something like that.

But yes I think the unfaithful will have their tears wiped away at the end of the kingdom before they step into eternity. We are going to be about God's business for all eternity, God just doesn't give us details as to what that is.

And those unfaithful must learn how to be faithful before they can step into eternity. It will be a very hard time for those that are found to be unfaithful, but at the end of the process God will show His unbelievable love to His children and wipe away their tears!

As far as the tribulation goes I don't think Christians will be going through the tribulation. I think the entire church is raptured (Rev. 1).

There will be people saved through the tribulation period, but I don't think all will be faithful, becuase we can see that in the sheep and goats of Matthew 25.

But those spoken of in Revelation are the faithful becuase they are the ones that were killed for their beliefs. Can't be much more faithful that that I don't think

 

[Gup20]

I have read through this thread. It is interesting. Here are my thoughts:

Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:
14 And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.
15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called [me] by his grace,
16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:


The whole of the book of Galatians speaks to the difference between “the Jews Religion” which is of Works, and Christianity, which is by Grace and Promise. I recently studied it thoroughly because my church was going through an issue with the doctrine of “Dual Covenant Theology”. The whole book of Galatians is tremendously damaging to any works-based theologies.
Notice it says THE GOSPEL (and it’s clear there is only ONE gospel) is not of man, neither by any man. Paul did not recieve the revelation of the Gospel from any man but from God.


Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
Rom 10:17 So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
So the faith that saves us comes directly from the Word of God, not from any man.


Look at the First Christian, Abraham:
Gen 15:5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.
6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.
God told him about Jesus, and Abraham believed Him. God counted this as righteousness.


Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
We can see, then that God made a promise of Jesus Christ to Abraham, and when Abraham believed him, God counted this belief in Jesus Christ as righteousness. This is verified in scripture:


Rom 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God.
3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.


To prove that the righteousness God saw in the first Christian Abraham was by faith, Paul asks the question:
Rom 4:10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which [he had yet] being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:


So it’s pretty clear that Faith comes directly by hearing the Word of God, and that Faith is what justifies a person - just as it did Abraham who was counted righteous BEFORE he was even circumcised. It proves the LAW of moses has no ability to save, but we are saved ONLY by grace through faith.
Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which [he had] being [yet] uncircumcised.
13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
So then, we can see that any “OTHER GOSPEL” where man is saved by any other means than Faith is not the Gospel of Christ.



For this discussion to be meaningful, I think we need to define our terms. By “Faith” I am referring to the belief in Jesus Christ. By “Works” I am referring to adhering to the Law of Moses.


Regarding the Justification of Abraham, he was indeed saved by his faith — but that faith was faith in Jesus Christ. God told him something specificly about Jesus Christ, and Abraham believed God. This is why his faith was counted as righteousness.
For definiative proof that a person is saved by Faith, see the “faith hall of fame” in Hebrews 11:
Hbr 11:6 But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.


Now with that perspective, add in James 2 - that faith without works is dead. This shows that it is FAITH that saves a person, it is faith that justifies a person, or makes a person righteous. However, works justifies or confirms one’s faith.


Jam 2:18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.


In other words, Faith is “what you truely believe”. And “what you truely believe” can be seen by how you act. This is why Paul says “shew thee my faith by my works”. He demonstrates in this verse the proper relationship between Faith and Works. Faith saves, the corresponding action to that faith demonstrates the faith. YOU CAN indeed have faith without works and be accepted into heaven, however, you CANNOT have works without faith and enter into heaven.


Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.


Contrast that with what the Bible says about Faith:
Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Jhn 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
Rom 3:22 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:

 

[Gup20]

There are three covenants God makes with Man which affect our “salvation status” (which is to say, our life vs death status). The first was God’s covenant with Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowlege of good and evil (which was broken). This “original sin” brought sin and death (separation from God) to this world (Rom 5:12). This was where we lost everlasting life. This is why we need salvation. But do you see what the sin was? Was it eating the fobidden fruit? Perhaps. That was certainly the manifestation of the sin. But the ‘original sin’ was that Adam did not believe God, and his disbelief was confirmed by his actions. God told him that if he ate the fruit, he would die. The serpant questioned God’s Word, and Adam believed the lie above the Word of God. This was his sin. Does it remain a sin to eat fruit today? No. Eating fruit has no bearing on one’s salvation. But their heart belief certainly does. Their action was the outward working of their inward believe. Thereby the relationship between faith and works is properly understood.

The second covenant was God’s covenant with Abraham that through him, the world would have a savior. This covenant included the Abrahamic and later the Mosaic coveants and the Law. This is where most Works based (aka legalistic) denominations choose to focus. But look at the beginning of that covenant in Genesis 15:
Gen 15:5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.
6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

God tells Abraham a fact about Jesus, and Abraham believed God and this is what counted as righteousness. Remember that Abraham was justified before he was circumcised… therefore his justification was of Faith Alone.
The third covenant is the “gentile covenant” whereby all men (including Jews, BTW) can be saved. This involves believing in Jesus Christ. Really, this is the second salvation covenant, because the first covenant with Adam was under the state of eternal life, whereas the Abrahamic/Mosaic and Christian covenants were in a state of death and sin.

Now see what the Bible says about the first salvation covenant (Abrahamic/Mosaic):
Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.
27 For this [is] my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers’ sakes.
30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.
32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

You see, the Israelites — the only people on earth keeping the law (aka doing good works worthy of attaining salvation) did NOT attain salvation through their works. For if they could, Salvation would not have been extended to the Gentiles! Salvation HAD TO BE by grace through Faith, otherwise the Gentile could not be saved. Why?

Romans 4 give us part of that answer:
Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
14 For if they which are of the law [be] heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:
15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, [there is] no transgression.
16 Therefore [it is] of faith, that [it might be] by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

Then, Paul goes back to Genesis … to the original salvation covenant …
Rom 4:17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, [even] God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.

Keeping in mind that “Thy Seed” is a direct reference to Jesus in both Genesis and Romans (Gal 3:16).
Galatians CONFIRMS this interpretation of scripture very soundly. Read here:
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance [be] of the law, [it is] no more of promise: but God gave [it] to Abraham by promise.
19 Wherefore then [serveth] the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; [and it was] ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
21 [Is] the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

And the next verse confirms Romans 11!!
Gal 3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

Gal 3:26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
Gal 3:29 And if ye [be] Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

You see — you become “Abraham’s Seed” by faith in Jesus Christ, and once “Abraham’s seed” you are heirs according to the promise. It is not through works and the law as Galatians 3 describes in detail.

Look at Galatians 4 for further confirmation of everything:
Gal 4:21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he [who was] of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman [was] by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Hagar.
Remember the two salvation covenants I was talking about? One is the Abrahamic/Mosaic (the law) and one is by Christ to the Jews and Gentiles?
Gal 4:25 For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

Who is the “we”. The “we” are those who are heirs according to the promise by faith in Jesus Christ. It is not by works, or by the law. The law has no power to save any man. See what it says in Gal 4:30? Cast out those who try to be “saved by works” because they will not be heirs with those who are “saved by faith”. Cast out those under the Law because they will not be heirs with those under Grace. Cast out those who try to earn salvation, they will not be heirs with those who recieve the free gift by promise.
This agrees with Romans 11:32 where it says God concluded them all as unbelievers, and they were cut off, as well as with Romans 4:14.
The Jews are “spiritual Ishmael” and the Christians are “Spiritual Israel”. The Christians are heirs according to the Promise, as Isaac was. Like the Jews, those who try to fulfill the law are “heirs according to the flesh” and will not be counted as heirs, just as Ishmael was cast out of Abraham’s camp. The ONLY way to become an heir according to the promise is by Faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[Gup20]

It is clear from scripture that Works alone can save no one - be they works of the law or ‘works of charity’. However, lets look at the contrasting verses of James 2:24 and Hebrews 11:6.

Jam 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
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?
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Hbr 11:6 But without faith [it is] impossible to please [him]: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and [that] he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Hbr 11:17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten [son],

Hbr 11:31 By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.

So we see here two seemingly contradictory passages. One says Abraham and Rahab were justified by works, and one says they were justified by faith. Lets look at other verses describing faith/works justification:

Rom 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Gal 3:24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Gal 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.

Gal 3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, [it is] evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Act 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

The number of scriptures that (seemingly) advocate justification by works is 1, while the overwelming bulk of scriptures dealing with justification talk about faith.

Rom 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God.

Furthermore there are scriptures that say justification is NOT by works (Rom 4, Gal 2). As I said before, you can have justification by Faith, and your works “make perfect” your faith… but you cannot have justification by works alone.

Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

No where in scripture do you see someone justified by works alone. Yet, here in Romans 4:5 we see that someone can have faith without works and be justified.

Lets look more closely at James 2 and the stories of Abraham and Rahab. We see from Hebrews 11 that both Abraham and Rahab had faith with their works. Neither had works alone.
Jam 2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

Verse 22 is the key to understanding the passage. It describes Work’s relationship with faith. It describes “works” as a modifier of the status of one’s faith, not as a primary justifier. Furthermore, it is more than evident that the “works” spoken of in James 2:22 (by context) include the works of the Law (James 2:4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,12,13,14) as this is a significan portion of the context.
So the entire premiss of salvation by works is founded upon one verse which, as was shown, was incorrectly interpreted. Additionally, there is no support for “works of Charity” as a factor in being justified as righteous. That’s an unwarrented expansion of James 2:8. Clearly, this verse, as well as Matt 22:40, show that “Works of Charity” are indeed part of “the Law”. So to say that “works of charity” and “good deeds” are not part of the law is fallacious. They are one in the same; works and the law.

 

[stan the man]

I would like to make some comments before I resume, I have seen and have heard many people say that Catholics appeal to this passage (James 2) to prove that one must do meritorious works in order to come to God and be forgiven.

But many individual understandings of the Catholic use of the passage is false. Without realizing it, some are beating a straw man. I have read a great amount of Catholic books, and Catholics do not claim that one must do meritorious works in order to come to God and be justified. In fact, Catholic theology claims it is completely impossible to do anything meritorious whatever prior to being justified. Therefore, they do not use James 2 to prove what some think.

I can say that Protestants need not fear that Catholics claim one must merit forgiveness. One does not. That is not what James 2 says. And that is not what Catholics believe James 2 says.

Unfortunately, I must also say that Protestants bear responsibility for not realizing what Catholics believe on this matter. Some have not read Catholic books themselves, or if some have then they have not read them thoroughly, else they would realize this. Instead of trying to understand the Catholic view before criticizing it, some have simply repeated malicious falsehoods concerning Catholic teaching and at most have skimmed Catholic works looking for snippets to support the rumors they have heard. I know. I used to do that.

 

[Faith alone]

Gup20,

Well, you posted quite a bit of thoughts on justification, and at first I didn't see where you were going. But I think I do now:

So it’s pretty clear that Faith comes directly by hearing the Word of God, and that Faith is what justifies a person - just as it did Abraham who was counted righteous BEFORE he was even circumcised. It proves the LAW of moses has no ability to save, but we are saved ONLY by grace through faith.
Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which [he had] being [yet] uncircumcised.
13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
So then, we can see that any “OTHER GOSPEL” where man is saved by any other means than Faith is not the Gospel of Christ.

I also liked what you said regarding the fact that Abraham was declared to be righteous ("justified") before works.

Jam 2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

Verse 22 is the key to understanding the passage. It describes Work’s relationship with faith. It describes “works” as a modifier of the status of one’s faith, not as a primary justifier. Furthermore, it is more than evident that the “works” spoken of in James 2:22 (by context) include the works of the Law (James 2:4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,12,13,14) as this is a significan portion of the context.
So the entire premiss of salvation by works is founded upon one verse which, as was shown, was incorrectly interpreted. Additionally, there is no support for “works of Charity” as a factor in being justified as righteous. That’s an unwarrented expansion of James 2:8. Clearly, this verse, as well as Matt 22:40, show that “Works of Charity” are indeed part of “the Law”. So to say that “works of charity” and “good deeds” are not part of the law is fallacious. They are one in the same; works and the law.

I'm not sure what you're saying here about the relationship of faith and works. For example, would you say that we are justified by faith alone, or by faith modified by works (faith plus works)?

Thx,

FA

 

[stan the man]

I can combine the insights of the previous two sections—the "mere intellectual faith" hypothesis and the "bad faith" mistake—to form a solution which does justice to the text and which, incidentally, is acceptable to both Protestants and Catholics.

The key lies in recognizing that the "mere intellectual faith" hypothesis is on the right track in identifying the faith humans and demons share as one of assent to the truths of theology. The interpretation only goes wrong when it adds a pejorative element by describing the faith as <mere> intellectual faith. If I strip off this pejorative label, I get what is in essence the correct solution: James is talking about intellectual faith—assent to the truths of theology.

There is nothing wrong with this kind of faith. It is in itself a <good> thing. One <needs> to assent to the truths of theology. However, it is by itself incomplete. Intellectual assent to the truths of theology is not enough to save one, so James criticizes those who think that merely having intellectual assent is sufficient.

This interpretation of the faith allows us to make sense out of both the positive and the negative remarks in the text, as the following substitution shows:

14 What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has intellectual assent but has not works? Can intellectual assent save him?
15 If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food,
16 and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit?
17 So intellectual assent by itself, if it has no works, is dead.
18 But some one will say, "You have intellectual assent and I have works." Show me your intellectual assent apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my intellectual assent.
19 You assent that God is one; you do well. Even the demons assent to that—and shudder.
20 Do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that intellectual assent apart from works is barren?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?
22 You see that intellectual assent was active along with his works, and intellectual assent was completed by works,
23 and the scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham assented to God['s promise], and it was reckoned to him as righteousness"; and he was called the friend of God.
24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by intellectual assent alone.
25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so intellectual assent apart from works is dead.

This makes sense of the entire text. In the first half of verse 14, someone would indeed go around claiming that he intellectually assents to God's truth. In fact, people often go around claiming precisely this: "I believe everything God says, no less and no more; I take seriously whatever God says. He is the only ultimately reliable source of truth, so I give absolute assent to his utterances and to his alone."

And in the second half of verse 14, James could still ask his negative rhetorical question, "But can intellectual assent save him?", leading him to conclude in verse 17 that "intellectual assent by itself, if it has no works, is dead."

Again, in verse 18, someone could be claiming to have intellectual assent and James could ask his paradoxical question for them to show their assent without works, while offering to show his intellectual assent to the truths of theology by his works.

In verse 19, James can both commend the person for having intellectual assent to the fact there is one God, yet point out that this does not save the demons.

In verse 20, he can still be arguing that intellectual assent is not enough, and in verse 22 speak of how Abraham's intellectual assent was active with his works and was completed by them.

In verse 23, he can point to Genesis 15:6, where Abraham assented to God's promise that he would have offspring like the stars of heaven, and this assent was consistent with him being reckoned righteous and called the friend of God (cf. Rom. 4:18-22).

And, finally, James can draw his conclusions in verses 24 and 26 that man is not justified by intellectual assent alone and that intellectual assent which is alone is dead.

This solution thus makes sense out of the entire passage, and as a happy coincidence, it is acceptable to both Protestants and Catholics since both agree that one is not saved by intellectual assent alone, as per James's negative rhetorical question in verse 14.

We must bear this solution in mind when we discuss the passage in public and resist the temptation to say that James is talking about false faith, dead faith, or mere intellectual faith, for none of those are true and each leads to gross distortions of his argument.

We must force ourselves to accurately describe the kind of faith he is describing as intellectual assent (even the phrases "intellectual faith" or "intellectual belief" have a pejorative connotation to them, though they are denotatively correct). Only in this way can we be accurate in our discussion of the passage and avoid hopeless confusion when trying to interpret it.

This is especially important for some who are discussing the passage, because the phrase in verse 24, where James says man is not justified "by faith alone," is embarrassing and some people will be tempted to impugn the type of faith being discussed.

But if it is kept fixed in mind that James simply means "intellectual assent" by "faith" then this verse becomes no more problematic than ones in which Jesus says things like, "The Father is greater than I" (John 14:28). Jesus is speaking in that passage of the Father having a higher position than he does in the economy of salvation (the Father is the one who sends the Son and who receives the offering of the Son, etc.), not of the Father as belonging to a greater order of being than the Son.

Thus in John 14:28, like in James 2:24, once the difference between the two usages of the key term is recognized (greater in the economy of salvation rather than greater in the order of being, and faith as intellectual assent rather than faith as full, justifying faith), the problematic aspects of the statements vanish.

Having this shown that the faith James is talking about is intellectual assent (though not "mere" intellectual assent, for it was the "mere" aspect I got rid of when I rejected the "mere belief" interpretation—by the term "faith" James just means intellectual assent, without reference to whether it is accompanied or unaccompanied intellectual assent)

In order to really do justice to James 2, one must conduct a careful, investigative reading of the text, without hostile presuppositions toward it. To do a serious, unbiased interpretation of the text, one must begin by looking at the way it uses the three key terms—faith, works, and justification. Only after looking at the meaning of these three terms can the theology of the passage be understood and then harmonized with the theology of other passages in the New Testament, such as Paul's discussion of justification in Romans.

In my past few post I have examined the meaning of the term "Faith" in James 2. Now I would like to start to examine the second of the key terms: "works."

 

[Faith alone]

James 2:14ff - what is James saying?

I think that this text in James 2 is probably the most difficult one to understand and get to make sense. Many verses there are translated in various manners so as to try to make sense out of it.

Justification is by faith alone, but people use this text in James 2 to question that Paul taught clearly that justification is by faith alone. There is no other text for them to use. "True faith will inevitably result in a life of consistent good works." An appeal is made to James 2 to show that saving faith must produce consistent good works, otherwise "such a faith” is obviously spurious. Yet James has got to be the least theologically oriented of all NT letters. So I do not understand why so much is made of some of his very practically-oriented statements.

While I do not disagree with the assertion that a genuine Christian faith will by its very nature produce good works, I just do not see James saying that. He is not telling us that faith will naturally result in works; he is telling us to DO good works! He is simply saying that IOT be justified before men, we need works to back up our faith - to perfect or complete its effect. James wants his believing readers to add works to their genuine faith. I agree with stan that there is nothing wrong with the faith James is talking about in James 2:14ff. What they need is not better faith, but works.

Now I am not saying that when someone genuinely trusts in Christ that there is not a genuine change in the person - 2 Corinthians 5:17 - and that will naturally result in works. But it is quite different to claim that a life of dedicated obedience is guaranteed for anyone who has genuienly trusted in Christ, or even that such works will be visible to people. God alone may be able to detect the fruits of regeneration in some of His children. But that is not what James is talking about here.

James 2:18, 19 But someone will say, "You have faith, and I have works. Show me your faith without (or perhaps "by") works, and I will show you faith from my works. You believe that God is one; you do well (good works). The demons also believe--and they shudder."

I agree with Gap20 in that James is not talking about a faith that is spurious. Whenever it is argued that faith is more than a "mere" intellectual assent (IOW that faith must also include surrender-commitment to the Lordship of Christ), reference is inevitably made to the demons’ faith mentioned in vs. 19. Now stan does something different here in saying to not include "mere." But regardless, it seems that the result is still that the faith is missing some aspect or component IOT be complete. So intellectual faith is still not enough to save you from your sins. That I do not buy. Faith is faith. The Bible knows nothing about "intellectual assent" or "intellectual faith" vs. "heart faith."

Yes, even the demons, or angels, have faith... but are they saved by their faith? Did Jesus die for these demons? Did Jesus become a demon or angel so that He could die for them? Is Jesus both God and demon/angel? Of course not. James is not talking about being justified before God IOT gain eternal life. That's not his point. James is not saying that it is not enough to believe in Jesus Christ - that works are also required. If he were, he would be in direct contradiction with Paul.

James is not saying that there is something wrong with the faith of a believer who does not give another believer what he needs - food and clothing. There is something wrong with his practical living. James is not a theologian. He wants people to live for Christ. He wants them to see the importance of works. He is tired of hearing, "we are no longer under the law, so it doesn't matter how we live." It does matter. True, not regarding gaining eternal life. But it does matter in this life and in eternity - rewards.

James says, "You believe that God is one. The demons also believe and tremble." We are not saved by believing that "God is one." This text is not about saving faith. It is about living for Christ. And besides, it is clear in the gospels that the demons believe - they know - that Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ. But salvation is not an option for them, and James is not saying that it has anything to do with the kind of faith they have. How can they "trust in Christ's death for them" when Christ did not die for them? He is saying that the actions of the demons is the issue. But actually, as I'll try to show below, that wasn't what James was saying... it was the argument of the hypothetical objector - with whom James does not agree.

But James said that faith without works is dead. Does he mean that the faith is not good? No. He means that without works to back up the faith we will not accomplish anything for Christ - the faith is useless in a very practical way.

Now notice the James 2:18, 19 above where is translated what was "you do well" as "you do good works" (KALOS POIEIS) This is essentially the same expression as in James 2:8, Matthew 5:24, 12:12 & Luke 6:27. The point the hypothetical objector to James is trying to make is that it isn't really possible to show good works so that they can be seen be others and so demonstrate the existence of faith, because since we see two widely different works - from the same affirmation of faith... The demons believe there is one God and tremble; James believes the same thing but does good works. But James is trying to show such a hypothetical objector that he is wrong - works are evidence of our faith. As James expresses it, "faith without works is dead/useless."

That's why James spoke about a justification by works. He is arguing that the hypothetical objector is wrong - that faith can be demonstrated to people - by our works. God sees our heart. People see our actions. John said something similar in his first letter when he said, "Let us not love in word or speech, but in deed and in truth." James is not talking about justification before God - which is by faith. That's why he argues that Rahab and Abraham were justified by works - whereas Paul says they were justified by faith... before God.

So in James 2:14ff James is arguing against those in the church who are saying that works are not important. And the "dead faith" does not mean a false or insufficient or incomplete faith, but a useless faith. It isn't the faith that is the issue. It is the lack of works. Now I will freely acknowledge that James 2:14-26 is probably the most difficult passage to try to put together in a way that makes sense and is consistent with Paul's writings. But I think the key is starting with recognizing that this text has nothing to do with eternal life - with justification from our sins before God.

FA

 

[stan the man]

This is the examination of the second key term: "works" in James 2.
Unfortunately, in this passage James does not give us nearly as much material to work with concerning the meaning of this term as he did the previous one (Faith). However, one this is clear: He is not talking about the same kind of works that Paul does when discussing justification in his epistles.

I will get more into this later, but suffice it to say that Paul in those passages is talking about "works of the Law" (Greek, <ergon nomou>), and the Law he is discussing is the Mosaic Law, the Torah.

Thus when he says, in Romans 3:28, "For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law," he immediately follows it up in the next verse, 3:29, by asking, "Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also?"

This can be brought out even more clearly if one takes the simple step of using the Hebrew term for the Law—<Torah>

"For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of Torah. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith."

Recent work in the Dead Sea Scrolls, including the recently published and very important MMT document, which served as the <Constitution >or <Declaration of Independence >for the Qumran community, reveals an enormous preoccupation on the part of first century Jews with "works of Torah." The phrase "works of Torah/the Law" is used repeatedly and confirms this interpretation.

But none of this is present in James. He does not use the phrase "works of the Law," and in any event could not, especially in the Christian age, say that we are justified by intellectual assent and works of the Torah, no matter in what sense the term "justification" is taken. Thus he is not talking about the same type of works Paul is when he discusses justification.

When I turn to the text of James, I find that he does give us some examples of the kind of works he has in mind. In 2:15-17, James says:

"If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of 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 does it profit? So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead."

In this passage there is a three-part parallelism between James's description of what a work-less person does and how a work-less faith is to be evaluated:

"you say 'Be warmed and filled,' / without giving them the things needed for the body, / what does it profit?"

"faith, / if it has no works, / is dead."


Here the works that the faith lacks are identified with "giving them the things needed for the body," in other words, the corporal works of mercy, which is a species of the good works Paul talks about.

A similar conception is found in 2:21-22, where we read:

"Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works."

Here we have the offering of Isaac identified with the works James is talking about, and so again we find James talking about a species of good works.

The same is found in James 2:25:

"And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified bya works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?"

Here again works are identified as a species of good works in that Rahab's assistance of the spies in their escape was a good work (and, in fact, a corporal work of mercy). We also see this identification of works as good works outside James 2. In James 1:25 we read: "But he who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer that forgets but a doer that works, he shall be blessed in his doing." Here the works are identified as actions in accordance with the perfect law of liberty (which is not the Mosaic Law since Christians are not subject to that). And in James 3:13 we hear: "Who is wise and understanding among you? By his good life let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom." So again the works are identified as manifestations of a "good life" of "meekness and wisdom." In other words, the works James is talking about are good work, not Paul's works of the Torah.

Before I examine the third key term: Justification in James 2. I would like to look at where Paul talks about "works".

 

[Hope of Glory]

but suffice it to say that Paul in those passages is talking about "works of the Law" (Greek, <ergon nomou>), and the Law he is discussing is the Mosaic Law, the Torah.

The moral law was never done away with, only the Mosai law.

 

[Faith alone]

Summary of faith & justification in James 2

My last few posts have gotten pretty lengthy. p) SO let me try to show how some view Kames and handle the apparent contradiction with Paul in Romans and Galatians, and deal with the "faith without works is dead" and the justification by faith and by works...

I think we need to start with how James 2:18, 19 may be translated. Notice the quotes start early in vs. 18 and extend to the end of vs. 19. The NASB comes close to doing this. Nost modern translations end the quotes after "and I have works."

James 2:18, 19 But someone will say, "You have faith, and I have works. Show me your faith without (or perhaps "by") works, and I will show you faith from my works. You believe that God is one; you do well (good works). The demons also believe--and they shudder."

James is not saying here that faith is more than a "mere intellectual assent." He is not contrasting two types of faith. Actually, he is talking abouttwo kinds of "justification." The first thing to be noticed is that the word which is used asa modifier in 2:24 is MONOS, not MONON. MONON is an adjective. But MONOS is an adverb, and cannot modifiy the noun PISTIS ("faith"). Hence vs. 24 is translated as...

James 2:24 "You see that a man is justified by works and not only [justified] by faith."

Now how about that section that refers to demons believing and trembling? First, Jesus did not become a demon and die in the place of demons so that if they trusted in Him to save them, they would gain eternal life. And please take note that the quotes there are referring to what a hypothetical objector to James might say in arguing that works are not necessary... This hypothetical objector is simply pointing out that both demons and a believer (such as himself) might believe in God ("that God is one") and yet they might profuce compeltely different works from the same belief... The demons believe there is one God and tremble; James believes the same thing but does good works - so argues the objector. Hence, he thinks that he has shown that works do not demonstrate our faith.

That's why James spoke about a justification by works. He is arguing that the hypothetical objector is wrong - that faith can be demonstrated to people - by our works. God sees our heart. People see our actions. James is not talking about justification before God - which is by faith alone. That's why he argues that Rahab and Abraham were justified by works - whereas Paul says they were justified by faith... before God. If we go to the Genesis record we will see that Genesis 15:6 - in which itsays that Abraham was justified by faith - occurs many years and several chapters before the sacrifice of Isaac that Abraham was going to make.

God knew that James believed in Him - trusted Him. But an outside observer can only go by what he sees - his works. And actually God responded to Abraham's willingness to offer his only son as something which proved to Him that he trusted Him.

So in James 2:14ff James is arguing against those in the church who are saying that works are not important. And the "dead faith" does not mean a false or insufficient or incomplete faith, but a useless faith. It isn't the faith that is the issue. It is the lack of works.

The justification in James 2 that James is referring to is a justification by works before man. (Perhaps a justification by faith plus works) The justification that Paul spoke about was by faith alone - before God. Now I may have missed a few things here - but it does draw the various parts together for me.

FA

 

[stan the man]

Paul's use of the words "Works of the Law."

Now I want to look at Paul's use of the words "Works of the Law."

Romans 3:20 is the first occurrence of the expression "works of the Torah" (Gk., ergon nomou) in Paul. This term is familiar in modern preaching as "works of the law," however it would be more properly translated in context as "works of Torah," since the law (nomos) Paul is everywhere speaking of in Romans and Galatians is the Mosaic Law (Torah; nomos being the common Septuagint translation of the Hebrew term "Torah").

As I said in my last post, the translation of ergon nomou as "works of Torah" is confirmed by archaeological-lexical evidence because it also appears in the Dead Sea Scrolls, the writings of the first-century Qumran community in Israel. It appears in a famous document, MMT, which served as the Constitution or Declaration of Independence for the Qumran community. This document, whose name translates as "Some Pertinent Works of Torah," is focused on certain disputed interpretations of specific Mosaic regulations, and it reveals an enormous preoccupation on the part of first century Jews with works of Torah. The phrase works of Torah/works of Law is used repeatedly and sheds great light on the meaning of the term in Paul (cf. the three articles in the Nov/Dec 1994 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review and R. Eisenman and M. Wises book The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, chapter 6, Works Reckoned as Righteousness -- Legal Texts).

The term "works of Torah" thus predates Paul and is a term he picked up from the Jewish vocabulary of his day (which is why he is having to dispute with people over it in Romans and Galatians, because they were already using the term). And as I said, its first occurrence in Paul is Romans 3:20. Before this point in Romans the term ergon ("work" or "deed") and its cognates were only found in 2:6, 7, and 15. In none of these places does the term indicate what Paul here has in mind.

 

[stan the man]

Paul's use of the words "Works of the Law."

In 2:6 Paul stated that God would judge every man according to his work. Obviously he did not mean works of Torah because the judgment of Gentiles was in view as well as the judgment of Jews (cf. 2:9-10).

In 2:7 Paul stated that God would reward those who persevered "in well-doing" (lit., "in good work") by giving them eternal life or immortality (as well as glory and honor). But this is precisely what Paul says works of Torah will not get one because Torah does not give the power to deal with sin. (Thus there is a distinction in Paul's mind between "good work" and "works of Torah.")

And in 2:15 Paul stated that when Gentiles do by nature what Torah requires they show that "what the Torah requires" (lit., "the work of Torah") is written on their hearts. This is the core of Torah which is really important—the same thing Paul has in mind in 8:3-4 when he says that God has done what Torah could not do by sending his Son to condemn sin in the flesh, "in order that the just [righteous] requirement of the Torah might be fulfilled in us" (8:4). The "work of Torah" of 2:15 is thus the same as "the righteous requirement of the Torah" of 8:4. It, not all the Torah's commands about diet and festival and ceremony, is what is written on the hearts of Gentiles and which Christ died in order to empower us to accomplish.

Thus the introduction of the term "works of Torah" in 3:20 is a new theme in the epistle, separate from the general "works" (actions, whether good or bad) according to which men will be judged, separate from the "good work" which God will reward with eternal life, and separate from the "work of the Law" which is written on the hearts of Gentiles and which Christ died so that we might fulfill. Because of its distinction from these things, we must inquire more closely into what Paul means by the term.

Unfortunately, the context here does not give us much of a clue, and it becomes clear in the next chapter, Romans 4. Once the term "works of Torah" has been introduced, evidence accumulates rapidly concerning precisely what Paul has in mind.

In 3:28, Paul reiterates his thesis that "a man is justified by faith apart from works of Torah." To support this, he asks rhetorically, "Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also" (3:29). "Works of Torah" must therefore be something that are characteristic of Jews rather than Gentiles. If Paul has in mind anything particular here, it would presumably be the ceremonial components of Torah (circumcision, food laws, festival laws), which are distinctively characteristic of Jews. It would not be the moral components of Torah, since even Gentiles have these written on their hearts (2:15) and they consequently do them "by nature" (2:14).

It is in chapter 4 that we have the first concrete example of what Paul means by "works of Torah," and the example confirms the thesis just advanced (that if Paul has anything in mind it is the ceremonial rather than the moral components of Torah). The example is circumcision (4:9-12). Paul emphasizes with great force the non-necessity of circumcision for justification. In fact, the whole purpose of his discussion of Abraham as the father of the faithful (chapter 4) is to show the non-necessity of circumcision.

This indicates that circumcision is the work of Torah par excellence which Paul has in mind—something confirmed by the fact that Paul had earlier conducted an extended discussion of the irrelevance of circumcision to salvation (2:25-3:1) and by the fact that right after his affirmation in 3:27 that works of Torah are not necessary he drew the implication that God "will justify the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith" (3:30).

 

[stan the man]

Paul's use of the words "Works of the Law."

My hypothesis that Paul has in mind primarily the ceremonial elements of Torah by "works of Torah" is thus confirmed by the discussion of circumcision in Romans. It is further confirmed by the discussion of circumcision in Galatians.

Paul takes pains to point out Titus was not compelled to be circumcised at Jerusalem (Gal 2:3). Paul characterizes the agitators who scared Peter into hypocrisy were "the circumcision party" (Gal 2:12). He emphasizes that "if you receive circumcision, Christ will prophet you nothing" (Gal 5:2). His statement that that "every man who receives circumcision . . . is bound to keep the whole Torah" (Gal 5:3), indicates that circumcision was at the forefront of the debate over Torah and was the sign of embracing Torah. He states that "in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail" (Gal 5:6).

Paul emphasizes the difference between his preaching and the preaching of circumcision by asking, "But if I . . . still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted?" (Gal 5:11), and goes on to state that he wishes the circumcizers "would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!" (Gal 5:12, NIV) He warns his readers that those "that would compel you to be circumcised . . . [do so] only in order that they may not be persecuted" (Gal 6:12) and that "even those who receive circumcision do not themselves keep the Torah, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may glory in your flesh" (Gal 6:13), finally reminding his readers again that "neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation" (Gal 6:15).

But while circumcision is the work of Torah par excellence which Paul has in mind, there are other works, as indicated by the text of Galatians. When Paul reminds Peter in Galatians 2:16 that they both "know that a man is not justified by works of Torah," it is in a context where Peter and the other Jews had separated themselves from eating with the Gentiles of Antioch (Gal. 2:12-13). This was because Gentiles were unclean and because they ate unclean food (Acts 10:9-16 with 11:3-12). Eating with Gentiles thus indicated a breach of the separation between clean and unclean people (clearly stressed in the Torah) and a partaking of unclean food (also stressed in the Torah). Thus the laws of separation between clean and unclean are also in view when Paul discusses "works of Torah."

Paul also laments that the Galatians "observe [Jewish] days, and months, and seasons, and years!" (Gal 4:10). This indicates that in addition to circumcision, separation laws, and food laws, Jewish festival laws are also subsumed under what Paul has in mind when he speaks of "works of Torah." In short, Paul has principally in mind the ceremonial works of Torah when he speaks of "works of Torah." (The phrase "ceremonial works of Torah" is to be preferred to the more common phrase "works of the ceremonial law" since Paul does not speak of a ceremonial Torah in contrast to a moral Torah or a civil Torah. The tripartite division of Torah into moral, civil, and ceremonial commands, while an accurate division, is an anachronism that is not found in Paul's thought. The Torah can certainly be divided in that manner, but Paul does not himself make that division. If any division is at the fore of Paul's mind, it is between the binding and the non-binding parts of Torah. But when he discusses these he does not speak of two separate Torahs, but of one Torah which has two aspects—moral and ceremonial—which respectively are and are not binding on Christians. We must thus differentiate between the "(ceremonial) works of Torah" which do not count for anything "in Christ" and the "(moral) work of Torah" which is written on the hearts of Gentiles and which Christians are empowered to fulfill.)

 

[mojoala]

Judged on faith or works

All I know is that the last book of the Bible is the voice of God.

Jesus stresses works more than he stresses faith:

Here are all the verses from Revelations that contain the word faith or works in any form thereof:

Rev 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Rev 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

Rev 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

Rev 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Rev 2:10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Rev 2:13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

Rev 2:19 I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first.

Rev 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:

Rev 3:1 And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead.

Rev 3:2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God.

Rev 3:8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name.

Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;

Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.

Rev 9:20 And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:

Rev 13:10 He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Rev 14:13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them.

Rev 15:3 And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints.

Rev 16:14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

Rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

Rev 18:6 Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.

Rev 19:11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Rev 21:5 And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

Rev 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Rev 22:6 And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.

Rev 22:12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

Not much to say about being judged on ones faith is there. I would be terrified if my faith failed to produce works pleasing to God. How about you.

 

[stan the man]

A question arises concerning whether Paul has in mind only the ceremonial works of Torah when he uses the phrase. Does he also have in mind the moral work of Torah? Many people assume that he does, but this is a judgment that must be established by exegesis and evidence rather than by a simple assertion that it is so.

A person who recognizes the united nature of Torah in Paul's thought might argue that, by virtue of its united nature, when Paul speaks of works of Torah he must mean all works of Torah, whether ceremonial or moral. But this is a faulty inference. Arguing that a united whole is unnecessary does not mean that none of its elements are necessary. To assert that it does mean this is to commit what is known in logic as the fallacy of division (i.e., the whole has a certain property—non-necessity—therefore all the parts have this property as well). (To give an example of this fallacy I learned in my first class in logic, a great building may have a certain property, such as weighing hundreds of tons, but it does not follow from this that each brick the building has this property as well.)

To give an everyday example, a dietitian might tell us that drinking diet Coke is not necessary to good health, but we would not at all be permitted to draw the inference from this that drinking water (the principal ingredient of diet Coke) is not necessary to good health. In the same way, we cannot simply assume from the fact that Torah is not necessary to salvation that none of the things in Torah are necessary to salvation. This is abundantly shown by the fact that one of the things in Torah is belief in God, which on anyone's account, is necessary for salvation. (Even if it is implicit faith.)

Furthermore, Paul's apparent view of a united Torah is mitigated by the fact he regularly moves back and forth between elements of Torah which are and are not important but uses strikingly similar language to express these elements. For example, his use of the phrase "works of Torah" to denote primarily (or exclusively) the ceremonial works which are characteristic of Jews (and which are not written on the hearts of Gentiles) and the similar phrase "work of Torah" which is written on the hearts of Gentiles and which does sometimes characterize their behavior. Much of the impression one gets that Paul has a united Torah in mind is derived from his language (which always speaks of a single Torah, not a set of moral, civil, and ceremonial Torahs), yet his language differentiates between different kinds of "work(s) of Torah."

Because of both these considerations (the logical and the linguistic), one cannot argue from Paul's view of a united Torah to the conclusion that he is saying that every element of Torah is unnecessary. Indeed, as I have shown, at least one element of Torah—belief in God—is necessary. That "work of Torah" is required.

 

[Gup20]

I'm not sure what you're saying here about the relationship of faith and works. For example, would you say that we are justified by faith alone, or by faith modified by works (faith plus works)?

I am saying that Works can only bear witness to one's faith, while the faith is what justifies. While a person CAN be justified by faith alone, one cannot be justified by works alone.

For example - lets say you jump out in the middle of the road and proclaim to several onlookers that the car coming down the street is not going to hit you, but that it will pass right through you causing you no harm. Then, at the last minute, just before the car impacts you, you dive out of the way of the vehicle. We could say that your actions revealed what you truely believed in your heart - that the car would indeed hit you and harm you. Therefore, it could be said that our works can demonstrate our true beliefs. Again, it is not that works can save -- only faith can save -- but works can certainly demonstrate what we truely believe.

In other words - Do you truely believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross for your sins? Yes? Then act like this is what you believe. But when you do - know that it is your FAITH that justifies and saves you, not your actions. You can't do good enough works to earn your salvation. Without Faith, it is impossible to please God.

Works gives you an opportunity to put a seal on what you believe. It confirms it and removes all doubt that this is in fact what you believe.

 

[Hope of Glory]

Mojo, no one is saying that works are not important; just that our everlasting salvation is not dependent upon them, either to earn salvation, keep salvation, or to prove salvation.

 

[mojoala]

While a person CAN be justified by faith alone

Please show us one verse that says we are justified by faith ALONE.

Here I will make it easy on you I will give every verse that contains "ALONE" in it.

Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Mat 14:23 And when he had sent the multitudes away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray: and when the evening was come, he was there alone.

Mat 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Mat 18:15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

Mar 1:24 Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.

Mar 4:10 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable.

Mar 4:34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

Mar 6:47 And when even was come, the ship was in the midst of the sea, and he alone on the land.

Mar 14:6 And Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me.
Mar 15:36 And one ran and filled a spunge fu
ll of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down.

Luk 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Luk 4:34 Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God.

Luk 5:21 And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh
blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone?

Luk 6:4 How he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him; which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone?

Luk 9:18 And it came to pass, as he was alone praying, his disciples were with him: and he asked them, saying, Whom say the people that I am?

Luk 9:36 And when the voice was past, Jesus was found alone. And they kept it close, and told no man in those days any of those things which they had seen.

Luk 10:40 But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she help me.

Luk 13:8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:

Joh 6:15 When Jesus therefore perceived that they would come and take him by force, to make him a king, he departed again into a mountain himself alone.

Joh 6:22 The day following, when the people which stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was none other boat there, save that one whereinto his disciples were entered, and that Jesus went not with his disciples into the boat, but that his disciples were gone away alone;

Joh 8:9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

Joh 8:16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

Joh 8:29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

Joh 11:48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.

Joh 12:7 Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this.

Joh 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.

Joh 16:32 Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.

Joh 17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

Act 5:38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:

Act 19:26 Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands:

Rom 4:23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;

Rom 11:3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.

Gal 6:4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.

1Th 3:1 Wherefore when we could no longer forbear, we thought it good to be left at Athens alone;

Heb 9:7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

Jam 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

 

[stan the man]

We must turn to exegesis and evidence to establish whether the "(moral) work of the Torah" is included in Paul's phrase "works of Torah." There are a number of very powerful arguments for the idea that they are not:

1. One piece of evidence that I already noted comes from outside the Bible. Recent archaeological and linguistic studies have shown that in first century Judaism the phrase "works of Torah" was a technical term for actions which served as Jewish identity markers (i.e., ceremonial works), indicating their membership in the Jewish covenant, in contrast to those who were outside of it. (See Dunn, Jesus, Paul and the Law, p. 220, Romans, vol. 1, p. 154. This thesis is endorsed by numerous modern authors, including E.P. Sanders, Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People, p. 147, Alan Segal, Paul the Convert, p. 131, F. J. Matera, Galatians, p. 93, )

2. Paul clearly has the ceremonial works in mind but he does not clearly have the moral work in mind. This is indicated by the fact that he repeatedly and explicitly stresses the non-necessity of ceremonial works, and especially circumcision, but he never repeatedly or explicitly stresses the non-necessity of the moral work, such as love.

3. Furthermore, Paul not only does not stress the non-necessity of love but that he lays a great deal of stress on the importance of love and obedience. For example, when Paul states that "we wait for the hope of [justification]" (Gal 5:5) he says that "neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail [toward that hope], but faith working through love" (or "faith made effective through love," RSV margin; Gal 5:6).

4. Also, Paul indicates that eternal life is a reward for "perseverance in good work" (Rom 2:7) and that we "seek . . . immortality by perseverance in good work". He also states that "he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life" (Gal 6:8) and sowing to the Spirit is defined in context as "shar[ing] all good things with him who teaches" (Gal 6:6, see also 2 Cor 9:1-6), "doing the good" (Gal 6:9), and "doing good to all men" (Gal 6:10). These clearly indicate the necessity of doing good in order to receive the gift of eternal life on the last day.

The only way a person could try to avoid the force of this argument would be to say that that (1) is ultimately inconclusive (even though quite strong) because it relies on extra-canonical evidence, that (2), while quite strong, is presumptive rather than conclusive, that (3) has in mind primarily good that is necessary after one is justified, not before, and that (4) is speaking of the final reception of eternal life rather than initial justification.

This rejoinder is possible (but very doubtful, in view of the strength of the preceding arguments), but even if successful it would not damage the exposition of Romans I am here developing. It would merely show that love is not necessary for initial justification, leaving intact the fact that they are necessary for the reward of eternal life on the last day (Rom 2:7, Gal 6:6-10) and final, eschatological justification (Gal 5:5-6).

The thesis that love is not necessary for initial justification is something to which everyone in Christendom is agreed. The fact Protestants agree to it is so well-known it does not need documentation. But the agreement of Catholics to this thesis is so commonly denied (in Protestant preaching) that it does need documentation.

A Catholic can be perfectly happy saying that "works of Torah" (including works of love) are not necessary to become justified because the Council of Trent, the official Catholic response to the Protestant Reformers, states, "[N]othing that precedes justification, whether faith or works, merits the grace of justification. For if it is by grace, it is no more by works. Otherwise, as the apostle says, grace is no more grace."(Trent, session six, "Decree on Justification," ch. 8, citing Rom 11:6.) Trent thus teaches that nothing prior to justification, including works (of whatever kind) merits justification.

In fact, Catholic theology would teach that works of love proper are impossible prior to justification because prior to that time the theological virtue of love has not been infused (poured) into the believer's heart (cf. Rom 5:5—"God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us"). The only kind of love which a person has before justification is the self-oriented love which he shows to those who he hopes will do him good. But this kind of love doesn't count for anything with God (Matt. 5:46). But if works of love proper are not possible before justification, obviously they are not necessary for justification.

Finally, the Eastern Orthodox would also agree with the thesis that works of love are not necessary in order to become justified, indicating the agreement of all in Christendom on this point.

Therefore, even if "works of Torah" includes "the (moral) work of the Torah," it is of no consequence to my exposition of Romans. It is extremely improbable, given an unbiased evaluation of the four arguments above, that Paul includes the moral work under "works of Torah," but it would not damage my interpretation if he does.

One word of application of the preceding considerations to the interpretation of 3:20. As I showed earlier, Paul reasoned that through Torah comes the knowledge of sin and, since Torah does not impart the power to escape sin, it is incapable of justifying one. Paul thus states that "no human will be justified in his sight by works of Torah." Either interpretation of "works of Torah" will make sense of this assertion.

If "works of Torah" means all works of the Torah, including works of love, then it is obvious they will not justify one because Torah does not give the ability to do works of love. Similarly, if "works of Torah" means ceremonial works, then it is again obvious that one is not justified by works of Torah because doing ceremonial works does not even begin to deliver from sin, which is the reason the Torah is unable to justify.

Thus, whichever way the phrase "works of Torah" is construed, Paul's argument remains firm: Torah only gives knowledge of sin, not escape from it, and so performing works of Torah will not lead to justification. By works of Torah no man will be justified.