The Blessedness - Romans 4:6-8

[DHK]

Scripture 5 says, “However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.
That means that the man who does not trust in giving of the blood of animals to justify him, but trusts only in God to justify him.

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

Verse three speaks of Abraham.
Verse five starts with the word But, indicating a contrast from the believing Abraham to the unbeliever who is not justified. It says what it says; it means what it says:
The unbeliever who does no work, obeys not, but simply believes on God (Christ), that man is justified and his faith is counted for righteousness. God has given him a standing of righteousness because of his faith in God. He is justified by faith alone; no works involved.
Salvation is by faith alone, and not of any kind of works: works of the law, good works, not any kind of works. This is what the passage is teaching. To him that works not, but believes on him that justifies the ungodly...

The scriptures 1-6 are, again, about works, such as circumcision. Abraham believed in God, God commanded Abraham to give a seal of his faith, and that seal was circumcision. Abraham took Ishmael, and all those born in his household or bought with his money, every male in his household and circumcised them. Now, did God consider Abraham righteous because he did the work of circumcising his son and all the males in his household, or did God consider him righteous before that? Abraham was considered righteous before that WORK OF CIRCUMCISION! THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT WE DO NOT HAVE TBEY GOD, for Abraham obeyed God BEFORE the WORK of circumcision,

The Scriptures do not indicate that circumcision was included in any of the works that Abraham did. The "works of the law," came long after Abraham's life. Circumcision is not what is referred to here. In the larger scope of his life it is a rather insignificant event.

Abraham obeyed when God told him where to go. Abraham obeyed God when God told Abraham to offer Isaac as a sacrifice.

Romans 4:1-2 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

What is being referred to here?
The fact that Abraham by faith left Ur of the Chaldees.
He went to a place where he knew not where he was going.
He dwelt in tents, lived a nomadic life, according to the will of God.
He grew old, Sarah past the time of her life, and yet still held to the promise that God would give them a son.
When given a son he was told to sacrifice him.
He sacrificed him; but God provided a substitute as the knife was about to fall.
He continued to walk with God.
He rescued his nephew Lot with 315 of his own hired servants.

And the story of his life goes on and on. His works can be counted. They seem to be numberless. Circumcision was not one of them. That is not what people saw in the works of Abraham. They saw a man who walked by faith; a man who was called "The Friend of God."

But if Abraham boasted in his own works, he could not glory.
Romans 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
--The works were all a result of his belief in God. Abraham's faith counted him righteous. He was made righteous because he had put his faith in the Lord.

Abraham BELIEVED AND OBEYED GOD before he was circumcised.

Why do you harp on circumcision. Abraham lived ca. 2100, and Moses ca. 4,000, almost 2,000 years after the time of Abraham. Abraham came long before the law. Circumcision had nothing to do with the salvation of Abraham. Abraham was saved by faith and faith alone. If you don't believe that then you reject the Scripture:

Romans 4:3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
--There is nothing about obedience; nothing about circumcision.

Against all hope Abraham BELIEVED God that he would be the father of many nations. How do you get that that is NO PERSONAL PARTICIPATION WHEN IT IS ABRAHAM WHO HAD HOPE? How do you think there is no personal participation when it is Abraham who had faith?

Faith is not a work. Therefore there is no personal participation.

Romans 4:18-21 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. And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb: He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
The last part of this verse is one of the best definitions of faith in the Bible.
It is "being fully persuaded that what God has promised, God will do."
Thus faith is not a work.
It is not participation with God. It is a simple belief and trust that God will accomplish what he has promised. That is what God did. He did it all without Abraham's help. God kept his promise to Abraham. Abraham did nothing. It was all of grace.

God credits OUR faith to us.

What is that supposed to mean.
Does God have a big chalk board, and every time you show a little bit of faith in him, He says, "good for you Moriah," and puts up a mark on the chalk board for you. Then when you get to heaven you can count all that you have "merited" in heaven. Salvation by works is heresy.

 

[The Biblicist]

Are you kidding? You compare me to the Catholics and SBM, and I am not supposed to take offense to it. You do not understand my beliefs, so do not try to tell others what I believe about the ungodly man. You even continue your slander against me personally when you tell me try honesty for a change.

There is a difference between "comparison" and "inclusion"! I did not compare you to the Catholics but I included you with the Catholics because you both respond the very same way.

 

[The Biblicist]

I decided that I am not going to discuss anything with those who keep trotting out the "cultist" charge and are allowed to get away with it.

No one trotted out the cultist charge. What I said referred to the METHOD of hermeneutics being used by you and Moriah and the Catholics. What I said is true and you demonstrate it every time you respond. Neither of you can deal with the Biblical text in an exegetical fashion - that is self-evident - just look at your responses.

 

[Moriah]

Verse three speaks of Abraham.
Verse five starts with the word But, indicating a contrast from the believing Abraham to the unbeliever who is not justified. It says what it says; it means what it says:
The unbeliever who does no work, obeys not, but simply believes on God (Christ), that man is justified and his faith is counted for righteousness.

No way is the man who “obeys not” in right standing with God. YOU ADDED TO THE WORD OF GOD WHEN YOU SAID the Bible says what is says, and means what it says; then you say, “The unbeliever who does no work, obeys not, but simply believes on God (Christ), that man is justified and his faith is counted for righteousness.” I can hardly believe I am reading this from you.

God has given him a standing of righteousness because of his faith in God. He is justified by faith alone; no works involved.

God gave to Abraham the work of circumcision as a seal of his faith! Abraham believed AND OBEYED GOD EVEN BEFORE THIS. When did Abraham go where God said to go, was it before or after circumcision? It was before circumcision!

Salvation is by faith alone, and not of any kind of works: works of the law, good works, not any kind of works. This is what the passage is teaching. To him that works not, but believes on him that justifies the ungodly...

Why would God and Jesus make their home with someone who does not obey? Jesus says the Father and he will make their home with those who obey! See John 14:23.

What is being referred to here?
The fact that Abraham by faith left Ur of the Chaldees.
He went to a place where he knew not where he was going.
He dwelt in tents, lived a nomadic life, according to the will of God.
He grew old, Sarah past the time of her life, and yet still held to the promise that God would give them a son.
When given a son he was told to sacrifice him.
He sacrificed him; but God provided a substitute as the knife was about to fall.
He continued to walk with God.
He rescued his nephew Lot with 315 of his own hired servants.

And the story of his life goes on and on. His works can be counted. They seem to be numberless. Circumcision was not one of them. That is not what people saw in the works of Abraham. They saw a man who walked by faith; a man who was called "The Friend of God."

Are you kidding? The Bible SPEAKS of whether Abraham was justified BEFORE or AFTER CIRCUMCISION!
The Bible SAYS CIRCUMCISION.

The Bible does not say Abraham was justified before he obeyed God and went to where God said to go! In fact, the Bible tells us that BY FAITH ABRAHAM MADE AN ACTION. BY FAITH, Abraham went where God said to go. BY FAITH, Abraham offered Isaac as a sacrifice.

Ask yourself this, did God nail obeying Him to the cross? NO! Did God nail circumcision of the flesh to the cross? YES!

If a person does not have a mind and heart set on obeying God, if a person does not obey God, then how that person is different from Satan is something you need to explain.

Faith is not a work. Therefore there is no personal participation.

Faith IS a personal participation.

Does God have a big chalk board, and every time you show a little bit of faith in him, He says, "good for you Moriah," and puts up a mark on the chalk board for you. Then when you get to heaven you can count all that you have "merited" in heaven. Salvation by works is heresy.

I have an unwavering faith. I do not doubt.

How is it that you do not see it as wrong to teach no obedience to God and Jesus in order to be saved?

 

[Michael Wrenn]

No one trotted out the cultist charge. What I said referred to the METHOD of hermeneutics being used by you and Moriah and the Catholics. What I said is true and you demonstrate it every time you respond. Neither of you can deal with the Biblical text in an exegetical fashion - that is self-evident - just look at your responses.

I have dealt with the Biblical text that way; you just cannot accept it because that would upset the applecart of your being able to infallibly interpret scripture -- infallibly in your own mind, that is.

 

[DHK]

How is it that you do not see it as wrong to teach no obedience to God and Jesus in order to be saved?

1. Salvation is by faith and faith alone.
2. Salvation is not by works. That teaching is your teaching and is heresy.
3. Salvation is by grace through faith...not of works. You deny the Scripture.
4. We are justified by faith and therefore have peace with God. (Rom.5:1) You deny this Scripture.
5. Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed unto him. You deny this Scripture.

You deny the totality of Scripture which teaches that salvation is by faith and not of works. It is not of obedience (works), it is of faith. Why do you deny the Bible?

 

[The Biblicist]

I'm sorry that you cannot distinguish between our faith reckoned as righteousness -- which is what the Bible teaches -- and righteousness being attributed or imputed to us.

No such distinction is made in Romans 4:1-25. You are simply misinterpreting what Paul says.

Rom. 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

First, all the verbs in these two verses are in the present tense showing identifical or simeltaneous action with each other and all modify the "ungodly."

Believing, justifying and imputeth are all simeltaneous actions that are all "WITHOUT WORKS" and descriptive of the "ungodly" person. Hence, the righteousness is derived from an external source as the person being justified, beliving and being imputed righteousness is "ungodly." An "ungodly" person cannot be the source of righteousness. Neither can his works be the source of righteousness by the very fact he is believing "without works" or "worketh not."

The righteousness is related to "his faith" (not faithfulness as that is being denied by the fact his state is "ungodlly" and it is "without works.").

The righteousnesss is found in the OBJECT of His faith or in the Person and work of Jesus Christ EXTERNAL to himself ("ungodly") and EXTERNAL to his own works ("worketh not" "without works").

You cannot simply dissect this text from its context and make if mean what you want it to mean. The "faith" in question has already been defined in the introduction in Romans 3:24-26 and in the application in Romans 4:21-25. The righteousness obtained by faith is found "in" the object of that faith or in the Person and works of Jesus Christ:

Rom. 3:24 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 merely introduces Abraham to illustrate this introductory assertion! This is also proven by the APPLICATION of Abraham's faith in Romans 4:21-25 in the conclusion of this illustration:

21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 ¶ Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

For your position to be true in this context one would have to get rid of the term "ungodly" and replace it with "godly" and get rid "worketh not" and "without works" and replace it with "works of righteousness."

Moreover the SAME Greek term is translated "imputeth" and "counted" and "reckoned" and so you theological distinction between "imputeth" and "reckoned" is false.

There is a difference, a great difference. It is the difference that separates Eastern Orthodox and Anabaptist theology from the Latinized West -- Roman and Protestant. You think you have escaped the errors of Rome and the Magisterial Reformers, but your mind is imprisoned in the Latin West where it will probably remain entrenched. You have escaped Rome only to fall into the error of the Magisterial Reformers and their false doctrine of forensic, legalistic justification. I prefer the original, New Testament, early church, Eastern, and Anabaptist views. The Western view of justification is cold, detached, and legalistic. I don't find God to be any of those.

Here is your problem! You need to get your theology from the Scripture not from TRADITIONS of men and uninspired church history.

P.S. I don't want to fight with you any longer, so I'll just drop it.

You are not fighting me! You are fighting the Apostle Paul. He is the one that used the SAME Greek term for all three words (counteth, imputeth, reckoned). He is the one that defines the person needing justified as "ungodly." He is the one that defines "righteousness" received by faith to be EXTERNAL to the person being justified by claiming his person to be "ungodly" and his justification is "without works" and "worketh not".

Your problem is with Paul! You need to stop getting your theology from secular traditions of men and start getting from the scriptures based upon EXEGESIS rather than EISGESIS!

 

[Moriah]

1. Salvation is by faith and faith alone.
2. Salvation is not by works. That teaching is your teaching and is heresy.
3. Salvation is by grace through faith...not of works. You deny the Scripture.
4. We are justified by faith and therefore have peace with God. (Rom.5:1) You deny this Scripture.
5. Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed unto him. You deny this Scripture.

You deny the totality of Scripture which teaches that salvation is by faith and not of works. It is not of obedience (works), it is of faith. Why do you deny the Bible?

DHK,

You should go and reply to each of my comments, for you speak of me doing that, why do you not? You rarely, if ever address what I say to you.

 

[Moriah]

The unbeliever who does no work, obeys not, but simply believes on God (Christ), that man is justified and his faith is counted for righteousness.

I can hardly believe what you say. How can anybody preach no obedience?

James says faith without action is dead.

You teach dead faith. You teach that dead faith is the kind that saves!

 

[Moriah]

1. Salvation is by faith and faith alone.
2. Salvation is not by works. That teaching is your teaching and is heresy.
3. Salvation is by grace through faith...not of works. You deny the Scripture.
4. We are justified by faith and therefore have peace with God. (Rom.5:1) You deny this Scripture.
5. Abraham believed God and righteousness was imputed unto him. You deny this Scripture.

You deny the totality of Scripture which teaches that salvation is by faith and not of works. It is not of obedience (works), it is of faith. Why do you deny the Bible?

Even the demons believe that there is One God; they believe this while they have the shuddering action.

I can hardly believe that you teach us not to obey to be saved.

James 2:22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.

James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

No such distinction is made in Romans 4:1-25. You are simply misinterpreting what Paul says.

Rom. 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

First, all the verbs in these two verses are in the present tense showing identifical or simeltaneous action with each other and all modify the "ungodly."

Believing, justifying and imputeth are all simeltaneous actions that are all "WITHOUT WORKS" and descriptive of the "ungodly" person. Hence, the righteousness is derived from an external source as the person being justified, beliving and being imputed righteousness is "ungodly." An "ungodly" person cannot be the source of righteousness. Neither can his works be the source of righteousness by the very fact he is believing "without works" or "worketh not."

The righteousness is related to "his faith" (not faithfulness as that is being denied by the fact his state is "ungodlly" and it is "without works.").

The righteousnesss is found in the OBJECT of His faith or in the Person and work of Jesus Christ EXTERNAL to himself ("ungodly") and EXTERNAL to his own works ("worketh not" "without works").

You cannot simply dissect this text from its context and make if mean what you want it to mean. The "faith" in question has already been defined in the introduction in Romans 3:24-26 and in the application in Romans 4:21-25. The righteousness obtained by faith is found "in" the object of that faith or in the Person and works of Jesus Christ:

Rom. 3:24 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 merely introduces Abraham to illustrate this introductory assertion! This is also proven by the APPLICATION of Abraham's faith in Romans 4:21-25 in the conclusion of this illustration:

21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 ¶ Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

For your position to be true in this context one would have to get rid of the term "ungodly" and replace it with "godly" and get rid "worketh not" and "without works" and replace it with "works of righteousness."

Moreover the SAME Greek term is translated "imputeth" and "counted" and "reckoned" and so you theological distinction between "imputeth" and "reckoned" is false.




Here is your problem! You need to get your theology from the Scripture not from TRADITIONS of men and uninspired church history.



You are not fighting me! You are fighting the Apostle Paul. He is the one that used the SAME Greek term for all three words (counteth, imputeth, reckoned). He is the one that defines the person needing justified as "ungodly." He is the one that defines "righteousness" received by faith to be EXTERNAL to the person being justified by claiming his person to be "ungodly" and his justification is "without works" and "worketh not".

Your problem is with Paul! You need to stop getting your theology from secular traditions of men and start getting from the scriptures based upon EXEGESIS rather than EISGESIS!

That is what you are doing, not I. Your interpretation is colored by the Magisterial Reformers. I am interpreting the scripture literally, then showing how the earliest churches, the Eastern church, and the Anabaptists viewed it. Forensic justification and imputed righteousness were invented by the Magisterial Reformers whose doctrines were as false as those of the RCC -- more so, in some cases.

 

[The Biblicist]

That is what you are doing, not I. Your interpretation is colored by the Magisterial Reformers.

Impossible! I have NEVER read them or their interpretations. Rediculous as I am pointing out the terms and grammar provided by Paul not the Reformers.

I am interpreting the scripture literally,

That is simply a lie! You have offered NO CONTEXTUAL BASED repudiation of my exposition of Romans and neither have you provided any CONTEXTUAL BASED exposition to support your position! So what you are claiming is an utter IMPOSSIBILITY! The truth is that you have offered NOTHING Bibilical based but only your own UNPROVEN ASSERTIONS backed by TRADITIONS! All you do is reference Post-Biblical positions by some Anabaptists in contrast to Protestant Reformers neither of which are inspired.

Your theology comes from read uninspired books not the scriptures and it is easy to prove it as you offer NOTHING THAT IS EXEGETICALLY BASED to support you assertions.

 

[The Biblicist]

That is what you are doing, not I. Your interpretation is colored by the Magisterial Reformers. I am interpreting the scripture literally, then showing how the earliest churches, the Eastern church, and the Anabaptists viewed it. Forensic justification and imputed righteousness were invented by the Magisterial Reformers whose doctrines were as false as those of the RCC -- more so, in some cases.

You NEVER deal with the Biblical evidence placed before you! You ALWAYS flee to TRADITIONS of men to support your case.

Deal with the contextual based Biblical data I presented you from Romans 4. I gave you precisely what Paul said and you cannot refute what I presented or you would have pointed out the errors in grammar or terms or context. So you flee to YOUR FINAL AUTHORITY - traditions of men just as the Catholics do!

Shut my mouth and DEAL with the Biblical data and Biblical based arguments I presented based upon EXEGETICAL data right out of the text.

 

[Moriah]

Biblicist,

Stop accusing Michael of things he does not do.

Man it gets old to hear that unfounded nonsense as a defense to debating doctrine and sharing our beliefs.

 

[DHK]

Even the demons believe that there is One God; they believe this while they have the shuddering action.

I can hardly believe that you teach us not to obey to be saved.

James 2:22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.

James 2:17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder.

Moriah, what is the object of your faith? Yourself? Satan? Christ?
The object of the demons faith was not God; it was Satan himself, and therefore they were not saved. They shuddered at the awesome power of God and the knowledge they had of the end of the world. But they were followers of another leader, Satan. That was the object of their faith.

I "believe" that Nero existed and did the terrible things that he did. But he is not the object of my faith. Nor does he make me shudder. The object of my faith is Christ. He is my Lord and King; to him I am subservient. Please use the word correctly.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

You NEVER deal with the Biblical evidence placed before you! You ALWAYS flee to TRADITIONS of men to support your case.

Deal with the contextual based Biblical data I presented you from Romans 4. I gave you precisely what Paul said and you cannot refute what I presented or you would have pointed out the errors in grammar or terms or context. So you flee to YOUR FINAL AUTHORITY - traditions of men just as the Catholics do!

Shut my mouth and DEAL with the Biblical data and Biblical based arguments I presented based upon EXEGETICAL data right out of the text.

I have done that repeatedly; it's not my fault that you are too blind to see it and too undiscerning to recognize it. I started with scripture, and then I showed how the earliest churches, the Eastern church, and the Anabaptists agreed, and how it was the Magisterial Reformers invented unbiblical doctrines.

There is a vast difference in reckoning our faith as righteousness as the scripture teaches, and attributing or imputing a false righteousness based on a legal transaction. The latter is a false doctrine which leads to another false doctrine -- forensic justification. It is I who start with scripture -- the literal rendering -- and then show how this view is upheld in the earliest churches, Eastern Christianity, and the Anabaptists; you, on the other hand, interpret through the lenses of the Magistetrial Reformers and thus cannot help but coming up with the wrong view.

 

[Michael Wrenn]

Biblicist,

Stop accusing Michael of things he does not do.

Man it gets old to hear that unfounded nonsense as a defense to debating doctrine and sharing our beliefs.

I am used to it; that's all he and some others can do.

 

[saturneptune]

Why are you so scared to attempt to EXEGETICALLY attempt to refute my OP??? I dare you or any Catholic advocate on this forum to attempt to EXEGETICALLY refute it IN LIGHT OF the CCC interpretation of circumcision's relationship to baptism!

How do the Catholics explain the practice of baptising infants in light of Matt 28:18-20?

 

[Moriah]

Moriah, what is the object of your faith? Yourself? Satan? Christ?
The object of the demons faith was not God; it was Satan himself, and therefore they were not saved. They shuddered at the awesome power of God and the knowledge they had of the end of the world. But they were followers of another leader, Satan. That was the object of their faith.

I "believe" that Nero existed and did the terrible things that he did. But he is not the object of my faith. Nor does he make me shudder. The object of my faith is Christ. He is my Lord and King; to him I am subservient.

My faith is in God.

Who said the demons were saved?

How do you bring Nero into this discussion?

I see you have a hard time understanding.

Let me try again. I love to tell you.

James says faith without action is dead.

Do you get that?

You teach such faith is a saving faith.

How do you not see the error in that?

You teach the dead faith James tells us about is a saving faith.

James says even the demons believe and shudder. Shuddering is an action that the demons do.

Even the demons believe and have an action.

YOU teach that we are NOT to obey, that we are not to have any action on our part, and you say to believe otherwise is a false teaching worthy of condemnation.

Do you get it now?

 

[The Biblicist]

I have done that repeatedly;

If that were true then you could easily respond to these simple and clear contextual based evidences that repudiate your position. If that were true you wouldn't make such a foolish distinction between "imputation" and "reckoned" as both translates the very same Greek term.

If that were true we could find such a response on this thread but we cannot!

The truth is you have NEVER provided a Biblical based refutation of these simple contextual facts.


DEMONSTRATE don't make unfounded ASSERTIONS!