The Works of the Law/works

[The Biblicist]

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. 2:16

Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, - Rom. 4:6

There are those on this forum who define "works of the law" in Galatians and "without works" in Romans to refer to the act of circumcision in becoming a Jew and thus proselyte to Judaism. They claim that these passages refer to acts 15 and that what Paul is repudiating is the idea that one must become a Jew under the Mosaic Law to be saved.

They repudiate the idea that the "works of the law" and "without works" repudiates justification by personal obedience to God's commandments.

However, both the context of Romans and Galatians use Abraham as the model to prove that we are justified by faith without works and that repudiates their entire interpretation because:

1. Abraham was a GENTILE
2. Abraham was justified without works before Judaism existed
3. Abraham was justiifed without works 430 years before the Mosaic Law Covenant
4. Abraham was justified without works by faith before he was circumcised.
5. We are justified by faith without works EVEN AS Abraham

Therefore, Paul is repudiating not merely justification by becoming a Jew through cirucmcision and obedience to the Mosaic Law but he is repudiating justification by personal obedience to any command of God before, during or after Moses and Judaism.

This is proven by Romans 4:1-12.

 

[RLBosley]

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. 2:16

Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, - Rom. 4:6

There are those on this forum who define "works of the law" in Galatians and "without works" in Romans to refer to the act of circumcision in becoming a Jew and thus proselyte to Judaism. They claim that these passages refer to acts 15 and that what Paul is repudiating is the idea that one must become a Jew under the Mosaic Law to be saved.

They repudiate the idea that the "works of the law" and "without works" repudiates justification by personal obedience to God's commandments.

However, both the context of Romans and Galatians use Abraham as the model to prove that we are justified by faith without works and that repudiates their entire interpretation because:

1. Abraham was a GENTILE
2. Abraham was justified without works before Judaism existed
3. Abraham was justiifed without works 430 years before the Mosaic Law Covenant
4. Abraham was justified without works by faith before he was circumcised.
5. We are justified by faith without works EVEN AS Abraham

Therefore, Paul is repudiating not merely justification by becoming a Jew through cirucmcision and obedience to the Mosaic Law but he is repudiating justification by personal obedience to any command of God before, during or after Moses and Judaism.

This is proven by Romans 4:1-12.

Precisely. Short, sweet and to the point. :thumbs:

BTW, what's with the sudden uptick in volume of Judaizers on the board? Seems to be a lot more now than there used to be.

 

[The Biblicist]

Precisely. Short, sweet and to the point. :thumbs:

BTW, what's with the sudden uptick in volume of Judaizers on the board? Seems to be a lot more now than there used to be.

It seems to be a feeding frenzy against OSAS.

 

[RLBosley]

I've seen that. But also in the last month or so others also demanding keeping the Law (Sabbath and tithe in particular). Maybe I'm just noticing it more?

 

[BobRyan]

There are those on this forum who make up the straw man that any who differ with them must believe in justification by personal obedience to God's commandments.

They can never get their opponents to say it - so they simply "quote themselves" to make the claim stick.

How "unexpected".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[The Biblicist]

There are those on this forum who make up the straw man that any who differ with them must believe in justification by personal obedience to God's commandments.

So Bob, what does the phrase "works of the law" and the word "works" mean in connection with Abraham who as you know was justified by faith "without works" (Rom. 4:5-6)???

1. Abraham was a GENTILE not a Jew
2. Abraham was justified BEFORE he was circumcised
3. Judaism had no existence until Mosaic Law was developed 430 years later
4. We Gentiles are justified by faith without works EVEN AS Abraham

So what do "works' mean in regard to Abraham except his own personal obedience (good works) or disobedience (bad works)????

 

[Gup20]

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. 2:16

Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, - Rom. 4:6

There are those on this forum who define "works of the law" in Galatians and "without works" in Romans to refer to the act of circumcision in becoming a Jew and thus proselyte to Judaism. They claim that these passages refer to acts 15 and that what Paul is repudiating is the idea that one must become a Jew under the Mosaic Law to be saved.

They repudiate the idea that the "works of the law" and "without works" repudiates justification by personal obedience to God's commandments.

However, both the context of Romans and Galatians use Abraham as the model to prove that we are justified by faith without works and that repudiates their entire interpretation because:

1. Abraham was a GENTILE
2. Abraham was justified without works before Judaism existed
3. Abraham was justiifed without works 430 years before the Mosaic Law Covenant
4. Abraham was justified without works by faith before he was circumcised.
5. We are justified by faith without works EVEN AS Abraham

Therefore, Paul is repudiating not merely justification by becoming a Jew through cirucmcision and obedience to the Mosaic Law but he is repudiating justification by personal obedience to any command of God before, during or after Moses and Judaism.

This is proven by Romans 4:1-12.

I agree with this 100%

It really is quite clear - Paul is talking about two covenants in Galatians and Romans... the covenant of Faith, and the covenant of The Law. The Law is the Law of Moses and the 10 Commandments:

Gal 4:21 Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen to the law?
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman.
23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise.
24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar.
25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.

Gal 4:30 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.​

 

[Gup20]

Phl 3:2 Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision;
3 for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh,
4 although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more:
5 circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee;
6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.
7 But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ.
8 More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ,
9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,

 

[The Biblicist]

I agree with this 100%

It really is quite clear - Paul is talking about two covenants in Galatians and Romans... the covenant of Faith, and the covenant of The Law. The Law is the Law of Moses and the 10 Commandments:

Gal 4:21 Tell me, you who want to be under law, do you not listen to the law?
22 For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the bondwoman and one by the free woman.
23 But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise.
24 This is allegorically speaking, for these women are two covenants: one proceeding from Mount Sinai bearing children who are to be slaves; she is Hagar.
25 Now this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children.

Gal 4:30 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.​

You got it Guppy! The ten commandments are inseparable from "Mount Sinai" and so "works of the law" have a direct application to this contrast between two covenants.

Notice that Bob has not responded to my challenge. If he responds, it will probably be in regard to the ten commandments and an attept to change the subject of this OP which does not do well for his position of justification by works which he calls "justification by faith without works."

 

[The Biblicist]

Phl 3:2 Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the false circumcision;
3 for we are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh,
4 although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more:
5 circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee;
6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.
7 But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ.
8 More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ,
9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith,

Yes! Verse 9 really exposes the justification by works of the law position that some hide under the terms "justification by faith without works" semantics by merely changing the definitions of such words as "works of the law" and "works" to mean Judaism.

 

[BobRyan]

So Bob, what does the phrase "works of the law" and the word "works" mean in connection with Abraham who as you know was justified by faith "without works" (Rom. 4:5-6)???

1. Abraham was a GENTILE not a Jew
2. Abraham was justified BEFORE he was circumcised
3. Judaism had no existence until Mosaic Law was developed 430 years later
4. We Gentiles are justified by faith without works EVEN AS Abraham

So what do "works' mean in regard to Abraham except his own personal obedience (good works) or disobedience (bad works)????

Originally Posted by BobRyan
The moral law of God is not a means of earning our way to heaven - it does not matter if you are talking about Lev 19:18 Deut 6:5 or Exodus 20:8-11.

I feel that God said to NT saints that "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19 and in Rev 14:12 the saints are those who keep the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus".

I feel that Paul said "do we then nullify the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31

The works of the law mentioned above are a reference to the fact that the lost cannot become saved by works.

For example you cannot "Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18 so much that your debt of sin goes away. All mankind need a Savior.

When you get a speeding ticket - you cannot reduce the ticket or even pay the ticket simply by going the speed limit for a month. Obedience does not pay for the debt owed by the lost.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[The Biblicist]

The works of the law mentioned above are a reference to the fact that the lost cannot become saved by works.

For example you cannot "Love your neighbor as yourself" Lev 19:18 so much that your debt of sin goes away. All mankind need a Savior.

When you get a speeding ticket - you cannot reduce the ticket or even pay the ticket simply by going the speed limit for a month. Obedience does not pay for the debt owed by the lost.

in Christ,

Bob

Your position does not make much sense. You can't have your cake and eat it too. On one hand you are saying a person cannot be justified by works or the keeping the deeds of law but on the other hand you claim violating the law can unjustify the justified. If law keeping cannot justify you neither can lack of law keeping condemn you or else keeping the law is what jmaintains your justification and ultimately what really justifies you. Your position is self-contradictory and oxymoronic and unbiblical as Paul says a person is justified by faith "WITHOUT" the law and you deny that ultimate justificaiton is "WITHOUT" commandment keeping. INdeed you insist that "WITHOUT" law keeping a person will be lost - unjustified.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
The moral law of God is not a means of earning our way to heaven - it does not matter if you are talking about Lev 19:18 Deut 6:5 or Exodus 20:8-11.

I feel that God said to NT saints that "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19 and in Rev 14:12 the saints are those who keep the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus".

I feel that Paul said "do we then nullify the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31

Your position does not make much sense. You can't have your cake and eat it too. On one hand you are saying a person cannot be justified by works or the keeping the deeds of law but on the other hand you claim violating the law can unjustify the justified.

Your "unjustify the justified" is your terms - not mine.

I prefer the actual Bible when it comes to "forgiveness revoked" Matt 18

"fallen from Grace, severed from Christ" Gal 5:4.

Cut off from Christ John 15:1-10

"you should fear for you stand only by your faith - if He did not spare them neither will He spare you " Romans 11

If law keeping cannot justify you neither can lack of law keeping condemn you

Read 1John 2:3-6 much?

Go to 1Cor 6 and start with the phrase "do not be deceived".

Go do 1John 3 and start with the phrase "do not be deceived"

Go to John 15 to see what happens to one who is cut off - severed from Christ.

It is not as though these are secret texts - hard to find.

(And we both know - that if you respond without going to the text - I will quote the text - so fair warning here.)

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

And of course - Matt 18 "forgiveness revoked" lesson regarding the loss of your salvation under certain conditions.

 

[BobRyan]

you or else keeping the law is what jmaintains your justification and ultimately what really justifies you. Your position is self-contradictory and oxymoronic and unbiblical as Paul says .

You write as if you never read Romans 6.

 

[The Biblicist]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
The moral law of God is not a means of earning our way to heaven - it does not matter if you are talking about Lev 19:18 Deut 6:5 or Exodus 20:8-11.

According to your view it is, look at the very next statement you make! Out of one side of your mouth you deny it is but out of the other side of your mouth you insist without it heaven cannot be entered.

I feel that God said to NT saints that "what matters is KEEPING the Commandments of God" 1Cor 7:19 and in Rev 14:12 the saints are those who keep the Commandments of God AND their faith in Jesus".

Matters for what? Entrance into heaven? Justification? Service? Sanctification? For what?

I feel that Paul said "do we then nullify the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! In fact we establish the Law of God" Rom 3:31

How do we establish the law? For justification? For salvation? Or do we establish the Law by faith in one who fulfilled it in our behalf (Rom. 3:24-26; 4:24-25; 2 Cor. 5:21; etc.)????

Your "unjustify the justified" is your terms - not mine.

I prefer the actual Bible when it comes to "forgiveness revoked" Matt 18

Because you do not understand "justification" includes forgiveness of sins! Justification includes TWO aspects and they are both spelled out in black in white in the very chapter dealing with justification (Rom. 4:6-8). (1) Imputed righteouosness (Rom. 4:6); (2) forgiveness of sins (Rom. 4:7-8).

So you are teaching the imaginary contradictory doctrine that one is not justified (forgiveness of sins/imputed righteousness) by works of the Law but yet without the works of the law one is not justified (forgiveness of sin/imputed righteousness).

 

[BobRyan]

Justification involves forgiveness.

Matt 18 involves forgiveness REVOKED.

Were were simply not supposed to "notice"??

 

[The Biblicist]

Justification involves forgiveness.

Matt 18 involves forgiveness REVOKED.

Were were simply not supposed to "notice"??

Your position is a contradiction. You cannot at one and the same time believe forgiveness of sin is revoked by the very same thing it cannot be obtained by. If it cannot be obtained by it neither can it be revoked by it or else it is obtained by it ultimately.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted by BobRyan
Justification involves forgiveness.

Matt 18 involves forgiveness REVOKED.

Were were simply not supposed to "notice"??

Your position is a contradiction. You cannot at one and the same time believe forgiveness of sin is revoked by the very same thing it cannot be obtained by. If it cannot be obtained by it neither can it be revoked by it or else it is obtained by it ultimately.

1. You cannot bend the Bible to fit your tradition for OSAS.

2. Notice "the details" in places like Romans 11, Gal 5:4, Matt 18, John 15:1-11 for the real fallen from Grace - severed from Christ, cut off from Christ problem described in the Bible.

3. Your logic is flawed - for you ignore the fact that while it is true that the lost do not gain salvation by works - they retain their salvation via the "perseverance of the saints" that the BIBLE teaches (not exactly the same thing as Calvinists make of it). Using the Bible model - it means that free will is exercised to "choose to persevere".

Having made that choice Paul is correct when in Romans 8 He says "IF you are by the Spirit putting to death the deeds of the flesh THEN are you the children of God". It matters not that this Bible doctrine does not fit with your tradition.

The one who is placed in the condition of being forgiven, and a new creation "old things passed away all things become new" must then "CHOOSE" to "Take up your cross and follow Me" (Matt 10) and as Christ said "or you are not worthy of Me". Matt 10.

==============================

[FONT=&quot]Rom 11
20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear.
21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.
22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off


===========================================
"Forgiveness revoked" model as Matt 18

Matt 18
32 Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me:
33 Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee?
34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.
35 So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.[/FONT]

 

[The Biblicist]

1. You cannot bend the Bible to fit your tradition for OSAS.

2. Notice "the details" in places like Romans 11, Gal 5:4, Matt 18, John 15:1-11 for the real fallen from Grace - severed from Christ, cut off from Christ problem described in the Bible.

3. Your logic is flawed - for you ignore the fact that while it is true that the lost do not gain salvation by works - they retain their salvation via the "perseverance of the saints" that the BIBLE teaches (not exactly the same thing as Calvinists make of it). Using the Bible model - it means that free will is exercised to "choose to persevere".

Having made that choice Paul is correct when in Romans 8 He says "IF you are by the Spirit putting to death the deeds of the flesh THEN are you the children of God". It matters not that this Bible doctrine does not fit with your tradition.

The one who is placed in the condition of being forgiven, and a new creation "old things passed away all things become new" must then "CHOOSE" to "Take up your cross and follow Me" (Matt 10) and as Christ said "or you are not worthy of Me". Matt 10.

==============================

[FONT=&quot]Rom 11
20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear.
21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, He may not spare you either.
22 Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off


===========================================
"Forgiveness revoked" model as Matt 18

Matt 18
32 Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me:
33 Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee?
34 And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.
35 So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.[/FONT]

So you have no response for your obvious contradiction that makes Justification by faith WITHOUT WORKS to be really defined as Justification by works - that is your doctrine. Instead of addressing the obvious contradiction you defend it - case closed.

Again, one cannot without contradiction state that we are forgiven WITOUT WORKS and at the same time demand WITHOUT WORKS such forgiveness will be revoked. No one can say without contradiction that we are justified by faith WITHOUT WORKS and yet maintain there is no ultimate justification by faith WITHOUT WORKS. That is precisely your position regardless of your denials, deceptions and evasive tactics.