Gospelexplained.com: Gal 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
HP: When looking at the verses in Galatians you mention, I do not believe that it is the works (in a sense) God calls upon man to perform as conditions of salvation that Paul is addressing which are, repentance, faith, or obedience to the moral law until the end, that Paul is addressing with words such as “made perfect in the flesh” or “dead to the law” or “I do not frustrate the grace of God,” or “for if righteousness come by the law.” It is apparent to me by the issues Paul brings up with these Galatians believers that deal with problems concerning their insatiable desire to revert back into the customs and ordinances of the ceremonial law, and that by keeping of them they obviously felt that they would or might “merit” eternal life. Ga 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.” So here is what I believe Paul was addressing. First and foremost the issue of ceremonial law, which in the case of the Galatians was, obviously seen in Chapter 5, circumcision. They must have been very incessant in reverting back to the old covenant ceremonial demands that Paul clearly understood had been wiped away by the atoning work of Christ, thinking that justification came by the keeping of this OT ordinance. The issue was not that repentance, faith and obedience to God’s moral law was not commanded and enjoined for them to do, but rather that circumcision was done away with as a means of justification. Note, they had 'falsely' thought circumcision was a means of justification, but from the beginning it was not so.
It is interesting to note that circumcision was NEVER, nor was any obedience to the moral law, nor the shedding of the blood of animals, ever the means of justification. There has been one ground and one ground only for salvation from Adam to our day, i.e., the mercy of God via the means of the sacrificial death of the Coming Messiah to them, and our Lords’ atonement on the cross for us. The Jews were just as confused then as much of the water baptism, church joining, ordinance partaking crowd is today. No I am not speaking against any of these ordinances, for they serve their intended purpose if partaken of in the right spirit in clear understanding of what they can and cannot do. Still, there are a lot of individuals today, as I am sure you are aware of, that still feel that justification comes by the performance of these works. None of these ordinances are conditions of salvation, but there are some works (in a sense), some formed intents of the heart and subsequent actions that God says are indeed ‘necessary works’ in order to make the atonement effective in our lives. Repentance, faith and obedience unto the end are three that Christ as well as Paul clearly enjoined as necessary to make the shed blood of Christ effective in our lives for salvation. These works of man, that God has placed as conditions for salvation, are NOT meritorious in any way, and do NOT constitute the grounds for forgiveness, but rather are always thought of in the sense of ‘not without which,” not “that for the sake of.” We are not saved on the account of these works, but neither will we be saved apart from these works. James tells us clearly, that faith without works is dead being alone. I believe the works he is referring to are none other than the three issues I mentioned above, i.e., repentance, faith, and obedience until the end. Here is brief illustration to make this point more understandable.
A man goes to prison for life, being justly condemned and sentenced by a judge for a specific crime. Can such an individual ‘merit’ a pardon by the performance of good works while in prison? Can such a criminal perform good works to such a degree that the governor is forced to grant this man a pardon based merely on the ‘merit’ of the performance of such good works? Absolutely not. Just the same can the governor, if he so pleases, pardon such a criminal? Of course he can. Still, there is something the criminal MUST do, there is an attitude that MUST be reflected by the criminal to receive a pardon IF the governor is indeed fair and just, and attitudes are tied inseparably to intents of the heart, this very initial intent being none other than a ‘work’ in one sense of the word. The governor MUST witness from the criminal a repentant attitude and a change of heart towards his former criminal behavior if the governor is even to consider such a pardon for the criminal.
What kind of governor would pardon a criminal from prison who had not exhibited true remorse for his crimes? Would not the governor have to be satisfied in his or her mind that IF they pardoned such a criminal that they would not return to commit the same crime or one of like heinous behavior upon society again and that such a criminal possessed and exhibited a true change of heart and attitude towards their former behavior? There are indeed certain conditions that the criminal must meet, works that such a one must of necessity do in order to have the opportunity for a pardon if such an opportunity is offered. These works on the part of the prisoner are in no way meritorious in nature, and in no way force the governor to grant such a one a pardon on their account. Just the same, there are definite conditions or works one must do in order for the governor to consider the pardon. These works are thought of in the sense of ‘not without which,’ not ‘that for the sake of.’ It can properly be stated that one is not pardoned due to any works (in one sense of the word ‘works’ in the sense of ‘that for the sake of’) of the prisoner, but just the same it can be said ‘without works’ (in another sense of the word, that being in the sense of ‘not without which’) one will never see the opportunity to receive a pardon.
Can you see how that works can be thought of as necessary for a pardon, or in the sense of “not without which,” yet at the same time no amount of works can be thought of as “that for the sake of” or forcing the governor to pardon the criminal on the account of works performed by the criminal?
The ‘conditions of salvation,’ or ‘works’ that God calls upon every man to do in order to receive a pardon for sins that are past, is not the issue of ‘works’ that Paul was addressing them about. Circumcision and possibly other OT ceremonial law were the issues, not repentance, faith, or obedience to God’s moral law until the end.
When the heart is right and repentance and faith are first enjoined, I believe you are right in that obedience will be the natural consequence of our primary focus, love towards God and our fellowman shed abroad in our hearts via the Holy Spirit. We will not have to grudgingly “work” at being obedient, but rather as our love toward God remains our primary focus, those works will flow as a natural result of that love, just as works towards our spouse flows naturally as a result of our love and commitment to them. Just the same, as we live out our life and see actions possibly inconsistent in our lives towards the object of our affections, it is a clear indication whether or not our love is sincere and if we are in fact who we believe we are. “Examine yourselves, to see if ye be of the faith’ is the Scriptural admonition. “Joh 8:31 ¶ Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;”
