Clearly, I have set this conversation "off on the wrong foot". I apologize for reading too much into your first note. I am very happy to know of your full commitment to this study. Unfortunately, many people often begin correspondence with me through the web-site on this very topic, but yet they have always ceased after a few exchanges. Most of these people casually toss out a few arguments with one hand, and yet they end the conversation by holding up the other. Too many of these people are more than willing to talk, while having little to no interest in exposing their hearts to true listening. I apologize for letting my experiences with others make me skeptical regarding you. It was an error on my part. I am very sorry. Hopefully, we can move forward, despite my error, and discuss the topic charitably, giving each other the benefit of the doubt, as anyone who bears the name of Christ should.
...
Moving to our question at hand, I believe this topic must not be that difficult to understand. The writer of Hebrews categorized the topic of "baptisms" as one of the "elementary principles" of the doctrine of Christ. "Repentance" and "faith" he labeled as the "foundation" (
Hebrews 6:1-2). If we fail to understand this topic and come to unity, it will only be because of our "hardness" or "slowness or heart". This is not a death sentence, because Jesus so labeled other good men of old, and so they were slow-hearted - for a time (
Mark 8:14-21; Mark 16:14; Luke 24:25). I will trust that we both sincerely desire to first remove any barriers from our own hearts, followed by helping the other where we have opportunity (
Matthew 7:3-5). Whatever the exact cause of any disagreement on this essential topic, it will certainly not be because God's Word cannot be understood alike or because of any other failure on God's part (
Ephesians 3:3-5).
I appreciate your sentiment regarding winning the "war" against Satan and not the "battle" or the "argument" against each other. You are quite right that any victory achieved over the other by misquoting a passage or lifting it from its context is a victory only in the flesh. Often, the apparent loser in this life is the ultimate winner (
Revelation 6:9-11). Admittedly, some brethren can be so hardened in false doctrine that inspired example may authorize reckoning of them as an
"enemy of righteousness" (
Acts 13:10; Philippians 3:2, 18-19); however, we are still commanded to
"love our enemies" (
Matthew 5:43-48); therefore, we should continue to seek their best interest whenever possible, regarding him not as our enemy, even though he may oppose the truth (
II Thessalonians 3:14-15; I Corinthians 13:4-8). Since your children and their friends are not participating in this discussion, I will reserve judgment of their actions, because I do not know all the facts, and because it does not matter. If no one ever obeyed God, it would not lessen or alter His will for us (
Romans 3:3-4; II Timothy 2:13). If every person who taught the truth was an evident hypocrite, that still would not remove our obligation to observe the truth they taught (
Matthew 23:2-3).
You should know that I cannot speak for you, the one who converted you, those you have converted, or the "seasoned gentlemen", neither can I speak for the "Church of Christ". I can only speak of the Bible and my understanding of it. But, the gospel, as I understand it to be revealed in Scripture, is not a "works-based religion", as you have stated. Neither, does salvation depend on perfect obedience in all points. However, that last fact does not mean that salvation is not conditional upon some points (
Matthew 7:21-23). It is trivial to both test and know whether one has done these things (
II Corinthians 13:5). In this I believe you have extended too much. I believe the Scriptures teach that the Christian
should have 100% confidence in their
own personal salvation. I have written a few articles in this regard, which I hope you might pass along to your children, since according to you, they may not understand this correctly:
http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles ... saved.html
http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles/forgives.html
http://www.insearchoftruth.org/articles ... hopes.html
Therefore, to argue that my belief system offers no confidence to me in regards to my own personal salvation is inaccurate. Faith eroding questions like, "Do you know everything?", "Have you done enough?", "Could you have missed something?", etc. pervert the basis for justification and cast ill repute on the very nature of God. Much more could be said here, but I think our time would be better spent on what I consider to be the root of the problem. The above questions are easily answered, once the rest is understood properly. Now, getting to the root of the problem, which is grace and works, with special application to baptism.
Where you have uniformly applied a single definition to the word, "works", throughout Scripture, and you have observed different arenas of judgment (
Romans 4=God,
James 2=man), I have recognized 2 different usages of the word "works" (
Romans 4=meritorious,
James 2=conditional), and I have uniformly applied a single arena of judgment - before God. The key to coming to unity will be recognizing our distinctive beliefs and then testing our theoretical interpretations against both the immediate context of each passage and the global context of all Scripture. It is very easy for both of us to waste time fighting "straw man" arguments, which the other does not really believe. However, such debate should not be quickly disregarded, because we may be blind to the ultimate conclusions of our own beliefs. In other words, some times we may be blind what to we really, ultimately believe, so we must be careful in dismissing the other's "inaccurate" representation of our beliefs. ...
Now, please allow me to answer the rest of the vital points from your email below. (Please see your last response, given below with inserted comments and questions.)
...
Also, at some point, I would like to share this discussion with those whom you are studying via email. As you noted previously, we should not be fearful of others seeing both sides of the issue. Would you mind if I sent a copy of this exchange to them? I would happily copy you, so you will know that the exchange was represented faithfully.
I pray you find this helpful. Please allow me to defend my occasionally sharp tongue in advance by again noting that this issue does not reside in a lack of knowledge of God's Word. You know the verses as well as I. Neither, is this issue caused by God's failure to effectively communicate His will. Such accusation would be blasphemy in light of
Ephesians 3:3-5, II Timothy 3:16-17; II Peter 1:2-3,
Romans 3:25-26; Hebrews 6:1-2; etc. Rather, this prolonged issue seems to stem from man's general hardness of heart and reluctance to accept what the Scriptures teach. Consequently, it is only out of brotherly love that I press your feet to the fire, as I see it (
Proverbs 27:17; Acts 2:36-37). If you love me, I expect you will do no less, just as I know you have and may continue to do for my benefit also.
May we both have a sincere love of the truth above all else (
II Thessalonians 2:9-12)
======================================================
email wrote:... You'll notice that I use the King James Version and in order to maintain continuity would ask that you do too.
I prefer the NKJ, but using the KJV is no problem. However, I do reserve the right to consult and reference other translations, because I do not believe the KJV to be an inspired translation. (For example, see bad translation of "Passover" as "Easter" in
Acts 12:4., "hell" in many places instead of "hades", etc.)
email wrote:You ask me a question - "If I do this, and if I find error in it, would you be open to studying it?" I feel that my past actions bear out the fact that I am willing to not only study but to change my beliefs if I feel that I am in error. I would ask you a similar question- If you read this and find error in your current belief, are you willing to change your belief? It's hard to do but I can say that I have been down that road. I trust the answer is yes.
Yes. My allegiance is to the Lord and truth above all else (
Matthew 16:24-27; Luke 14:26; II Thessalonians 2:9-12).
email wrote:Joh 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
(KJV)
Jesus is not saying that belief is a work. He is saying that they don't have to work, only believe. ... These people wanted to know what they should do. Jesus' answer...believe.
Mel, may I be polite but blunt here to avoid any vagueness? I believe you made a critical mistake here. You need to get much closer to the text. Your interpretation is certainly necessary to maintain your current system of belief, and I understand what you are saying, but your interpretation is simply not rooted in the text. Please allow me to explain:
The Jews asked about what
"works" they needed to do or
"work", as ordained by God, hence
"works of God". I believe we are most likely agreed in the context, which is: The Jews had a warped sense of perfect-lawkeeping, in that they thought they could do enough good works to merit salvation and boast in their works (see discussion of
Romans 4 below). Christ's answer obliterates that misconception, which answer is more fully expanded in Paul's letter to the Romans.
Now, here is my issue. Jesus said that
"belief" in Himself was the
"work of God". Jesus clearly labels belief in Him as a
"work of God". Now, either belief is a work, or Jesus lied. As I said in the last post, Jesus cannot lie (
Titus 1:2); therefore, belief is a work.
You can't just say "Jesus is not saying that belief is a work", when Jesus clearly and directly says that it is! You have to provide something in the text which necessarily says otherwise. Would you accept me treating
Romans 4 or
Ephesians 2 in that manner? Give me a reason that can be sustained from the passage, and I'll believe the text, but please don't tell me to believe opposite of the clear wording of the text and expect me to believe your words over the text.
Finally, please define the word "work" before we go any further. Is it not something we do as opposed to what God or Jesus does? If this is true, then you have already surrendered your position, when you admitted that belief is something Jesus said
we must
do!
If you believe that Jesus used the word,
"work", differently in this verse as compared other passages, then you have surrendered a major tenet of your position, as I understand it, which is that "work" must be interpreted uniformly throughout Scripture. However, if you accept the possibility of "works" being used in different ways in different contexts, then why will you not consider an alternative usage in
James 2? Much more on this point below...
email wrote:If work is a belief, what do we do with this verse?
Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
(KJV)
Paul is contrasting works and belief. Working not is a condition for justification.
What kind of works? The context answers this, if quoted more fully here:
Paul wrote: 1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
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.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
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,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. (Romans 4:1-8)
The definition here is clear. A
"work" is something "done", but in this passage, it is much more specific than that. A
"work", as defined in this context, necessarily
merits or
earns the reward (
Romans 4:4). This kind of
"work" places the rewarder in the recipient's
debt! In this case, the Jews, to whom Paul is writing, believed that they could do enough
"works", such that God would
owe them salvation. They actually believed God was in their
debt!
This definition is paramount. I believe it is one half of the key to resolving our differences. Whereas you have apparently defined a
"work" as anything we do to
receive salvation, Paul defines it in this context as anything we do to
merit salvation! (Please correct me if I have misrepresented your beliefs.) This is the crux of why I think you have misunderstood and misrepresented what I believe. Baptism, repentance, confession, and all the good deeds in the world could never
merit salvation! Why? One sin, no matter how insignificant it seems to us,
earns or
merits us eternal damnation in hell (
Romans 6:23). That is the only thing that any of us have
earned or
merited by our
works, which is why salvation by works can never succeed! We have all sinned and earned death and hell in the process (
Romans 3:23; 6:23).
Please note the other properties of
"works" as used in this context:
- works provide a basis for boasting, even before God (v. 2-3)
- works is in contrast to and eliminates grace (v. 4)
- works is in contrast to and eliminates faith (v. 5)
- works is in contrast to and eliminates forgiveness of sin (v. 6-8)
Now, if we find any other passage that, unlike
Romans 4, encourages
"works" or ascribes opposite attributes, then we must assume that two different kind of works are under discussion, or accept that one or both of the passages are in error! Correct? Please stop me here, if I am wrong.
email wrote:Also, if belief is a work, there is no grace. It's all works. That can't be according to Paul.
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
(KJV)
... unless,
"works" in
John 6:28-29 is used differently than in
Romans 4 and
Ephesians 2. No one in his right mind would argue that the performance of true belief, repentance, confession, AND baptism would
merit or
earn salvation. Therefore,
Romans 4 and
Ephesians 2 simply are not applicable to the
"work" of
John 6:28-29, neither do
Romans 4 and
Ephesians 2 eliminate the role of these conditional works in salvation! Furthermore, these actions do not eliminate grace. In fact, they require it!
What would be accomplished by saying the words, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and my Savior", unless God graciously gave them significance (
Romans 10:8-10)? What good would it do to repent and try to follow Christ, unless God forgave your past debt (
Romans 6:23)? What good would it do to be immersed in water, unless God recognized it (
Romans 6:1-6; I Peter 3:21)? Each of these acts, including belief itself, are dependent upon God's first acting. We have to hear the gospel before we can do any of those things (
Romans 10:17), which is dependent upon God's grace.
All of these conditional works are acts of faith that God will do what He has graciously promised. Otherwise, they are meaningless. If these were
meritorious works, then God would owe every man salvation who did these things, making salvation of man's eternal soul equitable to these 5 trivial things. Who can believe it? Therefore, there is neither Scriptural nor logical basis for necessarily associating these deeds with a "works-based religion".
As illustration of the harmony between immersion and God's grace, consider the comparable case of Naaman the leper. He was immersed 7 times in the river Jordan to be saved from his leprosy (
II Kings 5:1-14)? Did he
earn his physical salvation? Of course not! Otherwise, news would have spread, and every unbeliever who dipped 7 times in the Jordan river would have been saved of leprosy, because God would owe it to them based upon that one work. So, if Naaman did not earn his physical salvation by dipping in water 7 times, why would any one think that we could earn an even greater, eternal salvation by immersing only once in water?
There's nothing in baptism that eliminates grace or salvation by faith. As I said earlier, baptism necessitates salvation by grace and faith, because it is an act of faith (
Galatians 3:26-27; I Peter 3:21)!
email wrote:A person is justified because he believes in the finished work of Jesus Christ.
You are arguing that one is saved by belief alone. Therefore, you need to produce passages to that effect to establish your point - salvation by belief alone or belief only. I believe that belief is an integral part of God's requirements for salvation, so verses that say we are saved by faith or grace offer me no trouble in reconciling.
email wrote:We are justified the same way Abraham was- by belief.
Paul wrote:Ro 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
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.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
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,
7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
(KJV)
It wasn't until many years later that Abraham's works came into the picture when he followed God's leading to sacrifice Isaac. In the meantime he was already justified because he believed God. If it was because of his works, he would not have been justified till after he attemted to sacrifice his son. Scripture does not bear this out.
If I understand you correctly, you are making an argument based on the ordering of Abraham's belief and recognition of justification as recorded in
Genesis 15:6 versus the later timing of his attempted sacrifice of Isaac as recorded in
Genesis 22:1-12. In which case, you are reasoning that it would be absurd to assume that Abraham was not really justified until
Genesis 22, because he is acknowledged as believing and having his faith accounted as righteousness in
Genesis 15. Did I understand you correctly?
Assuming I understood you correctly, it is first worth noting that
Genesis 15 follows
Genesis 12 by quite a span of time, during which time Abraham answered God's call to leave his homeland and venture to Canaan, where God bestowed the land promise, and Abraham
"called on the name of the Lord" (
12:1-8). Also, during which time Abraham and Lot divided, Abraham received the nation promise, and he built an altar to the Lord in the plains of Hebron (
Genesis 13:14-18). Furthermore, before
Genesis 15, by the Lord's blessing, Abraham chased down the 5 kings, rescued Lot and his family, paid tithes to the Lord's priest Melchizedek, and received blessing from God by the hand of this priest (
Genesis 14). Yet, if you are correct, Abraham's faith not justified until
Genesis 15:6? Can we say that Abraham was unjustified until
Genesis 15? Although Abraham certainly stands as an example of justification by faith apart from the works of the Old Law (
Romans 4:9-12), he cannot be used as an example of justification by faith apart from
any works, because he was
"working" from the beginning of
Genesis 12, long before the statement recorded in
Genesis 15:6!
Secondly, we should recognize that God often acts based on events that are yet to come. I am sure this is no surprise. After all, He is a God existing outside and apart from time (
Exodus 3:14; Isaiah 46:9-10). Even our very context reminds us of this fact about God's nature:
Paul wrote: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. (Romans 4:17)
Therefore, if God can speak past tense of an event that did not transpire until a few thousand years after the statement, it should be no surprise that God can speak or even acknowledge one as being justified, although the basis for the justification has yet to occur. If this sounds hard to believe, even unreasonable, please consider this: When were the Old Testament saints justified? How about Abraham? In
Romans 4:1-3, Paul associates the events surrounding
Genesis 15:6 as indicating that Abraham had at least already being justified, and he associates that justification with grace and faith. Correct? But, we both know that the basis for all men's justification is Jesus' crucifixion, which occurred over 2000 years
after the statement recorded in
Genesis 15:6, correct? How can God make such statements?
Paul wrote:And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. (Hebrews 9:15)
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; (Romans 3:25)
So, if God can speak of Abraham as being justified some 3000-2000 years before "Jesus' finished work", as you like to say, then why can God not reckon Abraham's justification only 40 years before the events of
Genesis 22, especially considering that Abraham has been demonstrating a working faith for the previous 40 years (
Genesis 12-15)? The error here is trying to force a strict timeline, according to human eyes, onto a God who exists outside of time - a being to whom time has no meaning:
Peter wrote:But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. (II Peter 3:8)
Therefore, the argument on the timing of Abraham's recognition of justification does not stand. More on Abraham below...
email wrote:... In this same passage Paul quotes David telling us that a man's sins are not imputed or counted against him. --
Yes, I agree with this preceding statement. But, what follows is supposition. Telling me what you believe is not equivalent to telling me why you believe it, much less why I should believe it. You must substantiate your claims with Scripture, if you would like for me to agree with your conclusions. Of course, we must first tell each other what we believe before we can explain why, but we must not fail to include the reason why.
email wrote:-- He isn't saying that a man does not sin but rather that they are not counted against us and says that we are righteous without works. God calls us righteous and yet turns His back on His onl begotten Son because He took our sins and God cannot look on sin. Amazing!
... With
Romans 4 behind us, let's follow your lead and look at James now...
email wrote:Works are important and we are to do good works but it is not for our justification.
Even James declares this if we interpret it correctly. If we understand this correctly it is very clear.
James wrote:Jas 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?
(KJV)
Please permit me to quote a broader context, because I think it contains many more verses and points that are pertinent to properly understanding the above verses:
James wrote: 8 If ye fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.
14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
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.
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
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.(James 2:14-26)
First, let us go back to the original point from
Romans 4 and try to apply the same definition to the word,
"works", here. From this context, can we say that these
"works" meritoriously earn man's justification apart from faith, grace, and forgiveness? No! These
"works" of
James 2 function in harmony with faith - not in opposition to it:
- 2:18 - "shew thee my faith by my works"
- 2:18 - "faith without works is dead"
- 2:20 - "faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect"
- 2:22 - "scripture was fulfilled, which saith Abraham believed God, and it was imputed for righteousness"
- 2:24 - "by works a man is justified, and not by faith only"
- 2:26 - "so faith without works is dead also"
Therefore, these
"works" of
James 2 cannot be the same
"works" of
Romans 4, because the definitions and attributes given in the respective contexts simply do not match! One is in opposition to grace and faith, while the other works in harmony with it, even
"perfecting" or completing it!
The only remaining question that stands between us is the arena or judgment in
James 2. Is this judgment related to justification of our faith before God, or is this related to justification of our faith before men? Would it be fair to summarize your following paragraphs as interpretations of
James 2:18-24, based on the premise that the justification is before men and not God? It seems the only real contextual argument you made is based on the phrase,
"Shew me your faith" in
James 2:18. Therefore, if that interpretation on that phrase fails to stand, or if I show that judgment before God is a more reasonable interpretation from the greater context, are we not done? I am not trying to oversimplify your argument; however, I do want to go straight to the heart of the matter. If I have overlooked an essential point in the following paragraphs, as opposed to an elaborative point, please let me know.
email wrote:Abraham believed that God would raise Isaac from the dead (Hebrews 11:19). In this act of obedience he justified his claim to faith. Abraham did not impute righteousness to himself; that had been done many years earlier based on his faith in God. His claim to faith was justified by his works.
This anachronism was handled in the preceding discussion of
Romans 4.
email wrote:Verse 24 does not say that God justifies a man based on faith and works, but that the man by his works justifies himself in his claim to having saving faith. This justification is not a reference to the new birth, but to the man's claim (saying he has faith) to a new birth. When a man justifies himself, it is not before God that he is justified, but to his fellow man, as the passage demonstrates
"Shew me thy faith" James 2:18
So, there is verse 18 in the midst of this context, which requires the reader to show his faith. Does this mean the entire context is only about showing and demonstrating our faith to men, so as to justify our claims to men that we are faithful to God? Please let us consider a few points in answer to this question:
First, I must confess this proposed interpretation of
James 2 seems counterintuitive to all I know about the gospel. True, Paul needed Barnabas to justify his discipleship to the brethren, so they would permit his joining the local church (
Acts 9:26-28). However, that justification was something that Barnabas did - not Paul for himself. Yes, Paul defended his apostleship to the Corinthians, partially based upon his works (
II Corinthians 11:16-33). However, he loathed doing it; he called it
"foolish boasting"; and he only resorted to it, because the Corinthians had resorted to such foolish means for establishing authority (
II Corinthians 11:16-20). If their very souls were not at stake, he would not have even mentioned it. Therefore, even in this case justifying one's faithfulness before men is cast in very disparaging light. -- Furthermore, in general the Lord commends
hiding our good works from other men, which is the
very opposite of the commendation imposed on
James 2, showing our works so that we may be justified before men. To adhere to the recommended interpretation of
James 2 is to be like the Pharisees and Sadducees that Jesus so clearly condemned in His Sermon on the Mount (
Matthew 6:1-6, 16-18)! I cannot think of too many other things further from the gospel's morality. Meekness shrinks back from defending or justifying ourselves before others (
Matthew 5:5; Numbers 12:1-3). Generally, that is something that Christians leave up to God to do (
Numbers 12:4-11). On the flip side, in the very same book, James admonishes us
not to make the very judgments being enabled by the proposed interpretation of
James 2:
James wrote:Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge. There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy: who art thou that judgest another? (James 4:11-12 - see also I Corinthians 2:15; 4:3)
Second, I believe the context shows that justification before God, including salvation itself is the greater context. The request in
James 2:18 to demonstrate one's faith without works is a challenge to demonstrate that faith in general can exist without works. Please allow me to explain:
James had previously charged the Jewish Christians as essentially being hypocrites. They were showing favoritism to the rich in their assembly, while despising the poor (
2:1-7). Then, James admonishes them to show mercy to the poor, lest the same merciless judgment be shown to them (
2:8-13). Next, James explains that their faith without kindness to these poor was dead (
2:14-17)! And, what was their response?
"I have faith; you have works" (
2:18). In essence, it was the same old excuse,
"Everybody has a different gift. I do not have that gift, so I am not obligated to obey!" James annihilates their argument by demanding them to prove such a faith:
"Shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." They are being called upon, not to justify their faith before men, but to justify that faith can generally exist apart from works! They are being called upon to justify their excuse to not have to work! They must defend their excuse,
"Thou hast faith, and I have works". In essence, James' answer is that their faith is dead - before God - because they cannot defend their excuse to James or anyone else. This unmeetable challenge does not represent his full argument, but it is a part of the greater argument, as we will see.
Third, let us examine a few more points from the context to see if the topic is indeed salvation and justification before God - or men:
- 2:8-9 - Fulfilling the royal law of Scripture is contrasted with committing sin and being a transgressor. Does that sin pertain to salvation/judgment given by men? Or, by God?
- 2:10 - Failure to keep the whole law, as proscribed in God's commandments, renders one guilty of the whole law. Is that judgment before God or men?
- 2:12 - Reminds that they will be judged by the law of liberty. But, from elsewhere, please recall that there is only "one Lawgiver and Judge". Who is that but God alone (James 4:11-12)?
- 2:13 - Warns that judgment given without mercy shall receive no mercy. Who has right to such judgment, and has even promised such, except God alone (Matthew 6:9,12; 7:1-2)?
- 2:14 - The very question presented in the opening of this immediate context pertains to the ability of a faith without works to save ("Can faith save him?"). Note, the antecedent to "him" is the hypocritical reader who says he has faith without works. The destitute brother has not been introduced yet, and therefore, he cannot be the antecedent of the one needing saving.
- 2:17 - Faith without works is described as being "dead", not merely unobservable, but "dead". Can one be saved by a "dead" faith (Hebrews 11:6)?
- 2:18 - Detailed above... See first point...
- 2:19 - James raises the example of devils, or demons, who believe in God. Are they saved? Is their judgment from God or man? If they are not saved, and if their judgment is from God, then by the force of the parallel, James must be asserting that faith without works is equally judged and condemned by God.
- 2:20 - Again, faith without works is described as being "dead". Again, we must ask, "Can one be saved by a 'dead' faith?"
- 2:21 - Abraham's justification is set forth as an example. Who witnessed Abraham's deed? Who was concerned about observing this work? Who rendered a judgment on his actions? Was it God or man? More on this below...
- 2:22-23 - Abraham's faith is clearly described as being "imperfect" or "incomplete" before his offering of Isaac, because by that sacrifice, his "faith was made perfect". Was this faith made perfect before man or God? Notice that James connects the "perfection" of Abraham's faith with the fulfilling of Genesis 15:6, which is associated with his justification before God according to Paul in Romans 4:1-3. Therefore, if James is not discussing Abraham's justification before God, then neither was Paul in Romans 4, because they both build cases on the same verse!
- 2:24 - Again, we see the immediate connection of justification in this context to Genesis 15:6.
- 2:26 - Again, faith without works is described as being "dead". Can a "dead" faith save? What can a body do without its spirit before God or anybody else? Without the spirit, the body is completely dead - before God and man!
Finally, let us go back to the context in Genesis, referenced by James:
Moses wrote: 1 And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.
2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.
...
9 And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood.
10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son.
11 And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I.
12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.
...
15 And the angel of the LORD called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,
16 And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son:
17 That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;
18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice. [/i](Genesis 22:1-18)
Who was the recorded audience of this event? Was it men who orchestrated this trial? Was it men who stayed Abraham's hand and said,
"Now I know"? Was it men who reaffirmed the covenant and promise with Abraham to make him a father of many nations and bless them through his Seed? No! It was before God that all these events occurred, and it was God who judged Abraham's actions, rendering blessing and commendation.
Now, I am not saying that God did not know what Abraham would do until Abraham raised his hand. Interestingly, it is only at this point that God makes the promise to bless all the nations of the earth through Abraham's "seed", which seed is Christ as explained in
Galatians 2:8-9, 11. (Elsewhere, God again relates the establishment of this promise and the other promises to the fact that Abraham obeyed God -
Genesis 26:4-5). Yet, God must have foreknown the trial and Abraham's victory, because He foreknew Abraham's deeds and that He would bless Abraham with this very blessing long before the trial occurred in
Genesis 22 (
Genesis 18:18).
What I am saying is that God some times justifies a person before the actual basis of the justification has occurred. He can do this, because He exists outside of time. Remember that He justified all the Old Testament saints, including Abraham, long before Jesus died on the cross (
Romans 3:25; Hebrews 9:15). However, those saints' justification was not complete until Jesus actually died on the cross. Correct, or were they truly and fully justified before Christ's "finished work" upon the cross? In a similar way, we can reconcile that Abraham's faith was not justified before God until God observed the demonstration of that faith in offering Isaac. Remember, James said that Abraham's faith was
"perfected" at this work. Therefore, we must necessarily assume that Abraham's faith was incomplete or missing something until this event, or similar had occurred. Looking back at the context, Who is the one waiting to see the demonstration of Abraham's faith? Man or God? Clearly, it is God.; therefore, according to the
Genesis 22 account and
James usage of the text, we must understand that the context of
James 2:14-26 is salvation and justification of our faith before God.
email wrote:And in verse 25, Rahab had professed to believe that the Isrealites were going to destroy Jericho-- nothing more. When she proceeded to act upon that faith by risking her life to save the two spies, she justified her claim. Again, God did not justify her from her sin based on her act of saving the spies; rather, she justified herself to the two spies, who then made preperation for her survival.
Again, I appreciate your assertion, and I understand what you are saying. But, since James started this verse with
"Likewise", I understand this verse to also be about Rahab's justification and spiritual salvation before God. Remember, she was a Gentile and not subject to the law of the Jews for salvation, and therefore, she could be saved "by faith" as was Abraham, according to any demonstration of faith that God saw fit (
Romans 2:14-15).
email wrote:Again, our works are important and scripture tells us that "we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. Eph 2:10.
I do not believe that we are saved because of our belief in Christ's death, burial and ressurection and then we can live like we want to and have no guidelines. But our works do not justify us, God does.
I appreciate your clarification, but does belief and faith not justify us either, since God alone does? I think your play on words extends further than you intended, unless you want to say that we play no part in our justification, including faith and belief.
Like you, I also believe that God justifies us (
Romans 3:24-28), and like you, I also believe that we must at least believe, else we cannot access that justification. Yet, neither of us think that belief excludes God being the ultimate source of that justification. Likewise, I also believe that repentance, confession, and baptism do not exclude God as ultimate source of that justification, just as belief does not exclude God.
email wrote:The people you refer to in Matt. 7 may well have also been trying to work for their justification instead of obeying scripture. If we work for our justification we are not obeying God.
So, then you admit that belief is a form of obedience, something we do for salvation? Would that not make it a work, as you have defined it? Also, since they clearly believed, you must admit that something can go wrong beyond the point of just belief and faith alone? Maybe they had not believed "enough"? Are you 100% sure you believe "enough"? How do you know you are different than those of
Matthew 7:21?
And, you are admitting this is an eternal issue, heaven and hell hanging in the balance?
If that is the case, then I believe you have again surrendered your position, because you are placing qualifications beyond belief in Jesus as Son of God and Savior, and they are qualifications which we must meet, not God.
I think you dealt with this passage far too swiftly, overlooking all its import. Please read the passage again. Does Jesus say their problem was that they failed to believe or that they failed to obey?
email wrote:It may be a trivial point but if "It is finished" does not include the full price for our justification then we probably should cease to sing the song "Jesus Paid it All" in our assemblies and maybe some others that I can't think of right now.
I would not let my sentiment over an uninspired song trump
I Corinthians 15:14-19.
email wrote:This is quite lengthy and for that I apoligize. I don't intend to dominate the converstion but I do not desire to be misunderstood either.
No problem. The seriousness of this issue demands such attention. Plus, I have written quite a bit also. ... Maybe this would be an appropriate time to begin closing and offer a rough summary on my part. Please grant me the liberty of summarizing without having to fully defend points already established. If you would like for me to elaborate or justify any of these points further, please just ask.
m273p15c wrote:I believe that we are primarily and ultimately saved by grace, just as you noted (Ephesians 2:1-10; II Timothy 1:9; Acts 15:11). That is, by God's grace, love, and mercy Jesus was offered on the cross for us (John 3:16) paying the awful price that we could not afford to pay (Romans 6:23; Galatians 3:13). No amount of good deeds could ever offset our sin; therefore, as sinners, salvation could never come to us by any law or merit-based system (Romans 3:23; Galatians 3:21). Our only hope was a system that made provision for forgiveness, providing justification by mercy. This God did by devising a just system, wherein our sins could be forgiven and our faith could be accounted as righteousness on account of Jesus' sacrifice (Galatians 3:10-14; Romans 4:1-ff). However, this system did not provide universal salvation. Receiving this salvation has requirements for the sinner (Luke 13:23-29; Matthew 7:13-14). Satisfying these requirements are so trivial when compared to the wickedness of their sin, or when compared to the glory of heaven that performing the requirements cannot begin to merit their salvation. Only by grace is their salvation made possible (Ephesians 2:8-10). And, when compared to what God, Jesus, and the Spirit have worked; all glory, credit and praise rightly goes to God. There is no room for boasting on man's part (Romans 4:3-4; Ephesians 2:8-10). But, yet something is required of man. And, what is that thing you may ask? It is nothing but faith in Jesus!
Did you agree with all that? I think you would. If not, I would be happy to refine the above paragraph, so as to make the following point: If you can believe all of that, and accept that God has some requirement for us, then what would be changed by adding, "repentance, confession, and baptism" to the end of the preceding paragraph? Logically, what would have to change? I do not believe any of the preceding statements would have to change. The only question would be to establish the Scripturalness of each requirement, but none of the requirements could be eliminated immediately on a systematic basis, as I believe you have previously argued.
My understanding is that we are indeed saved by grace, in that God's grace sent Jesus to pay our debt, and God accepts our faith in place of righteous law-keeping, works of merit. However, God does not blindly accept any and all claims to faithfulness. He requires some demonstration of that faith - that it is a living or true faith (
James 2:14-26). He could have chosen just about anything. It is His right to choose as Lawgiver and Judge, but He has set up belief (of course), repentance, confession, and baptism as gates that must be passed before He will grant salvation (
Hebrews 11:6; Luke 13:3, 5; Matthew 10:32-33; John 3:5). Salvation is freely available to anyone, and anyone may satisfy the qualifications. They are trivial, but yet they are conditions; therefore, I have personally labeled them as "conditional works" to denote things we do for to satisfy conditions for salvation. This is in contrast to "meritorious works", which are things we do to
earn salvation. We could call them James-2-works versus Romans-4-works, but you get the idea. In summary I believe we are saved by grace through faith, but yet our faith will be judged according to our works (
James 2:14-26). Therefore, it is no surprise that we read that we will be judged according to our works (
I Peter 1:17; II Corinthians 5:10). Indirectly, one may speak of being justified by works, but that seems misleading, because it represents only a small part of the truth.
Reconciling these two great letters, Paul's letter to the Romans confronts the arrogant mind that thinks too highly of what it does to be saved. James' letter confronts the lazy, lustful mind that thinks too little of what it does to be saved. These writers were fighting two opposing extreme views; therefore, it would be a mistake to emphasize either to the neglect of the other. From these two letters, we see that grace and works, such as baptism, can and do function harmoniously together in God's scheme of redemption.
email wrote:Your statement "I am happy to thoughtfully and prayerfully respond to each and every concern or question that you present to me" concerns me a little. It could be taken as if you think have all the answers. I trust this is not the case.
Just because I am willing to respond (
I Peter 3:15), that does not mean I have all the answers. Some times the answer for now is, "I do not know. That is a good question. I will have to study it, pray about it, and get back to you."
email wrote:I definitely do not have all the answers and it seems that scripture indicates that we may never until we reach heaven.
I'm not sure we will need them then.
But, for this case, don't you agree that we already have what we need to come to a united understanding?
...
Also, I was hoping to receive an answer to
John 12:42-43, 48, as presented in the last email. Did you get a chance to think about it yet? I believe it shows that more than just belief is required of us, because the people believed but were not saved.
As you mull over the weight of these arguments, please keep in mind, we still have not discussed any of the verses that specifically mention or argue the necessity of baptism.... Hopefully, we will have opportunity to visit those passages later.
May God help us both to have a sincere love of the truth.