In our essays FR 135 and FR 138 we discussed the universal
principle of justification. It is righteousness /
justification / salvation imputed on the basis of our
faith. That principle includes more than a single
affirmation or act at a certain point in time for it is a
living, active, and
continuous faith by its very definition.
The
Golden Text of the Bible affirms that, “For
God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever
BELIEVES
(continues to believe, not once believed - ch) in him should not
perish but
have eternal life” (John 3:16).
Because of a common misconception that the principle of works of
the
Law, merit, or achievement rule out the principle of obedience
of faith, it is
widely proclaimed that one is saved at the moment of belief
before and without
any obedient act of acceptance, particularly the submission to
baptism. Most of you were probably brought up in a
Christian home like I was, and you never came to belief on any
particular date,
but you did confess Christ and were baptized as a defining
action completing
(making “perfect”) your faith.
While
denying the necessity of the baptismal ritual of initiation, and
denouncing it
as a work, most all evangelists instruct the sinners into other
expressions of
faith and acceptance. They are told to
accept Jesus in their hearts, commit their lives to Jesus, pray
the sinner’s
prayer, or some similar activity. Why
is the scriptural “repent and be
baptized” rejected as a work while the unscriptural
“pray the sinner’s
prayer” not a work? It is clearly a
substitution of man’s formula for the one declared by him
who held the keys of
the kingdom.
If
one is justified by faith before and without obedience, then all
commands and
instructions in the Scriptures may be ignored.
The only way to lose justification would be by losing
faith. As long as a person believes, he could
ignore all instructions and warnings relating to moral conduct
and
obedience. If one is justified by faith
alone and he continues to believe, he may practice all the works
of the flesh
that Paul enumerates with no loss of his imputed
righteousness. Poor misguided Paul thought that such a
person could not inherit the kingdom of God! (Gal. 5:19f).
His much learning confused his mind so that
he taught justification by faith alone and then demanded
obedience of
faith! And with my little learning, he
has confused me into believing that “such
shall not inherit the kingdom of God.”
If
a person believes with the intention of obeying, does God have
to wait at see
if the person is baptized before saving him?
In sustaining this point, it is proposed that God did not wait
until
Abraham offered Isaac to recognize his faith.
Not true! It is stated that he
offered Isaac (Heb. 11:17; James 2:21).
True, he did not kill him, but the word “offer” does
not mean to
kill. He offered him on the altar, and
the angel said, “Now I know you fear God”
(Gen. 22:12). James says that was when
his faith was perfected by works.
Although I cannot presume to limit what God
can and will do, I cannot give assurance from hypothetical
cases. Grace, by its definition, is free, but I am
not the dispenser of it and can offer no shortcuts to it.
We may ask the same question about a pagan
with an honest heart. Does God have to
wait and see if the pagan will believe when he hears the
gospel? I leave that to God, but I cannot tell a
sinner, “Just have an honest heart and you will be
saved.”
If
a sinner is saved by faith alone, he is saved without
repentance. All sorts of evasive arguments have been
offered. Some say that both faith and
repentance are gifts of God; hence a person cannot deny that
saving faith. Some teach that the Spirit will not let the
person deny the faith or sin so as to lose his
justification. So warnings against falling away are as
senseless
as warning a person not to jump over his house lest he break his
leg! Because no one can live without sinning, it
is argued that the enormity of our sins make no
difference. We are warned against letting grace become a
license to sin, so that must be a possibility.
What happens if a believer uses it as a license to sin? Is
he saved anyway?
Failing
to understand Paul’s distinctions in the principle of
faith, the obedience of
faith, and the principle of works, sincere students have made
him seem to be
inconsistent and to contradict his own teaching. Martin
Luther struggled with the system of law and works imposed
by the Catholic Church and came to understand justification by
faith. Then Luther’s concepts were misunderstood in
following generations who came to think he taught justification
by faith alone.
A fellow-student of mine in Abilene Christian College, J. W.
Roberts, became quite a scholar. He wrote the Living
Word Commentary on The Letter of James.
I shall quote at length from him here beginning on Page 98:
“The doctrine of ‘justification by faith only’ has become a
loaded expression in modern denominational theology. It is a
real bone of contention. The modern
denominational doctrine (in some groups) is that in conversion
man is saved at the instant of faith, when he puts his trust in Christ as his
personal savior. That leads to the denial of the
efficacy of other acts of obedience, especially baptism.
The Bible plainly teaches that baptism as an
act of faith is a condition of salvation or remission of sins
(justification). See Acts 2:38; Mark
16:16; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 22:16. This
does not mean that baptism is sacramental in the sense in which
sacraments are generally understood. A sacrament (as
used in Catholicism) is an act which has efficacy in itself and
in the validity of the administrator (an authorized person) and requires no
faith on the part of the one on whom it is administered.
In such an act faith does not ‘work together,’ for
there is no faith.
“But this use of the term ‘faith only’ is not the historic
meaning of the term. Martin Luther did not mean this by his
formula, and to attribute the rise of the term in its
denominational sense to him (as is so often done) is an injustice.
Luther meant that faith is the only meritorious ground of
justification — salvation or remission of sins can never be obtained on any
grounds apart from faith in Jesus’ blood. There are
only two means of salvation as Paul stated them in Romans 3:27:
‘the principle’ (law) of faith and the ‘principle’ (law) of human
works of merit (such as those under the law). See NEB on this
verse. Since Paul rejected the
principle of works, it follows that, unless one is to be saved
by the principle of faith, he cannot be saved. This
expression did not originate with Luther; others had used it
before him. But he stoutly defended the translation of
Romans 3:28: ‘Man is justified without works of the law
through faith only.’ To deny this (to Luther) would
be to deny the whole teaching of Paul and to affirm that one can
be saved by his own works without the Lord Jesus.
In this understanding Luther is correct.
“But Luther himself emphasized the importance of baptism. He is
quoted as saying, ‘We are justified by faith alone, but not
by the faith which is alone.’ Some of
the harshest things which Luther ever said were said in one
edition of his commentary — against those who deny the place of baptism in the
New Testament.
“Thus we see that ‘faith only’ can be used in two
senses. It can be used COMPOSITELY as the principle of
justification. But it can be used
ANALYTICALLY, where the process of obedience is broken down into
its component parts. In the first sense, salvation is
by ‘faith only,’ in the second sense, it is ‘by
works and not by faith only,’
for here faith is only one of the conditions of pardon: ‘He
who BELIEVES and is
BAPTIZED will be saved’ (Mark 16:16); ‘REPENT and be
BAPTIZED … for the
forgiveness of your sins’ (Acts 2:38).
Thus the doctrine of salvation
at the moment of faith — without obedience — is not a biblical
teaching, and it does not take its roots from the reformers.
It is rooted in the conversion experience theology of early
revivalism. It sets aside the plain teaching of the
Bible on the doctrine of obedience and works of faith.
“It is easy to see, therefore, that there is no contradiction
between Paul’s use of
justification by faith (only or ‘without works’) and
James’ teaching that
justification is by works and not by faith only. Paul is
thinking of the composite nature of faith as the
principle of justification by faith rather than by the works of
the law (or of human merit). James is thinking
analytically of faith as a condition of justification and insists that it must
obey the conditions of the teaching of Christ and perfect itself
in works.”
Those words give clarity and express the harmony of Paul and
James. Paul speaks of the principle of faith as the
whole condition of acceptance by God.
James speaks of the obedient actions involved in the principle
of faith.
Most everyone will agree that James was
correct when he stated that faith is dead if it is not
accompanied by works
which complete (“perfect”) the faith.
But it is commonly asserted that James is referring to the
obedience of disciples rather than to justification.
The principle of obedience of faith that James explains applies
both to the initial justification and the continuation of that saved
state. He very plainly makes it a “salvation
issue.” James asks rhetorically about faith without works,
“Can that faith SAVE him?” Then in
similar rhetorical manner which
demands an affirmative answer, he asks, “Was
not Abraham our father JUSTIFIED by WORKS, when he offered his
son Isaac upon
the altar? You see that FAITH WAS
ACTIVE ALONG WITH HIS WORKS, and faith
was COMPLETED by works … You see that a man is JUSTIFIED by
WORKS and not by
FAITH ALONE.” James is writing
about the same justification that Paul wrote about, and they
were in harmony
with one another but at odds with countless present-day
interpreters.
Was Abraham justified twice, or in two different manners? Was
he justified originally by faith before obedience and again
later justified by faith that was active like James wrote
about? Or, was not his justification sustained
continuously by his obedience of faith?
In
all this logic and illogic, we must not make Paul contradict
himself. His discussion of justification was to teach
Jews that Gentiles were included in the promises given
through Abraham.
So, he introduces his epistle to the Romans with his call
“to bring about the OBEDIENCE OF FAITH for
the sake of his name among all the NATIONS, including yourselves
who are called
to belong to Jesus Christ” (1:1-6).
We cannot afford to forget that Paul is setting forth the
PRINCIPLE OF
FAITH which includes OBEDIENCE OF FAITH as he later uses the
simple term of
FAITH.
If
we ignore that distinction, we will misapply his meaning in
Verses 16-17: “For I
am not ashamed of the gospel: it is the power of God for
salvation to EVERY ONE
WHO HAS FAITH, to the JEW first and also to the GREEK. For
in it the righteousness of God is
revealed through faith for faith; as it is written, ‘HE WHO
THROUGH FAITH IS
RIGHTEOUS SHALL LIVE.’”
We
shall break off here with hope of continuing later. If
this seems disjointed and repetitive, your gracious patience
is implored. May our minds be united in
truth.
(Cecil
Hook; September 2002) []