No it creates a dilemma for you. James says we are saved by works and not with alone. Paul rejected works of the law but encourages people to good works. It's rather plain and simple.
Faith or Law?
- Thread starter Gideon300
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
No it creates a dilemma for you. James says we are saved by works and not with alone. Paul rejected works of the law but encourages people to good works. It's rather plain and simple.
We are more than close with works or good works being necessary but works of the law (if I forgot to put the word "the" when referring to "works of law" it was an oversight on my part.) I see no logical way to claim works of the law and (good) works are the same when Paul, in one instance, is adamant that works of the law aren't salvific while simultaneously encouraging people to do (good) works.
We can't earn our entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven even as the result of having perfect obedience to the Law of God because it was never given as a way of earning our way there in the first place, not because we fall short of being good enough and need repentance to bridge the gap. In Matthew 7:21-23, Jesus said that only those who do the will of the Father will enter the Kingdom of Heaven in contrast with saying that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the reason why our entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven requires us to be workers of lawfulness is not in order to be good enough to earn our way there but because that is the way to know Jesus. Christianity is not just about having our sins forgiven but about turning from our sins and being made to be like Christ.
In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, in Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted the Book of the Law with "works of the law", and in Romans 3:31 and Galatians 3:10-12, he said that our faith upholds the Law of God in contrast with saying that "works of the law" are not of faith, so that phrase does not refer to the Law of God. Rather, Paul used "works of the law" to refer to the positions ht Gentiles are required to become circumcised (become Jews) in order to become saved. In Isaiah 45:17, it says that all of Israel shall be saved, which has led some to hold the position that the way for Gentiles to become saved is by becoming circumcised (becoming Jews), which is a position that Paul was strongly opposed to. For example, in Romans 2:17-29, Paul, addressed those who called themselves Jews, so he was addressing Gentiles who had converted to being Jews who were now calling themselves Jews, but who were not following the Law of God who were being put to shame by Gentiles who were following the Law of God and he was making the point that being a Jew is not just about being physically circumcised but also about having a circumcised heart, which is evident through our obedience to the Law of God.
You have completely overlooked Jesus’ own instruction regarding the works God requires:
BELIEVE in the One He has sent!
And you have been told a thousand times that to "believe" in him is to believe what he said, Matt 7:21.
It's tiring after a while
Are you actually supporting a false teacher? Or do you think you have told me this several times?
No thats you. If faith alone was sufficient then what Jesus says in Matt 7:21 is either a lie or he's crazy. It's quite clear that few if any people know what the word sufficient means. I've ridden this bull, in rodeos just like this so many time I can barely keep count and few if any of the cowboys know what it means.
It's been years since I've interacted with you and likely on another forum.
Firstly, how would you describe yourself or your beliefs - Messianic Judaism or ??? - Do you read other's works, such as from ffoz.org or other such groups? I forget.
Where would you like to begin, one point at a time? I'll take a few from the above, but I'd rather not deal with these long paragraphs.
- Rom3:27 Agree re: the contrast.
- What do you think Paul means by nomos?
- Gal3:10-12 Disagree re: contrast between book of the law and works of the law.
- The first clause about being under curse is based upon what has been/is written in "the book [of] the law"
- You'll have to explain why this language is not clear - why you see a contrast.
Oh Im well aware of that and why and the best thing for you to do is avoid it so you don't pget exposed.
A couple can be alone apart from the company of others while not being alone apart from the company of each other, so someone can be alone and not alone at the same time in different senses. The sense that we are declared righteous through faith alone is the sense that there no works that we are required to have done first in order to become righteous as the result, but what it means to be righteous is to be a doer of righteous works in obedience to the Law of God (1 John 3:4-7), so it is not the sense that we become righteous apart from becoming a doer of righteous works. This is why the faith by which we are declared righteous apart from works also uphold the Law of God (Romans 3:28-31). In Psalm 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey His law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith.
We embody what we believe to be true about God though our works, such as with James 2:18 saying that he would show his faith though his works, so everyone who is a doer of the same works as James believes in God. In other words, the way to believe in God is by embodying His character traits. For example, by being a doer of good works in obedience to the Law of God we are embodying His goodness, which is why our good works bring glory to Him (Matthew 5:16), and by embodying God's goodness we are also embodying the belief that God is good. Likewise, the way to believe that God is compassionate is by being compassionate (Luke 6:36), the way to believe that God is holy is by being a doer of His instructions for how to be holy as He is holy (1 Peter 1:16), and so forth, This is exactly the same as the way to believe in the Son, who is the radiance of God's glory and the exact likeness of His character (Hebrews 1:3), which he embodied through his works by setting a sinless example for us to follow of how to walk in obedience to the Law of God. This is also why the Bible frequently connects our faith in God with our obedience to Him, such as with Revelation 14:12 where those who kept faith in Jesus are the same as those who kept God's commandments. It is by this faith alone that we attain righteousness and the other character traits of God. This is also why saying that it is the will of the Father for us to be workers of lawfulness is the same as saying that it is the will of the Father for us to believe in the Son.
Does that go back to the days of TheologyWeb? It's been a while, how have you been?
My beliefs are in accordance with Messianic Judaism. My beliefs have developed over the years not from one source, though I generally agree with ffoz.
According to Deuteronomy 27-30, the way to be blessed is by relying on the Book of the Law while the way to be cursed is by not relying on it, so Galatians 3:10 should not be interpreted as Paul quoting from that passage in order to support a point that is arguing the opposite of that passage. Rather, the fact that cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything in the Book of Law straightforwardly means that the way to avoid being cursed is by continuing to do everything in the Book of the Law and that those who rely on "works of the law" instead come under that curse.
In Galatians 3:10-12, Paul associated a quote from Habakkuk 2:4 that the righteous shall live by faith with a quote from Leviticus 18:5 that the one who obeys the Law of God shall attain life by it, so the righteous living by faith are the same as the ones who are living in obedience to it. Moreover, the context of Habakuk 2 does not present the righteous living by faith as an alternative way of living that is not in obedience to the Law of God. In Isaiah 51:7, the righteous are those on whose heart is the Law of God, and in 1 John 3:4-7, everyone who is a doer of righteous works in obedience to the Law of God is righteous even as they are righteous.
God is trustworthy, therefore His law is also trustworthy (Psalm 19:7), so the way to rely on God is by obediently relying on His instructions, it would be contradictory for someone to think that we should rely on God but not on His instructions, and the position that God is a giver of untrustworthy instructions that are not of faith denies the trustworthiness and faithfulness of God.
I don't follow the alone analogy at all. Alone means to be by oneself. You either are alone or your not. A couple can be "alone" apart from others but they arent alone. Are you suggesting faith and works can be "alone" while together?
Luther said that an idle faith is not a justifying faith, so his doctrine of righteousness through faith alone was not intended to suggest that we ar not required to do works, rather he was speaking specifically in the sense that we are declared righteous by faith alone apart from be required to do works in order to become righteous as the result.
The only way for someone to attain a character trait is through faith but what it means to have a character trait is to be a doer of works that embody that trait. For example, the only way for someone to become courageous is through faith alone apart from being required to have first done enough courageous works in order to earn it as the result, but it would be contradictory for someone to become courageous alone apart from becoming a doer of courageous works, and the same is true for righteousness and every other character trait. So there is a difference between the way to become righteous and what it means to be righteous. The Law of God was never given as a way of becoming righteous, but rather it was given to describe the life of someone who is righteous as it describes the life of Christ. In other words, the Law of God is what someone is becoming a doer of by becoming righteous, not something that we are required to have done first in order to become righteous as the result. Jesus embodied the righteousness of God through his works by living in obedience to the Law of God, so that is also the way that we have the gift of getting to live by being given the gift of righteousness. We become someone who has faith, someone who will be declared righteous, and someone who is a doer of the Law of God all at the same time and anyone who is not one of those is also not the others, but we do not become righteous as the result of our works.
But faith alone apart from works isn't salvific. Scripture is clear. No one is "required" to do good works its a choice. Faith doesn't cause good works it if did atheists couldn't do good works but that's not the case. Just to head it off I'm not suggesting good works done by atheists are salvific.
You're assuming Paul & James are talking about the same moment of salvation, but they're not. Paul is talking about how a sinner is justified before God (Rom 3:28 & 4:5). James is talking about how a believer's faith is shown to be genuine before men (Jas 2:18). Paul excludes works from justification because ""to the one who does not work but believes, his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom 4:5). James excludes empty profession because ""faith by itself"" (which James says does exist) is dead & unproductive (Jas 2:17). Paul's point: works don't contribute to justification. James' point: works demonstrate the reality of the faith that justifies. If works were part of faith's essence, James couldn't speak of ""faith by itself"" at all. And if works were part of justification, Paul couldn't say justification is for the one who ""does not work."" They're addressing different questions, not contradicting each other.
Your Dilemma, Nedsk
If works are part of justification, why does Paul say justification is for the one who ""does not work"" (Rom 4:5)?
And if works are part of faith's essence, why does James say ""faith by itself"" exists (Jas 2:17)?
You can't affirm both apostles without contradicting one of them
Agreed that Paul used nomos many ways, which is part of the issue in understanding him. This doesn't answer what Paul meant by law of works vs. law of faith, so I'll leave this for now.
Thanks for your first two answers. It was not TheologyWeb but some other forum I don't recall at the moment. I thought I remembered ffoz in our discussions. It's been years but I'd read several of their publications before any discussions with you.
Paul's focus in Gal3:10 is the curse: 'As many as are ek works of law are under a curse.' He immediately quotes Deut27:26 from the book of the law as proof - there is no contrast between 'works of law' and 'the book of the law.'
The preposition ek here means 'from/out of' in the sense of reliance or dependence: those who rely on works of law (as the source of righteousness) are under curse because the law itself demands they 'continue/persevere in all things written in the book of the law, to do them.' No one can do that perfectly, so law-reliance inevitably brings curse, exactly as the law declares - this is Paul's point.
As I said previously, one point at a time.
You are correct in this part.
... but here you go off into error. 1 John 4:7 actually says "He who does what is right is righteous". It doesn't mention "works in obedience to the law of God".
I think that "law of works" refers to "works of the law" while "law of faith" refers to the Law of God that our faith upholds (Romans 3:31).
You name definitely rings a bell now that I think about it. Maybe Christian Forums?
If relying on "works of law" involves doing something that is not continuing to do everything in the Book of the Law, then it would be natural to quote Deuteronomy 27:26 in order to show that all who rely on "works of the law' come under that curse. In other words, there were people who relying on becoming circumcised (converting to being Jews) in order to be saved instead of relying on the Book of the Law (Romans 2:17-29).
In Deuteronomy 11:26-32, the difference between being under God's blessing or His curse is not based on whether or not we have perfect obedience but on whether we choose to serve God or to chase after other gods. In Romans 10:5-8, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the world of faith that we proclaim in regard to the righteousness that is by faith proclaiming that that the Law of God is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So it was presented as a possibility and as a choice, not as the need to have perfect obedience in order to avoid being cursed. The Law of God came with instructions for what to do when His people sinned, so we could repent in accordance with those instructions and continue to be a doer of the law without coming under its curse. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, so if we needed perfect obedience in order to avoid being cursed, then everyone in the OT would be cursed, however, everyone in the OT being cursed does not reflect the reality of what is recorded about those who served God - just those who chased after other gods.