Have we done away with the law by means of faith?

[Doran]

there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised man if he learns to believe, and the Gentile because he believes. Does that mean that we are using faith to rob the law of its force? No, we are setting the law on its right footing. ... You see, then, that it takes deeds as well as faith if a man is to be justified.

The law is not gone, it is in its right place. We are indeed justified by faith and we are justified by works, as the scriptures say (Romans 3:28, James 2:24)

On the other hand, it is written: "For by works of the law, no flesh shall be justified in his sight, since through the law comes the knowledge of sin" (Rom 3:20. See also, Rom 3:28; Gal 2:16; 3:2, 10). What you have just done is pour new wine into old wine skins, attempting to syncretize what Jesus said cannot. Might wanna reconsider Jas 2 in its proper context.

 

[Fervent]

As far as I can tell, the whole of the modern debate seems to be built on a false dichotomy that drives people to the extremes. Everyone has faith, and everyone has works. What our faith is in is what matters, not simply faith itself, and our works depend on that faith. The question is, do we have faith in what we do for ourselves(and purportedly for God) or do we have faith in what God has done for us? Our works will betray where our faith rests, and in that way we are justified by faith and works. "Faith alone" does not exist, but the protestant reformers took hold of that slogan to denounce a theology that placed the onus of salvation onto the people through scholastic penance theology rather than recognizing that Christ alone is our Savior.

 

[timothyu]

The question is, do we have faith in what we do for ourselves(and purportedly for God) or do we have faith in what God has done for us?

He said it is how we treat others including our enemies.

 

[Fervent]

A lot of people are condemned already due to unbelief (no faith, and worse).
And a lot of people, multitudes , have no works (of anything Godly, good , or by faith).
Rather , by their works, they earn the payment (penalty?) of working for unrighteousness - death.

Unbelief isn't a lack of faith, it's faith in the wrong things. It's faith in idols and created things, rather than the Creator. There is no one completely devoid of faith, as everyone puts their trust in something. As for works, no one other than invalids are without some sort of works to their name. Very few have no good works, either. But good works of the unbelieving condemn them rather than being to their credit.

 

[timothyu]

Unbelief isn't a lack of faith, it's faith in the wrong things.

Worst of all, in ourselves

 

[GDL]

For there are two kinds of righteousness:

There is righteousness which is before God, and there is righteousness before our neighbor here in the world.

I questioned this theory decades ago and still do. It's really just a way of working backwards from 2 justifications.

The commandment of God cannot make us righteous before God--but does speak to us being righteous toward our neighbor.

Depends on the commandment. How about this one: NKJ 1 John 3:23 And this is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave us commandment. Seems to me Faith + Works are right here and, in more ways than it may appear on the surface.

 

[GDL]

That really isn't the question. And it is easily answered with a direct quote from one of saint Paul's letters. So, at least within the locus of saint Paul's letter to the Galatians the role of faith and its proper use is as follows.

Galatians 3:21-25 GNB Does this mean that the Law is against God's promises? No, not at all! For if human beings had received a law that could bring life, then everyone could be put right with God by obeying it. (22) But the scripture says that the whole world is under the power of sin; and so the gift which is promised on the basis of faith in Jesus Christ is given to those who believe. (23) But before the time for faith came, the Law kept us all locked up as prisoners until this coming faith should be revealed. (24) And so the Law was in charge of us until Christ came, in order that we might then be put right with God through faith. (25) Now that the time for faith is here, the Law is no longer in charge of us.​

The law is incapable of saving one from one's sins. But it does show one what sin is. And it shows one what goodness is. Thus, faith with works (good works) is the means by which grace saves one from one's sins. One never earns salvation as a reward, it is not wages paid for a worker's work. Salvation is a gift, specifically it is the gift of Jesus Christ himself as saviour in whom Christians are saved by union with him through baptism and the Spirit. But let's not spill more ink on this. Saint James summaries it beautifully and succinctly saying, "it is by our actions that we are put right with God, and not by our faith alone. "

And Romans 2:13 teaches us a little bit more about works because it is the doer of the law who is justified before God. And the Lord Jesus Christ added emphasis to this idea in one of his parables wherein he teaches that doing is better than merely acknowledging.

Matthew 21:28-32 GNB "Now, what do you think? There was once a man who had two sons. He went to the older one and said, 'Son, go and work in the vineyard today.' (29) 'I don't want to,' he answered, but later he changed his mind and went. (30) Then the father went to the other son and said the same thing. 'Yes, sir,' he answered, but he did not go. (31) Which one of the two did what his father wanted?" "The older one," they answered. So Jesus said to them, "I tell you: the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the Kingdom of God ahead of you. (32) For John the Baptist came to you showing you the right path to take, and you would not believe him; but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him. Even when you saw this, you did not later change your minds and believe him.​

So, it is clear from the scriptures that believing without doing is worthless, but doing has value.

It's interesting that both Paul and James are the only ones that use this word "doer(s)" in regard to the Christian, Where Paul obviously applies it to 'the law", James applies it to "the word" (James1:22, 23) and then to "law" in James1:25; 2:12.

When James applies it to "the word", in context he attaches this to 'the perfect law of freedom" in James1:25 and in that same verse defines "a work doer" as one who looks and remains intellectually with focus into "law" which is emphasized by word placement, then elaborated as "the perfect law of freedom". Then he adds that this person does not become a forgetful hearer, "but a doer of work" (again, doer looks to be emphasized). It is these who will be blessed in their "doing."

In the context, of James1, this "word", "this perfect law of freedom" is the "word of truth" God used to birth us as a kind of first fruits of His creatures (James1:18) (the new man in Christ). The word and the perfect law of freedom is the Gospel. So, the Gospel is Law and belief in Jesus Christ is commanded (1John3:23, et.al.).

I guess the task is to go back to Paul and figure out which Law he's speaking of and in what context, especially since he says "God will render to each man according to his works" and then he says eternal life will be given to those who in endurance of good work are seeking glory and honor and incorruptibility/immortality, and before he speak of law doers. And especially since Paul is speaking in the context of judgment "in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my (Paul's) Gospel" (Rom2:16). There's that "Gospel" again, which James correlates to the Perfect Law of Freedom".

FWIW, I'm not Roman Catholic, and I was taught by Protestantism, that RC was evil with its "works salvation". And I agree that works need to be understood well. But IMO this position within Protestantism has a range of explanation and it has come to be a far swung pendulum in reaction to RC. Some of this reaction has trended into absurdity and "work" has become a proverbial 4-letter word. Unless I miss my guess, @RandyPNW has come to some of this conclusion as well and I can see in his posts where he is deriving some of his comments about work from Scripture.

As an aside but pertinent, do any of us think we're going to be judged by Mosaic Law that was fulfilled by Jesus Christ and is not valid for the righteous as their rule of life?

 

[RandyPNW]

It's interesting that both Paul and James are the only ones that use this word "doer(s)" in regard to the Christian, Where Paul obviously applies it to 'the law", James applies it to "the word" (James1:22, 23, 25) and then to "law" in James4:13.

When James applies it to "the word", in context he attaches this to 'the perfect law of freedom" in James1:25 and in that same verse defines "a work doer" as one who looks and remains intellectually with focus into "law" which is emphasized by word placement, then elaborated as "the perfect law of freedom". Then he adds that this person does not become a forgetful hearer, "but a doer of work" (again, doer looks to be emphasized). It is these who will be blessed in their "doing."

In the context, of James1, this "word", "this perfect law of freedom" is the "word of truth" God used to birth us as a kind of first fruits of His creatures (James1:18) (the new man in Christ). The word and the perfect law of freedom is the Gospel. So, the Gospel is Law and belief in Jesus Christ is commanded (1John3:23, et.al.).

I guess the task is to go back to Paul and figure out which Law he's speaking of and in what context, especially since he says "God will render to each man according to his works" and then he says eternal life will be given to those who in endurance of good work are seeking glory and honor and incorruptibility/immortality, and before he speak of law doers. And especially since Paul is speaking in the context of judgment "in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my (Paul's) Gospel" (Rom2:16). There's that "Gospel" again, which James correlates to the Perfect Law of Freedom".

FWIW, I'm not Roman Catholic, and I was taught by Protestantism, that RC was evil with its "works salvation". And I agree that works need to be understood well. But IMO this position within Protestantism has a range of explanation and it has come to be a far swung pendulum in reaction to RC. Some of this reaction has trended into absurdity and "work" has become a proverbial 4-letter word. Unless I miss my guess, @RandyPNW has come to some of this conclusion as well and I can see in his posts where he is deriving some of his comments about work from Scripture.

As an aside but pertinent, do any of us think we're going to be judged by Mosaic Law that was fulfilled by Jesus Christ and is not valid for the righteous as their rule of life?

Great post! You may have a better command of the language explaining it than I do. But I'm pretty sure we're on the same page.

 

[GDL]

But I'm pretty sure we're on the same page.

I tend to agree to the degree I've seen your posts.

 

[RandyPNW]

I tend to agree to the degree I've seen your posts.

Nobody agrees with me 100% of the time. I'd be lucky if people agree with me 50% of the time. Thanks--I always appreciate confirmation. (the smiley face was because we were on the same literal page--not to be confused with agreement)

 

[childeye 2]

there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised man if he learns to believe, and the Gentile because he believes. Does that mean that we are using faith to rob the law of its force? No, we are setting the law on its right footing. ... You see, then, that it takes deeds as well as faith if a man is to be justified.

The law is not gone, it is in its right place. We are indeed justified by faith and we are justified by works, as the scriptures say (Romans 3:28, James 2:24)

For what it's worth, it would be helpful to qualify the term "works'. There should be no contradiction between James and Paul. Paul is stating that NO FLESH will be justified by the works/deeds of the law. These works are qualified as works of the law.

Whereas when James speaks of his "works", I don't get the sense he is talking about the letter of the Law because they're qualified as works of faith. He would therefore be alluding to good works that come by means of The Spirit, through faith. For this Spirit of God's righteousness comes in the knowledge of God by grace through faith and not because someone performs the letter of the law. Wherefore he says, 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. It seems to me that James is simply claiming his works are a product of his faith.

Wherefore Paul writes:
4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:

5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?

9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

Galatians 5:22-23
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith.

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

 

[timothyu]

(the smiley face was because we were on the same literal page--not to be confused with agreement)

You made a funny. Rare on the forums.

 

[RandyPNW]

You made a funny. Rare on the forums.

Sadly, humor doesn't always bridge some of these mild differences....

 

[BobRyan]

For what it's worth, it would be helpful to qualify the term "works'. There should be no contradiction between James and Paul. Paul is stating that NO FLESH will be justified by the works/deeds of the law. These works are qualified as works of the law.

Whereas when James speaks of his "works", I don't get the sense he is talking about the letter of the Law because they're qualified as works of faith. He would therefore be alluding to good works that come by means of The Spirit, through faith. For this Spirit of God's righteousness comes in the knowledge of God by grace through faith and not because someone performs the letter of the law. Wherefore he says, 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. It seems to me that James is simply claiming his works are a product of his faith.

Wherefore Paul writes:
4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:

5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?

9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

Galatians 5:22-23
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith.

23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

God's Law is not 'against the Spirit" or 'the fruits of the Spirit".

God's Law is written on the heart under the NEW Covenant of the OLD Testament Jer 31:31-34 that is unchanged in the NT - Heb 8:6-12

"do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! in fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

"what matter is keeping the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19

Where the "first commandment with a promise" in that still-valid unit of TEN is "Honor your father and mother" Eph 6:2

The command 'do not take God's name in vain" is never quoted from in the NT - but is still valid as almost all Christian denominations affirm.
Yet not taking God's name in vain does not become a work - apart from the Gospel that "earns" the sinners way into heaven and that fact is not an argument AGAINST keeping that commandment nor an argument against any of God's commandments.

 

[GDL]

the smiley face was because we were on the same literal page--not to be confused with agreement

 

[GDL]

Paul is stating that NO FLESH will be justified by the works/deeds of the law

Whereas when James speaks of his "works", I don't get the sense he is talking about the letter of the Law because they're qualified as works of faith.

So, James is speaking of [good] works done in progressive sanctification (after being birthed by God by the word/message of truth/Gospel by Faith) and being judged by the Gospel, just as Paul speaks of being judged by the Gospel (Rom2:16). This aligns with Paul who instructs of Justification by Faith, not by works of [OC] law, and elsewhere in Rom, Gal, Eph at minimum, works being done in progressive sanctification under grace, not under [OC] law, in Christ in Spirit.

Isn't all the confusion really just about James' use of "justification"? Is it always to be viewed as a technical term for what takes place when we first come to Christ?

Paul doesn't think the word "justified" only relates to God's justification of the new believer (Rom3:4; 1Cor4:4; 1Tim3:16, et.al.). In 1Cor44, Paul, the believer, speaks of being judged for his actions by the Lord and justified by Him. "Justified" is just a legal term that speaks of being deemed or declared righteous, vindicated. It is used in speaking of wisdom, God, Jesus Christ, unbelievers when they become believers, believers in their works (Abraham the believer when tested; Paul the believer will be justified for his actions and not by any man nor by himself).

There are more than one justification and progressive sanctification flows from initial justification and sanctification. Neither are by works of [OC] law which when initially justified we are not under. It's all by grace under grace as judged according to the Gospel.

 

[childeye 2]

God's Law is not 'against the Spirit" or 'the fruits of the Spirit".

God's Law is written on the heart under the NEW Covenant of the OLD Testament Jer 31:31-34 that is unchanged in the NT - Heb 8:6-12

"do we then make void the Law of God by our faith? God forbid! in fact we ESTABLISH the LAW" Rom 3:31

"what matter is keeping the Commandments of God" 1 Cor 7:19

Where the "first commandment with a promise" in that still-valid unit of TEN is "Honor your father and mother" Eph 6:2

The command 'do not take God's name in vain" is never quoted from in the NT - but is still valid as almost all Christian denominations affirm.
Yet not taking God's name in vain does not become a work - apart from the Gospel that "earns" the sinners way into heaven and that fact is not an argument AGAINST keeping that commandment nor an argument against any of God's commandments.

Thanks for the response. I hear you. It's just that it seems to me this topic always reverts to a question framed as, Should we do/keep the law or not now that we have come to Christ? And it's understandable that to some this question would be the same as asking, Are we at liberty to sin after coming to Christ?

I'm meaning to convey that questions such as these can be misleading and are obscuring the issue. For example, if I convey that being in Christ is the same as doing the letter of the law, that would be misleading. For where in the law does it state to pick up your cross and forgive those who sin against you?

To obey the Truth is a more precise language. For apart from a wanton ignorance, I perceive that an act of sin is not voluntary but instead manifests through a deception, a lie posing as the Truth. Romans 1 clearly indicates the commonsense knowledge that it's wrong to suppress the Truth, and this would necessarily include the truth that sin comes through first believing something that is untrue. I consider the prodigal son to be the perfect analogy to confirm what I'm saying.

In my experience sin comes through imaginings that in reality are false hopes that ultimately end up empty and void of anything meaningful as pertains to the Eternal and to everlasting things. Moreover, I believe we are utterly deceived by the devil into trading away virtue for vice. Under such a deception one who is deceived would be seeing something as a positive when in reality it is a negative.

I therefore believe that I must pick up my own cross forgiving others who sin against me so as to follow The Christ who suffered crucifixion and death so that sins could be forgiven. In this way, I not only acknowledge my own weakness to deception through showing forbearance and patience towards others in their time of weakness, but I also love others as I would want to be loved when I was weak and without strength. A wanton ignorance would therefore be a different matter.

5 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

3 And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;

4 And patience, experience; and experience, hope:

5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

 

[childeye 2]

So, James is speaking of [good] works done in progressive sanctification (after being birthed by God by the word/message of truth/Gospel by Faith) and being judged by the Gospel, just as Paul speaks of being judged by the Gospel (Rom2:16). This aligns with Paul who instructs of Justification by Faith, not by works of [OC] law, and elsewhere in Rom, Gal, Eph at minimum, works being done in progressive sanctification under grace, not under [OC] law, in Christ in Spirit.

For what it's worth, yes this sounds accurate to me.

Isn't all the confusion really just about James' use of "justification"? Is it always to be viewed as a technical term for what takes place when we first come to Christ?

I don't recall James using the term justification, but he does mention that mercy rejoices against judgment and suggests that we should speak as though we will be judged by the law of liberty.

Paul doesn't think the word "justified" only relates to God's justification of the new believer (Rom3:4; 1Cor4:4; 1Tim3:16, et.al.). In 1Cor44, Paul, the believer, speaks of being judged for his actions by the Lord and justified by Him. "Justified" is just a legal term that speaks of being deemed or declared righteous, vindicated. It is used in speaking of wisdom, God, Jesus Christ, unbelievers when they become believers, believers in their works (Abraham the believer when tested; Paul the believer will be justified for his actions and not by any man nor by himself).

There are more than one justification and progressive sanctification flows from initial justification and sanctification. Neither are by works of [OC] law which when initially justified we are not under. It's all by grace under grace as judged according to the Gospel.

I opened my post by stating that Paul is talking about how the flesh cannot be justified by the works of the law. As I see it, doing good needs no justification, so there's a reason why he points to the flesh. However, the resurrection can be pointed to as proof that Christ is justified in dying for our sins despite our flesh and is therefore the justifier of our hope in obtaining life apart from the works of the law unto God's Glory.

Your sentiments as a summation therefore bring to my mind that we are judged by what measure we use to judge others between two different fears of God perceived in the two covenants. So, let us consider what Jesus meant when he said, "Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and old."

 

[GDL]

I don't recall James using the term justification, but he does mention that mercy rejoices against judgment and that we should speak as though we will be judged by the law of liberty.

This is one of the if not the main dilemma debated in James. Such can be seen at least back to Luther who did not like the epistle of James.

NKJ James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?

 

[timothyu]

"

Have we done away with the law by means of faith?"​

No, we live it to show we agree/have faith that the will of God is superior to our own.