Defining "Works"

Saint Steven said:

Have you read the whole Bible, cover to cover?

Click to expand...

Oh yeah. I have read the whole Bible. Many times, Steve. Although, even with all of the multiple readings I've done, I always find there's more to learn and ways for me to better understand it.

No worries, most Christians haven't. But I have. As a young adult I read it cover to cover and created my own reference Bible in the process. That is how I learned the Bible and why I have retained so much of it. With the help of the Holy Spirit. (not men)

Click to expand...

Well, you sound a bit like me in that regard, Steve! That's awesome that we have that in common, bro!

John 14:26 NIV
But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

Click to expand...

That's a great quote. To supplement that, I'd also offer Ephesians 4:11-13 (in context of course).

Saint Steven said:

The law doesn't apply to Abraham. He was before Moses and the giving of the law.

John 1:17
For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

NET Genesis 26:5 All this will come to pass because Abraham obeyed me and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."

Saint Steven said:

I wasn't talking about you. You understand the term "aforementioned", correct? Who did you mention? (before) Wink, wink...

Click to expand...

Thank you for the clarification, Steve. I understand now, and it sounds like we're on the same page about that.

Saint Steven said:

How would that apply to Ephesians 2:10 ?

Click to expand...

I think that Ephesians 2:10 is more generally talking about good deeds. I would not want to interpret it narrowly.

Saint Steven said:

Thanks for your reply. Good post.
I was hoping that someone would bring up the "works of the law" aspect. Worth exploring.

However, I don't think that is what Romans 4:4-5 is in reference to. Though there is discussion of the "works of the law" is chapter three, chapter four begins like this.

Click to expand...

2PhiloVoid said:

Well, I understand your point, but I'm going to have to unfortunately disagree with you on your reading of Romans 4:1-3, bro. ... I hope we can still be friends.

Click to expand...

Saint Steven said:

No worries.
One simple test is to take the phrase "works of the law" and use it to replace "works" in the scripture in question. (Romans 4:4-5) Then we can see if the verse still works. (no pun intended)

Now to the one who [does the] "works of the law", wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not [do the] "works of the law" but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Click to expand...

2PhiloVoid said:

I appreciate your stance in applying logic and consistency here, Steven. The only thing is that your test, here, isn't one that I think I've seen used in any of my various sources on Hermeneutics and Exegesis. So, I don't know just how effective this application will be for our overall efforts to understand Paul.

Click to expand...

Thinking through a few things:

Re: the "simple test":

Re: context:

At this point:

I agree with Steve that works in general is being discussed in regards to wages. I agree with 2Philo that context and further exegesis tells more of a story than the "simple test."

I think Paul has so much knowledge and revelation, and speaks so fluidly, that a simple read of his writings will only give part of the story.

I think God is righteousness and His law is thus part of Him that He has written in part in all hearts, likely from the beginning, to work in consciences. God was talking to Cain about sin (lawlessness). Peoples were writing laws before Moses. Abraham was keeping God's laws before Moses. Nations that didn't have God's written Law could & can show God's Law written on hearts.

I think "works" in general may well include "works of law" in Paul's thinking and he fluidly switches back and forth to highlight various issues. Earlier in this thread where I took a stab at defining, or better explaining works as basically everything we do, I saw this fluidity from Paul on that matter as well.

GDL said:

Thinking through a few things:

Re: the "simple test":

- Agreed, "works of law" doesn't seem to make sense in 4:1-3 due to the obligation of wages. It seems work in general is being discussed.

- But, does the simple test exclude "works of law" from being included?
​

Re: context:

- As Steve pointed out from Scripture, the Mosaic Law began with Moses 430 years after the promise to Abraham (Gal3:16), so it seems "works of law" wouldn't apply to Abraham.

- But it seems there was law in Abraham's time: NKJ Genesis 26:5 "because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws."

- Studies on God's Law point this out and other things like God talking about "sin" as early as Gen4, and that several of the 10 Commandments can be discerned in Scripture earlier than the Sinai giving.

- Back to Romans context:

- Paul starts speaking specifically about "law" (and sin/lawlessness) in 2:12 in the context of judgment and God's wrath, but he's been discussing wrath since 1:18 and obedience of faith (so righteousness) vs. unrighteousness (which is sin) since 1:5. So, law has been in the background all along.

- Rom2:15 speaks of the "work of law" written in hearts identified in the conscience of nations/gentiles "not having law" (2:14). This seems to be talking about the Mosaic Law, but did consciences begin working only after Moses?

- "Works of Law" is first used in 3:20 and Paul reaches at least a partial conclusion about it in 3:28.

- I don't see this discussed much, but "Works of Law" in 3:20 is summing up much previous discussion, and if we look at NKJ Romans 3:19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under (translation??) the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. And 3:9 says both Jews and Greeks are "all under sin."

- So, is all humanity under sin & law at least since the Garden (??) so all can become guilty before God, so God can show His Grace & Love to all by sending His Son, and more specifically to those who come to Him in Faith? Is "works of law" specifically re: Mosaic Law?
​

At this point:

I agree with Steve that works in general is being discussed in regards to wages. I agree with 2Philo that context and further exegesis tells more of a story than the "simple test."

I think Paul has so much knowledge and revelation, and speaks so fluidly, that a simple read of his writings will only give part of the story.

I think God is righteousness and His law is thus part of Him that He has written in part in all hearts, likely from the beginning, to work in consciences. God was talking to Cain about sin (lawlessness). Peoples were writing laws before Moses. Abraham was keeping God's laws before Moses. Nations that didn't have God's written Law could & can show God's Law written on hearts.

I think "works" in general may well include "works of law" in Paul's thinking and he fluidly switches back and forth to highlight various issues. Earlier in this thread where I took a stab at defining, or better explaining works as basically everything we do, I saw this fluidity from Paul on that matter as well.

​

Click to expand...

Yeah, I get what you're saying. I just read the whole of the semantic inferences a little differently.

However, even with that said, I wish everyone would understand that I'm essentially agreeing with them when we say that we're not saved by zeroing in on doing "Works of the Law." They needn't be a part of our faith, even though real faith will have good deeds of love, charity, mercy, forgiveness, and so on in it.

Saint Steven said:

On what basis are we considered righteous?

Click to expand...

I have understood righteousness means wisdom of the just, correct understanding of what is good and right. When person has that correct understanding, it leads to righteous works, because person understands what is good and right and wants that. I think one nice example of this is:

"Two men went up into the temple to pray; one was a Pharisee, and the other was a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed to himself like this: 'God, I thank you, that I am not like the rest of men, extortioners, unrighteous, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week. I give tithes of all that I get.' But the tax collector, standing far away, wouldn't even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me, a sinner!' I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."
Luke 18:10-14

It is possible that even righteous person does mistakes, but the difference between wicked and righteous is, righteous person regrets and is sorry, which shows that right understanding and attitude that leads to better works.

For a righteous man falls seven times, and rises up again; But the wicked are overthrown by calamity.
Pro. 24:16

Our works are "water above the glass." Any reward we'll cast at his feet.

[Luk 17:10 NIV] 10 So you also, when you have done everything you were told to do, should say, 'We are unworthy servants; we have only done our duty.' "

[Rev 4:10b-11 NIV] They lay their crowns before the throne and say: 11 "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being."

Agallagher said:

It looks like a person has to put forth effort...

Click to expand...

Luke 13:24 "Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able."

Strive-- Greek agōnizomai (Looks and sounds like our English word 'agonize')
Strong's definition:
1) to enter a contest: contend in the gymnastic games
2) to contend with adversaries, fight
3) metaph. to contend, struggle, with difficulties and dangers
4) to endeavour with strenuous zeal, strive: to obtain something

This work, this striving earns nothing but a necessary precondition Christ has put upon the free gift of salvation/enetering the strait gate.

Paul4JC said:

[Luk 17:10 NIV] 10 So you also, when you have done everything you were told to do, should say, 'We are unworthy servants; we have only done our duty.' "

Click to expand...

I get your point, but we'll have crowns to cast due to what we've done here with Him, in faith-obedience, in Christ, with Him working in us by His Spirit, within His Salvation Plan.

This verse you quote is an interesting one in the study of faith & obedience. Although I see a direct Scriptural parallel between faith & obedience, they are 2 different words with 2 different base meanings.

I think this is what Jesus points out in the context of this part of Luke. Sometimes we might fall back on an excuse by saying we just don't have enough faith to do what He commands (17:5). To which His reply may well be to just do what we're commanded to do, to remember we're servants, and we should not expect to be thanked for simply doing our duty.

He is God after all. He's gracious, patient, kind, etc., but at some point He draws the line and reminds us who He is. He's afforded us an incredible Grace to bring us in line with His will, by Faith. But this Faith is Faith-Obedience from the start, and His intent in Salvation is to develop this in us to make it natural for us to Love Him, Love neighbor, and one another as siblings - all being a faithful obedience to Him simply for who He is. As God, He will have His way with His creation.

Saint Steven said:

Lots of discussion lately about "works".
When compared with discussions about "grace" and "faith", we are pretty quick to define the terms.
But, what about "works"? It seems to go undefined, and appears to mean different things to different Christians. What's your definition?

Additionally, I would like to discuss a few aspects that I find interesting about works.
1) The good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. (Ephesians 2:10)
2) The "do nothing" works of Jesus. (John 5:19) Imitating the Father.
3) Wood, hay and stubble works. (1 Corinthians 3:12-14)
4) No work "works". (Romans 4:4-5) Trusting God, not self.

Ephesians 2:10 NIV
For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

John 5:19 NIV
Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.

1 Corinthians 3:12-14 NIV
If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward.

Romans 4:4-5 NIV
Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Click to expand...

Hi Steve, good post.

The Bible is actually pretty clear that the judgment is according to works (Rom 2:6; 2 Cor 5:10; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 20:12; Psa 62:12; Pro 24:12).

Given this, we can't just write-off works as all the same, you are right to try and define the different kinds of works and there has already been some good comments to this end.

One of the problems of modern Christianity is our definition of faith. James makes it pretty clear that faith without works is dead, and the example given to us of the people of God in the Bible is clearly one of works coming through their faith and obedience to God. Faith to them wasn't just conceptual belief as modern Christianity seems to be, it was believing to the extent that they did the works of God.

Romans 4:4-5 is interesting. If we believe that the Bible does not contradict itself (for it speaks often on the side of good works) then it seems fair to conclude that Paul is talking of works apart from faith. If we are unsure of the interpretation of this verse, it seems wise to take a step back and see what the whole Bible says on works, rather than trying to discern it from one verse.

Hello Brett, Romans 5: 4 Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

Was thinking about this verse today sometimes in my life, I feel as though nothing of importance is going on for sometimes it is rather still when having a day off from the work place.

It is a strange sentence structure here ; but God does justify the ungodly and the wicked for we were those people once before when we had no belief or any faith on God.

Because the verse goes on to say, 7 “Blessed are those
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the one
whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”

Low and behold Romans 5:8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us..

Going onward from Romans 3 - 5 into even furtherance of faith and trust in God 5 - 8, and perseverance continues.

Saint Steven said:

But what do we do with that phrase "... good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do."? That seems very specific, narrow, if you will.

Ephesians 2:10
For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

Click to expand...

I think we just accept it and praise God that he has prepared good things for us to do. I wouldn’t want to interpret the nature of those works narrowly. They could include anything from raising children to starting hospitals in the Congo.

Saint Steven said:

I'm beginning to think that this passage is on par with Ephesians 2:8-10.
Probably not a good idea to just shrug it away.

Three times we see a statement about "credited as righteousness" in reference to faith apart from works. (see bold below)

Romans 4:1-8 NIV
What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter? 2 If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. 3 What does Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
4 Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. 5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
7 “Blessed are those
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
8 Blessed is the one
whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”

Click to expand...

To me, when Paul said "worketh not" in Romans 4:5 and "not of works" in Ephsians 2:9 the issue is what TYPE of work was Paul speaking about in these verses. I showed in an earlier post the Bible speaks of many different types of works, that all works are not the same.

Those that have allowed themselves to believe Luther's faith only (no works) wish these 2 verses to eliminate ALL works of all kinds. But this cannot be for it creates contradictions. These verses cannot eliminate ALL works then that eliminates the wrok God did in bringing a plan of salvation to man through Jesus Christ. It would also eliminate obedience to God's will which BOTH Paul and James agree are necessary to becoming saved:

James 2:24----------works (obeying God's will)>>>>>>>>>>>>>justifies
Romans 6:17-18-----obey from the heart (obey God's will)>>>>>>justifies

So faith only in basically claiming all works are alike therefore Romans 4:5 eliminates ALL works which again creates a contradiction and drives a wedge betwen James and Paul when NONE exist.

The reason James says works justify (James 2:24) and Paul says works do not justify (Romans 4:2) is because they are talking about two different types of works. The works James says justifies is obedience to God's will as Abraham obeyed God's will in offering Isaac (James 2:21). The type of work Paul says does not justify in the context of Romans chapters 1-4 are the works of strict, perfect fllawless law keeping the OT law required.

James is saying faith without works cannot justify.
Paul is saying works without faith cannot justify.

They are approaching the same conclusion from different directions.

Again, James is saying faith apart from obedient works cannot justify.

What does Paul mean by works apart from faith cannot justify?

Again, in Romans 4:2 the type of work Paul is talking about is the perfect, flawless law keeping work the OT law of Moses required to be justified.

Paul says in Galatians 3:12 Paul says "And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them." Seems odd Paul saying the OT law of Moses is "not of faith" when men under that OT law as David had faith. What does Paul mean then? Paul is showing under the OT law that what you do is all that matters for that OT law require the work of sinless law keeping to be justified. And if the Jew could keep the law sinlessly perfect then his reward is of debt not of grace (Romans 4:4) for the sinless do not need grace. Therefore under the OT law faith meant nothing in being justified for that law required the work perfect sinless law keeping to be justified. You could have all the faith in the world under that law but offend that law just one time then that law condemned you, no justification.

In Romans 3:1-9 Paul speaks of the OT law being given to the Jews and it was an advantage in many ways to the Jews except for one way...it could not justify them for again it required the work of flawless sinless law keeping to be justified. The Jew, no matter how hard he tried, could not keep it perfectly leading Paul to say those works required by the OT law do not justify. David and Abraham both sinned therefore could not be justified by the OT law that required perfect flawless law keeping, so how were they justified? By an obedient faith not by flawless sinless law keeping the OT required.

So what Paul means by works apart from faith do not justify he is saying to try and be justified by perfect sinless works in keeping the OT law cannot justfy one apart from faith for one will end up committing a sin and be condemend, left unjustified by the OT law.

Paul - faith AND obedience apart from the work of sinless, flawless keeping does justify.
As James says faith and obedient works justify.

2PhiloVoid said:

Alright, so I see that you're employing a hermeneutic for your exegesis. And from what source have you drawn your methodology? Do you have a scholar you can offer me whom you feel backs you in your interpretation here?

Click to expand...

Wait. Are you telling me a scholar is needed to backup the logic behind the idea where the plain text provides a meaning then that’s the meaning? Really?

Let’s test that idea, again, with some examples. Due Process Clause says no state shall deprive a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. A plain text meaning is the state can take anyone or all three away so long as they give due process. Now, are you taking the point of view that despite that logical plain text meaning of those words, it is to be set aside for some other meaning? Really? That’s logical? That’s rational?

“Do not park my car in the driveway. Pull my car up into the bay and park it in the bay.” This has a plain text meaning, of not parking the car in the driver but parked in a building that is a compartment where the car is to be parked. Despite that logical plain text meaning, a scholar is needed to say that plain text meaning makes sense and it is logical to follow that meaning? Really?

The evidence of what Paul is talking about is in the plain text of the verses in Romans 4:1-6. Paul says “works.” He doesn’t say “the Law” or “works of the law.” Paul used the Greek word ergon/ergois, which isn’t translated “works of the Law.” There’s no use of the Greek word ergon/ergois in Scripture as “works of the law.”

Now, in verse 13 Paul uses the phrase “the Law.” That’s interesting. So, prior to this point he says “works” but in 13 the phrase “the Law” is used.

What can we deduce? Paul is perfectly capable of saying “the Law” and perfectly capable of saying “works of the Law.” After all, in verse 13 the phrase “the Law” appears. But Paul didn’t say “works of the Law” but only said ergon/egois, “works.” Paul isn’t just referencing “works of the Law” with the Greek word ergon/ergois. Paul is referencing works and works isn’t not=works of the Law.

To reach your equation requires one to ignore the Greek word Paul used, ergon/ergois and its meaning, a meaning not used in Scripture to mean “works of the Law.” Furthermore, it creates a paradox since Paul has no reservation about using the phrase “the Law,” he does so several times in the NT, including Romans, but refused to marry the phrase “the Law” with the word “works,” which is a very strong, if not nearly ineluctable point that Paul isn’t equating “works” with “works of the Law” as you imply.

Not that it matters but William Lane Craig and Licona are supporters of the idea where the plain text provides a meaning, that’s the meaning. Same In the legal field, Scalia held this view, as had the Supreme Court for centuries, more prominently in what is now known as Textualism/Original Meaning, advocated by Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, Kavanaugh, law professors Randy Barnett, Josh Blackmun, Bjork, many if not all lawyers/law professors, with the Federalist Society.

But really, the above doesn’t matter, because it is logical to take the plain text meaning as the meaning.

2PhiloVoid said:

No, brother Steve. In this instance, I'm only referring to the verse that I had under the microscope back up in post #50, where I was being trounced on by NortreDame and not really allowed a place to be heard. (i.e. Romans 4:2)

Click to expand...

Trounced? That’s dramatic.