Post by Admin on Apr 11, 2019 14:54:45 GMT
The following is an OP ran on a multi-denominational Forum in the Baptist board:
Most are familiar with the Reformation, and many Baptists follow a Reformed perspective to a certain degree, so I would like to pose a question concerning a primary debate between Catholics and Baptists: on what basis can we adhere to the Catholic view that Justification in Romans 4 is equal to salvation?
Despite the fact that Catholics impose an eternal context into James 2 and we (Baptists) can easily show that it is a temporal context, few give consideration to the context of Romans 4. I would suggest that we must interpret Romans 4 as an example given of precedence concerning being justified before God, rather than an example of justification which equates to Eternal Redemption. I will try to keep the OP short and begin with one point, and I ask that only those serious about the topic participate.
First point: Abraham is declared righteous, and most hold the view that this means he was "saved." I agree Abraham was saved during his lifetime, however...Abraham was not eternally redeemed. He died not receiving the very promise of the blessing that God would justify all families/nations of the Earth through the Seed. He died not receiving the Atonement (though it is popular among Baptists to believe he did, there is no basis in Scripture for that view, and much to deny it as a reality (this thread will attempt to show that is the case)). He died not being reconciled to God. He died not being born again. He died not receiving remission of sins on an eternal basis. He died not receiving the Promised Spirit, the Comforter. So the first point is that Abraham died not receiving the elements of Eternal Salvation, and I will be glad to debate any of these points in this thread.
As to the specific topic of justification, I will present a very simple argument that despite being declared righteous...we must not equate this to the imputed righteousness of Christ:
Romans 4 King James Version (KJV)
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.
Abraham's belief and the faith that arose out of it was counted unto him for righteousness. I think we can all agree that we can say without controversy that Abraham was justified by belief and faith alone, as Paul makes it clear that if it were works it would have been a reward, rather than a crediting of righteousness. However, James makes it clear that Abraham was also justified by his works:
James 2:21-24 King James Version (KJV)
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.
As I said, we can easily see that this is a temporal context, because we see the works complete the belief which led to faith which led to works. Furthermore we know that if we were to impose an eternal context into this we would have to equally conclude that a man might be saved by giving food to the hungry and clothes to those who are cold. Atheists do this, are they saved by that action? We know they are not. We might be inclined to shake our heads at Catholics for equating James' statement to salvation, but again...
...what about Romans 4? Is not the Protestant/Evangelical guilty of doing the same thing? I would suggest to you, yes. Let's take a look at another passage of someone declared righteous before the Cross and Resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Luke 1:5-6 King James Version (KJV)
5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
Justified by God and the reason given? Obedience to the commandments and ordinances of the Law. Justified by the works of the Law. Here are some more people justified by the works of the Law:
Romans 2:13-15 King James Version (KJV)
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)
No point in arguing, the doers of the law shall be justified. Paul gives an example of Gentiles who did not have the written Word of God, nor were they in Covenant with him through the law doing the things contained in the law. The Law was written on their hearts, an indication of God's revelation given to men outside the sphere of direct revelation. We know this isn't an inherent ability to understand the spiritual things of God, because we are told the natural man cannot receive or perceive the spiritual things of God. Secondly, we have to ask Who wrote the Law on their hearts, and the obvious answer is God. And third, it's stated in this very text that they do not have the Law, which indicates that which the Jews do have, which was given them by God. So we see men being justified by works as well as justified by belief and faith alone, but, wait a minute...
Romans 3:10 King James Version (KJV)
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Do we have a conflict? Not at all, not if we maintain a proper context concerning justification. As I said, Romans 4 and James 2 speak about justification, and when we are given a text concerning Eternal Redemption and Eternal Salvation it is very clear:
Ephesians 2:8-9 King James Version (KJV)
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.
Clearly a soteriological text, and it is plainly stated we are saved by grace...alone. It is a gift. And unlike justification...
...works are explicitly excluded.
Now a passage that is speaking of Justification in an eternal context:
Romans 3:20-26 King James Version (KJV)
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 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;
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Paul isn't contradicting himself when he states in the previous chapter that the doers of the Law shall be justified, he is simply speaking in a different context, one that is temporal. here he is speaking in an eternal context and no man will be eternally redeemed through anything they do. Why was Abraham justified? He believed God. He had faith. He had works. So in his life he was justified, just as Lot was, and Rahab, and Zacharias and Elisabeth.
But they all died not receiving the promises (many of which are listed in the beginning of the OP).
So I would suggest that when Paul gets to Romans 4 he is simply giving an example of precedence concerning whether men can actually be justified on a basis of imputation, rather than having to "earn a reward" for services rendered.
To sum it up, we must distinguish between justification which is based on what we do, and justification which is based on what Chist did:
Romans 3:24 King James Version (KJV)
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
God bless.
Most are familiar with the Reformation, and many Baptists follow a Reformed perspective to a certain degree, so I would like to pose a question concerning a primary debate between Catholics and Baptists: on what basis can we adhere to the Catholic view that Justification in Romans 4 is equal to salvation?
Despite the fact that Catholics impose an eternal context into James 2 and we (Baptists) can easily show that it is a temporal context, few give consideration to the context of Romans 4. I would suggest that we must interpret Romans 4 as an example given of precedence concerning being justified before God, rather than an example of justification which equates to Eternal Redemption. I will try to keep the OP short and begin with one point, and I ask that only those serious about the topic participate.
First point: Abraham is declared righteous, and most hold the view that this means he was "saved." I agree Abraham was saved during his lifetime, however...Abraham was not eternally redeemed. He died not receiving the very promise of the blessing that God would justify all families/nations of the Earth through the Seed. He died not receiving the Atonement (though it is popular among Baptists to believe he did, there is no basis in Scripture for that view, and much to deny it as a reality (this thread will attempt to show that is the case)). He died not being reconciled to God. He died not being born again. He died not receiving remission of sins on an eternal basis. He died not receiving the Promised Spirit, the Comforter. So the first point is that Abraham died not receiving the elements of Eternal Salvation, and I will be glad to debate any of these points in this thread.
As to the specific topic of justification, I will present a very simple argument that despite being declared righteous...we must not equate this to the imputed righteousness of Christ:
Romans 4 King James Version (KJV)
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.
Abraham's belief and the faith that arose out of it was counted unto him for righteousness. I think we can all agree that we can say without controversy that Abraham was justified by belief and faith alone, as Paul makes it clear that if it were works it would have been a reward, rather than a crediting of righteousness. However, James makes it clear that Abraham was also justified by his works:
James 2:21-24 King James Version (KJV)
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.
As I said, we can easily see that this is a temporal context, because we see the works complete the belief which led to faith which led to works. Furthermore we know that if we were to impose an eternal context into this we would have to equally conclude that a man might be saved by giving food to the hungry and clothes to those who are cold. Atheists do this, are they saved by that action? We know they are not. We might be inclined to shake our heads at Catholics for equating James' statement to salvation, but again...
...what about Romans 4? Is not the Protestant/Evangelical guilty of doing the same thing? I would suggest to you, yes. Let's take a look at another passage of someone declared righteous before the Cross and Resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Luke 1:5-6 King James Version (KJV)
5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.
Justified by God and the reason given? Obedience to the commandments and ordinances of the Law. Justified by the works of the Law. Here are some more people justified by the works of the Law:
Romans 2:13-15 King James Version (KJV)
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)
No point in arguing, the doers of the law shall be justified. Paul gives an example of Gentiles who did not have the written Word of God, nor were they in Covenant with him through the law doing the things contained in the law. The Law was written on their hearts, an indication of God's revelation given to men outside the sphere of direct revelation. We know this isn't an inherent ability to understand the spiritual things of God, because we are told the natural man cannot receive or perceive the spiritual things of God. Secondly, we have to ask Who wrote the Law on their hearts, and the obvious answer is God. And third, it's stated in this very text that they do not have the Law, which indicates that which the Jews do have, which was given them by God. So we see men being justified by works as well as justified by belief and faith alone, but, wait a minute...
Romans 3:10 King James Version (KJV)
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Do we have a conflict? Not at all, not if we maintain a proper context concerning justification. As I said, Romans 4 and James 2 speak about justification, and when we are given a text concerning Eternal Redemption and Eternal Salvation it is very clear:
Ephesians 2:8-9 King James Version (KJV)
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.
Clearly a soteriological text, and it is plainly stated we are saved by grace...alone. It is a gift. And unlike justification...
...works are explicitly excluded.
Now a passage that is speaking of Justification in an eternal context:
Romans 3:20-26 King James Version (KJV)
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 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;
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Paul isn't contradicting himself when he states in the previous chapter that the doers of the Law shall be justified, he is simply speaking in a different context, one that is temporal. here he is speaking in an eternal context and no man will be eternally redeemed through anything they do. Why was Abraham justified? He believed God. He had faith. He had works. So in his life he was justified, just as Lot was, and Rahab, and Zacharias and Elisabeth.
But they all died not receiving the promises (many of which are listed in the beginning of the OP).
So I would suggest that when Paul gets to Romans 4 he is simply giving an example of precedence concerning whether men can actually be justified on a basis of imputation, rather than having to "earn a reward" for services rendered.
To sum it up, we must distinguish between justification which is based on what we do, and justification which is based on what Chist did:
Romans 3:24 King James Version (KJV)
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
God bless.