Hi all,

my question, with regards to James Dunn's argument that "works of the law" in Paul refers specifically to Jewish badges of identity, ie. food laws, ceremonial rituals, etc, and not morally upright living ...

What's the standard Reformed knock-down rebuttal to this argument?

Related to this, is how to answer a Roman/EO sympathizer that says that the history of the church has always believed in salvation by faith and works?

__________________
Dennis Oh
Toronto, Canada
"The gospel is only good news if it gets there in time" -- Carl F. H. Henry

On Galatians 2:16 the reformers point out that the apostle's antithesis is so absolute that it is impossible to take "works" as applicable to only one part of the law. For the antithesis to be valid it must apply to works of every kind. The appeal to Psalm 143:2 confirms the absoluteness of the denial.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."

Allow me to play devil's advocate for a moment. I know this topic has been beaten to death and forgive my being still a novice and student of these matters, but it's always good to go back to fundamentals. Consider the argument:

1. We are justified by faith.
2. Works are evidence of justifying faith
3. Works are necessarily tied to faith (as the sun's heat is to its rays)
4. Therefore, justification is by faith and works

This is the typical catholic/synergistic argument, but what of the above do we find reprehensible? Is the logic THAT unsound?

Do we not affirm that works are necessary for salvation?

In light of the discussion this is about justification and I believe that the whole law is every point of it. Especially the decalogue or Ten Commandments.

__________________

Norseman Moderator

R. Martin Snyder
1689er
http://www.puritanboard.com/blogs/puritancovenanter/

"Our object should not be to have scripture on our side but to be on the side of scripture; and however dear any sentiment may have become by being long entertained, so soon as it is seen to be contrary to the Bible, we must be prepared to abandon it without hesitation."
William Symington

Click to get:Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

1. This argument has the deck stacked against the Protestant at the very beginning. He professes that we are justified by faith alone. (apart from the works of the law)

2. Yes. See Heidelberg Catechism, Q&A 64

3. Works flow out of faith i.e. are subsequent to faith but not part of the definition of faith in the statement 'justification by faith'. Since justification is a 'once for all' event works can have no place in something that has already been finished.

4. This is a non sequitur.

Conclusion: Works are not necessary for salvation: salvation is necessarily unto works. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

__________________
Rev. Daniel Kok
Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
Leduc, Alberta CANADA

"What sort of pledge and how great is this of love towards us! Christ lives for us not for himself!"
John Calvin, Commentary on the Hebrews (7:25)

Hi Pastor Daniel. Fellow Canadian!

once we use the term "necessary", whether in speaking of "works necessary for salvation" or "salvation necessary unto works" doesn't this imply that they are interconnected and inseparable? like siamese twins or two sides of a coin, we cannot speak of one without the other.

the word "necessary" places a condition on receiving the desire outcome.

I completely agree that justification is a declarative act, occuring in a moment of time, not the wrongly asserted notion of catholics that it is an infused, gradual righteousness, etc...

I'm just grappling with that word "necessary" - it seems to imply that faith is not alone. Just like that popular maxim "we are justified by faith alone, but faith is alone in the one justified." I don't want to relegate these great confessions as word games, but to me it's tempting to see them as all saying the same thing.

any helps would be appreciated, cheers.

If you read my 'Conclusion' again you will see that I changed the word 'necessary' into 'necessarily'. Christ guarantees our justification and our sanctification (1 Corinthians 1:30) Therefore our justification is not by sanctification but rather unto sanctification.

So I would not say that works are necessary for the Christian so much as they are inevitable because of our union with Christ (Romans 6:1ff.)

Truly brother these are not word games: the difference is between those who believe Christ is sufficient or insufficient. Roman Catholics teach justification by faith + works; Protestants teach justification by faith alone. The difference couldn't be clearer:

Heidelberg Catechism, Q&A 30

Dennis,

It sounds like you are grappling with something that might be answered by our beloved Greenbaggins discussing the book of James and Norm Shepherds book.

Justification in James Green Baggins

Genesis 15:6 in Paul and James Green Baggins

thanks for the helpful posts.

so, it comes down the fundamental question:

Are works necessary for final salvation?

or put negatively, Will the person without works be excluded from salvation?



if YES --> catholicism ?
if NO ---> antinomiansim ?
YES and NO ?

Certainly both Catholics and Protestants (following James) safeguard against antinomianism. Catholics do it by reworking the doctrine of justification, Protestants do it by working with the doctrine of sanctification. But both are insepable elements in salvation with common practical outcomes.

thoughts?

The hope of the Catholic is based upon the merits of Christ, the saints, Mary, and one's efforts to achieve final justification. If one really lives according to this system they will only have fear and bondage (Galatians 5:1; cf. 1 John 4:17-18).

Yes it is true that Catholics are often good people living morally centered lives. But if they cling to the Catholic system they are not living Christ centered lives. If they do not cling to the Catholic system than they need to repudiate it and join a true church (Galatians 1:6-7).

So the outcome may at times be common but this is an exception to Rome's view of justification, not the consistent result.

In Reformed Protestant expositions of the doctrine of justification, works are described as a consequential condition of justification, that is, it is expected that works will follow them that believe. Works are the product and evidence of a true and lively faith. Men will be judged according to works in the sense that their works will testify the genuineness of their faith. But it is not by works that a man is justified. The very best works of a believer are corrupted by sin and can only be acceptable in the sight of God because the man himself has been accepted through the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ.

The following items seem to be inextricably linked to each other:

Faith and works
Justification, sanctification, glorification

Theology rightfully distinguishes these things as a means of fully understanding their relationship and protecting the gospel. And as Rev Winzer has said elsewhere, "Wisdom distinguishes things that differ."

When things are inextricably linked, however, i'm tempted to allow mingling and overlapping of meaning.

The Reformed theologian says, 'saving faith includes works'
The Catholic says, 'faith and works saves'

Are we splitting hairs? is it an option to view things as wholes, or must we chop finely?

thanks.

Romanism: Faith + Works = Salvation

Gospel: Faith = Salvation + Works

The distinction is on which side of the equation you place works. And of course, that faith is a gift of God.

__________________
Brad
Member- Eagle Heights PCA
Winchester, VA

Pro 16:33 The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.

Isa 8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Ephesians 2:8-10. I know.... We all know this.

I like it!

Thanks Brad.

The reformed theologian never says saving faith includes works in relation to justification. Faith is the alone instrument which takes hold of Jesus Christ and His righteousness; at the same time, that faith is never alone in him that is justified, but is accompanied by all other saving graces which will consequentially bring forth fruit to the glory of God.

Think of the engrafting of a branch into a tree. Whatever leaves and fruits the branch might have, as long as it remains separate from the tree it is in a state of death because it is cut off from the supply of life which only the tree can provide. It is the engrafting into the tree that vivifies the branch and its fruits. Likewise, take a person with all the formalities of a Christian man who does not trust in Jesus Christ. Without faith he is dead in his sins, no matter how flowery he appears to other men. Upon believing he is united to Christ, and all that Christ is becomes his. Then, and only then, through the uniting act of fatih, is the man given the justification of life. Then, and only then, does he flower and fructify with the life of the Saviour.