Truth Magazine

By Dudley Ross Spears

A gospel preacher named John S. Sweeney moved to Illinois in the fall of 1854. Shortly after his arrival, he debated a Methodist preacher called, “the Reverend Mr. Pattet.” The proposition for debate was simple. Mr. Pattet affirmed what was plainly written in the Methodist Discipline, viz., “Wherefore, that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort” (Article IX, “Of the Justification of Man”). Brother Sweeney, with the full force of divine truth, denied and devastated such a false doctrine. He ended the short-lived debating activity of the “Reverend Mr. Pallet,” and evidently, other Methodist preachers have learned the same lesson. The entire Methodist Episcopal denomination has stopped defending their doctrine of justification “by faith only.”

The doctrine of “justification by faith only” is the offspring of the famous German reformer, Martin Luther. The Protestant Reformation was “born” as a result of the “discovery” Luther made of this false doctrine. It has become an ingrained part of every denomination that holds to the so-called Evangelical theology. They all proclaim that man is saved, justified and pardoned by “faith only.” Luther was so controlled by this idea that he took the liberty of adding the word allein (German for “alone”) to the word “faith” in Romans 3:28. Even though he was taken to task repeatedly for this unwarranted addition, he steadfastly refused to relinquish it. He explained, “that he was not translating words but ideas and that the extra word was necessary in German in order to bring out the force of the original” (Bainton, Roland H., Here I Stand, Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, Nashville, pp. 332-334). No German translator would agree with Luther. In fact, the Swiss translations do not have the word that Luther added. Only the Genfer Bibel adds “only” and it is the Swiss equivalent of the German Luther translation.

Adding the word “alone” to the text of Romans 3:28 completely changes the meaning of Paul. Whereas Paul affirmed, “We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law,” the addition of “alone” limits justification to faith and excludes anything else. The Bible clearly shows that while “works of the law” are excluded, faith plus works are necessary for salvation or justification. There is a difference in saying, “a man is cured from disease by medicine, apart from `faith healers,”‘ and saying that “a man is cured from disease by medicine only, apart from `faith healers.”‘ In the first sentence, taking the medicine is not excluded, but in the second sentence taking the medicine is excluded. Just so Paul does not exclude works in general, but specifies “works of the law.”

A Clarification

There is no one who has read the Bible with any degree of profit who would deny that man is justified “by faith.” That fact is established clearly by divine revelation. Paul reaffirmed the proposition that man is justified “by faith” when he said, “Being therefore justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:1). Both the books of Romans and Galatians set forth the principle that sinners are justified “by faith.” I seriously doubt that there is a man alive who believes in justification “by faith” any stronger than those of us who are members of churches of Christ.

But there is a vast difference in saying that man is “justified by faith” and then saying man is “justified by faith only.” The most outstanding difference is that one is taught in the Bible and the other is denied in the Bible. The Epistle of James has this statement: “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (2:24, A.V.). Consider the following comparison.

James 2:24	Methodist Discipline
“by works a man is justified and not by faith only.”	” . . . that we are justified by faith only is a   wholesome doctrine . . .”

There is no way these two statements can be reconciled. They state exact opposites. What the Bible says is not so, the Methodist Discipline calls a “wholesome doctrine.”

The word that James used for “only” is from the Greek word monos and is defined as, “alone, solitary” (W.E. Vine). It is interesting to read the words of a master linguist from the past. He is John A. Bengel and wrote, “Only – Here Scripture has prophetically stigmatized these degenerate disciples of Luther, who ever call for faith only, not that of Paul, but faith isolated from works.” (New Testament Word Studies, Vol. II, p. 710). Edwin T. Winkler, D.D., author of the Commentary on the Epistle of James, published by Judson Press, and known far and wide has this interesting commentary: “Both Paul and James recognize faith as a principle without which acceptable works cannot be performed and salvation cannot be attained” (An American Commentary on the New Testament, edited by Alvah Hovey, D.D,). This sounds strange coming from Baptist scholars. Yet, it is a truth that needs to be learned. “Faith only” will not justify; faith plus works will justify.

James used the same word (monos) once more in his letter. In James 1:22 he wrote, “But be ye doers of the word and not hearers only (monos).” The principle here is the same as in James 2:24. The hearer only does nothing. Therefore, the do-nothing hearer, the hearer who will not obey the Truth, is the one who wilt not be blessed. In exactly the same way, the individual with faith only, does nothing, obeys nothing and performs no works; therefore he is not justified or saved. God does not bless those who only hear and who only believe James describes an individual who has faith plus nothing, showing that such faith will not save. It is right odd to hear others say just the opposite, even sometimes from those who should know better.

Let it be clearly understood now, that faith does justify and save, but faith only does neither. It is not a question of whether faith justifies or is essential to salvation or not. The issue is whether faith alone will save. If, in the act of believing, nothing more is required by God, then “faith only is a wholesome doctrine,” but if the Bible teaches that faith plus works equals salvation, it is very unwholesome.

Some Consequences

If the doctrine of “justification by faith only” is true, there are several consequences that must be faced. If all that God requires of sinners is that they believe, plus nothing, then there are some passages of Scripture that do not make much sense.

1. If one is saved by “faith only,” then James contradicts Paul. This is the position Martin Luther took in regard to James. He simply disregarded James and called it, “a right strawy epistle.” The truth is, of course, that James does not contradict Paul. Paul and James both teach that faith only will not save. Both teach that faith plus works equals salvation. Paul wrote the Galatians, “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision: but faith working through love” (Gal. 5:6). How could anyone charge Paul with denying works and affirming “faith only”?

2. If one is saved by “faith only,” then one can be saved without obedience to the gospel of Christ. One must believe the gospel to be saved (Mark 16:16). If, however, that is all that God requires, obedience to gospel commands plays no roll at all. But consider this statement in reference to Christ. “Though he was a Son, yet learned obedience by the things which he suffered; and having been made perfect, he became unto all them that obey him, the author of eternal salvation” (Heb. 5:8-9). But if one is saved by “faith only,” it matters very little whether one obeys Christ or not. Who is ready for such a consequence?

3. If one is saved by “faith only,” then one could be saved and never openly confess Christ. Notice, “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue” (John 12:42). Here are some chief rulers of the Jews who believed “on Him.” Their faith cannot be questioned, but it did not overcome their fear of men. They would not confess Christ. Those who affirm that men are saved by “faith only” must accept the consequence that men can be saved with a silent faith, a faith that will not confess Christ openly. Who is ready for such?

4. If one is saved by “faith only,” then one can be saved before becoming a child of God. Consider the statement in John 1:11-12. “He came unto his own, and they that were his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he the right to become children of God, even to them that believe on his name.” The facts of this passage show clearly that those who receive Christ received the “right” to become children of God. John specifies those who receive Christ as, “even to them that believe on His name.” Those who believe on His name are those who receive Christ and they are the ones who have the right to become children of God. One cannot become what one already is. Therefore, one who believes and does not exercise the right to become a child of God, can be saved according to the doctrine of “faith only.” They must face the consequence of having a person saved, but not being a child of God. Are they willing to do so?

5. If one is saved by “faith only,” and saved before becoming a child of God, one is saved before being born again. One cannot be a child of God without the new birth. Jesus told Nicodernus, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” (John 3:5). All of God’s children are born into His family, but since the believer has the “right” to become a child of God, the doctrine of “faith only” would allow an individual to be saved, but not born again. Will the advocates of “faith only” accept this?

6. If one is saved by “faith only,” then one is saved with a dead faith. James said, “faith apart from works is dead” (2:17). Faith that has no works cannot save, unless one accepts the consequence that a dead faith will save. Furthermore, James said that works make faith perfect (2:22). Perfect faith is complete faith. If one can be saved by an imperfect dead faith, then perhaps the doctrine of “faith only” is a wholesome doctrine, but if not, it is anything but wholesome and comfortable.

Faith And Works

The basis of this paper is that faith must have works, else there is no justification or salvation. Faith plus works equals salvation. There are some who object to the expression, “faith plus . . . .” They claim it is “faith plus nothing” that saves. But inspired men speak differently. To put it as clearly as possible, there is not way that the expression “faith only” can be used, understood or interpreted so as to make it a Bible doctrine. Those who think differently, please try it once. “Only” means solely or alone. It means “exclusively.” To affirm that salvation comes “by faith only” is to affirm that faith exclusively saves. That rules out God’s love, His grace, hope, the blood of Christ, obedience, etc. There is no way that the doctrine of “faith only” can be expressed in biblical terms because it is denied by biblical fact.

In the passage previously studied from Galatians 5:6, Paul shows that it is “faith working through love” that avails. Faith must exist before it can work and it must work through love before it can avail anything. Those who believe that “faith only” will save a sinner are forced to the conclusion that faith avails salvation before it works through love. Again, they flatly contradict the Bible.

Justifying Works

Not all works will justify or save the sinner. James does not affirm such. Paul identified the works he excluded as “works of the law” (Rom. 3:28). Works, in the New Testament, fall into three categories: (1) works revealed and required by the law of Moses, (2) works that human beings invent by their own wisdom, and (3) works that justify the sinner. One cannot deny that works of the Mosaic law have nothing to do with salvation, or that works human wisdom invents avail nothing. But still, James said that some kind of works justify the sinner.

Paul wrote, “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, and not by the works of the law, for by the works of the law shall not flesh be justified” (Gal. 2:16). Three times Paul specified “works of the law.” He did this to show the kind of works he had in mind which will not justify. Nothing in this passage of Scripture even hints that obedience to the commands of God are excluded. On the other hand, faith plus works may be included in the simple statement, might be justified by the faith of Christ.”

Again, Paul wrote Titus, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost” (Tit. 3:5). Here, Paul once more specifies the works he says will not justify. He calls them works of righteousness “which we have done.” I can think of no more appropriate example of such works “which we have done” than the denominational idea of how men are saved. In their “revivals” they call on sinners to answer the “altar call” or come to the “mourner’s bench.” Sometimes they get people so excited and frantic that the sinners jerk, twitch, quiver, shout, roll in the aisles, jump the pews and act as if anything but the Holy Spirit is working on them. Who invented such an idea? Does it come from God? If so, what passage indicates such a thing? The answer, dear reader is “none!” This kind of “salvation” belongs to man’s wisdom and is excluded from God’s plan.

But, still there are some kind of works that James tells us will justify. “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” What kind of works are they? Consider what the disciples asked Christ. They wanted to know, “What shall we do that we might work the works of God?” (John 6:28). Here is another category, viz., “the works of God” and these are to be done by men. Jesus answered, “This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent” (John 6:29). Jesus said that believing on Him is a work of God. Why? Simply because it is the command of God. In John’s first letter, he wrote, “And this is his commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ. . .” (1 John 3:23). God has commanded us to believe; therefore, believing is a work of God. It is not a work God must do, or will do for us, it is a work we must accomplish. The same is true with all of the things God commands us to observe.

Consider once more the passage from Titus 3:5. Here Paul said that we are not saved “by works of righteousness which we have done,” but that we are saved by God’s mercy, “by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” God’s mercy is the incentive of our salvation. The washing of regeneration is the means of our obedience to His commands. The washing of this regeneration is the baptism that results in our being raised to a new life in Christ (Rom. 6:3-4). It is the “birth of water and of the Spirit,” that brings us into the family of God. Baptism in water, for the remission of sins, is not a work of righteousness which we have done. It is the work of God exactly like belief in Christ is a work of God. Baptism rests on the same authority that commands belief. Since Paul says we are not saved by works of righteousness which we have done, but that we are saved by the washing of regeneration, it is easy to see that baptism is not a work of human merit.

Faith plus baptism, the works that justify the sinner, equals salvation. In the words of Christ, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16). Dear reader, consider carefully how you stand with God. Do not be misled and deceived by the false idea that faith only will save. It will not save anyone, saint or sinner. It never will be acceptable to God. It is the cunning devise of Satan and has been proclaimed by his henchmen. Renounce it now and if you have not yet shown your faith by complying with the commands of God, do so before it is everlastingly too late.

Guardian of Truth XXVII: 2, pp. 52-55
January 20, 1983

By Earl E. Robertson

It seems that from time immemorial men have substituted their own creed for the word of the living God. To the scribes and Pharisees Jesus said, “Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?” (Matt. 15:3). Again he said, “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:9). People who think they have the right to teach anything they wish religiously can, of course, see no wrong in it; but people committed to the fact that only God can guide men religiously see much wrong in it.

The old Philadelphia Confession of Faith, a creed made by men to guide men in religious matters, says, “This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature co-working with his special grace; the creature being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead.”

There are many errors in this man-made creed, but let us examine just one at this time: the contention that the sinner is wholly passive in conversion. This old creed is yet preached by men who ought to know better. The matter of being “passive” is the opposite of “active.” The creed contends man can do nothing in being converted; that should he try, he nullifies the grace of God. Jesus say, “he that doeth the will of my father” (Matt. 7:21), is the one who enters heaven. Being “wholly passive” does not permit this action demanded by Jesus! Peter affirmed on Pentecost that remission of sins is predicated upon repentance and baptism. (Acts 2:38.) The verb “repent” translates is active and commanding. No one can obey this divine command without action; and without this action, there is no remission of sins! But with this action one is no longer passive; therefore, either Peter is right and the human creed wrong, or the human creed is right and the apostle Peter is wrong. Which do you believe?

Faith comes by hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17; Eph. 1:13), not a creed authored by mere men. Why not accept the word of God and reject the creeds of men?

Guardian of Truth XXVII: 2, p. 52
January 20, 1983

By Wayne S. Walker

John the Baptist was a preacher (read Matt. 3:1-3). In fact, John was probably one of the most popular and most effective preachers of all time. But in many religious circles today, preaching is on the decline. Mass media is challenging churches for the attention of people. Many would rather stay at home and watch a sermon on TV than go to church. Others would rather stay at home and watch anything on TV. And even of those who do attend church services, some are quite disinterested in preaching and find Eutychus a kindred spirit. They either snooze through the sermon or shift their minds into neutral and turn their thoughts elsewhere.

Why is much of the preaching that is done so ineffective? Some blame it on the lecture method used in preaching. Since th’ congregation never gets to participate directly and immediately in the sermon, they would just as soon do away with preaching and set up discussion groups instead. Others blame the dogmatic style of preachers who, they say, sound too “preachy.” They do not want to be “preached” to because they feel they have a right to their own opinion. No one is going to tell them what is right, what is wrong, and what they ought to do, or they blame the subjects and material chosen by preachers – dull, too old-fashioned, not relevant enough. And occasionally, a few of these objections may be valid.

But John Killinger, in The Centrality of Preaching, suggests why much of what is called preaching is not really effective. “People are not tried of preaching but of non-preaching, of badly garbled, irrelevant drivel that has in so many places passed for preaching because there was no real preaching to measure it against.” Many churches have imported the idioms of the world into their music, worship, finances, fellowship – and into their preaching as well. Their ministers quote more poets and novelists than scriptures. They prefer to give book reports rather than Bible lessons. They play down the great spiritual truths about man, his sins, and what he must do. And they don’t talk about the differences between the kingdom of the world and the kingdom of God any more.

However, people are asking important religious questions. Is the Bible true? How does it affect me? Does it really mean what it says? And these questions can be answered only by gospel preaching. God still uses preaching to reach men and bring them to Himself. David Lloyd-George, former British prime minister, said, “When the chariot of humanity gets stuck. . . nothing will lift it out except great preaching. There is nothing in this case that will save the world but. . . preaching.” The apostle Paul said the same thing earlier and in a much better way in 1 Cor. 1:21.

There are six different words in the New Testament that describe preaching, two of which are more common than the others. One, used of John in our text, means “to herald, announce, proclaim” (denoting what the preacher does). The other, used in 1 Cor. 15:1 means to tell good news, to speak glad tidings (defining what the preacher says). Because of the importance which the Bible places on preaching, it needs to be revitalized. We must put it on a firm Biblical basis. Preaching should be looked upon not merely as a method of filling an hour on Sunday mornings, but as a means of instructing people in the way of the Lord. Good preaching can only be based on sound scriptural doctrine. Therefore, we have to know the true goals, aims, and ideals of preaching in order to share God’s word effectively with those who need it.

This is a subject everyone should study. Preachers, of course, need to know it so they can faithfully discharge the responsibilities God has given them. Elders ought to be aware of it so they can work with the preacher to see that the flock is fed properly. And every Christian must recognize it so the members can demand sound preaching where they attend. With this in mind, let’s examine some characteristics of effective preaching.

I. Purposeful. We must preach the mighty works of God, not opinions or platitudes. Preaching is a sacred trust, a blessed opportunity, a divine call. The goal is not to catch the spirit of the age, but to correct it with God’s truth. Preaching should be a thermostat, not a thermometer. Therefore, we must so present Jesus Christ that people will come to know Him, love Him, serve Him, and yield their lives to Him completely.

II. Practical. Preaching must have an application for the hearer. Without that, it is like a doctor who gives a sick man a lecture on health, but sends him out of the office without a prescription to cure his illness. But preaching must also apply to the preacher. The effectiveness of preaching declines when a gulf develops between the one who preaches and the people. Holiness must characterize our lives so that those who see us may have a good example. “Practice what you preach!”

III. Personal. The effectiveness of preaching proves itself by what happens to each person who hears it. Some aspect should reach every listener. No one should walk away from church without some spiritual insight. Preaching provides the meeting place for the soul and God – it nurtures souls. Thus, preaching must speak to the listener’s situation. And to do this, the effective preacher or teacher should analyze and know his audience.

IV. Powerful. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth” (Rom. 1:16). Preaching should be measured in terms of eternity, rather than time. Like the prophets of old, we may sigh anxiously. However, we must continue to speak the word with power. We should not despair but know that in God’s good time the effort will be worth it. The stamp of success may never appear in time, but it will in eternity. Success does not come automatically, but it will eventually when we communicate the good news powerfully to bring life to a dying humanity.

Conclusion

Preaching is God’s method for saving the world. We have no alternative. Preaching must be revitalized if we are to do God’s task. It must be preaching with purpose – to reconcile a world to Jesus Christ – and with practicality. It must be preaching to people – where they are, in their need. Above all, it must be preaching by the power of the word of God. And I am not just talking about public preaching; every Christian is a preacher in one sense of the word, because each of us it to proclaim the good news to those we are in contact with.

Guardian of Truth XXVII: 2, pp. 50-51
January 20, 1983

By Jeff Smelser

Standing in a store, another customer and I exchange polite greetings. Comments concerning the weather, the high costs of merchandise, etc., may follow. If circumstances permit, the conversation eventually becomes more personal, my southern accent is noted and my fellow shopper asks, “What are you doing up here in Ohio?”

“Preaching.”

“Hallelujah!” he exclaims. Then he begins to recite his own “conversion experience,” or perhaps begins to tell of the many ways in which the Lord has blessed him since he “accepted Jesus Christ as Lord.”

But what has happened? Only minutes earlier, our conversation was in an entirely different vein. This individual who moments before was content to talk about the most mundane things is suddenly hardly able to contain his “testimony,” and his joy in the Lord. And this change has been wrought simply because I stated that I am preaching. But preaching what? He hasn’t a notion as to what it is that I preach. But no matter. That isn’t the point. He can fairly safely assume that I don’t preach Satanism (I don’t look the type), and about all that is left is what the world calls the gospel. Exactly what doctrines I preach are irrelevant. The question comes to my mind, what is relevant to this individual? Could it be that the only important factor in producing this sudden change is that I have given myself away as someone who most likely will not scoff at one who claims to be a Christian? Could it be that my new friend is prompted to give his “testimony” simply because I seem to be a safe auditor?

Or consider a co-worker with whom you have had a casual acquaintance. He has not said anything about the gospel of Jesus Christ until one day, he discovers that you are a Christian. Henceforth, not a day passes without a greeting of “Hallelujah, Praise the Lord” from your suddenly zealous for the Lord co-worker. The point is certainly not that people should keep the gospel to themselves. Nor is the point that a Christian should subdue his joy if he unexpectedly finds that an acquaintance is also a Christian. Rather the point of these observations has to do with what being a Christian involves. To some, being a Christian seems to consist of nothing more than giving testimonials, primarily to people who won’t ridicule them; that is, to safe people.

With that thought in mind, I make mention of a woman named Pat with whom I have been studying the Bible. She has some acquaintances who love to testify. Some of these I have met, and have discussed the Bible with them in Pat’s presence. On points of disagreement, their defense was a testimonial, and usually a long one. I listened. Pat later apologized for the behavior that some of the testimony givers had exhibited and complemented my behavior saying, “you listen, so patiently!” I can’t help but wonder if perhaps my listening made such an impression on Pat because all her “Christian” friends are such lovers of testifying that they rarely listen to one another. To them, Christianity isn’t abiding in the doctrine of Christ (as in 2 Jn. 9); doctrine isn’t important. Christianity isn’t keeping the commandments of God (as 1 Jn. 5:3); they were saved by faith only and they have an “experience” to prove it! For these people, Christianity is primarily reciting their conversion “experience” and the wonders that God supposedly works in their lives furnishing further evidence of their salvation. Christianity is not a way of life, but a topic of conversation. But, how does the saying go, “Actions speak louder than words.”

Indeed, every Christian ought to be eager to share the good news of Jesus Christ with others. But this readiness to share the gospel ought to be more than a facade. It ought to characterize the Christian even when an unbeliever is his auditor. And his “testimony” should not be concerned with what has happened to himself, but with what Jesus Christ did and said. The individual who professes to rejoice greatly in Jesus Christ and yet sets aside the doctrine of Christ in favor of his own “experience” has a superficial joy. One will surely rejoice if he loves the lord (John 14:28). But if he is not concerned about the Lord’s words, or commandments, he does not truly love the Lord (John 14:15, 21, 23) and his rejoicing is in something other than Christ.

Having said all that, perhaps we might be moved to look at our own lives. How extensively does Christ pervade our lives? Paul said, “It is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me” (Gal. 2:20). Does Christ live in us only to the extent that we speak of the gospel only when talking with a safe person? Having discussed some element of biblical teaching with a safe person, do we feel that we have fulfilled our duties as a Christian? If we desire to convert people, we must first learn to be Christians, no just talk Christ. Then we must learn to initiate conversation concerning the Bible without fear of being ridiculed by an unbeliever. “Boldly” is the term used to describe the manner in which Paul preached at Damascus (Acts 9:27), in Jerusalem (Acts 9:29), in Iconium with Barnabas (Acts 14:3), and in a Jewish synagogue in Ephesus (Acts 19:8). Paul said he “ought” to speak boldly in the gospel (Eph. 6:20). He was not ashamed of the gospel (Rom. 1:16). And in Paul’s life we see that Christ not only spoke through him, but He did indeed live in him. No, we shouldn’t browbeat someone with the Bible when they have made it clear that they are not interested. But we should not assume that they are not interested before we even broach the subject. Most won’t be interested. A few will be. And if Christ truly lives in us, He will teach these few through us, boldly!

Guardian of Truth XXVII: 2, pp. 49-50
January 20, 1983