Truth Magazine

By Mike Grushon

In the past several years, one of the critical doctrinal controversies that has arisen among our brethren has to do with the nature of man’s righteousness. Some of our brethren have advocated the viewpoint that the personal righteousness of Christ is imputed to the Christian. This means in practical terms that when an individual becomes a Christian, he stands before God as righteous because he has Christ’s righteousness in the place of his own. The book of Romans contains the lengthiest single passage which discusses the concept of imputation. Therefore, it is appropriate that a small part of a special issue on the subject of the Book of Romans be dedicated to a study of what Romans really . teaches about imputation of righteousness.

The word “imputation” is but one way that translators render the two Greek words ellogeo and logizomai. These two words are found throughout the New Testament and are translated by many words including: suppose, reason, number, reckon, counted, thinkest, concluded and esteemeth. Obviously, these Greek words have a very common usage. However, it is when the word impute or one of its synonyms is used in relation to the concept of man’s righteousness before God that it becomes a part of the controversy between truth and error.

It is no easy task to briefly define the false concept of imputation which is being advanced by some brethren today. The concept is a part of the theology developed by John Calvin. Calvin’s concept of imputation is not an isolated belief. It is an integral part of a well-developed logical system. At the base of this concept is the idea that Christ’s perfect obedience must stand in the place of man’s inability to perfectly obey. Calvin says, “By his obedience, however, Christ truly acquired and merited grace for us with his Father . . . . if as a righteous man he suffered for unrighteous men – then he acquired salvation for us by his righteousness, which is tantamount to deserving it . . . . so by one man’s obedience many are made righteous (Rom. 5;19)”(1) Calvin’s concept of imputation is essential if one must justify man meriting salvation. We can recognize man’s shortcomings, so if he is going to merit salvation it must be on some basis other than personally achieved righteousness. Thus how does imperfect man become perfectly righteous? Listen to Calvin, “For if righteousness consists in the observance of the law, who will deny that Christ merited favor for us when, by taking that burden upon himself, he reconciled us to God as if we had kept the law? . . . What was the purpose of this subjection of Christ to the law but to acquire righteousness for us, undertaking to pay what we could not pay? Hence the imputation of righteousness without works which Paul discusses (Rom., ch. 4). For the righteousness found in Christ alone is reckoned as ours . . . . Now that power arises solely from the fact that the Son of God was crucified .as the price of our righteousness.”(2)

Thus, the concept is that the Christian is righteous because Christ lived as a substitute law-keeper and died perfectly righteous. That perfect righteousness is imputed, put to the account of the individual Christian and he, thus, stands before God righteous with Christ’s perfect righteous. Calvin’s system is very difficult to pick and choose portions to believe and portions to reject. So it is with the concept of the imputed righteousness of Christ. The consequences of man having Christ’s perfect righteousness seem obvious to nearly everyone but those of our brethren who are promoting it. What does Calvin view as its result? Listen, “Then he bids us take refuge in Christ’s blood, that having acquired righteousness we may stand secure before God’s judgment.”(3) The result of imputation of Christ’s righteousness is the impossibility of apostacy, the preservation of the saints. These two doctrines go together, the one is the basis of the other. It is only a matter of time that if an individual believes that one that he will be forced to the other, It is ironic that some of these brethren who act as if they have recently discovered the Biblical concept of grace have adopted a position that puts such emphasis upon merited salvation.

Of course, if the Bible teaches the doctrine that Calvin developed and some of our brethren are espousing is what the Bible teaches then we all ought to accept it. However, when we look at what the book of Romans says about imputation we find no mention of perfect obedience or the imputation of Christ’s righteousness.

The favor that Abraham received was riot merited by him or by the act of any other. Paul says, “For what does the Scripture say? And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness . . . . but to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness” (Rom. 4:3, 5). Notice the contrast, Calvin says that the perfect righteousness of Christ is imputed to the Christian. The Bible says that the believer’s faith is imputed for righteousness. The impact of Calvin’s doctrine is that once man has obtained Christ’s perfect righteousness, he is secure in salvation. After all, if Christ’s personal righteousness has been counted as your own how could you possibly be lost? On the other hand, Paul says that faith is imputed for righteousness: Standing right before God is conditioned on an individual’s faith, not merit whether obtained upon your own or from some other source. This is the vital difference between what the Bible says and what our brethren who have accepted Calvin’s concepts are teaching.

However, the book of Romans does not stop at simply affirming that faith is imputed for righteousness. Paul goes on to accurately describe the nature of such a faith. He discusses the nature of Abraham’s faith that was imputed to him as righteousness. In Romans 4:9-25, Paul demonstrates that faith that is imputed for righteousness is an active and obedient faith. Abraham completely trusted God and submitted to His will. The specific example Paul had under consideration was Abraham’s acceptance of God’s promise of a child when he and Sarah were well past child-bearing age. Paul says, “Yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief, but grew strong in faith giving glory to God, and being fully assured that what He had promised, He was able to perform. Therefore also it was reckoned to him as righteousness. Now not for his sake only was it written, that it was reckoned to him, but for our sake also, to whom it will be reckoned, as those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification” (Rom. 4:20-25). Abraham’s faith was such that he did God’s will. This does not mean that Abraham was perfect; it means that he was faithful. His faith was imputed for righteousness. Paul says our faith in Christ will likewise be imputed as righteouness. Again we stress not our sinless perfection; not our perfect obedience or that of any other (although we recognize Jesus’ perfection, we cannot accept that its purpose was to merit salvation through perfect righteousness); but our humble, active, obedient faith is what the Book of Romans says is imputed for our righteousness. For those who have such faith, Jesus died as a deliverer, the perfect sacrifice for our sins.

In an article this brief it is impossible to adequately describe the development of the Calvinistic doctrine of imputation, or to fully develop the scriptural position as it is set forth in the book of Romans. If the contrast between the two has been made evident, that Calvin lays stress upon the perfect obedience and meritorious life of Christ which is imputed to the believer resulting in the impossibility of any subsequent action of that believer resulting in his being lost, and the stress of the scriptures that faith on the part of the individual is imputed for righteousness thus resulting in the constant need for the individual Christian to live faithfully before God, then our time has been well spent.

In view of the purpose of this special issue on the book of Romans, we conclude by mentioning the place and doctrine of imputation plays in the overall message of the book of Romans. When Paul tells us that faith is imputed for righteousness, he allows us to see the means by which we can overcome sin which is common to us all and which results in the penalty of death (Rom, 3:23; 6:23). The solution to the problem of sin lies not with man’s ability to achieve righteousness upon his own. We are not going to merit salvation. However if God is going to grant such salvation, He may choose the basis upon which he is going to do so. Paul’s declaration that “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness” (Rom. 4:3), is the declaration of what basis God has chosen. Thus, the gospel is God’s power of salvation to those that believe (Rom. 1:16) because God counts such humble, trusting, and obedient acceptance of His word and counts those who exhibit it as righteous. Every Christian can be thankful that God has so bestowed His grace upon us by sacrificing His Son for our sins and providing us with the gospel of salvation.

QUESTIONS

• Define the word impute or imputation.
• What New Testament book and chapter discuss at length God’s imputation of man’s faith for righteousness?
• Who is one of the leaders of the Protestant Reformation who included a doctrine of imputation in his theological system?
• What is the name of his book, containing the doctrines of his theology?
• The Calvinist and Reformation movement developed an explanation of how God can view man as perfectly obedient, as earning and deserving his salvation. State that explanation.
• Pure Calvinism aruges that no work of obedience to the gospel is essential to salvation because someone has done all the obeying for us. Who?
• What false idea of a Christian’s security goes along with the denominational dogma of imputation?
• Contrast what the Bible says must be put down, recorded, or imputed to the ungodly for righteousness with what Calvin said must be imputed.
• Contrast the nature of Abraham’s faith with the Calviniandenominational doctrine of justification by faith before and without any other obedience.
• Use Abraham’s life to illustrate the difference between justification by a life of absolute human perfection in works and justification by obedient faith.

Endnotes:

1. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed.by John T. McMeill (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 4th printing, 1967), I, p. 531.

2. Ibid., p. 533.

By Mike Willis

Our nation has been somewhat shocked and, perhaps, sobered by the news report of the death of over nine hundred people in Guyana. Following the murder of Representative Leo J. Ryan, a Democrat from California, Jim Jones led his people in the commission of mass suicide. The newsreels have shown the mass self-murder victims; the papers have given a tremendous amount of space to this event. Undoubtedly, it will be the major news story of the year.

So far as I have been able to piece together, the story of Jim Jones and his group may be briefly summarized as follows. Jim Jones began a rather respectable (in the eyes of the world) religious group in Indianapolis. Because of “persecution,” he left Indianapolis with about 120 followers to establish the People’s Temple in California. For several years, he worked in California primarily ministering to the blacks and underprivileged. During this time, he rubbed shoulders with some of the well known political figures in California. When things happened which did not please Jones in California, he started a colony in Guyana. During the course of this time, Jones became paranoid and tyrannical in his control over his religious sect. Mass suicides were rehearsed periodically. When Ryan was murdered after his investigation of the sect, the whole colony (with the exception of a few survivors) committed suicide by drinking cyanide poisoning mixed with Kool-aid. The death total reached 914.

In thinking of this horrible event, let us try to assess what happened in light of the Scriptures and remember some of the lessons revealed therein. Let us glean what good we can from these stark events.

Lessons Which We Need To Be Reminded Of

1. Call no man “lord. ” We need to be reminded of the dangers of following any man religiously from what has happened in Jonestown. Even the most dedicated and zealous of men can be wrong. Their thinking can become distorted to lead hundreds, yea even thousands, of people into error. If the people in Jonestown had realized that no man had authority over them to the degree that Jones exercised, they would not be dead at this time. They would not have administered cyanide poison to their infants.

Hence, we need to be reminded that there is but “one Lord” (Eph. 4:5). Jesus said, “But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master; even Christ” (Matt. 23:810). Although we have used these verses to teach the sinfulness of wearing religious titles (a legitimate usage of the passage), a more important point to be observed is that only God has the right to command men what to do.

The difference between the Pope, a council or synod, and Jim Jones is only in regard to what they command their followers to do. All of them assume a position of authority (to legislate to man) which has not been given to them. Indeed, we need to be reminded that all authority belongs to Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:18).

2. One church is not just as good as another. For many years, denominationalists have been preaching that one church is as good as another. Indeed, anyone who has the audacity to teach the oneness of the church (Eph. 4:4), is considered to be some kind of narrow-minded, bigoted idiot. Yet, the naked truth was driven home with force as secular newsmen and political commentators alike could see that this was not a “good” church.

Yet, Jim Jones’ church has just as much authority for being in existence as does Joseph Smith’s, Martin Luther’s, John Wesley’s, or John Calvin’s. He had just as much authority for making rules for his members – yes, even the rule of mass suicide – as does any one of these above-mentioned men or the councils and synods which presently govern these bodies started by these men. They legislate spiritual laws for their members, although Jones had just as much authority to demand his followers to commit suicide as the United Presbyterian Church had for demanding its followers accept homosexuals as priests. Jones had just as much authority to demand his followers to commit suicide as the Roman Catholic Church has to legislate regarding birth control, eating meats, forbidding priests the right to marry, and a host of other pernicious doctrines.

We need to remember, from the lesson at Jonestown, that one church is not just as good as another. Christ built His church (Matt. 16:16). He built but one church (Eph. 4:4). The church which He built is governed by Him as its Head (Eph. 1:22-23). There is no human denomination, planned by men, built by men, and governed by men which is as good as the church which God planned, Jesus built, and continues to govern! Whereas it is true that one human denomination is just as good as any other human denomination, no human denomination is as good as the church built by Christ. One church is not as good as another.

In a day when some Christian men are wanting to court denominationalism, Christians need to be reminded of the sinfulness of religious denominationalism. It is condemned of God (1 Cor. 1:10-13). Churches which wear human names, follow human creeds and men, practice things not authorized in the Scriptures, and other similar departures from God’s revealed word are disapproved of God. Men cannot be saved while associated with them.

The doctrines taught by these groups will damn men souls in eternity and, frequently, destroy their lives while on this earth beneath. The ways revealed in the word of God must be understood to be the only ways which have the “promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come” (1 Tim. 4:8).

3. The body is devoted to the service of God. The mass suicide of 914 souls is hard to comprehend. I cannot imagine hundreds of people thinking that they are best serving God by murdering their babies and themselves. Yet, this is what happened in Guyana. Christians need to be reminded of the truth of God’s word regarding their bodies.

First of all, I need to be reminded that my fleshly body is not inherently sinful. Some, having so concluded, believe that its passions are to be indulged or that asceticism is the means of controlling this sinful body. Both views are wrong. My body was created by God. Its desires are not inherently sinful; every desire that my body has can be legitimately fulfilled without transgressing god’s word. What has happened is that Satan uses the body as a means of persuading men to sin.

Secondly, I need to remember that nothing is to control my body. “All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any” (1 Cor. 6:12). Anything which enslaves my body is sinful.

Thirdly, I need to remember that my body has been purchased by Christ. “What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s” (1 Cor. 6:19-20). Inasmuch as my body belongs to Christ, He is the one who determines how it is to be used. My body is to be presented as a living sacrifice (Rom. 12:1-2) wholly dedicated to His service. Whatever He commands me to do with my body is what must be done with it.

Fourthly, I need to remember that my body will be raised up in the last days (1 Cor. 6:14). The Bible teaches a bodily resurrection. This doctrine is altogether undesirable to some present-day eastern religions and first century gnosticism which religions had the hope of a release of the spirit from the body. Christianity, however, teaches the resurrection of the body.

Remembering these doctrines taught in the Bible regarding the body, we cannot hold in high esteem those who wilfully destroy their bodies. There is nothing glorious in suicide, under any circumstances. Any person who holds such a low view of his body as to be willing to destroy it, has departed from following the revealed will of God.

4. “If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Matt. 15:14). The lesson that the blind followers of blind guides will be equally destroyed can be clearly seen from the events at Jonestown. Jones not only hurt himself, he took others with him into hell.

For years, Catholics have been teaching blind obedience to their spiritual leaders. Here are some quotations from Catholics which demonstrate this dogma:

“There is only one remedy for this evil (over scrupulous conscience – SGD), and that remedy is absolute and blind obedience to a prudent director. Choose one consult him as often as you desire, but do not leave him for another. Then submit punctiliously to his direction. His conscience must be yours for the time being. And if you should err in following him, God will hold him, and not you responsible” (Explanation of Catholic Morals, p. 24).

“Once he does so (enters the church – RJM), he has no further use for his reason. He enters the Church, an edifice illumined by the superior light of revelation and faith. He can leave reason, like a lantern at the door” (Ibid., p. 76).

“Obey blindly, that is, without asking reasons. Be careful, then, never to examine the directions of your confessor . . . In a word, keep before your eyes this great rule, that in obeying your confessor you obey God. Force yourself, then, to obey him in spite of all fears. And be persuaded that if you are not obedient to him it will be impossible for you to go on well; but if you obey him you are secure” (Liguori, Spouse of Christ, p. 161).

(These quotations are taken from Handbook of Religious Quotations, edited by Samuel G. Dawson and Rod MacArthur, pp. 43-44.) This position which is taught by Catholics regarding their members’ responsibilities to obey implicitly their leaders is exactly the kind of obedience which led to the death of 914 people in Jonestown. We simply must remember that one has a responsibility to find out whether or not what his teacher is teaching him is the truth. If a man follows a false teacher in his damnable doctrines, his would will be damned, according to Jesus.

Despite the fact that we can see this so clearly with reference to the people in Jonestown and with reference to the Catholics, some cannot see the ‘same thing with reference to problems among us. There are some who are teaching that those who blindly follow their leaders into using instrumental music in worship, participating in the sponsoring church arrangements, supporting recreational activities from the church treasury, and other such false doctrines will not suffer the consequence of their sins. They teach that if one openly and rebelliously participates in these sins that he can lose his soul. Yet, if he ignorantly commits these sins, the grace of God forgives him of that sin automatically. If this works for some people, it should work for all people. Will the grace of God automaticaliy forgive those responsible people who followed Jim Jones in Jonestown? Will the grace of God automatically forgive those Catholics who blindly and ignorantly follow their leaders? If not, by what authority does one teach that those who blindly and ignorantly follow their teachers into the sins committed with reference to the sponsoring church, church sponsored recreation, and other sins will receive automatic forgiveness?

Brethren, we simply must manifest confidence in the statement of Jesus. He said, “And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Matt. 15:14). The blind followers of blind guides are just as lost as are the blind guides. They need salvation! That is why it is so important that we reach them with the truth of God’s word.

Conclusion

Perhaps there are several other lessons which we need to learn from Jonestown which I have overlooked. However, these lessons are so blatantly obvious that all of us need to learn from what happened there this points that we might never forget our responsibility to obey the Lord’s commandments.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 3, pp. 51-53
January 18, 1979

By William V. Beasley

Do you have eternal life? This is something that we can know (I John 5:13). It is something that each of us should be striving to know. To know, yea, means a hope of heaven when this life is over. To know, nay, means hell as long as we remain in that condition. Let us continue our study of 1 John that we may know concerning our eternal salvation.

“Prove The Spirits” (1 John 4:1-3)

“Beloved, be not believing every spirit but (ever) be testing out the spirits whether they are from God, because many pseudo-prophets are gone out into the world” (4:1, R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of Peter, John, Jude, p. 484). All Christians have the responsibility to “ever be testing out the spirits.” This is not reserved for the elders, deacons, preachers -or even for George (“Let George do it”). What “spirit” are we testing? It is not the speaking of the Holy Spirit (a part of the God-hood), but of the “spirit” within a man. The warning is about false, pseudo prophets (these have a spirit in them). Is the prophet abiding in the Son? Father? Is God’s word (seed) abiding in the man? This proving is a continuous process (re-read Lenski’s translation). Those who preach truth may begin to preach error. All false teachers teach some truth.

John tells us (4:2-3) how we “prove” the spirits, but there is more in these verses than is apparent with a hasty reading. It is not speaking of a simple verbalization, “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.” After having given (by our count) some 18 or 19 things to know one has eternal life this “seven word salvation” would be completely out of place. We test, try, prove by considering a man’s confession; we cannot see his heart. A man’s confession is made not by his lips alone, but also by all his actions. It is a confession (profession) by word and deed that Jesus Christ is personally Lord (Ruler) and Savior. We are to be, as it were, fruit inspectors (Matt. 7:16, 20). Unless the confession is correct, the heart cannot be.

John did not object to negative teaching: “Every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God. . . ” (4:3). “Confesseth not” is a stronger and broader term than “denieth” (2:23). One is a negative action; the other is the lack of a positive action. We must be confessing Jesus Christ in our lives. People can, yea must, see Him in us (Gal. 2:20; Matt. 5:16). The marginal reading in the ASV for “confesseth not” is “annulleth Jesus.” We can annul Jesus in a great many ways other than by verbalizing, “Jesus Christ is not come in the flesh.” Any and all refusals to obey are an annulment of His Lordship in our lives. Our lives may, indeed, disagree with what we say (Luke 6:46).

“Overcome” False Prophets (1 John 4:4-5)

To “know that ye have eternal life” you must overcome the false prophets, the servants of the Devil, “he that is in the world” (4:4). We have at our disposal the “greater” One (James 4:7-8; Phil. 4:13). The false prophets are “of the world” (4:5) and can attract the world(ly). We must have a love of truth (2 Thess. 2:11), be spiritually minded (1 Cor. 2:4) and set to stop the mouths of false prophets (Tit. 1:10-I 1). Beloved, we cannot stop the mouths of false prophets while we play `footsie” with them. When someone goes astray we are wont to ask, “How could this happen?” The answer is apparent: They were of the world for the “world heareth” (4:5) the false prophets (see John 8:47). They lacked a love for the truth.

Respect Apostolic Authority (1 John 4:6)

Today we hear such things as, “Well, the apostles were just men,” “That was only Paul’s opinion and Paul was a woman hater” or “We do many things for which we have no authority.” Jesus taught that the words of the apostles were authoritative (Luke 10:16) and John re-affirmed that authority: “We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he who is not of God heareth us not. By this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error” (4:6). The apostles, guided by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 2:10-13), wrote scripture (2 Pet. 3:14-16). The “spirit of truth” is in the man who goes to the apostles (New Testament) for authority; the “spirit of error” sees no need for such “legalism.”

Conclusion

Do you know you have eternal life? Are you ever testing the spirits? Are you daily confessing Christ in your life? Are other people constrained by your life to “glorify your Father who is in heaven” (Matt. 5:16)? Have you overcome (overcoming) the false prophets? Do you respect (obey, abide in) the apostolic authority? Does your life set forth the “spirit of truth?”

Truth Magazine XXIII: 3, p. 50
January 18, 1979

By Irvin Himmel

Frequently Paul mentions works or deeds in his epistle to the saints at Rome. Whatever he means by “works,” the term expresses something opposed to grace and faith. He insists that justification does not find its source, in works.

Let us take a look at some of his statements In chapters 3, 4, 9, and 11 in this connection.

“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” (3:20).

This remark comes at the conclusion of a series of Old Testament quotations designed to show the Jew that he stood convicted of sin by the law in which he took so much pride. He could not keep the law without sin. When he sinned, the blood of bulls and goats could not take away his sins (Heb. 10:4), -so he became guilty before God. Consequently, no one could be justified in God’s sight by the deeds or works of the law. For this reason, the righteousness or justification offered by God, witnessed by the law and the prophets, is manifested apart from the law.

Works and Boasting

“Where !s boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law” (3:27, 28).

If a Jew had lived sinlessly under the law, he could have boasted of his accomplishment. He would have been justified by his human perfection, therefore by the law of works (his own spotless deeds) boasting would follow logically. However, no Jew attained such sinless perfection. The law made its subjects keenly conscious of guilt by pronouncing a curse on them. “For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them” (Gal. 3:10).

Justification comes through the channel of submissive faith, not by works of merit. This forever excludes human boasting about one’s salvation. The law of faith rules out glorying. Justification by faith shuts out the deeds of the law.

Abraham’s justification

“For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scriptures? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness” (4:2, 3).

The case of Abraham illustrates Paul’s point. The Jews took pride in being the fleshly offspring of Abraham. Whatever facts about Abraham might be recited, the interest of the Jewish reader would be aroused. Abraham was not justified by the law of works. God did not count him righteous on the basis of human accomplishments or deeds of merit. The great patriarch’s faith in God, demonstrated in obedience, was the foundation of his righteousness.

“Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (4: 4,5).

Anyone who relies on his own labors to recommend him to God is expecting reward from God as a matter of debt. But we frail humans can no more earn salvation than a cowboy can lift himself off the ground by pulling on his own bootstraps. We need help from heaven. God provides that assistance through grace. Our reward is based, therefore, on divine grace, not on divine indebtedness to mankind.

The expression “to him that worketh not” must be kept in its context. The working under consideration is that which is apart from grace and faith. Paul is not saying, “to him that obeyeth not.” He is describing the person who attempts to be saved by the law of works rather than the principle of faith. The one who “worketh not” in this passage is the individual who does not rely on his own deeds as if they could save without his showing faith in God, but recognizing his inability to merit God’s favor, he exercises faith which is counted for righteousness.

Human Perfection vs. Forgiveness

“Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered” (4:6, 7).

There are two possibilities relating to how man might be accepted before God: (1) by sinless deeds; (2) by forgiveness. The first of these possibilities would make grace needless and would allow human boasting. In the first three chapters of Romans, Paul showed the universal need for salvation by demonstrating the sinfulness of both Gentiles and Jews. This leaves the second possibility as man’s only hope. The quotation from David confirms what Paul has said already. Righteousness is imputed without works (apart from our trying to work or merit our way into acceptance) through the forgiveness of iniquities. The phrase “without works” does not mean without obedience to God. The contrast is not between faith (in the sense of mental assent) and obedient; the contrast is between faith (in the sense of submission) and works (in the sense of spotless deeds that would leave one without guilt).

God’s Purpose Not Built on Human Merit

In the Old Testament, it is clear that God made certain choices in working out the plan of redemption. He chose Isaac, not Ishmael, as the heir. He chose Jacob, not Esau. The choice was made before Jacob and Esau were born,

. . . that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth”(9:11).

Abraham and Sarah worked up a plan to try to help God. Ishmael was born. God was not impressed with their little scheme. His purpose does not rest on such works. He made a determination relating to Jacob and Esau before they were born. The eternal purpose of God reflects His own will. Human works or actions are not the source of the scheme of redemption.

Jews Relied on Works

God’s gracious plan includes both Jews and Gentiles. Although the Jews had the law of Moses to tutor them in preparation for the gospel, the Gentiles proved to be more receptive to the offer of forgiveness.

“But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law” (9:31, 32).

Moses’ law was “the law of righteousness.” At the same time it was “the ministration of death” (2 Cor. 3:7). It brought death and condemnation by pronouncing a curse on all who fell short. It was righteous within itself, and it was designed to bring true righteousness by pointing the Jews to Christ (Ram. 10:4). But they tried to attain justification by the deeds of the law (which they could not keep) apart from Christ. So they were seeking righteousness, not by faith in Christ, the fulfillment of the law, but by the works of the law, which works could have commended them to God only if they had kept them to perfection.

The vast majority of the Jews were lost because they were relying on the rites and ceremonies of -the law of Moses. A remnant remained “according to the election of grace.” This refers to the relatively few Jews who were willing to follow the Messiah.

“And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But (f it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work” (11:6).

The “election” is the way of salvation: This is by grace, not by works. Again, the word “works” does not refer to obedience to the Messiah, but rather the deeds of the law, or such works as provide room for boasting. “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8, 9).

Paul Upholds Obedience

Having surveyed “works” in the book of Romans, let it be noted that all these deeds which Paul excludes from our justification stand opposed to grace and faith. In this same epistle Paul acknowledges that “obedience to the faith among all nations” (1:5) was the grand object of his receiving grace and apostleship. Obedience is the companion of grace and faith. It is through faith expressed in humble obedience to Jesus Christ that we receive what is made possible by grace.

The apostle taught in 9:9, “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” Confessing with the mouth is essential to salvation. It is an action required of man. It is a part of justification by the principle of faith.

In the same letter the apostle taught that we are “baptized into Jesus Christ.” We are buried in baptism then raised to walk in newness of life (6:3-5). This is included in our obeying from the heart to be made free from sin (6:17). Baptism, like confessing with the mouth, is a part of justification by faith. It is something that man must do, but it leaves no room for boasting. No one earns forgiveness by believing, confessing Jesus, and being baptized. The law of faith demands submission through these acts to receive what is freely provided by grace.

Confession and baptism do not belong to the “law of works.” Paul never referred to the requirements of the gospel as works of which we could boast, nor did he put confession and baptism in the category of deeds opposed to grace and faith. The “works” excluded from the plan of salvation are not to be confused with faith which works (Gal. 5:6) in response to the grace of God.

Paul and James

Some imagine that James contradicts Paul on the subject of works. This is not the case at all. James speaks of “works” in a different sense. He refers to “works” as they express faith, whereas Paul speaks of “works” that stand in opposition to the law of faith. James asks, “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save them?” He proceeds to give a number of illustrations to show that faith without works is dead (Jas. 2:17-26).

Just as Paul used Abraham to demonstrate man’s inability to be justified by his own deeds without faith, James used the case of Abraham to show how faith blesses through works. He concludes, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.”

Paul showed that human deeds, works of merit, are not the ground of justification; he affirmed that we are saved by grace through faith apart from accomplishments that would earn favor with God. James showed that saving faith is an active faith. We are justified by faith, but not a dead faith. Faith must work to avail. Therefore, we are justified by works in the sense of obedience.

Paul wrote about “works” in one category; James, about “works” in a different category. The teaching of one is in perfect harmony with the teaching of the other. Men have problems because they take their statements out of context, or else they attempt to make these statements crutches for some humanly-devised system of theology.

QUESTIONS

• What must the Jew have done if he were to boast of his own justification?
• Why was Paul’s use of Abraham especially appropriate for Jewish readers?
• Upon what is the reward based when we are justified by obedient faith?
• What is meant in Scripture by “worketh not”?
• David explained what is meant for God to impute “righteousness without works.” What did David say?
• Since God chose Isaac not Ishmael, and Jacob not Esau, in his use of the Jewish nation we know His purpose or choice in a plan for salvation is not based upon what?
• After the coming of Christ, what is the only way that the Law of Moses could have saved someone?
• Who among the Jews were the elect according to grace?
• What is the companion of grace and faith?
• Compare the use which Paul and James make of Abraham in explaining how we are justified.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 2, pp. 43-45
January 11, 1979