Faith and Works

[Aaron the Tall]

I was doing a little Bible study the other day, and I think I have a clearer idea (at least in my mind) of how faith and works intermingle.

I started off reading John the Baptist's message in Luke 3. When the people ask how they should respond to John's message of repentance, he gives different groups of people specific actions that they should take, such as sharing clothing and food with those who are in need.

By giving the people tasks to do, was he preaching a salvation of works? No, you'll see that the actions were different for each people group - so he wasn't prescribing a universal law that would lead them to salvation.

Let me ask this: would the people follow John's advice if they didn't believe his message about the coming judgment? No. You see, the actions John prescribed act to reveal the level of faith in the hearers. But, faith is not just mentally agreeing with the message - it is a total surrender to the message that results in action.

This is summed up in James 2:14-24. Starting with "What use is it if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?" This is the definition of true faith. It is not mentally agreeing with the message - it is belief that results in action.

It later states "Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?"
He isn't justified by a work of the Law that says "if I do such and such, then God owe's me salvation." He is justified by a work of faith that says "I believe that God has promised such and such, and therefore I will respond in obedience."

In Romans 4 we learn that Abraham is justified not by the works of the Law, but by faith. Abraham believed that God would give him a son in his old age. Yet, was Abraham going to have the promised son just by mentally agreeing that God could do it? No. Abraham would never have the son if he didn't act upon that faith and do his part with his wife. Who, knows, maybe they had to do their part over and over again many times until she got pregnant. This was truly an act of faith for two people well past their prime.

So, I see works as a vehicle for our faith. Works by themselves without faith, however, are just man's stinking attempts to earn God's favor. It can't be done.

 

[veteran]

it is belief that results in action.

I think that pretty much sums it up. We should have works that will prove our Faith. That's also how Abraham showed his Faith.

 

[glorydaz]

it is belief that results in action.

I think that pretty much sums it up. We should have works that will prove our Faith. That's also how Abraham showed his Faith.

Amen. I do like the way Aaron the Tall put it, too.

Abraham would never have the son if he didn't act upon that faith and do his part with his wife. Who, knows, maybe they had to do their part over and over again many times until she got pregnant. This was truly an act of faith for two people well past their prime.

There was no sitting around waiting for it to happen. :biglaugh

Prior to this, he took a bond woman...we see what that got him.
Going before the Lord doesn't usually work out that well.
It's only as we wait for direction and then obey that we receive the "promised" results.

 

[RichardBurger]

It is a mistake to focus on what James wrote and miss out on what Paul wrote

James 2:20-21
20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?
(NKJ)

Is James right? According to Paul, Abraham was accounted as righteous before Isaac was born and it was not because Abraham performed any work other than faith (believing God‘s promise) in God.

Gen 15:4-6
4 And behold, the word of the LORD came to him, saying, "This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir."
5 Then He brought him outside and said, "Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be."
6 And he believed in the LORD, and He accounted it to him for righteousness.
(NKJ)

God accounted Abraham righteous solely for his faith in His Promises, and not by anything that He did.  Paul accurately reports this.  But James points to Genesis 22, many years after Isaac was born, when Abraham was well over 100 years old, that he agreed to offer Isaac.
 
James writes:
22  You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.
23  And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend.
24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

Neither of those last two statements jives with the Genesis 15:4-6 account. Nowhere does the OT Scripture say that Abraham "was called God's friend" BECAUSE he was willing to offer up his son Isaac. In Isaiah 41:8 it states that God called Abraham His friend but nowhere in the context of the chapter does He say it was because Abraham offered up his son Isaac.

What James wrote, as shown above, is a direct contradiction of the Gospel that Paul taught and the account given in Gen 15:4-6. Abraham was righteous before God solely because he believed God’s promises.

In my opinion the book of James is not written to the grace church. It was written to the Jews who were under the law. His writings are void of the gospel of grace as taught by Paul. Here are some facts that support my opinion. I find them interesting.

1. The word “Law†is found in 18 places
2. The word “grace†is found in 2 places
3. The word “Christ†is found in 2 places
4. The word “Justified†is found in 2 place with the words “by works†after them
5. The words “by faith†is found 1 time (justified by works and not by faith only)

6. The word “cross†is not found
7. The word “reconciled†is not found
8. The word “sanctified†is not found
9. The word “saved†is not fond
10. The words “in Christ†are not found

 

[mondar]

It is a mistake to focus on what James wrote and miss out on what Paul wrote...

James writes:
22  You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.
23  And the scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness," and he was called God's friend.
24 You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.

Neither of those last two statements jives with the Genesis 15:4-6 account. Nowhere does the OT Scripture say that Abraham "was called God's friend" BECAUSE he was willing to offer up his son Isaac. In Isaiah 41:8 it states that God called Abraham His friend but nowhere in the context of the chapter does He say it was because Abraham offered up his son Isaac.

What James wrote, as shown above, is a direct contradiction of the Gospel that Paul taught and the account given in Gen 15:4-6. Abraham was righteous before God solely because he believed God’s promises.

In my opinion the book of James is not written to the grace church. It was written to the Jews who were under the law. His writings are void of the gospel of grace as taught by Paul.

Richard, IMO you have did quite well with Paul, but you misunderstand James.

There are two kinds of faith in James. There is the false faith, and the true faith. The question of James is how to identify these two different faiths. Notice the flow of the context.
Vs 14 This is the claim...One man "says he has faith" (of course he does not have faith, but merely claims to have faith)
Vs 15 - 16 This is an illustration of the works of the man who "says he has faith." Notice the parallel. This man "says" to the brother in the Lord and he "Says" he has faith. It is mere words in both vs 14 and in the illustration in verses 15-16.
Vs 17 This is the conclusion. The kind of faith that turns away believers in need, and is nothing but talk is not true faith, but it is a dead faith.

Vs 18 This 2nd claim is that the person has faith. The other person has works, but notice in verse 18 what works do... At the end of the verse this man uses his works not for salvation, but to show that his claim to faith is true.
*** Verse 18 is important because it most clearly shows us the context of James 2. James is not saying works save, but he is saying that works manifest true faith.
Vs 19 This 2nd illustration is about the "faith" of demons. The kind of faith that intellectually knows who and what God is, but is totally rebellious against God is not true faith.
Vs 20 This is the 2nd conclusion. The faith that does not bear fruit is barren and empty. Faith can be seen, faith bears fruit, faith results in works.

Vs 21 This claim involves Abraham. One must be careful. As soon as we see the word "Justification" we think of justification by faith alone. I do not deny that doctrine and neither does James. Remember the context. The context is about works manifesting a true faith. The person who claimed faith in verses 14 and 17 were followed by illustrations that their claim cannot be justified. So if Abraham was a rebellious man who hate God, his claim to faith would not be just. The point of this verse is that works justify the claim to have faith. The mere statement "I have faith" does not justify the that claim at all. This is not justification by works in the sense that Paul denies (see Romans 4:4-5). It is not the persons soul being justified before God, but his claim to have faith is being justified by works.

Vs 22 At the beginning of this verse works and faith are fellow workers. Faith never functions with only evil works, or without any good works. Faith always has at least some fruits.
At the end of the verse we have the word ????????? (perfect). Actually the word does not speak of any spiritual perfection, but it speaks of a goal line where a person scores. Faith has arrived when it is the kind of faith that has its fruits.

Vs 23 This is a quote from Genesis 15 as you have observed. It includes the quote concerning transferred or imputed faith. The passage is used here to give an OT proof text that Abraham was a believer.

Vs 24 The claim here is that works justify a persons claim that he has faith.
Vs 25 The illustration of Rahab shows that she can claim to have faith justly. Her works showed it.
Vs 26 The conclusion is that if faith results in any fruits, then it is not true saving faith.

***The message of James does not mix faith and works in salvation. Salvation, or justification is by faith alone. The message of James does not contradict Paul, but compliments Paul because James defines true faith. True faith involves a change of life. The order must be kept strait. Christians do not do works to become saved. Christians do works because they are saved, and this is the message of James 2.

 

[glorydaz]

Richard, IMO you have did quite well with Paul, but you misunderstand James.

There are two kinds of faith in James. There is the false faith, and the true faith. The question of James is how to identify these two different faiths. Notice the flow of the context.
Vs 14 This is the claim...One man "says he has faith" (of course he does not have faith, but merely claims to have faith)
Vs 15 - 16 This is an illustration of the works of the man who "says he has faith." Notice the parallel. This man "says" to the brother in the Lord and he "Says" he has faith. It is mere words in both vs 14 and in the illustration in verses 15-16.
Vs 17 This is the conclusion. The kind of faith that turns away believers in need, and is nothing but talk is not true faith, but it is a dead faith.

Vs 18 This 2nd claim is that the person has faith. The other person has works, but notice in verse 18 what works do... At the end of the verse this man uses his works not for salvation, but to show that his claim to faith is true.
*** Verse 18 is important because it most clearly shows us the context of James 2. James is not saying works save, but he is saying that works manifest true faith.
Vs 19 This 2nd illustration is about the "faith" of demons. The kind of faith that intellectually knows who and what God is, but is totally rebellious against God is not true faith.
Vs 20 This is the 2nd conclusion. The faith that does not bear fruit is barren and empty. Faith can be seen, faith bears fruit, faith results in works.

Vs 21 This claim involves Abraham. One must be careful. As soon as we see the word "Justification" we think of justification by faith alone. I do not deny that doctrine and neither does James. Remember the context. The context is about works manifesting a true faith. The person who claimed faith in verses 14 and 17 were followed by illustrations that their claim cannot be justified. So if Abraham was a rebellious man who hate God, his claim to faith would not be just. The point of this verse is that works justify the claim to have faith. The mere statement "I have faith" does not justify the that claim at all. This is not justification by works in the sense that Paul denies (see Romans 4:4-5). It is not the persons soul being justified before God, but his claim to have faith is being justified by works.

Vs 22 At the beginning of this verse works and faith are fellow workers. Faith never functions with only evil works, or without any good works. Faith always has at least some fruits.
At the end of the verse we have the word ????????? (perfect). Actually the word does not speak of any spiritual perfection, but it speaks of a goal line where a person scores. Faith has arrived when it is the kind of faith that has its fruits.

Vs 23 This is a quote from Genesis 15 as you have observed. It includes the quote concerning transferred or imputed faith. The passage is used here to give an OT proof text that Abraham was a believer.

Vs 24 The claim here is that works justify a persons claim that he has faith.
Vs 25 The illustration of Rahab shows that she can claim to have faith justly. Her works showed it.
Vs 26 The conclusion is that if faith results in any fruits, then it is not true saving faith.

***The message of James does not mix faith and works in salvation. Salvation, or justification is by faith alone. The message of James does not contradict Paul, but compliments Paul because James defines true faith. True faith involves a change of life. The order must be kept strait. Christians do not do works to become saved. Christians do works because they are saved, and this is the message of James 2.

Mondar, you've shown excellent insight on this one.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Mondar,
Thanks for your insights.

I have been thinking about faith in relation to salvation, and the resulting "works."

I recently heard a pastor of a "sect" say that Satan wants you to believe that you can be saved by saying the sinner's prayer. He advocated a specific work in order to be saved. I sort of see where he is coming from. We don't get saved by citing magical words - we are saved by believing. Anyone can repeat the sinners prayer - but does that gain them entrance to heaven? I would say no - if the words were not truly understood and believed.
Furthermore, a convert's salvation should result in a change of life and subsequent obedience to God. Their new faith should be manifest by works. As John the Baptist said "bring forth fruits in keeping with repentance." If a supposed convert does not live a changed life of obedience after getting saved (or at least begin the process of living differently) - then we should wonder if they really have true faith.

James 2 challenges me not to sit back and recite verses and mentally agree with them - but to act on them and demonstrate that I believe them. I can say I believe there is an invisible chair behind me - but until I go to sit down on it - it's a dead "faith."

 

[RichardBurger]

There is no way that anyone can prove they have faith in God's promises based on the cross. It is between the person and God who sees into the heart. Men can not see into the heart of someone else. Abraham believed God and was accounted as righteous before God solely because he believed God's promises. Today we are saved solely because we believe God's message of salvation by faith in Jesus' work on the cross alone. A man/woman does not have to justiify themselves before men. Only to God and those that have placed their faith, trust, confidence and hope in God's work on the cross are justified before God.

However, in religion, men base their opinin on the faith of others by what they do that is opposed by the rest of religion. No man/women has to prove their faith to anyone else. But it seems to me that those that contantly write about works are trying to tell other they must do them when in truth they don't do them either. To me they are just trying to put on a show that they are closer to God than anyone else.

I do not have to prove my faith to others. But God knows that I have placed my faith, trust, confidence and hope in His work on the cross, His Son Jesus who died on the cross to pay for all my sins. In Him I trust while others seem to trust that they know how to do the works that God requires when in reallity they don't really do them.

I have also come to realize that those that do not believe in eternal security are beliving in their works to save and keep them. A person can't have two masters. Either they are trusting in God for their salvation OR in their works. As for me, I will trust (have faith) in God.

 

[RichardBurger]

Richard, IMO you have did quite well with Paul, but you misunderstand James.

There are two kinds of faith in James. There is the false faith, and the true faith. The question of James is how to identify these two different faiths. Notice the flow of the context.
Vs 14 This is the claim...One man "says he has faith" (of course he does not have faith, but merely claims to have faith)
Vs 15 - 16 This is an illustration of the works of the man who "says he has faith." Notice the parallel. This man "says" to the brother in the Lord and he "Says" he has faith. It is mere words in both vs 14 and in the illustration in verses 15-16.
Vs 17 This is the conclusion. The kind of faith that turns away believers in need, and is nothing but talk is not true faith, but it is a dead faith.

Vs 18 This 2nd claim is that the person has faith. The other person has works, but notice in verse 18 what works do... At the end of the verse this man uses his works not for salvation, but to show that his claim to faith is true.
*** Verse 18 is important because it most clearly shows us the context of James 2. James is not saying works save, but he is saying that works manifest true faith.
Vs 19 This 2nd illustration is about the "faith" of demons. The kind of faith that intellectually knows who and what God is, but is totally rebellious against God is not true faith.
Vs 20 This is the 2nd conclusion. The faith that does not bear fruit is barren and empty. Faith can be seen, faith bears fruit, faith results in works.

Vs 21 This claim involves Abraham. One must be careful. As soon as we see the word "Justification" we think of justification by faith alone. I do not deny that doctrine and neither does James. Remember the context. The context is about works manifesting a true faith. The person who claimed faith in verses 14 and 17 were followed by illustrations that their claim cannot be justified. So if Abraham was a rebellious man who hate God, his claim to faith would not be just. The point of this verse is that works justify the claim to have faith. The mere statement "I have faith" does not justify the that claim at all. This is not justification by works in the sense that Paul denies (see Romans 4:4-5). It is not the persons soul being justified before God, but his claim to have faith is being justified by works.

Vs 22 At the beginning of this verse works and faith are fellow workers. Faith never functions with only evil works, or without any good works. Faith always has at least some fruits.
At the end of the verse we have the word ????????? (perfect). Actually the word does not speak of any spiritual perfection, but it speaks of a goal line where a person scores. Faith has arrived when it is the kind of faith that has its fruits.

Vs 23 This is a quote from Genesis 15 as you have observed. It includes the quote concerning transferred or imputed faith. The passage is used here to give an OT proof text that Abraham was a believer.

Vs 24 The claim here is that works justify a persons claim that he has faith.
Vs 25 The illustration of Rahab shows that she can claim to have faith justly. Her works showed it.
Vs 26 The conclusion is that if faith results in any fruits, then it is not true saving faith.

***The message of James does not mix faith and works in salvation. Salvation, or justification is by faith alone. The message of James does not contradict Paul, but compliments Paul because James defines true faith. True faith involves a change of life. The order must be kept strait. Christians do not do works to become saved. Christians do works because they are saved, and this is the message of James 2.

Mondar, you've shown excellent insight on this one.

The Jews were still under the law until God destroyed the Temple (read the story of the barren fig tree). James and the elders were still teaching the law of Moses (read Act 21). James' letter was written to the Jews, not the grace church. But religion wants James and Paul to say the same thing so that they can mix works with grace,.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Richard,
Are you saying that the new covenant wasn't ratified until the temple was destroyed. I thought it was brought into full effect when Jesus died and offered his blood before the Father in the heavenly temple. That makes no sense. Jesus said the work was finished - not that his sacrifice wouldn't change anything until the temple was destroyed.

I read Acts 21. I see no hint that the elders taught the Law. I see the exact opposite, that they did not expect the believing Jews to circumcise their children and walk according to the customs. (vs. 21) The only reason Paul goes through the process of sacrifice and purification in this chapter is so that he doesn't cause an extra stumbling block for the unbelieving Jews who were coming to seize him and question him.

Are you also suggesting that Romans wasn't written until after the temple was destroyed? My Bible suggests it was written in A.D. 57 - before the destruction.

 

[RichardBurger]

Richard,
Are you saying that the new covenant wasn't ratified until the temple was destroyed. I thought it was brought into full effect when Jesus died and offered his blood before the Father in the heavenly temple. That makes no sense. Jesus said the work was finished - not that his sacrifice wouldn't change anything until the temple was destroyed.

I read Acts 21. I see no hint that the elders taught the Law. I see the exact opposite, that they did not expect the believing Jews to circumcise their children and walk according to the customs. (vs. 21) The only reason Paul goes through the process of sacrifice and purification in this chapter is so that he doesn't cause an extra stumbling block for the unbelieving Jews who were coming to seize him and question him.

Are you also suggesting that Romans wasn't written until after the temple was destroyed? My Bible suggests it was written in A.D. 57 - before the destruction.

In saying His work was finished only means His prophesied work was finished.

Only one gospel???

For those that believe there has never been but one gospel I offer the following proof that one existed and has now been replaced by the new (grace).

Galatians 3:22-25
22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed.
24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.
NKJV

So then when did faith come? Was it before Christ’s work on the cross and has it always existed? Looks to me like it was after Christ.

Romans 11:19-20
19 You will say then, "Branches were broken off that I might be grafted in."
20 Well said. Because of unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by faith. Do not be haughty, but fear.
NKJV

Faith was not in effect as long as there was a chance that the Apostles could persuade The Jews to accept Jesus as their Messiah.

Luke 13:6-9 (The Parable of the Barren Fig Tree)
6 He also spoke this parable: "A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none.
7 Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, 'Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?'
8 But he answered and said to him, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it.
9 And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that you can cut it down.'"
NKJV

The fig tree represents the nation of Israel. The three years are the years Jesus preached the “Kingdom at Hand†gospel. The keeper of the vineyard are the Apostles. The Apostles had about 40 years to convince the Jews that Jesus was their Messiah. We know that they couldn’t do it so God destroyed the Temple and turned away from the Jews and YES the gospel changed. The old passed away and was replaced by the gospel of Grace.

All that was written "to the Jews" in the O.T. and the N.T. was written "to the Jews," not to the Gentiles. Is it necessary for us to understand them? YES. If we don't then we are missing the foundation for understanding who Jesus is and the shift to the gospel of God's grace. The message of salvation by God's grace, "alone," given to Paul, was without precedence. It was not in the Jewish relationship with God. The Jewish relationship was a religious one of "faith + works to show that faith" (James 2:24). However, the gospel of God's grace requires no works whatsoever. God has done all the works that are necessary on the cross. As Paul said;

Rom 4:5-6 (NKJ)
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,
6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

Only Paul penned the words "in Christ" for he understood that God places those that believe in Him "in Christ" by the operation of the Holy Spirit (new birth). Man cannot accomplish this new birth. This idea of being "in Christ" was totally new. Up to this time it was all in a religious relationship of works, rituals and ceremonies.

 

[glorydaz]

Faith has been around for a long time...Abraham is called the father of faith.

27Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 28Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 29Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: 30Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. 31Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Romans 4
1What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? 2For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. 3For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. 4Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. 6Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, 7Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. 8Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. 9Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness. 10How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. 11And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: 12And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. 13For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect: 15Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression. 16Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, 17(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. 18Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. 19And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's womb: 20He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; 21And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. 22And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. 23Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; 24But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; 25Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Richard,

Just so I can be clear on your stance. Are you saying that Romans (and all of Paul's writings) were written after the temple was destroyed? I have never heard the concept of 2 gospels as you have described, nor have I ever heard your interpretation of the fig tree story. Are you the only one who holds these views - or are there others that do the same?

Thanks.

 

[LostSoul]

Faith without works is dead.

 

[RichardBurger]

Faith has been around for a long time...Abraham is called the father of faith.

The promise of salvation by faith was only given to two people before Christ.

God's promise(s) to Abraham: Gen 22:17-18 (NKJ)
17 "blessing I will bless you, and in multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies.
18 "In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice."

In Gen 22:17 we see the word "descendants," it is plural, not singular and it refers to Abraham's children in the flesh. ---- In verse 18 we see the word "seed" and it is singular, not plural, and it is referring to Christ. ---- It should also be noted that in verse 17 we see a promise God made to the descendants (plural) that they "shall possess the gates of their enemies." This has never been fulfilled. Read Isaiah 54:1-8, Ps 72 and know that these words have not been fulfilled either. But they will all be fulfilled during the 1000-year reign of Christ on this earth.

In Gal 3:16 we see Jesus as the SEED (one). The promise of righteousness by faith was made to Abraham AND HIS SEED (Jesus), NOT SEEDS (THE JEWS)
Let me say it again, the promise of righteousness by belief (faith) was ONLY MADE TO ABRAHAM AND HIS SEED, Jesus. It was not made to all men AT THAT TIME.

 

[RichardBurger]

Richard,

Just so I can be clear on your stance. Are you saying that Romans (and all of Paul's writings) were written after the temple was destroyed? I have never heard the concept of 2 gospels as you have described, nor have I ever heard your interpretation of the fig tree story. Are you the only one who holds these views - or are there others that do the same?

Thanks.

No. However you can see that the book af Acts is a transistional book from the "kingdom at Hand" and the gospel of Grace.

You are looking for a fixed stop/start time for each and it does not exist. Paul recieved the Hidden gospel before the Temple was destroyed. During the 40 years between Christ's death and the destruction of the Temple the message Paul gave was instituted for the Gentile. When God destroyed the Temple the time for the Jews to accept Jesus and His earthly kingdom was at an end. After this occured the only way to God was though faith in Jesus' work on the cross just like it is for the Gentiles under grace.

If the Jews had accepted Jesus as their Messiah Jesus would have returned and set up the promised kingdom on this earth.

The gospel of grace would have only been for the Gentiles.

You shoud be aware that a kingdom of this earth was never promised to the Gentiles. The destiny of those under grace is in the heavenlies.

 

[RichardBurger]

When was faith instituded?

Foreseeing-Beforehand-would justify

Galatians 3:6-8
6 just as Abraham "believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham.

8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, "In you all the nations shall be blessed." NKJV

Note the words foreseeing, would justify, beforehand. They clearly indicate that faith was not instituted at that time. It was to be a future event.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Richard,
I would like to hear an answer to my question.

But here's another. Are you saying that Jesus (the seed) was justified by faith?

 

[RichardBurger]

Richard,
I would like to hear an answer to my question.

But here's another. Are you saying that Jesus (the seed) was justified by faith?

It is not me saying it. The scriptures say it.

I looked back at your post. I thought I answered it. However, I see that you want know if I am the only one that sees it as I do.

Most religious people do not see anything as I do because anything that is outside of the teachings of the church are seen as wrong. -- That does not bother me. The truth is the truth.

I use the words religious people because it has always been the religious that have persecuted the children of God. --- Go into a Christain church and declare that salvation is the work of God, not man. Tell them that God does not live in houses made by the hands of men, and see how you are recieved. They will tell you that you must (a law) do works in order to have faith. That is rubbish.

I have no physical, man ran, church nor do I wish to establish one. I am a child of God, made one by the Holy Spirit. My church is a spiritual one and is not made by men.

 

[Aaron the Tall]

Richard,

I was mainly wondering if you thought Romans was written after the temple was destroyed, but going back over your post I see that you did answer this.

It looks like you are saying that if the Jews accepted Jesus as the Messiah, he would have come again shortly after his departure to set up his earthly Kingdom. However, the believing Gentiles were not to be a part of this kingdom on earth - and were to go to heaven upon death to be with the Father. Since the Jews didn't receive Jesus, the gospel of faith was instituted for the Gentiles in order to be a part of the Kingdom. Did I get that correct?

A couple questions arise. If Jesus death and establishment of a new covenant didn't establish a Gospel of faith and grace for the Jews - how did the Jews get saved? Were they still to obey all of the Law in addition to believing that Jesus is the Messiah to enter the Kingdom? Also, how many Jews had to believe in Jesus in order for Jesus to go with plan A. Certainly many Jews believed. There were whole churches of Christian Jews. Was that not enough? Did they need a majority?

Also, doesn't Paul make it clear that true "Jews" are those who are "inwardly" followers of God - not those who are part of a Jewish heritage? (Rom 2:28) Also, that God has reconciled Jews and Gentiles through Jesus and made them into one man? Doesn't this mean that the same blessings and the same curses applied evenly to both people groups since Jesus death? Therefore, I don't see how you can advocate a separate gospel for both people groups.

I'm guessing you are getting these notions from the book of Romans - specifically chapter 11. It's been a while since I looked over these verses - so I am not completely clear on all that they mean.

I am more curious about your idea that Jesus was justified by faith. What passage do you gather this from? To be justified, wouldn't that mean that Jesus was at one time guilty and unholy? I would hope you don't believe that. The angel tells Mary in Luke 1:35 that the baby (Jesus) will be "holy" - ie: he was perfect in holiness from birth without need to be made holy.

You said:

Go into a Christain church and declare that salvation is the work of God, not man. Tell them that God does not live in houses made by the hands of men, and see how you are recieved. They will tell you that you must (a law) do works in order to have faith. That is rubbish.

I believe both items you mentioned are rubbish. I'm not sure what kind of churches you are used to, but I haven't been to any church that taught those things. I don't think anyone here has said you must do works in order to have faith. Faith must proceed works. But, the point of my posting was that I think we might have to adjust our definition of faith. (or at least I do) Faith is not mere mental agreement. It is expressed by action. Action is a sign that your faith is not mere mental agreement, but that it is heart genuine and true.

I take it you see that church goers blindly swallow everything that is preached from the pulpits. Many might be like this, but I am not one of them. We are always to test what is taught from the pulpits by the Scripture. Does this mean we are to abandon church because we may hear a few shaky doctrines? I think not. The NT epistles stress the importance of gathering together.

That's all for now. I look forward to hearing from you.