Faith That Works

download

USELESS FAITH

James 2:14-26

If you have genuinely experienced the life-changing power of God’s grace, if you have been radically changed and transformed, if you have the nature of Christ and the Spirit of Christ within you, how can that not make you a generous person?  Is it possible that even though you know the right answers to the questions, you’ve actually never experienced true saving faith?  And a faith that isn’t a saving faith is a faith that is useless.  That’s the argument that James makes in James chapter 2.

Now James is a very practical book, perhaps the most straight-up practical book in the New Testament.  The author James is not the Peter, James, and John; it’s James, the half-brother of Jesus.  This book’s written less than twenty years after the resurrection of Christ, so a very early book.  He’s writing to dispersed Jews—Jews that consider themselves to be Christians, but because of the persecution in Jerusalem they have fled and been dispersed around the Mediterranean.  But James has a concern that even though they consider themselves to be Christians, for many of them there’s simply no evidence that they have experienced a life-changing encounter with Jesus.  They say the right things but there are no works that seem consistent with a life that has been changed by Jesus.

Just because you say you are a Christian, just because you may know the right answer to some quiz questions, doesn’t mean you’ve actually experienced true life change.

So in Chapter 1, James talks about the need to be “doers of the word and not merely hearers only.”  The Bible’s not an encyclopedia.  The deal is not that someday when you die God gives a quiz and if you get eighty percent, you’re in.  It’s not all about information; it’s about: This is how life is to be lived, and it begins with a powerful encounter with the resurrected Christ.  He ends chapter 1 by saying, “For example, it should affect the way you talk.  It should affect a compassion for orphans and widows in need.”   In a 1st Century culture, those were the two most vulnerable categories of people.  You should genuinely care about those in need, and number three:  to remain unstained from the world—in other words to pursue a lifestyle of holiness.  So that’s being a doer of the word, not merely a hearer.

Chapter 2 moves into a discussion about partiality, that if you treat someone with money differently than someone who is poor, you’re guilty of partiality, which is completely contrary to the message of grace.  He doesn’t say that’s bad behavior; he says that’s sin.  As a matter of fact he says, “It’s every bit as much sin as murder or adultery.”  That then creates the context for the discussion that we want to have starting in verse 14:

What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? (*NASB, James 2:14)

 

Now it’s very important to understand the question is not whether salvation is by faith alone.  The discussion is not:  Is it faith alone?  Is it works alone?  Or is it faith and works?  That’s not the discussion.  As a matter of fact, that is a settled issue.  The New Testament could not be clearer that it is faith alone, not by works.  The issue James is discussing is the nature of saving faith.  There’s no question it’s by faith alone, but the faith that saves is a faith that works.  The Bible does not teach that salvation is basically an intellectual assent of three or four bullet points and, on the basis of my assent to that, I get my ticket to heaven and slip it in my back pocket.  The New Testament teaching is that salvation is a radical transformation.  It is rebirth.  You are a new creation in Christ.  You actually have a new nature and it’s the nature of Christ.  You actually have the very Spirit of Jesus dwelling within you.  It is complete and it is radical.  If that’s true, then it’s far more than an intellectual assent.  It is life changing and there should be evidence of a changed life.  If all there is that twenty years ago I said a prayer, put my ticket to heaven in my back pocket, and “I’m good,” and other than that you live no differently than the rest of the world, you have reason to question whether you have actually experienced a saving faith.  That’s why James says, “Can that faith save him?  Can a faith that has no works save?”  That’s the question at hand.

Verse 15:

If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? (Vs. 15-16)

So there’s our illustration:  Somebody is in need of food.  Somebody is in need of shelter.  Rather than having a heart of generosity, there’s merely pious language.  Go in peace, be warmed and be filled.  But the question is, “What use is that?”  And the answer is, “It is no use.”  It does nothing to meet the needs of these people.  A true, radical transformation produces a heart of generosity.  There is within us the compassion for people in need just like Jesus demonstrated when He walked on the earth.  Verse 17:

Even so…verse 16 is the illustration…faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself…

 

In other words faith that demonstrates no real life change.

To experience the resurrected Christ, something deep within me changes.  I have a new conviction of sin; I have a passion for righteousness and holiness; I have a desire to be generous.  I want to know God; I want to know God’s Word; I want to know God’s people; I want to give my life to the things that matter.  If there’s simply no life change, that is a faith that is dead, and it is not a saving faith.  James anticipates an objection and he records that in verse 18:

But someone may well say, “You have faith and I have works”; (Vs. 18a)

Now verse 18 is much debated.  The debate is about where the quotation marks go.  In the Greek text there are no quotation marks, and so it’s up to the interpreter to decide how much of that verse is the voice of the objector.  I believe only the opening line is the objector.  All the scholars agree that it’s the voice of the objector saying, “Now wait a minute”, (and by the way this is perfect for our 21st century post-modern crowd).  The objection is, “Now wait a minute, you have your deal; I have mine.  You do it your way; I’ll do it mine.  Some have faith; some have works; it all works itself out.”  That’s basically what the objector is saying.  So then James is responding:

       “…show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.”                                        (Vs. 18b)

How do you demonstrate that you have truly experienced a saving faith if there are no works?  James is saying, “You have no reason to believe that you have experienced a life-changing encounter with Jesus if there are no works.  You simply have no evidence of that.”  But James is also saying, “I’ll show you I’ve been radically changed; it’s evident in the way I live my life.”

Now the purpose of this text is not for everyone to walk back out the doors thoroughly insecure, now wondering, “Am I really saved?”  It isn’t that complicated.  Look at your life: If you can demonstrate, “I have been radically changed,” “I have a passion for holiness,” “I have a heart of compassion,” “I want to know God,” “I want to know what God says,” “I want to be generous,” “I want to walk in holiness,” “I have conviction of sin,” there’s evidence that I have been radically changed by the power of Jesus.  But if you were to be completely honest and say, “You know when I look at my life, I know the right answers to the quiz questions, but other than that I see no real difference between my life and the unsaved people around me,” you have reason to believe perhaps you haven’t really experienced saving faith.  Verse 19:

You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder.

 

In referring that God is One, remember these are dispersed Jews and at the core of Judaism was the belief of one God.  It’s a reference to the Shema from Deuteronomy that says, “Our God is One God.”  All of the religions of the ancient world were polytheistic—had multiple gods.  There was one religion and that was Judaism where there is one and only one God.  So this is at the core of their belief system and James is saying, “You believe that.  Good for you!  So do the demons!”  They get it! There is one God and this God is powerful and it makes them tremble.  So let’s put this in 21st Century language.  Most of the people who identify themselves as Christians would say, “Well, I believe like the Christmas story; I believe that, you know, God became flesh; Jesus was born in a manger from a Virgin Mary.”  Well, good for you!  The demons believe that too!  “Well, but I believe the Easter story.  I believe that Jesus died on a cross.  I believe that He was buried.  I believe He rose again.”  Good for you!  The demons believe that too!  I would suggest there’s not a demon out there that denies the Christmas story or the Easter story; they know that’s what happened.  They get it.  They believe it and they tremble!  But clearly that doesn’t make them Christian.

You have to move from intellectual assent to what the Bible would call believing or trusting.  It’s a step of faith—that I actually trust that Jesus did this for me.  It includes repentance: I’m no longer pursuing self-righteousness but trusting in what Jesus did for me.  And it is a faith that results in a radical transformation, and that radical transformation should be evident in changes in your life, your purpose, your mission, your conviction of sin.  You are a new creation in Christ, and at the center of that should be a heart of generosity.  That’s who Jesus is and, if we now have the nature of Christ, it should be evident in our desire to help those in need.

 But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?  You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected; and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.  In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?  (Vs. 20-25)

Two illustrations:  If you were to take those verses, pull them out of context and isolate them, it’s very confusing. That seems completely contrary to what Paul teaches in Romans.  But this is a reminder why we do not take verses out of context and isolate them.  They are very much given in a context and that’s where they have to be understood.  So to start with, let’s remind ourselves that when Paul was making an argument that salvation is by faith alone, who did he use as the poster child to make his point?  Answer is Romans chapter 4: Abraham. He quotes Genesis 15:6: “Abraham believed and it was reckoned as righteousness.”  He wasn’t circumcised until two chapters later.  The discussion here in James is thirty years later when Abraham offered Isaac.  The argument that James is making is not that Abraham was justified on the basis of works, but rather that the Bible states he was justified on the basis of faith.  But to demonstrate that faith was a saving faith, it was followed by works.  Specifically thirty years later, in his greatest moment of faith, he was willing to offer Isaac, his only son, on an altar in obedience to God.  So the question would be: “Okay, the text says that Abraham was justified by faith.  How do we know that’s a true statement?”  Answer:  “His works demonstrated that he was truly, radically changed, justified by the power of God.”

It’s the same argument with Rahab.  Somewhere along the way, Rahab the prostitute believed.  We don’t know when that was.  We only know that when the spies went in to Jericho, she risked her own life to protect them, to care for them, and to deliver them.  What we know is that Rahab did not just have an intellectual assent.  She believed; she was radically changed; the evidence is that she actually risked her life in order to act on that faith and to deliver the spies.  The story of Rahab is a fascinating one.  Her faith was so great that she would live among the Jewish people and she would actually be a woman through whom the seed of the Messiah would travel.  If you look in Matthew chapter 1 in the genealogy of Christ, there listed is Rahab the harlot—a radical transformation.  His point is true: saving faith works.  He closes the chapter with verse 26:

For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.  

It’s a rather graphic illustration, but if you’ve been to a funeral, there’s a body in a casket.  Without the spirit there is no life; it has no potential to do anything.  Faith without works is like a body without spirit; it is simply dead.

So what do we do with this text?  First of all, this is not a text by which we judge everyone else’s salvation.  That’s always the danger in a text like that.  Perhaps you’re sitting there thinking, “Well, I’m thinking about Joe,”—“Joe’s out”—“and Sally”—“Sally’s out.” Or even my spouse.  That’s a very dangerous thing to do.  You don’t know that.  What you do know is yourself and your own heart, and that is the point of the text. Okay, good for you. You know the right answers: You know the right answers on the quiz; you know what to say when God asks you the Kennedy question.  That doesn’t mean you’ve experienced a saving faith.  A faith that saves is a faith that works (not faith plus works).  If you’ve truly experienced a radical transformation by the power of Jesus, Paul says to the Corinthians that salvation is on the basis of God’s grace and that grace is so radical that if you’ve truly experienced God’s grace, it will make you a generous person.  Specifically he says, “Jesus, who was rich for your sake, He became poor in order that through His poverty you might become rich.”   

 

Advertisements

How Abraham was justified

abraham

The Gospel Story: Like Abraham

A Study of Romans

Romans 4:1-25

If you could think of anyone in all of history who could possibly be good enough to be justified by their works, who would that be?  Oh we could probably talk about some names that we’d throw out, but what about this? The very first verse of the New Testament—Matthew, Chapter one, Verse 1— starts with the genealogy, the family tree of Jesus, and describes Jesus as the son of David, the son of Abraham—two of the marquee names of the Old Testament.  So let’s start with them.  Do you think it’s possible that these great men of faith, the great King David and father Abraham could possibly be justified by works?  That’s what we want to talk about now.  But I’d ask you to consider this possibility:  If it becomes obvious that even these great men of faith could not possibly be good enough for God, then wouldn’t it be reasonable to conclude that none of us are either?

If you have a Bible, turn to Romans, Chapter 4.  In Romans 3:21-31 we see one of the most hope-filled, beautiful paragraphs in all of the Bible where Paul reminded us that on the basis of Jesus becoming the propitiation for sin—that Jesus became the payment for sin—that God can remain just and declare sinful people to be righteous in His presence.  But it’s all by faith, nothing to do with works.  He summarizes it in Chapter 3, verse 28: “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works…”  

But one can imagine these religious Jews responding they don’t agree with that because they believe they themselves were perhaps good enough.  So Paul is going to argue this by saying, “Okay, let’s think about this.  Let’s think about our great father, Abraham.  If Abraham wasn’t good enough to be justified by works, then wouldn’t it be fair to conclude no one is good enough?” Verse 1:

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about…(*NASB, Romans 4:1-2a)

So he starts with, Let’s think about Abraham, our forefather.” Abraham would have been the greatest figure of faith that these people knew of.  He says, If it’s possible that he was justified by works, he would have something to boast in.” Now the Jewish rabbis did believe that Abraham was that good.  They did believe he was justified on the basis of his obedience, on the basis of his works.  I think part of what Paul is referring to is people that are highly moral, religious people tend to have kind of a mutual admiration society.  They convince each other that they’re good enough; they pat each other on the back.  And so that is kind of the imagery of Abraham.  If he was in their circle, they’d be patting him on the back and saying, “Abe, you’re good enough.” And so Paul says, “You know, if he was that good, he’d have something to boast about,

For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about……but not before God.” (Romans 4:2b)

But not before God! He reminds them that, at the end of the day, there is only one opinion that matters, and God doesn’t share their opinion.  He’s not good enough. Verse 3:

For what does the Scripture say? “ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.”

That statement comes from Genesis, Chapter 15, Verse 6 and virtually all theologians agree that was the statement of Abraham’s conversion.  That was the moment when he was justified.  In Genesis, chapter 12, God comes to Abraham and calls him out of his homeland and promises that, “Abraham, I will be your God, and I will make you into a great people; and through your seed all the nations of the world will be blessed if you just trust Me.” And Abraham believed.

Much as we talked about in Romans 3:21-31, this was not an intellectual assent.  He actually put his trust in God’s promise to the degree that he put his entire family at risk.  They actually pulled up stakes and headed for a land that they had never known but had been promised, which was his way of saying, “I believe you.”

But by Genesis 15, Abraham was starting to wonder about this promise.  He was getting older and older and starting to think: I may be getting a little too old to have children, so I’m not going to be able to have a seed that would become a great nation. So he said to God, I’m thinking maybe we should consider Plan B.” And God said, No Plan B.  I made a promise; I’ll keep the promise.” And Abraham believed, and it was credited to him as righteousness (Genesis 15:6).

The word credited there is an accounting term. It was credited to his account.

When we defined justification we talked about the fact that we stand before God clothed in the robe of our sin.  It’s dirty; it’s stained; it’s offensive.  But because Jesus became the propitiation for our sin, because he paid the debt for that sin, if we believe by faith, God is willing to remove the robe of our sin and replace it with a robe of His righteousness so that when God looks at us, He literally sees His own righteousness.  That will never be changed.  It will never be stained.  It will never be diminished.  It’s how God sees us now and forever.  That’s what it means to be justified.  Paul uses just a little different terminology with Abraham: that the righteousness of God was credited to his account because he believed—in other words, by faith. Romans 4:4:

‘Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due’

That phrase as what is due is literally not according to grace. So Paul is saying that when you work eight hours for someone and they pay you for that work, they’re not doing you a favor.  It’s not according to grace.  It’s what you’ve earned.  That’s what a wage is.  You have every right to expect that.

‘But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness’ (Romans 4:5)

To the one who does not work, this is then not a wage.  It’s not earned.  It’s not a right, but is rather a gift of God’s grace because you believe. Now a couple things in this verse:  There are those who would push it so far as to say: “Believing is actually a work.” Paul would disagree with that.  Look at the verse.  He clearly identifies belief in contrast to works.  It’s a non-work; it’s an un­work.  It’s simply believing the work has been done.  What does he believe?  He believes in Him who justifies the ungodly. It doesn’t say who justifies the high achievers, the really religious people like father Abraham.  As a matter of fact, the text is calling Abraham ungodly.

If that phrase does not sound somewhat scandalous to you, I would suggest you still don’t get it.  What right does God have to declare the ungodly righteous?  Now think about this: If a rapist, if a murderer came and stood before a judge, and the evidence was overwhelming that this person was guilty, what right would a judge have to stand in the courtroom and say, This person is righteous? But that’s exactly what God does.  He justifies the ungodly. How can He do that?  It’s based on the fact that His Son Jesus paid the debt of that sin.  And having covered that sin, He has the right to declare the ungodly to be righteous upon faith and repentance.  We’ve seen this word ungodly before. It shows up in Chapter 1, Verse 18: For the wrath of God is against all ungodliness. Until Abraham believed, he was under the condemnation of God.  He was under sin.  He was considered ungodly by a Holy God until His faith is credited to His account as righteousness. Now he uses David as another example:

‘… just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works’ (Romans 4:6)

So David clearly identifies that his own righteousness was not something he earned.  It wasn’t his wage, but rather by faith it was credited to his account.  Then Paul quotes David’s confession from Psalm 32:

BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED. BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT.”  (Romans 4:7-8)

Psalm 32 was David’s confession after his sin with Bathsheba.  He stands before God guilty of adultery and guilty of murder, and so he is celebrating that this is a God who doesn’t credit righteousness according to works.  He doesn’t give him what he’s earned.  What is the basis by which he says that? Well he tells us in his confession.  “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven.”  The Greek language has several words for forgiven. This is a word that means to carry away, to remove away. He follows that by the statement, whose sins have been covered. This is the idea of the propitiation, that the sins have been covered by the blood of Jesus.

Now those two concepts should sound familiar.  David was very familiar with the theology of the Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur, the day when there would be two goats.  One would be the scapegoat upon which the sins of the people symbolically were placed, and he was removed.  He was taken away, symbolizing those sins removed or taken away from their presence.  The other one would be a sacrifice, and the blood would be poured through the mercy seat, representing the blood covering the sins of the people.  Those are the two concepts David identifies.  Clearly he’s referring to the Day of Atonement.  He knows his theology: that God has taken his sin away, that God has covered his sin, that Jesus became that propitiation for sin, to the degree that he says God does not credit his sin to his account.

Now think about what he just said.  He is in the midst of a confession that he has committed adultery, that he has committed murder.  And yet, even in the midst of his confession, he states that God will not credit that sin to his account.  Why?  Because by faith he believed that God justifies the ungodly.  What he is saying is that when you are declared to be right in the presence of God, that righteousness is not a wage because of good works.  It’s not earned by good works, because it’s not your righteousness.  It’s not what you have earned.  It is the righteousness of God.  It can’t be changed.  It can’t be diminished.  It is the righteousness of God forever.

The Jewish rabbis taught that Psalm 32 only applied to the Jewish people, the circumcised.  They were God’s favorites, and so they could apply that, but no one else.  Paul says, “Let’s talk about that.”  Romans 4:9:

Is this blessing then on the circumcised or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, “FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.”  How then was it credited? (vs. 9-10a)

So they’re saying the promise is only to the circumcised.  And Paul is saying, “Let’s think about that a little bit.  How was it credited to Abraham?”  In other words, was it credited on the basis of faith or on the basis of works (works meaning circumcision)?  The question of how is answered around the question of when.

While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. (Romans 4:10b-12)

 Okay, what’s he saying there?  It’s actually quite radical.  Genesis 15:6 is the statement, “Abraham believed and it was credited to him as righteousness.”  The question Paul is asking is, “When was that statement made?  Before or after circumcision?”  Circumcision doesn’t even enter into the picture until Genesis, Chapter 17—two chapters later—probably even more importantly, at least a minimum of thirteen years later.  So the argument that Paul is making is that circumcision could not have had anything to do with this justification because he was justified thirteen years before he was circumcised.

Then he says something really radical.  He says, “Actually, if you want to get technical about it, Abraham was justified when he was an uncircumcised Gentile.” He was an uncircumcised Gentile long before he was a circumcised Jew.”  The question would be: why did he do that? The answer is in the text:  in order that he might be the father of all the uncircumcised Gentiles who would ever believe.

So we as Gentiles could actually say he was our father first.  Why did God do that?  The text tells us:  in order that it might be clear that the promise to Abraham was for the nations—every tribe and tongue and nation.  It was never intended to be restricted to the circumcised Jew only.  So before he was ever the father of the circumcised Jewish people, he was the father of the uncircumcised Gentiles who would believe down through history.  And then he adds, “He’s also the father of the circumcised, but not just the circumcised, the circumcised who believe and believe like uncircumcised Abraham did.”  So Abraham was justified apart from works.  He was justified apart from circumcision.  One can imagine now the objection: Well, what about the Law?  Certainly once the Law enters the picture, didn’t everything change?  Romans 4:13:

For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. But if those who are of the Law are heirs…meaning are justified…faith is made void and the promise is nullified; for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation. (Romans 4:13-15)

So you could imagine the objectors saying, “Well, what about the Law?”  Paul would make the argument to the Galatians that Abraham’s justification could not have had anything to do with the Law because the Law came four hundred thirty years later.  But what he says here is that the faith of Abraham is what was credited to his account as righteousness.  But if one single person, on the basis of keeping the Law, became an heir (in other words was justified), then at that point faith is void and the promise is nullified. In other words, what he is saying is: if it’s possible that someone could be good enough, then it’s no longer of faith and the promise is off.

Paul makes a similar argument in the book of Galatians when he says, “If, on the basis of keeping the Law you can make yourself righteous, then grace is nullified.” (Galatians 5:4).  If you add one single work to grace, then grace ceases to be grace; faith is void; the promise is nullified, and you’re on your own.  In order to keep the Law, you must keep every point of the Law perfectly every day of your life. This is very important to understand.  The first century religious Jews that Paul was writing to, some of them may very well have been Christians; they would have believed in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.  They would celebrate, in our terms, Christmas and Easter.  They would have embraced salvation by grace through faith.  They would have simply said, “Salvation by grace through faith plus...”  “At least you need to be circumcised.” “At least you need to be Jewish.” “At least you need to keep the Law.”

The very same problem concerns us today.  You have many, many Christian church denominations that would say, “It’s salvation by grace through faith.”  They celebrate Christmas.  They celebrate Easter.  They would quickly embrace the message of the gospel to where it sounds like they’re saying the exact same thing.  But once you drill down a little bit, what you find out is: it’s salvation by grace through faith…plus…baptism…plus…communion…plus…keeping the Sabbath…plus… whatever you want to put in there.  Jesus’ work was really good, but not quite enough.  There’s got to be this little thing we do as well.” The logic by which most people rationalize this goes like this: As long as they believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, as long as they embrace the core message, what does it really hurt?  You know, it doesn’t hurt to cover all the bases, maybe get a little extra credit, you know, maybe do a few more things just in case maybe that’s included too!  And so people think of it as being safe. What does it hurt to just add a few more works to the message of grace?

Look at the text.  That is not safe at all!

But if those who are of the Law are heirs…meaning are justified…faith is made void and the promise is nullified (Romans 4:14,15).

 At that point, faith is made void and the promise is nullified. Grace ceases to be grace when you add one single work to it.  Most of those denominations would deny that they add one single work to what Jesus did on the cross.  They would say, “We believe in salvation by grace through faith.  It was all Jesus!”  And they would maintain that position…until you choose to leave that denomination. And then they remind you: you cannot get to God without us. And at that point the jig is up.  They’ve been exposed.  You don’t need any denomination to merit righteousness with God.  It’s salvation by grace through genuine faith alone. Is this faith a working faith? Yes, works are the fruits, but faith is the root. Works don’t save us, but they prove your faith is genuine in God.

So Abraham was justified apart from works, apart from circumcision, apart from the Law, and finally apart from sight.  He had to believe by faith.

For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, (as it is written, “A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS HAVE I MADE YOU”) in the presence of Him whom he believed, even God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist. In hope against hope he believed, so that he might become a father of many nations according to that which had been spoken, “SO SHALL YOUR DESCENDANTS BE.” Without becoming weak in faith he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah’s womb; 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 God had promised, He was able also to perform. Therefore IT WAS ALSO CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.(Romans 4:16-22)

 God made a promise to Abraham that through his seed the nations of the world would be blessed. That would require Abraham to have a son, but Abraham was getting very old.  When it says in verse 18—in hope against hope, that phrase actually means he hoped even when it was unreasonable to hope by human standards.  Now think about this:  He’s 80…he’s 85…he’s 90…he’s 95…he’s approaching 100…no children! Human reason would say: Abraham, it’s probably not going to happen. Imagine the conversations he may have had with his friends.  They probably did an intervention and said, “Abraham, ol’ buddy!  Man, we love you, but you and Sarah, you need to let this thing go!  You’re 100!  She’s 90!  I mean you better think of adopting!  This is never gonna happen!”  But the text says there was one factor:  God had made a promise, and Abraham was unwilling to not believe the promise.  So he believed, even against all human hope, and God fulfilled His promise and gave him a son.  And eventually through that son and through the seed of Abraham would come the Messiah, through whom the nations of the world would be blessed. You say, “Why is he telling us that?”  Verse 23:

Now not for his sake only was it written that it was credited to him, but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, as thosewho believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, He who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our transgressions. (Romasn 4:23-25)

That we might have the faith of Abraham—that we might believe that God tells the truth—that He is a God who justifies the ungodly on the basis of what Jesus has done on our behalf.  Jesus being turned over is a phrase of a sacrifice—being handed over to be slaughtered—that he was handed over to the cross, the resurrection affirming our justification.  Basically what that means is: the resurrection gave evidence that the payment was indeed accepted.  God’s wrath was satisfied.  The evidence was the resurrection.

So what Paul is saying is that we choose to believe that God tells the truth.  The historical facts of the gospel story can be investigated.  They can be researched.  There’s lots of evidence to support that the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus are indeed true.  But I cannot prove to you the effect of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.  That you must believe by faith. You must decide in your own heart whether or not you believe God tells the truth when He says, “On the basis of that work, I am willing to justify the ungodly for those who believe by faith.”

I would suggest to you that there are far too many Christians who still identify themselves by their shame, by their guilt, by their struggles, by their failures, by their sin.  That still remains their identity and, because of that, they continue to struggle through life day after day after day, never really experiencing the victory over sin and temptation, and the joy and the freedom that God desires you to have.  And typically it’s reasoned out or justified like this:  “I’ve messed up so much.  I’ve sinned.  I have all this shame; I have all this guilt so I’m really thankful I believe that Jesus died for my sins.  I accept Him as my Savior, and He’s given me a ticket to Heaven, and if that’s all I get, that’s way more than I deserve, and so I’m just thankful to have that.”  And we think of that as humility.  Friends, that is not humility.  That is simply unbelief.  You simply lack the courage to believe God tells the truth when God has the audacity, when God is so radical as to say, “On the basis of what Jesus has done on the cross, to those who believe, I am willing to declare the ungodly righteous in My presence now and forever.”

My prayer would be that each one of us would have the courage to believe that.  It’s not what we’ve earned.  It’s not our wage.  It is a gift of God’s grace.  But I am telling you this: When you begin to see yourself as God sees you, it will change the way you live!

(Adapted: A message by Pastor Bryan Clark posted with his permission. Here’s the original sermon. http://www.lincolnberean.org/sermons/the-gospel-story/like-abraham)

Does Sabbath require Worship Attendance?

Most Sabbatarians fail to comprehend the implications of the belief system they embrace. Much of what they ‘know’ about their beliefs is a highly sanitized version that is promoted by their church and pastors, and errors they learned from other churches. Few bother to read and understand what is written in the Bible or think critically about what the doctrine implies, or even understand history, writings of early Christians, church fathers, and Jewish culture and practice. 

Communal worship in Israel 

If we are to understand attending worship services for a Jew in its context, we have to know something about the manner of communal worship in Israel under the old covenant. The national corporate worship had to occur in the place that God designated as a central worship site. Originally, this was at the Tabernacle, and after Solomon’s time, at the Temple in Jerusalem. We can see an explicit instruction about the place to worship in Deuteronomy: 
“You are to seek the place the Lord your God will choose from among all your tribes to put his Name there for his dwelling. To that place you must go…” (Deuteronomy 12:4).
 
This command to worship only at a designated location is also seen in Deuteronomy 16, which lists the annual festivals. See verses 5, 7, 11, and 16, among others.
 
The reasons for this were numerous. One consideration was that Israel should not alter the worship format and purpose that God had given the nation; otherwise they would easily lapse into worship that was directed to pagan deities. We can see how this happened in the wilderness when Moses left the people to receive the stone tablets (Exodus 32), and when Israel broke politically from Judah and set up its own religious system, including new worship formats, places and times (1 Kings 12:25-33).
 
 
What made Sabbath “holy”? 
 
The essence of Sabbath-keeping was physical REST. 
Ex 20:8-10 ”Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it HOLYSix days you shall LABOR, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall NOT DO ANY WORK
 
In Exodus 20:8-11 and Deuteronomy 5:12-15, the Sabbath command specifies rest from labor as the way to keep the day “holy.” There is no COMMAND or mention of going to a worship service each Sabbath for worship. 
Other passages in the Old Testament also define the Sabbath by rest (ceasing from labor), not by attendance at worship services. See Exodus 31:12-17, Numbers 15:32, Nehemiah 13:15-22 and Jeremiah 17:19-27. The latter two passages, though they refer to Jerusalem, do not mention anything about failure to attend worship services, but only work on the Sabbath as a desecration of this day.
 
An interesting study is to look up the word “Sabbath” in a concordance, find all the Old Testament references and then read those passages to see how this day was kept “holy.”
The conclusion will be that rest from labor is what made the Sabbath sacred time, not attendance at a worship service.
Most Israelites lived too far from the tabernacle to attend a worship service every Sabbath – and there is no evidence in the Old Testament that they did. And the law did not allow them to assemble anywhere else for worship. Nor do we find commands even for people near the Tabernacle that they had to gather for worship. The Sabbath was kept at home, by resting or ceasing from all activity.
 
Leviticus 23:3 ”Six days shall work be done: but the seventh day is the sabbath of rest, it is the sabbath of the LORD in all your DWELLINGS‘. 
 
Hence, there is no indication in Scripture of Israelite’s going to worship services of one kind or another in their local towns and villages. 
 
Ex. 16:29, ”Understand that the LORD has given you [Israel] the Sabbath. Each of you stay where you are; no one is to leave his place on the seventh day.”
 
They could travel to worship services at the Tabernacle only for the annual festivals. But they were COMMANDED by God to cease from labour in their living places, and EVERYONE was to not leave their place on the ritual Sabbath day. 
 
 
 
When did the Synagogue system come?
 
One might point to the New Testament and say, “But Jesus and Paul attended the synagogue on the Sabbath. Doesn’t this indicate that worship services were an essential part of God’s command to keep the Sabbath holy?”
 
Based on Scripture or Jewish history, there was no national system of Sabbath-day worship sites or places of communal instruction throughout Israel’s history in the Promised Land up to the captivity of Judah in the 530s B.C. and the return of a remnant to Judea a few decades years later.
There were no synagogues before the exile; there were no local meeting places in Israel before the exile, because there was no command for weekly meetings.
According to Jewish Encyclopedia,The synagogue as a permanent institution originated in the period of the Babylonian captivity, when a place for common worship and instruction had become necessary‘. 
The synagogue system allowed Jews to meet together in local towns and villages for prayer, the reading of the Holy Scriptures and for fellowship. The synagogue became a miniature sanctuary to replace the loss of the Jerusalem Temple.
 
Hence, Jews added the synagogue worship system, not based on biblical command, but on a sociological need, due to the loss of the Temple and the scattering of the people far away from the Promised Land. Nowhere in the Old Testament will you find a command to have local worship sites.
 
Now, there wasn’t anything necessarily wrong with the Jews setting up synagogues. They became an important center of fellowship and instruction in the Jewish faith. The New Testament does not condemn the practice; it is taken for granted. However, it is nowhere commanded, and no Sabbatarian group should command attendance at worship services as a way to keep Sabbath holy. 
For instance, even Christ did not consider it was important to have weekly meetings on the Sabbath while he was in the wilderness for 40 days (Matthew 4:2). 
So, when Jesus, Paul went to synagogues on Sabbath, it was actually out of a tradition of man (a custom that came about), and not a command of God.  
 
Hence, the Old Testament does not indicate that the Sabbath is kept holy through a meeting. Rather, it was kept as holy through rest (ceasing from labor and activity) by remaining in their dwellings.
 
Are modern day Sabbath keepers really Sabbath keepers? 
 
 
God is very specific about His Sabbath commandments and how to keep it holy. If anyone claims to observe the Sabbath ritual, they must comply with His specific commandments. If they don’t, they are Sabbath breakers. The following Sabbath commandments must be observed from ‘Friday sunset to Saturday sunset‘ (Leviticus 23:32) in order to claim holy Sabbath observance.
 
1. No work done at all (Ex. 20: 10; Lev. 23: 3; Jer. 17:21-22): By law if a person did not stop all types of activity in honor of the Sabbath, he was breaking the law. In Numbers 15:32-36 a man was caught collecting sticks on the Sabbath, and He was condemned as one who broke the Sabbath law.
 
2. Work shall be done for six days (Exod. 35:2): Do you or your congregation work for 6 days? Or 5?  The actual whole command is to work 6 days with only the 7th observed as a rest day. Many Sabbatarian’s observe Sunday just like Saturday except for the gathering in Church (which there is no command to do). So if you are not working for six days (meaning you have a holiday on sunday too), you’re still breaking the Sabbath law that God specified.
 
3. Your servants, and friends must rest with you: “In it you shall not do any work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your manservant, nor your maidservant, nor your ox, nor your donkey, nor any of your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates (Ex. 20:10; Deut. 5:12-14). If you have any friends over that are not Christian they must observe the rest day also. You can’t ask your servants to cook or sweep the floor on the Sabbath. 
 
4. No cooking or baking: SDA ‘prophet’ Ellen White wrote: “The command is, “Bake that ye will bake today, and seethe that ye will seethe; for tomorrow is the rest day of the holy Sabbath (Ex. 16:23)” That day is not to be given to the cooking of food…to keep the Sabbath according to the commandment — Bible Echo, February 13, 1899). 
 
 
5. No kindling of a fire (Ex. 35:3). No fellowship cookouts or barbecues. Adventists for instance annually meet up for camp meetings and cook food every Saturday for the entire congregation. They break the Sabbath law as a congregation at least once annually. 
 
6. No traveling stay at home (Ex. 16:29). Later the Jews added to this law, allowing only a half mile of travel on the Sabbath but the Jehovah given pure law says “stay at home.” Actually, If you kept this part of the law, you could not travel to your church gathering away from home. 
 
7. No buying and selling (Neh. 10:31; 13:15,19; Amos 8:5). Which means no eating out from restaurants or shops. Make sure you do no shopping whatsoever. If you run out of food or drink at home you failed to prepare for Sabbath.

8. No carrying any sort of loads from your houses:  ”This is what the Lord says: not bring a load out of your houses or do any work on the Sabbath, but keep the Sabbath day holy (Jeremiah 17:21,22)

9. No ironing of clothes: This goes out to Adventists specifically. These are the inspired words of their prophet, Ellen White. She was apparently ‘inspired by God’ to include ironing clothes as part of DO NO WORK: ‘See that all the clothing is in readiness, and that all the cooking is done. Let the boots be blacked, and the baths be taken [EGW, the inspired prophet of God of the remnant Adventist church says you can’t bathe on the Sabbath – most of my SDA friends take baths on Satudays. If you ask them they say they don’t have to be legalistic about it. That’s how loosely they take God’s word, picking and choosing what they want]. It is possible to do this. If you make it a rule, you can do it. The Sabbath is not to be given to the repairing of garments (no stitching or ironing clothes on Sabbath), to the cooking of food, to pleasure seeking (TV? playing in the park with children?), or to any other worldly employment. Before the setting of the sun, let all secular work be laid aside, and all secular papers be put out of sight. Parents, explain your work and its purpose to your children, and let them share in your preparation to keep the Sabbath according to the commandment — Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 355, 356 (1901).
 
If you insist on the Jewish ceremonial Sabbath law as binding on new covenant Christians, do YOU my friend understand what the law says? Are you who claim to observe the Sabbath, really a Sabbath keeper or a Sabbath breaker according to the God’s commandments? You decide. Remember to break one commandment, is to break all (James 2:10). 
 
In the Adventist human definition of Sabbath keeping, Sabbath keeping is primarily going to church on Saturday, refraining from paid employment, and doing some good works, but that is not what the Lord commanded from the 4th commandment or Jewish Sabbath, unfortunately.
By their Sabbath keeping definition, even my Catholics friends who attend church on Saturday evening must be Sabbath keepers as most catholic churches are now open for church services on Saturday. My catholic friends do not work on Saturday or Sunday, instead they go visiting their grand parents, and do acts of kindness. Even other Christians who attend worship services on Saturday or Friday evening would qualify for observing the Sabbath ritual. Yet that is not Sabbath keeping as per the 4th commandment.
No one kept the Sabbath before Exodus 16 – the Bible is clear. The rest of Genesis 2 is God’s rest, not man’s (Heb. 4:4).The old covenant including the Sabbath was given only to literal Israel (Deut. 4:6–45; 5:26; 7:6–11; Rom. 9:4; Neh. 9:14; Ps. 103:7; 147:19,20). The Ten Commandments are the actual words of the covenant (Ex. 34:28; 31:18; Deut. 4:13; 9:9–15; 1 Kg. 8:9,21) while the other laws are expansions, explanations, and applications of those laws (Deut. 29:1–9; Ex. 24:7). Importantly, the new covenant is not a continuation or a modification of the old; instead, it declares the the old covenant obsolete (Heb. 8:7–9; 13; 10:9; 2 Cor. 3:7–11; Gal. 3 and 4). We are not literal Israel, we are spiritual Israel whom God has a made a new covenant with, and we are not commanded to follow everything that literal Israel was commanded. The moral principles of the Ten Commandments that are relevant to believers in the new covenant are well–restated in the epistles, and Sabbath, circumcision, dietary laws are not among them (Rom. 13:9, 1 Tim. 6:1; 1 Jn. 5:21; Acts 17:29).
 
Sabbath law or ceasing from labor in the new covenant
 
 
The concept of “rest” is important in Scripture, and it has a deep spiritual meaning for Christians.
As Christians, we understand that our rest is in Christ, who is our Sabbath; He is the reality (Col 2:17). We enter this Sabbathismos today, daily, not on any particular day any longer. God’s ‘seventh-day rest’ (Hebrews 4:4), was ‘ready since He made the world’ (Hebrews 4:3), and the ‘time for entering his rest is today’ (Hebrews 4:7), not Saturday or Sunday.
When we rest spiritually in Christ, we present ourselves as the people of God before his presence in continuous sacred assembly. We are always the church, in his presence every day of the week, not just one.
 
 
For Israelites, the Sabbath was a day to rest at home, not a day to travel long distances and attend a worship service. The annual harvest festivals were the time for Israelites to enjoy communal worship and fellowship. Here is what the Expositor’s Bible Commentary (volume 2, page 623) says about Leviticus 23:3:
 
There is an emphasis here that the Israelite rested at home. There were special offerings given in the tabernacle (e.g., a double burnt offering), but the ordinary Israelite and his whole family rested. Presumably here was an opportunity for family worship and instruction in the law of God, but this is not specifically enjoined. What a boon a weekly rest must have been to the ancient laborer and farmer in his weary round of toil!
 
As did the Jews in their synagogue system, Christians find that regular fellowship and communal instruction is an important foundation of their religious life.
As Christians, we are free to meet together at any time of the day, any day of the week, and any season of the year (Romans 14:5) under the instruction given to the new testament church.
We are also free to rest on any day, and one in seven days is a good principle. However, the Jewish Sabbath ritual was fulfilled in Christ, and is not longer a requirement or a command for new covenant Christians (Col. 2: 16,17), 
 
We are not limited to meeting on just one day, since no day has been specifically set aside by God for Christian fellowship and worship. This was the case in the old testament as well. This is the case in the new testament too. We are always in the presence of God and worship him continually because Christ resides in us through the indwelling Holy Spirit. At the same time, we can gather weekly (Saturday, Sunday, Monday etc) and seasonally in small groups or in larger communal situations to praise God, to recall Christ’s work of salvation and to fellowship in the Spirit.

A brief outline of Sunday meetings from the Bible and History: 

Lord’s day – Neither from Pagan or Catholics but from the Bible!


1 Century evidence:

Jewish Sabbath no longer a Christian obligation:

Col. 2:16, 17 ”Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day

Christians can treat every day alike or consider some days sacred:

Rom. 14:5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

A.D. 53 – Weekly giving commanded on Sundays for all the churches of Galatia:

1 Corinthians 16:1-2 ‘Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the churches of Galatia, so you must do also: On the first day of the week let each one of you lay something aside, storing up as he may prosper, that there be no collections when I come.

A.D. 60 – Christian met every day for worship, also gathered for communion on Sunday, the first day:

Acts 20:7 “And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread”

Early Christians, church fathers met on Sunday for worship, communion, fellowship. Never on the Jewish Sabbath (No Christian Sabbath keeping in Acts) for it was abolished (see also: Sabbath is ceremonial!)

Sunday is not a Christian Sabbath or a day of rest, or a holy day to be kept. No more holy days, but Christians met for assembly on the first day since the time of the apostles before there was Constantine or Roman Catholic church. Sunday is not a pagan day for pagans didn’t have a weekly worship day:

2nd  to 3rd century evidence

AD 140 – Justin Martyr(Rome) wrote:

Sunday is the day on which we all hold our common assembly … Jesus Christ on the same day rose from the dead” (Apology, I.67).

AD 110 – Ignatius (Antioch) wrote:

”Let every friend of Christ keep the Lord’s Day as a festival, the resurrection-day, the queen and chief of all the days of the week. (Ignatius, Epistle to the Magnesians, chp 9. Ante-Nicene Fathers , vol. 1, pg. 62-63.)

Early Christians understood Sunday as the Lord’ day. John wrote:

Revelation 1:10 ‘I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day

AD 180 – Bardesanes, Edessa (Asia) wrote:

“On one day the first of the week, we assemble ourselves together.” Book of the Laws of Countries.

AD 194 – Clement of Alexandria (Egypt) wrote:

He does the commandment according to the Gospel and keeps the Lord’s day, whenever he puts away an evil mind . . . glorifying the Lord’s resurrection in himself. (Vii.xii.76.4)

AD 200 – Tertullian in Africa:

“We solemnize the day after Saturday in contradiction to those who call this day their Sabbath.” Apology, Chapter XVI. “We however, just as we have received, only on the day of the Lord’s resurrection, ought to guard not only against kneeling, but even posture and office of solicitude, deferring even our business.” On Prayer, Chapter XXIII.

The New Testament does not give a single example of Christians conducting their religious services on the Sabbath after the resurrection of Christ because Sabbath is abolished (See: No Sabbath in Acts).

For the first several centuries of the church’s existence, the written testimony is uniform that Christians met for worship on Sunday. Dr. Schaff says: “The universal and uncontradicted Sunday observance in the second century can only be explained by the fact that it had its root in apostolic practice.” History of the Christian church, Vol. I, page 478.

There have always been a few sabbatarians, but never the mainstream. They have always been fringe groups and considered heretical or cultic by the main church. Most of them were rooted in Judaism (Jewish converts to Christianity) and not gentile churches. The Ebiionites are an example. Then, Sabbatarians began to be resurrected in England in the time of the Reformation, over five hundred years ago. Yet, they (likes of the SDA’s, church of God) remain outside of mainstream today.

However, they have grown their numbers through the spread of false information (such as sunday is pagan, catholic church changed the Sabbath day in the 3rd century, Sabbath law is universal), conspiracy theories (sunday law etc), and a false understanding of the doctrine of law (see: Decalogue examined, Covenants).

Jesus, the apostles, the early church fathers, Luther, Calvin, all understood that Sabbath was ceremonial. None of these believed that the Pope or Roman Catholic church changed the Sabbath. Instead they saw that it was abrogated as clearly stated in the new testament and by the apostles (see: Did they teach Sabbath is ceremonial?)
 Part of the above articles have been adapted from GCI.