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 America 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?  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.”   

 

Adapted with the permission of the author: http://www.lincolnberean.org/sermons/lincoln-berean/useless-faith

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)

The True Church not an Institution

one-true-church
• The New Testament teaches that the attributes of the true church are soteriological (determined by faith in Jesus) and not institutional.

• The church is one because the atonement that Christ made on the cross has “brought peace to us. He united Jews and Gentiles into one people when, in his own body on the cross, he broke down the wall of hostility that separated us.” (Eph. 2:14, 15).

• So, the barrier which separates fellow believers according to class, race and sex has been removed by Christ’s death on the cross. The risen Lord is therefore the exalted Head of “a new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17) which is His “one body” (Eph. 1:16, 19-23; 2:14).

• The community of believers in Christ is the fellowship of “who have been called by God to be his own holy people. He made you holy by means of Christ Jesus, just as he did for all people everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord” (1 Cor. 1:2). So, the “saints” are those who have put their trust in Christ as Saviour, who have been born again by the Spirit, who have been reconciled to God and to each other and whom God has separated from the world to be His people (2 Thess. 2:13, 14; 2 Tim. 1:9, 10).

• The church is catholic (i.e. universal) because Christ has made atonement (payment) on the cross for the sins of the whole world and because this good news is now being proclaimed “to every nation, tribe, language and people” (Rev. 14:6).

• So, the universal church of God consists of all believers in Christ throughout the world. These are they who have received forgiveness of sins through faith in Christ’s name (Acts 10:43) and who have been born again into the family and kingdom of God (John 1:12, 13; 3:1-8). Local congregations are but the local manifestations of the one universal church of Christ.

• The church is apostolic because its faith and life are grounded solely on the testimony of the apostles whom Christ sovereignly appointed to witness and proclaim His saving work (Luke 6:13; Acts 1:2, 21, 22; John 14:26; 15:26f; 17:20).

• The New Testament has preserved for the church the content of the apostles’ teaching concerning Christ, His redemptive work on the cross, His triumphant resurrection from the dead, and His ascension to heaven where He was exalted by the Father to sit at His right hand.

• Just as the church was founded upon the apostles’ witness, so it is nourished and grows by continuing in the apostles’ teaching (Acts 2:42). The strongest condemnation rests upon anyone who would corrupt the purity of the apostolic Gospel (Gal. 1:6-9).The apostles’ interpretation of the Gospel is the final norm of sound teaching (2 Ti. 1:13-14; Tit. 1:3, 9).This is “the faith that was once (for all) entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3), and insofar as the Christian Church upholds the true Gospel as proclaimed by the apostles, it is “the pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15).This commitment to the apostolic witness alone will safeguard the unity, holiness of the church.

Roman Catholicism

• Rome interprets the attributes of the church in institutional terms. Unity means lockstep conformity and submission to the demands and teachings of the hierarchical Roman structure.

The Reformers

• The Reformers denied Rome’s claim that its organization constituted the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church because they had discovered a vital truth in the New Testament—that the attributes of the church are not institutional but soteriological.

• Therefore, according to the New Testament and the Reformers, Christ’s true church is the community of all who have put their trust in Him. The marks by which we may know the true church are: it believes and faithfully proclaims the pure and unadulterated Gospel as recorded in the Scriptures by the Lord’s chosen apostles, and it faithfully administers baptism and the Lord’s Supper (by which the gospel is portrayed).

Sectarian Claims

• Certain religious institutions claim to be Christ’s only true church to the exclusion of other Christian groups, which are regarded as apostate Babylon. In attempts to find scriptural support for such self-commending claims, appeal is made to certain isolated proof-texts upon which dubious interpretations are imposed. For example, Roman Catholicism appeals to Matthew 16:18 (“And I tell you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church”) in an effort to establish its supremacy.

• Some religious groups make the name of their denomination the mark of the true church (e.g.“The Church of Christ”).

• Sectarianism is contrary to the principles of the Bible by denying the unity, holiness, catholicity and apostolicity of the Christian Church as depicted in the New Testament Scriptures. It denies the unity of all who believe in Christ for the forgiveness of sins and that all believers have a common Father in heaven and share a common new life in the Spirit constituting them members of one family. Thus does sectarianism bring division into the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 3:16, 17).

• It denies the holiness of the church because it ignores the fact that the imperfections in belief and practice seen in the different segments of the Christian community are covered by the blood of Christ. It usually claims perfection for the doctrines it promulgates referring to them as “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.” According to them all other denominations are steeped in darkness and error.

• It denies the apostolicity of the church by its claims to have light and knowledge in advance of the rest of Christendom and sometimes even of the chosen apostles of Christ to whom were revealed all the truth the church needs to know this side of eternity. This advance light and knowledge is usually based on an extra-biblical authority.

Seventh-day Adventism

• In many respects the Adventist understanding of the church is very much like that of Roman Catholicism.

The True Church and Remnant

• Adventism regards itself not merely as “a church” but as “the church.” It claims that its denomination is the only true church on earth today. All other denominations it denounces as Babylon.Therefore, according to Adventism, it is the only legitimate visible church in the entire world. As stated above, such claims are only made by sectarian cults of which the Roman Catholic denomination is the greatest.

• Adventism not only claims to be the only true church on earth today, it also claims to be God’s remnant—His end-time church. The two main proof texts for this claim are Revelation 12:17 and 19:10. Based on these two texts it states that the true end-time church—the remnant—must observe all ten commandments and have a prophet. Accordingly, Adventism claims that it alone qualifies as “the remnant church.”

Adventism’s 1844 Theology

• The above claims by Adventism are also based on its unique interpretation of its cardinal text of Scripture—Daniel 8:14. Mrs. E. G.White, Adventism’s end-time prophetess, states: “The scripture which above all others had been both the foundation and the central pillar of the advent faith was the decla ration:‘Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’ Daniel 8:14” (GC 409).

What can be said of Adventism’s 1844 theology? Just as Christianity stands or falls on the resurrection event (1 Cor. 15:1-4), so Adventism stands or falls on the “1844 event.” If there were no resurrection, there would be nothing salvage- able in Christianity. If no event of redemptive significance occurred in heaven on October 22, 1844, there is nothing salvageable in Adventism.

• Adventism is adamant that God had revealed the true meaning of Daniel 8:14 to its pioneers and Mrs. White and that He has entrusted it to the Adventist denomination as His end- time message to Christendom and the world. This is the basis of Adventism’s triumphant self-image:“a special people with a special message for a special time” (to quote a popular Adventist slogan).

• Not only, however, is there no biblical data—a clear ‘Thus saith the Lord’—to support the 1844 date and Adventism’s explanation for the Great Disappointment debacle, the 1844 theology is contrary to the New Testament Gospel.

• Christ’s finished work of atonement (redemption) on the cross and His once-and-for-all entrance into the heaven itself—Heb. 9:24 to sit down at the Father’s right hand exclude a redemptive event beginning on October 22, 1844 (such as the ‘final’ atonement, the blotting out of sins started from 1844, the transfer of sin onto Satan, justification ‘full and complete’, the latter rain, the final seal of God, etc).

• In proclaiming such an event and exhorting people to place their faith in it, Adventists are preaching “another gospel” (Gal. 1:6-8)—a gospel with features not found in the writings of the New Testament apostles.

• At best, Adventism’s 1844 theology can only rest on an extra-biblical authority—that of its prophetess, Mrs. White. Raymond F. Cottrell, one of Adventism’s leading scholars, frankly admitted this. (See his paper submitted to the Glacier View Sanctuary Review Committee, August 10-15, 1980, entitled, A Hermeneutic for Predictive Prophecy, esp. pp. 28-30).

• So, in promulgating their 1844 theology, Adventists go beyond the apostolic witness as recorded in the New Testament. It cannot therefore claim to be a church based on the apostolic teaching of the Gospel.

• The remnant motif first appears in the Old Testament in reference to the minority in Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal (1 Kings 19:18).

• But the New Testament apostles employed the remnant motif to describe the New Testament community. (Acts 15:14- 18; Rom. 9:27-29; 11:1-5). Therefore, in the light of the New Testament, the Christian Church or Body of Christ IS the remnant since its inception on the day of Pentecost and will remain so until the last day when Christ will come again.

• The pioneers of Adventism developed their 1844 and end- time-remnant doctrines on the assumption that the last days did not arrive until 1798 (1844 era).

• But the apostles declared that they were already living in the time of the end and that the Gospel they were preaching was God’s end-time message for the world (Acts 2:17; Heb. 1:1, 2; 9:26; 1 Pet. 1:20; Rev. 1:1

• Therefore, Adventism’s claim that the last days arrived when it arrived on the scene in 1844 is way off the mark by about 1800 years! No, the last days arrived when Jesus arrived on the public scene 2000 years ago. This is the witness of His apostles.

• To now go beyond what the apostles preached and wrote is cultic. Adventism has officially denied what the New Testament says in this regard in order to maintain its unique 1844 theology and all that goes with it.

Conclusion

• In view of the above, what arrogance is manifested in Adventism’s claim to be the remnant church while not possessing that which alone makes a person part of God’s remnant—the true Gospel of Christ as promulgated by the New Testament apostles. Faith alone in this Gospel made the Gentiles part of the end-time remnant.

• The Jews had the Ten Commandments, observed the Sabbath and boasted the possession of more than one prophet (outdoing Adventism on this point).Yet they were excluded as a nation from the remnant because they rejected the Gospel concerning Christ and His saving work.

• Therefore, when weighed in the balances of the apostolic witness of the Gospel as recorded in the New Testament, Adventism is found wanting. Not only does it not have the true Gospel, the three or more divergent theological strands within Adventism (conservative, progressives, liberal, Sequeiran SDA gospels preached in the church) constitute nothing less than Babylonian confusion.

• And then it has the audacity to label all other Christian denominations Babylon!

• Adventism does not therefore qualify as the “one, holy, catholic and apostolic church” as per the attributes stated in the Bible.

(Adapted: The True Church not an institution by Christ Badenhorst (appeared on Proclamation Sept/Oct 2006)