Originally posted by George Blaisdell

Paul is addressing the sons of Abraham regarding the Law of the Jews... And how it originated in faith... And the PRIMACY of Faith... He is NOT addressing REPENTANCE as a WORK.

If you say so. "To him who does not work but trusts God" sounds pretty broad though.

Nowhere will you find Paul saying that God justifies the unrepentant. The wicked are justified by Faith IF THEY ARE REPENTANT. And repentance is a work.

I would rather say, "The wicked are justified by faith, and having faith, they are also repentant." Repentance isn't really a discrete work; it's a change of attitude which results in works. You're right that the justified are repentant. You're just wrong about the causality between the two.

Originally posted by George Blaisdell

That prayer is a confession of lack of works, contrition for that lack, and a supplication unto God to overlook that lack of good works and to regard the fact that he BELIEVES in God, even though he has not DONE THE WORKS of what he believes, AF IF the belief IS the works... He is confessing to his own hippocracy, and begging God to IMPUTE works to his faith, and THEN it confesses that NO WORKS CAN EARN salvation, that it is by Faith, and that his faith is defective...

AND... He looks to be trying to throw a bone to Augsburg... He is certainly NOT addressing the INNER works of Faith in his denial of works, for this prayer itself is such a work... And this is why it is the WORKS OF THE LAW OF MOSES that Paul is referring to when he contrasts Faith and works...

Arsenios

I simply don't see that in the prayer in question. I suppose we will have to agree to disagree.

Originally posted by George Blaisdell

And how many times do I have to ask you "What is the ROLE of you so called 'necessary works'"... Are they unto salvation, or a result of it? And you consistently say, and then ignore that you have said it, that works are EVIDENCE OF, and not a CAUSE OF, salvation...

I thought I said something about this, but perhaps you missed it.

The "role" of our works after we are in Christ is to serve God in obedience and to serve our neighbor, who needs them.

Nothing created can EARN God...

I don't think seeing grace as God himself is a good answer, but then again, I am not EO and so I am not bound by the E/E distinction.

Now Protestants like to cite this passage as proof of the futility of works, but what it really proves is the futility of UNREPENTANT works... Repentance is the FIRST work, you see, and it NEVER ENDS in this life on earth...

No one here has said works are futile--except to the extent they cannot justify us, because justification is the free gift of God. As St. Paul cited, Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. This is especially true of works from the unrepentant, which can never please God. However, a Christian can be obedient, and thus can do his works of serving God and his neighbor with a pure heart.

So what did the Publican offer, and the Pharisee? And where in this scheme does your Lutheran offering of NOTHING TO CHRIST fit in???

The publican approached God as what he is--a sinner. The Pharisee was more interested in how awesome he was at obeying the law, and that he is better than the publican to boot. ISTM the Pharisee "offered" his awesomeness to God, while the publican came as a supplicant. Furthermore, has the Pharisee had a contrite heart he would have been justified too.

If you do not OFFER CHRIST your repentance from your evil deeds, you will NOT RECEIVE CHRIST...

We do not see repentance as an "offer", but as supplication born of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. We see our sin and know we are not righteous, and cling to Christ and the cross. We do not believe we have anything to offer, as God is not in need of anything.

For the Faith is not MERE INTELLECTUAL ASSENT to precepts, but the DOING OF FAITH - eg Repentance, self denial, and on and on...

No Protestant here has said faith is anything like the mere intellectual assent of the truth. Nor do we separate faith and works. What we say is that our works cannot justify us.

You say it yourself when you insist that works are evidence of, and not ever the cause of, Faith...

If works cause faith, then we are saved by works and not faith. St. James would have had it backwards--our faith completes our works.

I mean, I thought you believed in Scripture! Do you NOT believe in James 2:22??? "By works was his faith perfected."

I have answered this several times. Faith without works is dead, works perfect faith in the sense that if we do not do works our fith is incomplete. Not unlike we are ncomplete without being in Christ.

Originally posted by Maxentius

I thought I said something about this, but perhaps you missed it.

It wouldn't be the first time...

The "role" of our works after we are in Christ is to serve God in obedience and to serve our neighbor, who needs them.

Which ignores Jame's telling us that works perfect faith...

I don't think seeing grace as God himself is a good answer, but then again, I am not EO and so I am not bound by the E/E distinction.

So much for your S/S... Peter tells us we PARTAKE of the Divine Nature, and Christ that we ARE gods... If Grace is but creation, then it is NOT God's NATURE in which we partake, you see... Because God is UNCREATED...

No one here has said works are futile--except to the extent they cannot justify us, because justification is the free gift of God. As St. Paul cited, Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness.

That is YOUR Protestant dogma - It is not the Apostolic deposit of the Church of the first thousand years, and now two thousand years...

This is especially true of works from the unrepentant, which can never please God. However, a Christian can be obedient, and thus can do his works of serving God and his neighbor with a pure heart.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/st.../separator.gif
Thi issue is sin and repentance... Hitler loved Eva and his dog... [a good work]

The publican approached God as what he is--a sinner.

He approached God as a REPENTANT sinner, and was justified...

The Pharisee was more interested in how awesome he was at obeying the law, and that he is better than the publican to boot. ISTM the Pharisee "offered" his awesomeness to God, while the publican came as a supplicant. Furthermore, had the Pharisee had a contrite heart he would have been justified too.

The Pharisee approached God as a righteous man whom God Himself had made righteous... He did not approach God as a repenting sinner, so ashamed of his sins that he could not even look up...

We do not see repentance as an "offer", but as supplication born of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

The word is OFFERING, an offering that is offered in sincerity and prayer... That is what our repentance IS, and it is what the Publican offered that the Pharisee did NOT...

We see our sin and know we are not righteous, and cling to Christ and the cross. We do not believe we have anything to offer, as God is not in need of anything.

"A sacrifice unto God is a broken spirit... A heart that is broken and humbled God will not despise..." [Psalm 50/51]

We offer our brokenness to God, my brother... And ask His Mercy...

No Protestant here has said faith is anything like the mere intellectual assent of the truth. Nor do we separate faith and works. What we say is that our works cannot justify us.

Faith justifies us, and works do not justify us, even though the Bible tells us plainly that works perfect the faith that brings justification??? No separation, you say, in that denial??

If works cause faith, then we are saved by works and not faith. St. James would have had it backwards--our faith completes our works.

So you deny Scripture, because it does not fit into your Protestant dogma that contradicts the Church of the Apostles for the first thousand years?? James plainly tells us that works perfect faith... [And we all know that faith engenders works... ] Even Hitler had good works that did NOT cause faith in him, nor mature [perfect] it... But IN THE CHRISTIAN, the righteousness of one's soul is NOT possible in the absence of works which perfect faith, and by their doing, ask, seek and beckon the Grace of God...

Works perfect faith in the sense that
if we do not do works our faith is incomplete.

So with that [very weak, by the standards of your mental abilities, Max - I mean, really! That is a pathetic rendering...] accounting, what on earth do you mean? Do works actually INCREASE faith, by completing faith??? Yet we can still HAVE saving faith even if it is incomplete? You see, to perfect one's faith means to BRING ONES IMMATURE FAITH TO MATURITY... Are we saved by immature faith?

Or do you see your faith as already fully mature and perfected because of Christ's sacrifice, and you are no longer in need of any additional maturity, because your righteousness, however absent in your soul, is present in Christ, in Whom YOU believe yourself to be present, and therefore God, in His divine blindness, only sees Christ when He looks upon your ontological UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, whicvh we have to understand as your continuing in your sins?

[How was THAT for a run-on sentence/question?!?]overcoming, to that degree are we righteous in FACT, and not in some imaginary imputation of the perfection of righteousness, which is Christ... So that a repentant sinner can say:

1: Lord, I no longer am a murderer of the innocent... [eg I have that much righteousness]
and
2: Lord, I still get angry with my fellow man [and am in that respect unrighteous]

You see, with your view, both of these matters pale under the fictictive cover of imputation of righteousness.

Yet in the actual ontology of the Christian soul, both are crucial,
if an ongoing life of repentance [eg the running of the race set before us]
is to be taken seriously...

Arsenios

Originally posted by RBerman

Repentance isn't really a discrete work; it's a change of attitude which results in works. You're right that the justified are repentant. You're just wrong about the causality between the two.

My brother, there are INNER works, and OUTER works, and BOTH are REPENTANCE...

The inner work of changing one's attitude is one thing, and is normally accompanied by a huge infusion of Grace... And this infusion is brought forth from God as a consequence of a rather massive DOING of outer works of repentance...

A miserly person, for instance, gives alms until he is utterly bereft of all possessions and destitute, and THEN God comes to him and gives him the infusion of Grace that heals his miserly infirmity of soul that CAUSED him to be miserly...
A
At that point, he gains by Grace the righteousness of generosity, having overcome miserliness by God's grace through faith demonstrated in the works of giving of alms...

This is how it works... One shortcoming at a time... Sin by sin...

And by this means, we are progressively justified - eg made ACTUALLY AND ONTOLOGICALLY [and not merely imputedly] righteous - by God's grace through works of faith... And in this, we MATURE in faith... Out faith is perfected... One work at a time... And we GROW in faith...

Surely you now this???

Arsenios

Originally posted by George Blaisdell

Which ignores Jame's telling us that works perfect faith...

Let me suggest a meaning for "works perfect faith" that is consistent with at least my views, whether with Maxentius or not: They don't perfect faith in the sense that anything more is needed for justification. But I would argue that God's ultimate purpose is to fix us and bring us into conformity with Christ. The union with Christ which is reflected in justification is the means by which God renews us. So I would say that in some sense the goal of faith and justification is to serve as the basis for a complete renewal. In that sense, the renewal, of which works are a component and the most visible sign, completes faith.

So much for your S/S... Peter tells us we PARTAKE of the Divine Nature, and Christ that we ARE gods... If Grace is but creation, then it is NOT God's NATURE in which we partake, you see... Because God is UNCREATED...

Grace isn't a creation. It's God's determination to save us. Calvin at least bases much of his theology on the concept of our union with Christ. Talking about partaking the divine nature isn't typical Protestant language, but it seems consistent with a union with Christ.

No one here has said works are futile--except to the extent they cannot justify us, because justification is the free gift of God. As St. Paul cited, Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness.

That is YOUR Protestant dogma - It is not the Apostolic deposit of the Church of the first thousand years, and now two thousand years...

huh? He's just quoted from Paul. The question is interpretation, which is what the rest of this discussion is about.

This is especially true of works from the unrepentant, which can never please God. However, a Christian can be obedient, and thus can do his works of serving God and his neighbor with a pure heart.

Thi issue is sin and repentance... Hitler loved Eva and his dog... [a good work]

He approached God as a REPENTANT sinner, and was justified...

Right. So Hitler's good work didn't come from faith, and thus isn't a Christian good work. I believe what you've said is consistent with the Protestant approach. I agree with RBerman that repentance is not a work. Someone who approaches God as a repentance sinner is also approaching God in faith.

The Pharisee approached God as a righteous man whom God Himself had made righteous... He did not approach God as a repenting sinner, so ashamed of his sins that he could not even look up...

Of course he was also justifying himself by works. At any rate, he clearly didn't have faith in the Protestant sense.

We see our sin and know we are not righteous, and cling to Christ and the cross. We do not believe we have anything to offer, as God is not in need of anything.

"A sacrifice unto God is a broken spirit... A heart that is broken and humbled God will not despise..." [Psalm 50/51]

We offer our brokenness to God, my brother... And ask His Mercy...

I believe you are in violent agreement.

Faith justifies us, and works do not justify us, even though the Bible tells us plainly that works perfect the faith that brings justification??? No separation, you say, in that denial??

But Paul himself says that works don't justify. The question is what that means. We deal with it by saying that when he said works don't justify, he was using a narrower meaning of justification than Catholics -- and I assume also EO -- typically use. "no separation" is straight from Luther. Works are distinct from justification, but not separated from it. I suggest above a meaning for works perfecting faith that I would consider acceptable.

So you deny Scripture, because it does not fit into your Protestant dogma that contradicts the Church of the Apostles for the first thousand years?? James plainly tells us that works perfect faith... [And we all know that faith engenders works... ] Even Hitler had good works that did NOT cause faith in him, nor mature [perfect] it... But IN THE CHRISTIAN, the righteousness of one's soul is NOT possible in the absence of works which perfect faith, and by their doing, ask, seek and beckon the Grace of God...

You have shown no denying Scripture. We have no problem at all with James' statement. One purpose of faith is to produce works. Actually, I don't see James saying specifically that works perfect faith. However I think it's consistent with his point.

Works perfect faith in the sense that if we do not do works our faith is incomplete.

So with that [very weak, by the standards of your mental abilities, Max - I mean, really! That is a pathetic rendering...] accounting, what on earth do you mean? Do works actually INCREASE faith, by completing faith??? Yet we can still HAVE saving faith even if it is incomplete? You see, to perfect one's faith means to BRING ONES IMMATURE FAITH TO MATURITY... Are we saved by immature faith?

He was giving you his reading of James. James says that our faith is dead without works. I think Max's statement is a paraphrase of that.

I actually agree that works and faith are mutually reinforcing, and thus that works increase faith. However James doesn't say what you are shouting at us, even though I agree with it. Luther understood that faith develops. He specifically said that justification is not based on the degree or quality of our faith. This allows for justification by faith alone, but also for the kind of development of faith that you're talking about.

I'm not going to argue about imputed righteousness. I believe that righteousness is imputed, but not for the same reason that Luther did, because I think he failed to take into account the OT background of the term righteousness. I don't think I disagree with his ideas, just some exegetical details.

Originally posted by George Blaisdell

My brother, there are INNER works, and OUTER works, and BOTH are REPENTANCE...

The inner work of changing one's attitude is one thing, and is normally accompanied by a huge infusion of Grace... And this infusion is brought forth from God as a consequence of a rather massive DOING of outer works of repentance...

A miserly person, for instance, gives alms until he is utterly bereft of all possessions and destitute, and THEN God comes to him and gives him the infusion of Grace that heals his miserly infirmity of soul that CAUSED him to be miserly...
A
At that point, he gains by Grace the righteousness of generosity, having overcome miserliness by God's grace through faith demonstrated in the works of giving of alms...

This is how it works... One shortcoming at a time... Sin by sin...

I agree with all this.

And by this means, we are progressively justified - eg made ACTUALLY AND ONTOLOGICALLY [and not merely imputedly] righteous - by God's grace through works of faith... And in this, we MATURE in faith... Out faith is perfected... One work at a time... And we GROW in faith... Surely you now this???

This is where we part company; I don't see what you described above as progressive justification. I see it as progressive sanctification.

Originally posted by RBerman

I agree with all this.

This is where we part company;

I don't see what you described above as progressive justification.

I see it as progressive sanctification.

Righteousness is steadfastness under fire...

When we first enter into the Faith, we are UNTESTED by fire...

We continue untested until tested...

It is by our RUNNING the RACE set before us, you see, that we are tested, and the testing is the temptations of sin, and we are to overcome these by self-determination through God's Grace... AS we overcome sins, we become MORE steadfast under the fire of the sins we overcome...

THEREFORE...

Se become more righteous [justified]...

Holiness is our participation in the One Who Holiness IS, and that is God, and is solely God's gift... I mean, really now, How are YOU going to INCREASE YOUR HOLINESS??? But by doing the DEEDS of RIGHTEOUSNESS, you CAN and WILL increase your righteousness... Just as by doing the deeds of unrighteousness, you will become ever more and more unrighteous...

You know this already...

Arsenios

Originally posted by hedrick

They [works] don't perfect faith in the sense that anything more is needed for justification.

Well, that is what we are examining, and it is your false and un-Biblical Protestant dogma...

But I would argue that God's ultimate purpose is to fix us and bring us into conformity with Christ.

It is also His IMMEDIATE purpose...

The union with Christ which is reflected in justification is the means by which God renews us.

Look - God does not just HAND OUT RIGHTEOUSNESS crackers... To be justified MEANS to be MADE RIGHTEOUS... Do you not know this?

So I would say that in some sense the goal of faith and justification is to serve as the basis for a complete renewal. In that sense, the renewal, of which works are a component and the most visible sign, completes faith.

James 2:22 plainly tells us that works are the MEANS of the maturing [in us] of faith... "By works..." is a dative of means...

Grace isn't a creation.

IF Grace is not a creation, then it is UNCREATED...

Only ONE is uncreated - God...

So are you saying that Grace is God?

It's God's determination to save us.

That makes Grace [into] God... You are getting more Orthodox by the second!

Calvin at least bases much of his theology on the concept of our union with Christ.

Basing faith on ANY concept is a bad idea, because ANY concept is but a human construct, and more, is a FALLEN construct...

Talking about partaking the divine nature isn't typical Protestant language, but it seems consistent with a union with Christ.

It is ENTIRELY so consistent...

huh? He's just quoted from Paul. The question is interpretation, which is what the rest of this discussion is about.

He said that works cannot justify us, and I have shown that they do...

I agree with RBerman that repentance is not a work. Someone who approaches God as a repentant sinner is also approaching God in faith.

So if repentance is not a work, then what IS it??? Do you think God repents FOR you, so YOU do NOT HAVE TO REPENT??? It is the FIRST commandment of Christ when He comes out of the desert, and the first commandment of John the Baptist, and it is the first command of Peter at Pentecost... So it is something we have to DO....

Are you really saying that what WE DO is NOT a WORK???

I believe you are in violent agreement.

To ASK GOD for His Mercy IS a work...

But Paul himself says that works don't justify.

That is false. He said that the works of the Law do not justify [make righteous] a person...

The question is what that means. We deal with it by saying that when he said works don't justify, he was using a narrower meaning of justification than Catholics -- and I assume also EO -- typically use. "no separation" is straight from Luther. Works are distinct from justification, but not separated from it. I suggest above a meaning for works perfecting faith that I would consider acceptable.

James 2:22 plainly tells us that the doing of works is necessary in order that our faith be brought to maturity, that works are the means of perfecting faith...

Luther falsely proffers that works but accompany faith, and that faith is always the sole cause of works, and that works are never the cause of faith...

Look - What you are not getting is the fact that there is:

1: IMMATURE FAITH
AND
2: MATURE FAITH

The progression from immaturity to maturity of faith is accomplished by the means of works... THAT is the meaning of James 2:22
Works are the MEANS of making one's immature faith mature, of perfecting faith...

Yet you and Luther deny this...

You have shown no denying Scripture. We have no problem at all with James' statement. One purpose of faith is to produce works. Actually, I don't see James saying specifically that works perfect faith. However I think it's consistent with his point.

Have you even read James 2:22??

2:22 Seest thou how faith was synergizing with his works,
and by works was faith made perfect?

I actually agree that works and faith are mutually reinforcing, and thus that works increase faith.

Good! Then we are agreed! Glory to God!

However James doesn't say what you are shouting at us, even though I agree with it.

If you read 2:22, and especially with the Strong's number 4904, synergize, you will find that it does indeed say exactly what I have been showing you, and which everyone her is ignoring...

Luther understood that faith develops. He specifically said that justification is not based on the degree or quality of our faith. This allows for justification by faith alone, but also for the kind of development of faith that you're talking about.

It develops by works, as we become more and more righteous while overcoming sins in the face of temptations, which is what righteousness IS... And is what it MEANS fo be justified - eg to be MADE RIGHTEOUS...

Arsenios

I am increasingly thinking that we just aren't going to communicate. You insist on rejecting everything Protestant as heretical, even when it says the same thing that you're saying. Your failure to use any critical thought makes the situation pretty much hopeless.

A typical example:

The union with Christ which is reflected in justification is the means by which God renews us.

Look - God does not just HAND OUT RIGHTEOUSNESS crackers... To be justified MEANS to be MADE RIGHTEOUS... Do you not know this?

You aren't following my argument. I agree completely that we develop what is in your terms righteousness. That's what I was SAYING. I am saying that it is the Holy Spirit uniting us with Christ that forms the spiritual environment, if you like, within which we do exactly the kind of development you are talking about.

The problem is that as the scholarship of the NPP is making increasingly clear, Paul doesn't normally use the term righteousness to refer to the godly character that we develop. I agree that we develop it, but that's not what he means by the word righteousness. What he means by righteousness is our status as members of the covenant. That's not something we earn. It's something God gives us, which is the spiritual basis of the kind of development you have been talking about and which ALL PARTICIPANTS OF THIS DISCUSSION AGREE OCCURS, roughly as you have described it. Since I know that Orthodox thought is not Pelagian, presumably you do acknowledge that our development as Christians isn't something we do independently of God, but instead depends upon the union with Christ that you keep talking about. It is this context, set up and maintained by God, in which our development occurs that we mean by justification. If you have another term for it, I'd be happy to use it.

If you want to respond, please do not continue reiterating descriptions of our spiritual development. That's not the question. The question is: does that development occur within the context of a union with Christ that is set up and maintained by God alone? I suspect your answer is going to be no, that everything is synergistic. If so, that's the real disagreement, at least with folks such as Maxentius and RBerman who are in the tradition of the magisterial Reformation. But please be clear on where the issue is. We do not deny that there is a development which is synergistic. Most of your argument assumes we do. However we believe that this development occurs within the context of a commitment to us by God that is established by him and that is stable. That's justification (in our sense -- we use sanctification for the development).

Saying that grace is God's determination to save us doesn't make grace equivalent to God. However it's not a separate thing, so that we can ask whether it is created or not.

Theology is (at least in part) a set of ideas, although if it isn't going to be an abstract game it has to come out of our experience of God. But as thoughts about God, it is by definition based on concepts. Are you sure you aren't playing word games to avoid the disaster of agreeing with me?

I don't think repentance is a work in the sense Paul is using works. As I understand it, Paul is rejecting works that are not motivated by our connection with Christ. Your example of something Hitler did that happened to be good. In Luther's terminology, faith is the way we participate in the union with Christ. I would say that repentance is actually the tie between faith and works. It's not a work in itself. Indeed I'd put it closer to faith. Like faith, it's part of what ties us to Christ, and motivates our actions. Of course you can come up with a kind of repentance that is a work, e.g. some kind of legalistic penance. But you can also come up with approaches to faith that turn faith into a work as well.

Originally posted by George Blaisdell

Righteousness is steadfastness under fire.

Whence did you derive this definition? Deuteronomy 6:25 says that righteousness consists of obeying all the law. Do you qualify for that? I don't. That's why Deuteronomy 9:4-6 specifically says that God's favor upon Israel was not because they were righteous, but rather despite their unrighteousness. Thus the first part of Romans 10 says that righteousness comes through faith, not works. This explains Romans 4's observation that righteousness is imputed due to faith apart from works.

Romans 4:1-8

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."
Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

"Blessed are they
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man
whose sin the Lord will never count against him."

Romans 10:1-13

Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

Moses describes in this way the righteousness that is by the law: "The man who does these things will live by them." But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) "or 'Who will descend into the deep?'" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart," that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

Originally posted by RBerman

Whence did you derive this definition? Deuteronomy 6:25 says that righteousness consists of obeying all the law. Do you qualify for that? I don't. That's why Deuteronomy 9:4-6 specifically says that God's favor upon Israel was not because they were righteous, but rather despite their unrighteousness. Thus the first part of Romans 10 says that righteousness comes through faith, not works. This explains Romans 4's observation that righteousness is imputed due to faith apart from works.

Thank-you for this post.

I want to give you a lens through which to understand Paul in Romans, for he is addressing a whole issue which ended up in the first Council at Jerusalem, because the Jews, the original Christians, had gone off on a Pharisitical tangent, thinking that in order to be a Christian, one must FIRST become a Jew - eg that only Jews could be Christians... This error, which Paul is trying to correct, forms the backdrop, the context, for understanding all that he is writing here...

But what I want you to do, mentally, just to verify your understanding of Paul, is the following exercise:
Whenever Paul says something like " if we believe on him that raised up Jesus...", Whenever he contrasts faith or belief with works, I want you to ADD to the text: "AND ACTED ACCORDINGLY..." So that this would read:

" if we believe on him that raised up Jesus AND ACT ACCORDINGLY

I will do this in the verses you quote below:

Romans 4:1-8

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about—but not before God. What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, AND ACTED ACCORDINGLY, and it was credited to him as righteousness."

Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God AND ACTS ACCORDINGLY who justifies the wicked, his faith, WHEN HE ACTS ACCORDINGLY, is credited as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works THE WORKS OF THE LAW:

"Blessed are they
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man
whose sin the Lord will never count against him."
IF HE DOEs NOT CONTINUE IN HIS SINS

Romans 10:1-13

Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes. AND ACTS ACCORDINGLY...

Moses describes in this way the righteousness that is by the law: "The man who does these things will live by them." But the righteousness that is by faith says: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?'" (that is, to bring Christ down) "or 'Who will descend into the deep?'" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).But what does it say? "The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart," that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming: That if you confess with your mouth, [AN ACTION eg A WORK] "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart AND ACT ACCORDINGLY that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, IF YOU ACT ACT ACCORDINGLY and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. [A WORK] As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him AND ACTS ACCORDINGLY will never be put to shame." For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, [A WORK] for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."[A WORK: "TO CALL ON"]

So you see that works are part and parcel of faith and belief... Yet Paul is arguing against the WORKS OF THE LAW... This is the context of his usage of the very term WORKS... He clearly is NOT meaning WORKS OF FAITH, because he is PRESCRIBING them, such as when he says to confess with the mouth what you believe in the heart...

And what is built in to all this is that the confession is unto salvation, whereas the existence of the belief in the heart is unto justification... Such that when we are saved by Faith, confession of the heart is what that means... And confession is a work...

And indeed, he DID manage to go a little overboard in his zeal to argue against making gentiles first become Jews in order to become Christians, and this is why James came along and administered the corrective to what COULD be misinterpreted in this epistle... IOW, Paul is SO focused on the propriety of the Gentiles to become Christians outside of Judaism that his words CAN be taken as a disparagement of ALL WORKS unto righteousness...

Now I am understanding that any ACTION taken by a man is a WORK...

Perhaps you understand a work to be something MORE THAN AN ACTION?

And if you DO, then you perhaps agree with Paul that the WORKS he is claiming are not unto justification are those of the Judaic Law...

And yet strictly speaking, the works themselves, even those of Faith, do not justify, do not make man righteous, but are UNTO justification, for it is them that implant into man's heart the faith, and it is them that crowd out the uprisings of the works of sin... For it is GOD Who justifies those who believe and act accordingly - eg in REPENTANCE... For without repentance, there is no Faith... And repentance is a WORK... An INNER work...

Arsenios

George, did you really just say that your position can only be supported by adding words to the Bible that are not actually there? And that Paul "went overboard" and said things that he did not really mean and needed "correcting" by James? We appear to have radically different views of how to approach Scripture, so it's no wonder we disagree about what it means.

I came across this while reading Romans through in one sitting:

Rom 10:8-10

But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved.

---

© source where applicable

I noticed the use of "saved" in the present and future tense.

Just a thought.

Originally posted by Maxentius

I noticed the use of "saved" in the present and future tense.

That's right. In different senses, we have been saved, we are being saved, and we will be saved.

Originally posted by RBerman

George, did you really just say that your position can only be supported by adding words to the Bible that are not actually there? And that Paul "went overboard" and said things that he did not really mean and needed "correcting" by James? We appear to have radically different views of how to approach Scripture, so it's no wonder we disagree about what it means.

1: I did not say that thie is MY position...
This is the position of the Orthodox Church, the Body of Christ...
This has not changed in 2000 years...
My opinion is as worthless as yours...

2: I DID say that Paul's words, because they are addressed to a specific issue, which was the role of the Judaizers in the Christian Faith proclaimed to the Gentiles, WAS CAPABLE of being MISUNDERSTOOD, which is EXACTLY what the entire Reformation has done, and that James addressed the very issue of misunderstanding which was possible...

3: Paul waas not at all CORRECTED by James...

4: YOU are corrected by James...

The meaning of BOTH James and Paul are included in Orthodoxy, which validated them both as part of the New Testament Canon...

5: LUTHER, the MAN whom YOUR FAITH is NAMED AFTER,
REJECTED JAMES as a late ADD-ON to Holy Writ,
As some minor scribe who had some good things to say...

6. Are you totally unaware of this first major issue of the early Church?
The issue of the need to become a Jew in order to become a Christian?
Ann that Paul, in his epistles, was addressing this very issue?
That this is why he opposes faith and works?
Because it is the Judaic Works of the Law that he has in view?

7: And at a deeper level, not even the works of the Faith justify,
but they are the means of FAith through which God Himself justifies man...
And if you do not DO these works, God will not justify you...
Because to justify is to make righteous...
And God will not heal the infirmity of your soul IF you do not yourself live repentantly from your sins.
And in it all, it is by God's Grace that we do ANYTHING...

So consider YOURSELF CORRECTED BY JAMES...

Not Paul...

And not the early Church which GAVE YOU both epistles...


Arsenios