Works

[Randy Kluth]

Works. There is a lot of confusion in the Christian World about Works. Paul spoke a lot about how Works did not justify us, that Christ's atonement alone covered our sins. He spoke a lot about how the Jews were no longer under the Law, that the Works of the Law are no longer valid, that Christ's Law alone is valid, which is based on faith in the atonement of Christ.

So did Paul dismiss Works altogether, or was he just dismissing Works under the Law? I believe Paul was just dismissing Works under the Law because he full well knew that the Law had been a valid covenant between God and Israel, and that God had required Works under the Law while that covenant was still in effect.

So what was Paul really saying? He was saying that while the Law was in effect, it was for the purpose of providing life in temporal matters. But it could not bring about eternal life. And so, once Christ had come and provided a final atonement for sins, the sacrifices of the Law ceased to be valid. And Christ's atonement superseded all of the sacrifices of the Law.

This made the Law impotent with respect to bringing even temporal life anymore, since the purpose of that covenant was to be suprseded by a greater covenant, the covenant of Christ. So yes, Paul taught that keeping the Law, and doing the Works of the Law, were bad now that Christ's covenant had superseded the old covenant of Law. But he was never saying that Works, as such, were bad--ony Works under the Law, after that covenant had been superseded.

Works, being valid while the Law was still in effect, are just as valid under the covenant of Christ, because he has Law and he has Works also. They just aren't the same covenant as the covenant of Law. They have to do with our requirement to follow him, to emulate him, to obey his commandment to love the brethren, to love our enemy, to testify to the Gospel of Christ's Kingdom, etc.

Again, Paul would've encouraged Jews to obey the Works of the Law while the Law was still in effect. And he would've acknowledged that those Works, being done in obedience and in faith, did produce temporal benefits, including life, health, and productivity. Paul's only point, therefore, was that Christ had come and superseded the Law, making those Works no longer a matter of obedience, and therefore, worthless. He was not saying that Christian Works were also worthless. On the contrary, Paul argued that following Christ involved all kinds of obedience to God, and his letters recount numerous exhortations to that effect. We should not be confused about the need to do good Works as a Christian!

Under the Law, we were told that Works under that covenant provided temporal benefits, and not eternal benefits. That's because only by the covenant of Christ could we obtain eternal life. And so, we should also know that under the covenant of Christ, we do Works not to obtain eternal life, but rather, to be obedient to God, to obtain His good pleasure. This also has some temporal benefits although we see, like Israel, that we live in the midst of those around us who are disobedient, thus leading us to have hard times. The best of the Prophets of Israel in the OT suffered despite their obedience to the Law. Their temporal benefits from serving the Law faithfully could not prevent them from suffering from the disobedience in the nation in which they lived.

Paul did not argue that the Law was bad for being unable to provide Israel with eternal life. Indeed its purpose was to show that until Christ came, the Law could only show man's lack of an eternal atonement. There is confusion, however, when we see Jesus emphasize that in Israel's time of backsliding, what they did under the Law was *false adherence* to the Law, doing the things required by the Law externally, but not doing the things internally required by the Law. God had asked them to have a "new heart," and not just do a few good Works.

Paul was not saying that by the Pharisees' example nobody could do good Works under the Law. On the contrary, Jesus condemned them for not doing Works under the Law *properly.*

And so, we can be sure that Paul did not say Works are out of reach for Christians. On the contrary, he was encouraging us to do true Christian Works. He was only telling Jews to move beyond the Works of the Law to the Works of Christ. And he was arguing that the Works of the Law, though good in their time, could never achieve eternal life, but only temporal benefits, while they awaited final redemption. Paul was arguing that they had to move on to Christ from the Law, since the Law was given in preparation for him, and always had meant to bring about an atonement that was eternal.

The Jews had to leave the Works of the Law because it had come time to move on, once Christ had come. Paul never said that Works were bad, and not even bad under the Law. They were only bad after Christ had come, because then the old Covenant had become passe, and observance of that Law after Christ had come was a form of disobedience, since the purpose of the Law had been to move on to Christ, the eternal atonement--the Works that last forever.

Let me be clear: Works are what pleases God and what God's purpose has always been for Man, to live up to the image of God for which we were created. Once we were defiled with a sin nature, our Works--no matter how good--could not redeem us, and give us eternal life. The Law was given to demonstrate that. It called upon Israel to obey, to be good, to do good works, for which they could be deemed righteous, and rewarded in the present world.

But righteousness, to achieve eternal life, could only come by Christ, who gave us the ability to perform the Works of faith, achieving salvation by the connection of his righteousness to his eternal atonement. Now we can do Works that are part of our eternal inheritance, and our Works, when they are truly of faith, will last forever.

And I'm confident that Christ's eternal atonement, covers those who had, under the Law, done Works through faith. Paul only argued that apart from Christ's eternal atonement, the Works of the Law, even done through faith, could not find eternal salvation. But inasmuch as they were good Works done in hope of eternal atonement, they could achieve, by faith, what they had hoped for.

Paul's argument was only that if they knew the Law could not achieve eternal atonement, why would they not move on from the Law to Christ once they knew Christ was the source of that eternal atonement? Without Christ, the Works of the Law were inadequate! They could not save! The Works of the Law were designed to *look forward to Christ,* and to move on from the Law to him when he came.

 

[Joseph77]

nvm

 

[justbyfaith]

The works of the law, even if you are in Christ, do not have the power to save you.

They are only the outworking of a salvation that comes solely through faith in Christ and His shed blood.

 

[Randy Kluth]

If you see a body laying out in a field on the ground, and it is not breathing, at all, for hours, days, years?

Is it alive ?

The body had truly been alive--otherwise, it could not have been a real body. But once it died, the only way it could be alive again would be through resurrection.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The works of the law, even if you are in Christ, do not have the power to save you.

They are only the outworking of a salvation that comes solely through faith in Christ and His shed blood.

I agree. My point was that the Law was a valid form of righteousness in its time, though it could not save. It enables a man to be saved if, by his works under the Law, he demonstrated faith in God equal to that which Christ's atonement accomplished. Works done under the Law and works done in Christ were properly done in faith. And they are able, through Christ, to obtain salvation. Though atonement had not yet come to the saints under the Law, their works were done in faith and are able to appropriate the atonement of Christ after he died and rose again.

Now that Christ has come, doing works under the Law are worthless, and in fact, disobedience. That's because the Law was meant to effect a faith that looked forward to an eternal atonement, and not anything sinful man could do on his own.

Not even the priesthood under the Law could provide an eternal atonement, because the priests had a sin nature, and not even the cleansing ceremonies of the priest could perfect them from the sin nature. And so, true faith under the Law looked beyond what even the priesthood of Israel could do, being imperfect and unqualified to bring eternal life.

 

[justbyfaith]

I agree.

You do not agree.

Works done under the Law and works done in Christ were properly done in faith. And they are able, through Christ, to obtain salvation.

This statement is in disagreement with my statement. My statement was that works do not obtain salvation even if they are done in Christ; but that we are only saved through the shed blood of Christ and not by works to any degree, shape, or fashion.

Now that Christ has come, doing works under the Law are worthless, and in fact, disobedience.

As believers under the new covenant, we do works according to the law because the law is written in our hearts and on our minds (Hebrews 8:8-10, Hebrews 10:16, Romans 8:7, Romans 8:4) because we are born again.

Therefore doing works according to the law, as it has been changed (Hebrews 7:12) from the letter to the spirit (Romans 7:6); are in fact worthy of reward (1 Corinthians 3:11-15) because they are done not out of an attempt to earn salvation but out of knowing that one is already saved and done out of the motivation of thankfulness and gratitude over the fact that God has saved us.

 

[Randy Kluth]

You do not agree.

This statement is in disagreement with my statement. My statement was that works do not obtain salvation even if they are done in Christ; but that we are only saved through the shed blood of Christ and not by works to any degree, shape, or fashion.

Your problem, my friend, is that you're judgmental and assume the worst. You are battling semantics. I have said that I do not mean the Works of men *ever* obtain salvation by their own merit alone. Their only merit is in the choice to obey God's word, while it is Christ's atonement alone that accomplishes salvation.

As believers under the new covenant, we do works according to the law because the law is written in our hearts and on our minds (Hebrews 8:8-10, Hebrews 10:16, Romans 8:7, Romans 8:4) because we are born again.

That is the way it is and always has been. Men, being created in the image of God, have access to the word of God by which they obtain virtue to obey God. Nobody has any virtue except it comes from God. But men *must choose* and thereby merit the right to obtain what Christ alone won for them, namely salvation.

Therefore doing works according to the law, as it has been changed (Hebrews 7:12) from the letter to the spirit (Romans 7:6); are in fact worthy of reward (1 Corinthians 3:11-15) because they are done not out of an attempt to earn salvation but out of knowing that one is already saved and done out of the motivation of thankfulness and gratitude over the fact that God has saved us.

Nobody can attempt, by works, to earn salvation since the time man fell. But we've always been called upon to obey God's word from the time man was first created. We do so because God has created a conscience in us by which we may receive God's commands and obey them. We obey God because it is the right thing to do, regardless of the fact we cannot, as sinners, merit salvation. The only merit we can attain to is the right to choose for salvation, which Christ alone won for us.

 

[justbyfaith]

You are battling semantics.

I know that this is the case. Because you are saying your words in such a way as to hide what you really mean while giving a hint of false doctrine in your statements; just enough to confuse the sincere student of God's word.

I have said that I do not mean the Works of men *ever* obtain salvation by their own merit alone.

This indicates that you do believe that they obtain salvation through merit; but that this merit must be accompanied by something.

Their only merit is in the choice to obey God's word, while it is Christ's atonement alone that accomplishes salvation.

The only merit that can even save is the merits of Christ's perfect life and death on the Cross. The choice to obey God's word is not meritorious in the slightest; except in that it comes out of salvation rather than an attempt to earn it. Then it resides as gold, silver, precious gems, wood, hay, stubble that will be revealed by fire on the day of judgment.

But men *must choose* and thereby merit the right to obtain what Christ alone won for them, namely salvation.

This is false doctrine. Choosing does not produce merit. We do have access by faith into the grace wherein we stand. But faith is not meritorious either. It simply obtains the merits of Christ.

Nobody can attempt, by works, to earn salvation since the time man fell.

People do it all of the time. People who don't want to place their faith and trust in the Cross to save them have only one other option, to attempt to earn their salvation through works.

We obey God because it is the right thing to do,

If we obey God at all, it is because we have been born again of the Holy Spirit.

There is a righteousness of the law, which is as filthy rags, which does not translate into true obedience. It is mere outward observance of rules and regulations. Real obedience has to do with a relationship with the Holy Spirit; where a man is prompted by love to do the good works that the Lord has beforehand prepared for him to do.

regardless of the fact we cannot, as sinners, merit salvation. The only merit we can attain to is the right to choose for salvation, which Christ alone won for us.

The right to choose for salvation is not meritorious; and we also do not attain to it: but it is given to us as the heavenly Father draws us to Christ. A man cannot choose salvation in the first place (John 1:13, Romans 9:16); but when a man is saved he is apprehended by the Lord. Of course he must be willing to be apprehended for the work to be completed; but no one seeks after God (Romans 3:11) unless they are already redeemed.

 

[Scoot]

The short simplistic view that I understand this subject is the following:

1) Grace - determines where we spend eternity. (Heaven, and then onto the new earth if saved, or Hades, and eventually the lake of fire if we reject Christ's Grace). Works has absolutely no part to play in salvation whatsoever. (Eph 2:8-9)

2) Works - determines how we spend eternity in the place determined above by (1). There are numerous scriptures that speak about all of us being judged by our works, and rewarded accordingly. This has nothing to do with salvation - but the rewards we receive if we are saved. (I would go as far to also consider the polar opposite - that those who's evil wicked works are greater, receive a greater level of punishment). Romans 2:6, 2 Cor 5:10, 1 Peter 1:17 to name a few supporting scriptures.

This may be an over-simplistic view - but for me it's one of the simplest ways to show the importance of works and why it's mentioned so much - whilst clearly identifying that it has absolutely no part to play in salvation, and from what I can tell - I believe fits into either the Calvin vs Arminian understanding.

I'm not sure where the O.P. sits regarding this, and it may be completely unintentional - but I too interpreted from the OP's posts what appeared to be that salvation is achieved by grace + works. If this is not what you were meaning @Randy Kluth, it could probably be cleared up by you making a single statement that "salvation is obtained by grace alone - and works have no bearing in salvation itself". Would you be willing to make this statement to clear the air please? (I hope you can - if you're not - I'd have no choice but to continue to read into your posts the same as @justbyfaith has).

(FWIW - and without getting into Calvin vs Arminian - my personal view is that making a choice is not what the scriptures on 'works' is referring to. ie - repenting and putting faith in Jesus isn't works)

 

[Joseph77]

nvm

 

[mailmandan]

If you see a body laying out in a field on the ground, and it is not breathing, at all, for hours, days, years?

Is it alive ?

That reminds me of James 2:26 - For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. The spirit (Greek pneuma) may also be translated "breath." As a breathless body exhibits no indication of life, so fruitless faith exhibits no indication of life.

 

[mailmandan]

Maybe it was alive, maybe not, at one time - that is not of concern.... OR IS IT ?
That which was once alive, now is dead !
A body laying on the ground without breathing, is dead.

So also is a man who has faith but no works.

In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims he has faith but has no works (to evidence his claim). That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith. So James does not teach that we are saved "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine.

 

[Joseph77]

nvm

 

[Truther]

Works. There is a lot of confusion in the Christian World about Works. Paul spoke a lot about how Works did not justify us, that Christ's atonement alone covered our sins. He spoke a lot about how the Jews were no longer under the Law, that the Works of the Law are no longer valid, that Christ's Law alone is valid, which is based on faith in the atonement of Christ.

So did Paul dismiss Works altogether, or was he just dismissing Works under the Law? I believe Paul was just dismissing Works under the Law because he full well knew that the Law had been a valid covenant between God and Israel, and that God had required Works under the Law while that covenant was still in effect.

So what was Paul really saying? He was saying that while the Law was in effect, it was for the purpose of providing life in temporal matters. But it could not bring about eternal life. And so, once Christ had come and provided a final atonement for sins, the sacrifices of the Law ceased to be valid. And Christ's atonement superseded all of the sacrifices of the Law.

This made the Law impotent with respect to bringing even temporal life anymore, since the purpose of that covenant was to be suprseded by a greater covenant, the covenant of Christ. So yes, Paul taught that keeping the Law, and doing the Works of the Law, were bad now that Christ's covenant had superseded the old covenant of Law. But he was never saying that Works, as such, were bad--ony Works under the Law, after that covenant had been superseded.

Works, being valid while the Law was still in effect, are just as valid under the covenant of Christ, because he has Law and he has Works also. They just aren't the same covenant as the covenant of Law. They have to do with our requirement to follow him, to emulate him, to obey his commandment to love the brethren, to love our enemy, to testify to the Gospel of Christ's Kingdom, etc.

Again, Paul would've encouraged Jews to obey the Works of the Law while the Law was still in effect. And he would've acknowledged that those Works, being done in obedience and in faith, did produce temporal benefits, including life, health, and productivity. Paul's only point, therefore, was that Christ had come and superseded the Law, making those Works no longer a matter of obedience, and therefore, worthless. He was not saying that Christian Works were also worthless. On the contrary, Paul argued that following Christ involved all kinds of obedience to God, and his letters recount numerous exhortations to that effect. We should not be confused about the need to do good Works as a Christian!

Under the Law, we were told that Works under that covenant provided temporal benefits, and not eternal benefits. That's because only by the covenant of Christ could we obtain eternal life. And so, we should also know that under the covenant of Christ, we do Works not to obtain eternal life, but rather, to be obedient to God, to obtain His good pleasure. This also has some temporal benefits although we see, like Israel, that we live in the midst of those around us who are disobedient, thus leading us to have hard times. The best of the Prophets of Israel in the OT suffered despite their obedience to the Law. Their temporal benefits from serving the Law faithfully could not prevent them from suffering from the disobedience in the nation in which they lived.

Paul did not argue that the Law was bad for being unable to provide Israel with eternal life. Indeed its purpose was to show that until Christ came, the Law could only show man's lack of an eternal atonement. There is confusion, however, when we see Jesus emphasize that in Israel's time of backsliding, what they did under the Law was *false adherence* to the Law, doing the things required by the Law externally, but not doing the things internally required by the Law. God had asked them to have a "new heart," and not just do a few good Works.

Paul was not saying that by the Pharisees' example nobody could do good Works under the Law. On the contrary, Jesus condemned them for not doing Works under the Law *properly.*

And so, we can be sure that Paul did not say Works are out of reach for Christians. On the contrary, he was encouraging us to do true Christian Works. He was only telling Jews to move beyond the Works of the Law to the Works of Christ. And he was arguing that the Works of the Law, though good in their time, could never achieve eternal life, but only temporal benefits, while they awaited final redemption. Paul was arguing that they had to move on to Christ from the Law, since the Law was given in preparation for him, and always had meant to bring about an atonement that was eternal.

The Jews had to leave the Works of the Law because it had come time to move on, once Christ had come. Paul never said that Works were bad, and not even bad under the Law. They were only bad after Christ had come, because then the old Covenant had become passe, and observance of that Law after Christ had come was a form of disobedience, since the purpose of the Law had been to move on to Christ, the eternal atonement--the Works that last forever.

Let me be clear: Works are what pleases God and what God's purpose has always been for Man, to live up to the image of God for which we were created. Once we were defiled with a sin nature, our Works--no matter how good--could not redeem us, and give us eternal life. The Law was given to demonstrate that. It called upon Israel to obey, to be good, to do good works, for which they could be deemed righteous, and rewarded in the present world.

But righteousness, to achieve eternal life, could only come by Christ, who gave us the ability to perform the Works of faith, achieving salvation by the connection of his righteousness to his eternal atonement. Now we can do Works that are part of our eternal inheritance, and our Works, when they are truly of faith, will last forever.

And I'm confident that Christ's eternal atonement, covers those who had, under the Law, done Works through faith. Paul only argued that apart from Christ's eternal atonement, the Works of the Law, even done through faith, could not find eternal salvation. But inasmuch as they were good Works done in hope of eternal atonement, they could achieve, by faith, what they had hoped for.

Paul's argument was only that if they knew the Law could not achieve eternal atonement, why would they not move on from the Law to Christ once they knew Christ was the source of that eternal atonement? Without Christ, the Works of the Law were inadequate! They could not save! The Works of the Law were designed to *look forward to Christ,* and to move on from the Law to him when he came.

The "works" everyone is talking about in modern Christendom that say we are not saved by, is not the same works as was described in the Bible.

The Bible's description of works were the keeping of the Law(found in the O.T., from Gen -Malachi).

Nowadays, Christians think lifting a finger is works.

Repentance(even thinking) takes work, baptism takes work, receiving the Holy Ghost takes work, not cussing when mad takes work, putting on shoes takes work....

These silly people omit the entire Bible, plus life itself.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The "works" everyone is talking about in modern Christendom that say we are not saved by, is not the same works as was described in the Bible.

The Bible's description of works were the keeping of the Law(found in the O.T., from Gen -Malachi).

Nowadays, Christians think lifting a finger is works.

Repentance(even thinking) takes work, baptism takes work, receiving the Holy Ghost takes work, not cussing when mad takes work, putting on shoes takes work....

These silly people omit the entire Bible, plus life itself.

Thank you! You've truly got it! You might've discerned how difficult it was to share on this because the several streams of thought, when mixed, get confused. Paul used "Works" as a shortened version of Jews attempting to be justified by the Law after Christ had come, or the inability of Works under the Law to obtain eternal salvation until Christ's atonement had taken place.

And absolutely, you pointed out the problem. Because of Paul's negative statements about "Works," Christians often create a dichotomy between Faith and Works, virtually denying that the Christian is able to do anything on his own. They say it must somehow be Christ in him doing the works, without any participation by the believer himself!

How is that even possible? God has always meant to involve men in His command to live in His image, after His likeness. When He gives us a command, He expects us to respond and to willfully engage that word by doing what it requires of him. This is called "Works," and it is *not* a nasty word.

I do believe some who do not mean well utilize this confusion over "Works" to deny that we need to do anything. They insist we can rely on grace, no matter what we do or who we are, because we "don't have to do anything." Indeed, we "can't do anything," they say. It must be "Christ in us" who does the work, and thus we skate, thinking that our works do not play any role in our salvation.

Even the word "salvation" gets confused because it is thought our works play no role whatsoever, as if Christ's atonement alone was necessary, and we need do nothing but "believe," whatever that means? They think that "believing" somehow allows us off the hook with respect to identifying what our belief is or what it entails. We're told it "cannot entail works."

And so, once again, in the name of "salvation" we are told we need do no works, when in reality, we are told that works play a role in our salvation--just not a role in our atonement. The role of our works in our salvation is not "justification" in the technical sense of providing for our own atonement. Rather, the role of our works in our salvation is a matter of responding to God's word by obeying it. We choose to believe the revelation that God gives us. This is our "works." Luther and Protestant lingo really messed this up, even though I personally love Luther.

So the meaning of "works" is utterly confused by many today, because they are confusing Christ's atonement with our response to that atonement. We confuse the virtue of our response to God's word with the perfect virtue of Christ, who provides us with the virtue of God.

We have to know that it is only *when* we respond to God's word that we obtain virtue from God, not creating it on our own. Whether a pagan responding to his conscience or a believer responding to the word of God, men are able, by their obedience, to obtain virtue from God. Never can anybody do good apart from responding to God's word, whether conscious of it or not.

So works does produce virtue, in conjunction with God's word. But it only brings salvation when we respond to the message of Christ's atonement. It was the works of Christ's atonement that only Christ could do. We *can* do the work necessary to respond to this message, or to respond to God's message generally. We do obtain from God the virtue necessary to respond to God's messages in a positive way.

Thus participating in God's salvation by positively responding to it is a virtue and is a form of meriting salvation. But this merit comes in conjunction with the work that Christ alone did in providing for us an atonement. This is a major mess in terms of how words are being used.

The semantics has not allowed us to admit our need to participate in Christ's righteousness as a verification of our salvation. And yet the Apostle John, in 1 John, labors to prove that Christ is a reality that must be worked out and demonstrated in our lives, if we really wish to prove we are saved and are children of God. The importance of this is that Christian salvation, to be real, must be demonstrated in our lives through *works.*

1 John 2.3 We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4 Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person.

Some malicious persons here, or even naïve ones, will complain that in saying we participate in our salvation we are displacing any need for Christ's atonement. Nothing could be further from the truth. Only Christ could work our atonement, and we need to actively show faith in that atonement to be saved. But we must also both internalize it and demonstrate it to show that we are truly saved. This is how we participate in our salvation, not by providing for our own salvation, but only by choosing to receive it, believe it, and to thus demonstrate it.

Again, we do not "participate in our salvation" by helping to provide atonement for our salvation. Rather, we "participate in our salvation" by responding positively to the message of Christ's atonement, and by choosing to live in the righteousness that Christ has provided.

 

[Randy Kluth]

In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims he has faith but has no works (to evidence his claim). That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith. So James does not teach that we are saved "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine.

I often worry about how you read my statements here in particular, because you have a good focus on unmerited grace. It would be very hard, if not impossible, for you to use the same statements I use, while you focus on the fact our works cannot save us. I agree with virtually everything you say on the subject of grace, although it is extremely difficult for me to put forward the need for Christian works without seeming to advocate for self-atonement.

Please know that I love and appreciate your own ministry, and do not in any way wish to advocate for works done for self-atonement, nor do I advocate for any kind of works done apart from our connection to God's living word. It is only by responding to God's word that we obtain any virtue at all! I only wish to say what you've said here, that faith without works is dead.

 

[Randy Kluth]

The short simplistic view that I understand this subject is the following:

1) Grace - determines where we spend eternity. (Heaven, and then onto the new earth if saved, or Hades, and eventually the lake of fire if we reject Christ's Grace). Works has absolutely no part to play in salvation whatsoever. (Eph 2:8-9)

2) Works - determines how we spend eternity in the place determined above by (1). There are numerous scriptures that speak about all of us being judged by our works, and rewarded accordingly. This has nothing to do with salvation - but the rewards we receive if we are saved. (I would go as far to also consider the polar opposite - that those who's evil wicked works are greater, receive a greater level of punishment). Romans 2:6, 2 Cor 5:10, 1 Peter 1:17 to name a few supporting scriptures.

This may be an over-simplistic view - but for me it's one of the simplest ways to show the importance of works and why it's mentioned so much - whilst clearly identifying that it has absolutely no part to play in salvation, and from what I can tell - I believe fits into either the Calvin vs Arminian understanding.

I'm not sure where the O.P. sits regarding this, and it may be completely unintentional - but I too interpreted from the OP's posts what appeared to be that salvation is achieved by grace + works. If this is not what you were meaning @Randy Kluth, it could probably be cleared up by you making a single statement that "salvation is obtained by grace alone - and works have no bearing in salvation itself". Would you be willing to make this statement to clear the air please? (I hope you can - if you're not - I'd have no choice but to continue to read into your posts the same as @justbyfaith has).

(FWIW - and without getting into Calvin vs Arminian - my personal view is that making a choice is not what the scriptures on 'works' is referring to. ie - repenting and putting faith in Jesus isn't works)

I appreciate the good sentiment expressed in this, reasonably put. I assure you atonement was provided by Christ alone. The problem I'm expressing is a difficult one, because over centuries of Christianity words have taken on technical meanings, when the biblical language itself was less technical. That's why Luther could not understand James and his sense of Christian works, because Luther read into Paul's use of the word "works" a technical application, meaning self-atonement.

But "works" does not always mean "self-atonement" in its biblical use. Words mean what they mean in context. And so, I'm not trying to stir the pot, but trying to re-focus on John's burden to get us to demonstrate righteousness--not just believe in it.

To say we "participate in our salvation" is loaded with problems, when it is understood, in the usual way, as self-atonement. I was raised a Lutheran--I would normally read it like you do, or as "justbyfaith" does. But in order to clarify, I have to expose the problem. And to do that I have to show how the supposed technical expression distorts an important aspect of our involvement in Christ's salvation. We have to do Christ's righteousness if we truly believe in it! We are not saved if we don't do it!

None of this has a thing to do with self-atonement. It is the necessary response to that atonement, to bring that salvation into our lives. Sorry, it's difficult! It is certainly by grace--by Christ's free gift of atonement--that we are saved. But it does require that we truly accept it, by putting it into effect in our lives. We need to embrace the new righteous nature he died to give us.

My sense of works is not just a matter of "how we will spend eternity." Rather, it consists of the things we do to serve Christ in our new nature, in terms of being charitable and in terms of fulfilling our ministry. For unbelievers, it may mitigate their sins in eternity and reduce their punishment. Works are the free choices we make to cooperate with God's word, whether many or few. Regardless, it isn't how many good works we do that matters, but only the fact that we receive a new nature from Christ that qualifies for salvation.

 

[Truther]

Thank you! You've truly got it! You might've discerned how difficult it was to share on this because the several streams of thought, when mixed, get confused. Paul used "Works" as a shortened version of Jews attempting to be justified by the Law after Christ had come, or the inability of Works under the Law to obtain eternal salvation until Christ's atonement had taken place.

And absolutely, you pointed out the problem. Because of Paul's negative statements about "Works," Christians often create a dichotomy between Faith and Works, virtually denying that the Christian is able to do anything on his own. They say it must somehow be Christ in him doing the works, without any participation by the believer himself!

How is that even possible? God has always meant to involve men in His command to live in His image, after His likeness. When He gives us a command, He expects us to respond and to willfully engage that word by doing what it requires of him. This is called "Works," and it is *not* a nasty word.

I do believe some who do not mean well utilize this confusion over "Works" to deny that we need to do anything. They insist we can rely on grace, no matter what we do or who we are, because we "don't have to do anything." Indeed, we "can't do anything," they say. It must be "Christ in us" who does the work, and thus we skate, thinking that our works do not play any role in our salvation.

Even the word "salvation" gets confused because it is thought our works play no role whatsoever, as if Christ's atonement alone was necessary, and we need to nothing but "believe," whatever that means? They think that "believing" somehow allows us off the hook with respect to identifying what our belief is or what it entails. We're told it "cannot entail works."

And so, once again, in the name of "salvation" we are told we need do no works, when in reality, we are told that works play a role in our salvation--just not a role in our atonement. The role of our works in our salvation is not "justification" in the technical sense of providing for our own atonement. Rather, the role of our works in our salvation is a matter of responding to God's word by obeying it. We choose to believe the revelation that God gives us. This is our "works." Luther and Protestant lingo really messed this up, even though I personally love Luther.

So the meaning of "works" is utterly confused by many today, because they are confusing Christ's atonement with our response to that atonement. We confuse the virtue of our response to God's word with the perfect virtue of Christ, who provides us with the virtue of God.

We have to know that it is only *when* we respond to God's word that we obtain virtue from God, not creating it on our own. Whether a pagan responding to his conscience or a believer responding to the word of God, men are able, by their obedience, to obtain virtue from God. Never can anybody do good apart from responding to God's word, whether conscious of it or not.

So works does produce virtue, in conjunction with God's word. But it only brings salvation when we respond to the message of Christ's atonement. It was the works of Christ's atonement that only Christ could do. We *can* do the work necessary to respond to this message, or to respond to God's message generally. We do obtain from God the virtue necessary to respond to God's messages in a positive way.

Thus participating in God's salvation by positively responding to it is a virtue and is a form of meriting salvation. But this merit comes in conjunction with the work that Christ alone did in providing for us an atonement. This is a major mess in terms of how words are being used.

The semantics has not allowed us to admit our need to participate in Christ's righteousness as a verification of our salvation. And yet the Apostle John, in 1 John, labors to prove that Christ is a reality that must be worked out and demonstrated in our lives, if we really wish to prove we are saved and are children of God. The importance of this is that Christian salvation, to be real, must be demonstrated in our lives through *works.*

1 John 2.3 We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4 Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person.

Some malicious persons here, or even naïve ones, will complain that in saying we participate in our salvation we are displacing any need for Christ's atonement. Nothing could be further from the truth. Only Christ could work our atonement, and we need to actively show faith in that atonement to be saved. But we must also both internalize it and demonstrate it to show that we are truly saved. This is how we participate in our salvation, not by providing for our own salvation, but only by choosing to receive it, believe it, and to thus demonstrate it.

Again, we do not "participate in our salvation" by helping to provide atonement for our salvation. Rather, we "participate in our salvation" by responding positively to the message of Christ's atonement, and by choosing to live in the righteousness that Christ has provided.

Awesome post.

The root of all this modern "works" talk is to negate being baptized to be saved, also negating Mark 16:16.

The second line of attack on water baptism from the "left" of christendom is saying Mark 16 does not belong in the Bible.

Fact is, prayer is also a work, so they have to tell folks they are saved without even praying etc.

This attack on the essential-ity of water baptism along with faith per Mark 16:16 is endlessly silly.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Awesome post.

The root of all this modern "works" talk is to negate being baptized to be saved, also negating Mark 16:16.

The second line of attack on water baptism from the "left" of christendom is saying Mark 16 does not belong in the Bible.

Fact is, prayer is also a work, so they have to tell folks they are saved without even praying etc.

This attack on the essential-ity of water baptism along with faith per Mark 16:16 is endlessly silly.

Participating in our salvation is a matter of showing our accepting of Christ's atonement for us, and embracing the righteousness he requires of us. I find Water Baptism to be on a lower level of requirements--more on the level of a recommendation. Sorry. Righteousness is something internal and demonstrated outwards by showing Christian spirituality, not encased in rituals, but able to be shown in rituals. Paul seemed to exclude Baptism from things that regard actual Salvation. But Baptism has been dealt with elsewhere. You are right, though--it is a kind of Christian "work."

 

[Randy Kluth]

Look up the original languages. The word translated faith - see if it changes or not.

This is an interpretive fallacy. "Faith" means what it means *in context.* Biblically we may speak of what the devils believe about God and what Christians believe about God--not the same thing. Some may believe the sky getting red means something. This is not always "saving faith" or godly faith.