# 'justification by faith' question!



## rembrandt (Jun 2, 2004)

I am currently reading the &quot;RCUS report on justification and the current controversy.&quot; I have a question. Please don't get into the Shepherd controversy. [i:4f73fdc9fa]I am just using a quote from somebody involved to ask a question.[/i:4f73fdc9fa] 

Hughs says attacking Shepherd:
[quote:4f73fdc9fa]To speak of a necessity of these good works for our salvation ... is to assign to them that very justifying status as works of the law which Paul has repudiated.[/quote:4f73fdc9fa]

I know this is not what he is really attacking, but: [b:4f73fdc9fa]What is wrong with saying that good works are needed for [i:4f73fdc9fa]final[/i:4f73fdc9fa] salvation[/b:4f73fdc9fa], [i:4f73fdc9fa]if[/i:4f73fdc9fa] we assume that all true faith produces good works (thus we must have [i:4f73fdc9fa]true[/i:4f73fdc9fa] faith)? 

Is it more correct to say that sanctification is the cause of good works and not justification itself; so, what James is really saying is that we must be sanctified, positionally and progressively, before our [i:4f73fdc9fa]true[/i:4f73fdc9fa] faith brings forth its fruit in works, thus making that faith fulfilled? I mean, thats not damaging the fact that justification is not by good works; because sanctification is the cause of good works. Justification itself would still have nothing to do with works, only sanctification...


So, one must have true faith [i:4f73fdc9fa]and be sanctified[/i:4f73fdc9fa] by it (or rather, upon it) to be just... right? Sanctification is a seperate act of God. But we need both faith and what comes from faith (really saying that we need 'true' faith). So, one must be justified and sanctified to be justified? [b:4f73fdc9fa]I assume that James is thinking, &quot;how can you be justified without being sanctified?&quot;[/b:4f73fdc9fa]

Please help me! Am I way off?

Paul

[Edited on 6-3-2004 by rembrandt]


----------



## fredtgreco (Jun 2, 2004)

It is the crucial difference between necessary consequence and necessary means. This is the cause of confusion.

Ordinarily, good works are a necessary (or better put, [i:e60a46d706]inevitable[/i:e60a46d706]) consequence of justification. But it need not be so in every instance, for example the thief on the cross.

This has been the dispute with Rome since the Reformation.

The Biblical model is:

faith --&gt; justification + good works

The Roman (and Shepherd) model is:

faith + good works --&gt; justification.

There is no final justification that is anything other than a vindication of the believer who is already justified by faith in Christ alone (see WSC 33, and also 36).

Shepherd posits that there is a ground of final justification that is different from initial justification, and that is the good works of the believer. This is unbiblical, and unconfessional. It is indeed a big deal.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Jun 2, 2004)

[quote:141effa063][i:141effa063]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:141effa063]
Hughs says attacking Shepherd:
[quote:141effa063]To speak of a necessity of these good works for our salvation ... is to assign to them that very justifying status as works of the law which Paul has repudiated.[/quote:141effa063][/quote:141effa063]

The &quot;works of the law having a justifying status&quot; that Paul repudiated is the notion that [i:141effa063]our own actual good deeds[/i:141effa063] have a justifying status - that is what he repudiated. He certainly did not repudiate the fact that the works of the law themselves have a justifying status, for that would be denying the covenant of works, and the necessity of Christ's active righteousness being imputed to us. We are saved in two ways through the Cross: Christ's death atoning, and being the propitiation for, our sin; and His active obedience to the law being imputed to our account. The latter of these absolutely shows the justifying status of works of the law - just not our own actual works, but rather Christ's works imputed to us.

[quote:141effa063][i:141effa063]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:141effa063] 
Is it more correct to say that sanctification is the cause of good works and not justification itself; so, what James is really saying is that we must be sanctified, positionally and progressively, before our [i:141effa063]true[/i:141effa063] faith brings forth its fruit in works, thus making that faith fulfilled? I mean, thats not damaging the fact that justification is not by good works; because sanctification is the cause of good works. Justification itself would still have nothing to do with works, only sanctification...[/quote:141effa063]

I see this as correct.

[quote:141effa063][i:141effa063]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:141effa063]
So, one must have true faith [i:141effa063]and be sanctified[/i:141effa063] by it (or rather, upon it) to be just... right? Sanctification is a seperate act of God. But we need both faith and what comes from faith (really saying that we need 'true' faith). So, one must be justified and sanctified to be justified? [b:141effa063]I assume that James is thinking, &quot;how can you be justified without being sanctified?&quot;[/b:141effa063][/quote:141effa063]

This seems incorrect to me. Really, this paragraph and your previous one seem to be inverses of one another, and I believe that your first paragraph describes the relation between justification and sanctification correctly, whereas this one does not. If we are to preserve Sola Fide, we must hold that justification itself has nothing to do with our own works. Rather, it has [i:141effa063]only[/i:141effa063] to do with genuine, saving faith. However, true saving faith will always produce good works in turn, by beginning the process of sanctification. When we place faith in Christ, we are united to Him through His atonement for our sins and His active righteousness imputed to us, at which time we also begin to be united to Him in our actual attitudes and deeds, hence the start of sanctification, which is what actually produces the good works. It is a very fine line, but in summary we do not actually need sanctification to be just, but once we are truly just, sanctification will [i:141effa063]always[/i:141effa063] subsequently follow.

In Christ,

Chris

[Edited on 6-3-2004 by Me Died Blue]


----------



## rembrandt (Jun 2, 2004)

Thanks Fred and Chris!!

This makes perfect sence:
[quote:8c6ce3db20]faith --&gt; justification + good works[/quote:8c6ce3db20]

This makes perfect sence:
[quote:8c6ce3db20]It is a very fine line, but in summary we do not actually need sanctification to be just, but once we are truly just, sanctification will [i:8c6ce3db20]always[/i:8c6ce3db20] subsequently follow.[/quote:8c6ce3db20] 

Paul


----------

