# doers of the law will be justified



## ijunn (May 13, 2014)

Still having a hard time to get arround bible texts that speak of justification according to works. Were the reformers right that the law demands perfection? Paul in Romans 2 does not seem hypotetical when he says that there are in fact gentiles who are doers of the Law (makes me think of cornelius). That doers of the Law will be justified seems in perfect line with bible texts that speak of the final judgment according to works. How does one know that he has done the law enough and have enough works. All I have when I read the bible, and verses like: they who have done good, and who have been this and that etc. all seem to point me to the fact that it is not faith alone. I guess I am becoming kinda tiring for some people, but I am really close to stop caring anymore :S. I read the testimony of Chris Rosebrough, and it sounds like he had the same struggle as I have. Lutheran theology sounds freeing when it speaks of Law and Gospel, yet I can't help but noticing that such interpretations seem kinda forced on texts that are clear of themselves. I find plenty of examples of people who are not perfect (in the sense that they try to obey Gods law as much as possible) who are being rendered as doers of the Law (David, Zacharia, Elizabeth, etc.)Help plz.


----------



## Scott1 (May 13, 2014)

We are saved by faith (that God gives the elect) in Christ's perfect righteousness alone.

We are saved by faith alone, but by a faith that never is alone.



> Westminster Confession of Faith
> 
> Chapter XIX
> Of the Law of God
> ...


----------



## ijunn (May 13, 2014)

I know that, yet that is not an answer to the contradictions that I now see in Scripture. This is kinda the same thing my pastor and friends say, but it doesn't solve my personal problem I have with certain bible verses.


----------



## kodos (May 13, 2014)

You are indeed justified by works. It is impossible to be reconciled to God without a perfect record of obedience. This is in fact what the Bible teaches.

It is also impossible for someone born of _ordinary _generation from Adam to be reconciled to God in such a way, since all have sinned.

What then?

You must have Christ's record of perfect obedience imputed to you, received by faith alone. You will have the alien righteousness of Christ, if you are found in Him. See what the Bible says here about the righteousness of Christ given to us.
2 Cor 5:21 - For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that *we might become the righteousness of God in Him.*
1 Cor 1:30 - But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—*and righteousness and sanctification* and redemption

See, Christ becomes our righteousness. As Machen famously said as he died, "I am so thankful for the active obedience of Christ, no hope without it". This is something that many Protestants have forgotten since the time of the Reformation, but that the Reformed have remembered. It is not just the atonement that is Christ's work, it is also His active obedience so that our unrighteous record becomes His, but His perfect righteousness can become ours.

It is Jesus' record that will be accepted on your behalf before God. Not your own, which is imperfect and stained throughout with sin. 

Because, outside of Jesus, this is what the law does:

Romans 3:19-20
19*Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and *all the world may become guilty before God*. 20*Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, *for by the law is the knowledge of sin*.

Those who are regenerate however, will desire to follow God's law - though imperfectly at all times (see: Romans 7). The heart of faith desires to do good deeds. It is a dead "faith" that does not desire to do good works. See the promise in Ezekiel of what regeneration and having the Spirit of God within you will result in, yet note that it comes _after_ you have been cleansed by God. One cannot get this backwards, and _do_ the law so that God gives you His Spirit. Therefore, one becomes a _doer_ of the law after regeneration, and justification.

Ezk 36:
25*Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26**I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you*; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27**I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them*.

But it is never work (doing the law) that will _justify _you before God. Christ's righteousness imputed to you is required to justify you, which you receive by faith.

Westminster Shorter Catechism Q.33 (What is Justification?):
Justification is an act of God’ s free grace, wherein he pardoneth all our sins, (Rom. 3:24–25, Rom. 4:6–8) and accepteth us as righteous in his sight, (2 Cor. 5:19,21) *only for the righteousness of Christ imputed to us,* (Rom. 5:17–19) *and received by faith alone*. (Gal. 2:16, Phil. 3:9)

I hope this proves to be useful to you brother. Do not be afraid of questions, do not get tired of them. There are good answers to the questions you pose. Sometimes it is also useful to probe the question from a different perspective, and ask, "What if I need to be righteous by following the law?" What then? Work out _those _conclusions - and like Luther, you will run straight into the arms of Christ, seeking _His_ righteousness, after you have found deep despair in your inability to keep the law.


----------



## Gforce9 (May 13, 2014)

kodos said:


> You are indeed justified by works. It is impossible to be reconciled to God without a perfect record of obedience. This is in fact what the Bible teaches.
> 
> It is also impossible for someone born of _ordinary _generation from Adam to be reconciled to God in such a way, since all have sinned.
> 
> ...



Well stated, Rom! Ian, we will stand before God and that, under the absolute standard of pure perfection. No human has any chance whatsoever of being called "just" under those circumstances.....on his own. For the Christian, however, he/she stands cloaked in the perfect righteousness of the Savior. What the first Adam failed to do in keeping every jot and tittle of the holy Law of God, the second Adam did in all perfection. That is the perfection; the only perfection in which one could stand.

As for contradictions in Scripture, I would only say a better and correct way to state your frustration is _there is a tough issue I can't seem to resolve_. There is no contradiction in Scripture, only serious flaws with it's readers, including me


----------



## Abeard (May 13, 2014)

When we talk about obedience it always comes down to the heart. When gentiles obey the Law are they doing it for the love of God?

My understanding of justification by works is that our works are our witness to our new birth. Some may have an abundance of good works and some may have few.


----------



## ijunn (May 13, 2014)

I wish I could correspond with any of you guys. I am currently going through the book of romans, which once was a resting place for me, but now raises a lot of questions and make me doubt the reformed interpretation. Thanks for all the reply's btw


----------



## kodos (May 13, 2014)

If you ever want to chat 1:1, I know many pastors or elders on this board would be willing to spend time with you. If you ever wanted to chat with me, PM me - I am available via Skype if you find the forum format too confining.

Otherwise, please just list out the verses / passages you are having issues with - and then we can go from there. There are many good wise folks on the PuritanBoard who would love to help you. The great thing about this forum is that your struggles may be the same as someone else on the internet who may not feel like they can ask this question. But they get to benefit from your questions, and the responses given here.

Another point to consider. As Calvinists, the Reformed have seen the eternal decree of God as not only involving justification, but also good works:

*Ephesians 2:10* - For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.


----------



## py3ak (May 13, 2014)

If Romans is troubling, my quick suggestion is to take it as a whole. It's a longish letter, and very rich, so there's a real pressure to dig into the details. That's clearly a good thing to do; but sometimes people get so far into the details of a text that it is possible to forget the broader context of the epistle as a whole. Thus Romans 2:5-16 _taken in isolation_ might seem to point to the possibility of being justified by works; but how does that fit with Romans 3 and Romans 11, about the universality of sin? How does it fit with Romans 4 and 5, about justification by faith through the work of Christ? How does it fit with Romans 6 and 7 about being free from the law? How does it fit in with Romans 10 about submitting to the righteousness of God, Christ being the end of the law, and salvation coming through calling on the name of the Lord?
There is a reason Paul didn't end his letter in chapter 2. It is not obscuring the meaning of a clear text to insist that it be read _as part of the larger argument_. In my own reading and wondering, I have noticed that many interpretations of Paul, including many of my own thoughts, wind up being unsustainable when I read a text against its larger background.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 13, 2014)

I recently took time on a Sunday morning to preach an evangelistic message (at least, that was the intent), the text for which was Rom.2:1-13. The final v13 contains the sobering statement: that [only] the doers of the law will be justified. Hearers [only] cannot be justified.

Now the purpose of Rom.1:18-3:20 is to ensure that not one living soul escapes from the knowledge that he is damned for his failure to obey God. The first part of Rom.2 is directed against the (Gentile) moralist. He thinks he is not the subject of Paul's diatribe against the wickedness of the generality of the Gentiles, found in ch.1. Paul will not allow the "judge" of others (v1) to escape condemnation himself.

In my sermon, I used the example of the man who travels in his vehicle through a whole town from end to end; being forced to stop at nine out of ten stoplights. He doesn't catch a single break. And with one intersection and traffic control to negotiate, he again(!) sees that he will not have permission to continue without a long pause. So, he accelerates and goes through the intersection in defiance of the "halt" signal. The enforcement official sees the violation, and commands a stop to the violator, thus to demerit his infraction of the law.

What sort of response does the law have to the excuse, _"I stopped at 90% of the lights! Why doesn't that count for something?"_
"Sorry, pal. The law doesn't grant you credit for doing one's obligation, so that on occasion when you do as you please, you get a freebee."
He has become a mere "hearer" of the law, rather than a doer. And now he must pay the price for his (one) failure to be a doer, always.

In point of fact, no one is even close to being as good as all that. We've only stopped at the light when it was convenient, we've pushed the limits whenever we thought it would be to our advantage, and we've resented every light--the one's we've stopped for, and the many that we've run. When has our obedience even once measured up? Or do some think God sees in us "congruent merit" (the Romanist doctrine), by which our meager and sin-tainted good-deeds are treated as though they were "good enough," assuming they advance to a different threshold, a lowered standard? Actually, Rome's estimate of human righteousness is the real "legal fiction."

We should at v13 come to the horrifying realization that this truism is a devastating and comprehensive condemnation. There is a "hypothetical" quality to it; however, the focus of what Paul says is: 1st) on the fact that every reader falls into the "hearer only" category; along with 2nd) a bit of wistful wondering whether there could be anyone of the second kind, an obedient man.

My evangelistic point was that _everyone desperately needs the "doing" of the law that he has failed to accomplish; and therefore God, in order to save men, has provided the perfect "law-doing" of another, to be credited to them who believe they need it, and for whom nothing else will do. *And this provision is Christ*. In Christ, the mere hearers are reckoned to be doers; they are found in him, not having a righteousness that is their own, which is from the law, but that righteousness that is through faith in Christ_ (Php.3:9; cf. Rom.3:28; 10:3-4).


----------



## Scott1 (May 13, 2014)

ijunn said:


> I know that, yet that is not an answer to the contradictions that I now see in Scripture. This is kinda the same thing my pastor and friends say, but it doesn't solve my personal problem I have with certain bible verses.



Be careful to say "apparent" contradictions- Scripture does not contradict itself. That is, the Holy Spirit, speaking in Scripture is not contradictory. You may not understand it, or be willing to accept its truth, but Scripture is not inconsistent.

Also, you may find helpful the Scripture proofs for Westminster Chapter XIX, an excellent study of the systematic theology of justification by faith in Christ's Righteousness alone and the third use of the law which sweetly complies with it.


----------



## jwithnell (May 13, 2014)

> I am currently going through the book of romans, which once was a resting place for me, but now raises a lot of questions and make me doubt the reformed interpretation.


The word of God is vast. What might seem an ample understanding can become insufficient as we grow in our understanding of the scripture as a whole. Keep reading, studying, and asking the Spirit to illuminate it for you. As long as you are trying to interpret scripture with scripture and are humbly dependent on God to teach you, don't worry about the questions it might raise and whether or not you've had it "right" in the past.


----------



## Gesetveemet (May 13, 2014)

Scott1 said:


> We are saved by faith (that God gives the elect) in Christ's perfect righteousness alone.
> We are saved by faith alone, but by a faith that never is alone.



I understand that it is God who gives us faith but is the wording "we are saved by faith" correct? Shouldn't there be a distinction of perhaps by grace through faith?


----------



## Scott1 (May 13, 2014)

Gesetveemet said:


> Scott1 said:
> 
> 
> > We are saved by faith (that God gives the elect) in Christ's perfect righteousness alone.
> ...



Yes,
It's better to say we are saved by grace, through faith (in Christ's righteousness) alone.

Faith is the vehicle; it is Christ's actual righteousness, his perfect life and perfect death that alone do save us and pay the penalty for our sin.

And God gives us even the saving faith to believe that, and rest in it.

In a sense, we must be very careful to be clear, but in a sense, we are saved by works....
Christ's works alone which are, alone, sufficient to satisfy God's holy standard and His sacrifice to pay the penalty for our sin.

There is no contradiction in that, and every Christian must know this clearly.


----------



## ijunn (May 14, 2014)

Okay, so there are no contradictions, then perhaps I see contradictions between the reformed creeds and the Bible. Example: Acts chapter 10 clearly states that Cornelius was acceptable to God because he did what was right (he worked righteousness). Now the text does not indicate that Cornelius was sinless and other parts of Scripture say that all men are sinners. So I conclude that he did not fullfill the law perfectly, but he did give to the poor etc. (love fullfills the law). As I see it, the text clearly teaches that Cornelius was right with God because of his behaviour. Now, what does Cornelius have that I don't have? All I see in Scripture are these super saints. So I start doubting, either the creeds are wrong, or many people are truly not born again because they aren't super saints.


----------



## py3ak (May 14, 2014)

Ian, grave doubts and deep issues are usually better addressed in person than online. Have you discussed these matters with your pastor or elders? 

As for Acts 10, it has to be read for what it is. Cornelius is a person of upright character, one who has come to believe in the OT scriptures, but has not gone the length of circumcision, etc. And he is a Gentile. Peter is sent to preach to him for at least two reasons. One is that Cornelius needs to know that Jesus of Nazareth is the fulfilment of the OT he has been drawn to. The other is that Peter needs to know that the gospel is for all people, not just for the Jews.
The point, then, is not that Cornelius earned God's favor by what he did. The descriptions of vv.2,35 are not about how people are reconciled to God: that is found in v.43 and in 11:18, the reflection upon what happened there.
Exposure to the OT Scriptures and hearing something about Jesus was used to stir Cornelius up to seriousness in seeking God. Peter was sent in answer to that prayer. It is still true that those who seek will find, and the example of Cornelius could be inexactly paralleled by instances where someone hears something of the gospel and prays for someone to be sent to explain things more fully. 
Cornelius was not justified by obeying the law; his sins were remitted through Christ.


----------



## Scott1 (May 14, 2014)

ijunn said:


> Okay, so there are no contradictions, then perhaps I see contradictions between the reformed creeds and the Bible. Example: Acts chapter 10 clearly states that Cornelius was acceptable to God because he did what was right (he worked righteousness). Now the text does not indicate that Cornelius was sinless and other parts of Scripture say that all men are sinners. So I conclude that he did not fullfill the law perfectly, but he did give to the poor etc. (love fullfills the law). As I see it, the text clearly teaches that Cornelius was right with God because of his behaviour. Now, what does Cornelius have that I don't have? All I see in Scripture are these super saints. So I start doubting, either the creeds are wrong, or many people are truly not born again because they aren't super saints.



Ian,
After reading Acts 10, 
it does not say Cornelius was saved because of his "right" works. You are reading that in.

Your presupposition or conclusion is out of the context of both the chapter and the whole of Scripture. Remember, context is essential in understanding Bible passages. That's why a systematic theology like the Westminster Standards summarizes is so helpful.

It describes _narrative_ here that Cornelius had a (good) reputation for seeking and obeying God, not _didache_ (doctrine) that he (unique in the whole of Scripture by your presupposition) was saved by his own works.

He is commended for his good works, recognized for them as a visible outward pattern, but not saved by them.

Keep in mind the Scripture would tell us by principle that _all_ have sinned (Romans 3:23). It does not say all except Cornelius....


----------



## Scott1 (May 14, 2014)

> Acts 10
> 
> English Standard Version (ESV)
> Peter and Cornelius
> ...


*.*


----------



## kodos (May 14, 2014)

The logic of the Apostle Paul is particularly helpful here in Galatians 3:21 - "I do not set aside the grace of God; for *if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain*.”

If one can be righteous through their good deeds (such as you posit Cornelius might have been), then why Jesus Christ? What purpose does He serve? What purpose does His death, and resurrection serve then? I like the entire passage, some of it quoted below: 

15*We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, 16*knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law *but by faith in Jesus Christ*, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, *that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified*.
17*“But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! 18*For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19*For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God. 20*I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but *Christ lives in me*; and the life which I now live in the flesh *I live by faith in the Son of God*, *who loved me and gave Himself for me*. 21*I do not set aside the grace of God; *for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain*.”


----------



## ijunn (May 14, 2014)

kodos said:


> The logic of the Apostle Paul is particularly helpful here in Galatians 3:21 - "I do not set aside the grace of God; for *if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain*.”
> 
> If one can be righteous through their good deeds (such as you posit Cornelius might have been), then why Jesus Christ? What purpose does He serve? What purpose does His death, and resurrection serve then? I like the entire passage, some of it quoted below:
> 
> ...



Then why Jesus Christ? Indeed, well thats what I don't understand. All the previous posts have not adressed the fact that Peter said to Cornelius that those who fear God and do good (do righteousness) are acceptable to God. So, the negative side of that is that those who do not fear God (and Paul says that no one fears God), and that those who do not do good (and Paul says that none do good), are not acceptable to God. Yet the Scripture says that Cornelius was told to get Peter to preach the Gospel to him and his Household so that they might be saved. So, why? What about the sinners who are not acceptable because they don't fear God and don't do good, is there partiality with God all along? Do such sinners have to reform their lives in order to be saved? And I know al lot of Christians, and I would like to include myself, who can hardly be called fearers of God and doers of good, yet they believe and try (myself included). So there must be some level, or some measure by which we must be able to conclude, this one REALLY believes, because he fears God enough and does enough good. This is what I see in a lot of radical lordship salvation camps where I used to come from. They just don't want you to be sure you are saved.

Someone asked a question if I have discussed this with my pastor and/or elders. I have, yet the answer is unsatisfying. "The bible teaches we are saved by grace through faith". Okay.. so how do I know I have true faith? Well, they say, you need to look at your works and your performance. Sanctification is the fruit of justification. Okay, soooo how do I know I have enough sanctification to conclude that my faith is real? Or what if I still have particular sins. Well, they say, then you might not truly believe. 



Do you see where this is going? It's a never ending circle.


----------



## a mere housewife (May 14, 2014)

I'm not qualified to teach or debate these issues, just a very clear text and a reflection on my own experience:

'. . . he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.' Titus 3:5-7

In context it is very clear what kind of works were being done before the goodness of God appeared, and what we are to devote ourselves to after this free grace makes us heirs according to hope. 

I have never once found it comforting to examine my works in a state of doubt. I go straight to Christ who promised that those who come to Him, He will in no wise, not for any reason, cast out. I must also pray that the Holy Spirit will enlighten me and help me before I read my bible, or I tend to wrest it to my own frame of doubt and not to see and rest in Christ.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 14, 2014)

Ian,
There are people--and even some pastors--who _very foolishly_ advise their hearers to look to themselves and their performance to obtain a measure of assurance that they are "making it," that they are saved.

But this is damaging counsel. It is possible for practically anyone to take some encouragement from his deeds, and comfort himself that it looks to him like spiritual life and growth. And because anyone *can* do it, and there's no objective measure of the "quality" of the work, such a measure is unreliable and formally and practically useless.

-- Person One has lived as a Christian for, say, 20 years, and thinks he has quantified, objective measures of his spiritual "improvement" over that time. He is pretty sure he can tell that he is at least 51% better than he was. He's a very disciplined person, and tithes of his money and his time to charitable causes and to his church.

-- Person Two has lived as a Christian for, say, 30 years, and seriously wonders if he has made any measurable "progress" spiritually in all that time. His prayer life has gone up and down. He thinks he has more self-control in one area, but less in another. He loves his three children more, but his wife less. He's more aware of his sin than he's ever been.​
Which one of these men is more assured of his place in the kingdom of heaven? Just based on the information above, there is NO POSSIBLE way to tell. They can't tell themselves, nor can others tell. These descriptions might even be the same man, ten years apart!

The way to assurance is to look _*away*_ from yourself. Like Peter who obeyed the summons of Christ to walk on the waves with him, we are fine when we keep our eyes on Jesus, not on our own feet (natural ability) or on the winds and waves (earthly circumstances). Peter's confidence could NEVER be in his own act of walking. Each step further couldn't, shouldn't, wouldn't make him more confident in himself. Only looking to Jesus kept him upright.

Scripture tells us that believers really do grow in grace. The Spirit of Christ who dwells in his people is the Spirit of obedience (inverse Eph.2:2), the Spirit who cries out "Abba, Father," Gal.4:6. These are statements by God that believers should embrace. Children, who only see life stretching out interminably in front of them may think they will never grow up; they cannot tell from day to day that they have advanced at all. But their parents confidently tell them, "O, you certainly will grow up." And the children should believe them.

I just preached through 1Cor.8. One of the problems in Corinth was spiritual pride: the confidence folks had in their spiritual attainments in knowledge, deeds, and giftedness. Paul describes two parallel spiritual ideals of the Christian life, knowledge and love. Knowledge without love is puffed up, empty and vain. Love is knowledge in action. Without knowledge, love is useless activity without any direction. So each ideal is dependent on the other.

Paul points out, v2, that no one yet knows anything spiritually as he ought, not even the person who knows the most. So, it is impossible to gauge one's spirituality by testing one's knowledge; because if we always ought to be better knowers than we are, then we don't know "enough" to escape blame.

Well, what about the other ideal? What about love? Can I measure my spirituality--my knowledge of God--by how much love I show? After all, love is the working out of knowledge, the building up of good, of others... What does the Apostle say? Does v3 read, "If you love God (a little/a lot), then clearly you know God (a little/a lot)?"

No, v3 surprises the reader by subverting "my love" as an index to "my knowledge" of God, as an index to "my spirituality." A new believer who has very little knowledge may show forth his (new) love for God in ways that put the long-term believer, who may know much more, in the shade (for a variety of reasons). Rather, v3 reads, "If anyone [thinks he] loves God, [let him take comfort only in this:] that he is KNOWN BY God." Let that Christian remember this: that "we love him because he first loved us," 1Jn.4:19.

Do you think you love God? Good, but don't take comfort in such feelings or displays. Think only of how whatever love is there is purely the product of a prior divine act of love toward you.

How do you know you have faith? How do you know you are alive, bodily? Is it because you measure your breaths? Is it because you are constantly taking your pulse? Is it because you ran to the store this morning? What if you are a brain in a vat? Radical skepticism can undermine every confidence, if you give it free reign.

How do you know if you have faith? Do you believe the Word of God, or don't you? Do you know it, accept it as true, and rest in it? That's faith.


----------



## Scott1 (May 14, 2014)

Comments below.



ijunn said:


> Then why Jesus Christ?
> 
> Because Christ alone lived a perfect, sinless life and therefore was able to pay in full the penalty for your sins.
> 
> ...


----------



## Moosepig (May 14, 2014)

Ian, my brother,

Your post has led me to earnest prayer for you. This is a very important issue and one you are clearly struggling greatly with. I would encourage you to take this to the Lord in prayer as well. Ask him to reveal his truth to you. Ask him to show you how salvation works. Ask him how you can find and rest in the assurance of eternal life.

You have come to a good place. You are grappling with the deep things of the center of the Christian faith and have come to a board where many people are well versed in these things and able to help you. Take a deep breath. Exhale. Sigh in relief. You have the Scriptures. You have many here to help you think through them. Don't become anxious or frantic or hopeless.

You seem to be troubled by two main issues: 1) How is one truly saved, and are works a part of that? and 2) How can one have assurance of one's salvation?

1)
Scripture makes it clear that salvation comes by faith alone, apart from works.

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. Ephesians 2:8-10
We are saved by faith. Not as a result of works. It is a free gift from God. Now, then in verse 10, it becomes clear that we were saved by God so that we then could walk in good works. But do not confuse the order. Dead in sins -> saved by grace -> called to walk in good works. 

Another passage:
Philippians 3:4-9
Though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith.

Paul's righteousness from God did not come from the law. He considers any gain from the law as worthless. Paul's righteousness came from faith in Christ.

You then say, "But then what about this verse or that passage?" Good questions. Keep asking them. But in the meantime, hold fast to the simple and plain truths we see here in these passages. Salvation and eternal life come from Jesus' death in your place. 

2) You then ask, "So how can I know that I am saved?"
Faith, when in other terms, can be called dependence. Are you depending upon the sacrifice of Jesus Christ in your place for the forgiveness of your sins? Are you depending solely on what Jesus did for you for eternal life? If you stood before God and he asked you, "Why should I let you into heaven?" would you reply, "Not because of any good in me, but because my Savior Jesus died on the cross, taking my sin and my punishment, and offered me forgiveness if I place my faith in him. And so I trusted in him. I believed in him and upon his actions and his works do I base my hope for eternal life." If so, then trouble yourself not with questions of, "How sanctified? What exactly should I be seeing?" Given where you are at right now, these are not helpful questions. 

Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” John 6:28-29 Take comfort in these truths Ian. If you believe these things then rest knowing you are saved.

And what comfort there is friend! I have hope for you that in the next few hours or perhaps days as you continue to bring your questions to this board that soon the simple truths of the gospel will wrap themselves around your heart as a blanket of joyful assurance. Imagine that Ian! You may soon find in yourself a deep peace about your eternal state that will never end. You may just be a few hours away from knowing resolutely that Jesus has *claimed* you as his, never to fear hell or damnation again. This is what he offers to each of us and what he is offering to you now. Trust in Jesus and his atonement, and then be free from the anxieties you are now plagued by! You will then be able to rest, knowing that you are *eternally, totally* safe from the wrath of God.


----------



## Peairtach (May 14, 2014)

When the Bible speaks about people like Noah being "perfect", and David being "a man after God's own heart", it is speaking about the sincere yet imperfect sanctification and good works that do not justify, but are accepted by God in Christ.

Only Christ's works justify the sinner by faith alone.

See e.g. John Ball on "The Covenant of Grace". I'll have some quotes from John Ball's treatise, later.


----------



## ijunn (May 15, 2014)

Peairtach said:


> When the Bible speaks about people like Noah being "perfect", and David being "a man after God's own heart", it is speaking about the sincere yet imperfect sanctification and good works that do not justify, but are accepted by God in Christ.
> 
> Only Christ's works justify the sinner by faith alone.
> 
> See e.g. John Ball on "The Covenant of Grace". I'll have some quotes from John Ball's treatise, later.



How do you know your sanctification and good works are sincere?


----------



## ijunn (May 15, 2014)

Thank you all btw, for all the reply's. I will bring it all in prayer and take it with me in my further studies.


----------



## ijunn (May 15, 2014)

Scott1 said:


> Comments below.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Indeed, well thats what I don't understand. All the previous posts have not adressed the fact that Peter said to Cornelius that those who fear God and do good (do righteousness) are acceptable to God. 

Again,
you are reading your own conclusion based on your own presupposition in. The text, in context does not say that.





"Then Peter began to speak: "I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism but *accepts* from every nation* the one who fears him and does what is right.*"

In the preceding verses you see why Peter said this to and about Cornelius. He was known to do righteousness. The point that Peter is making I believe, is that allthough Cornelius is a gentile, he proves that gentiles can be accepted by God (and not just jews) if they fear Him en do what is right. I don't know how you go around that. Now I also read that Cornelius wasn't saved. So that clears some things up, but I spoke a roman catholic who used these verses to show that Cornelius needed forgiveness of past sins, but that his works are also important to keep him in the covenant with God. I believe this is also wat the New Perspective on Paul preachers teach.


----------



## Peairtach (May 15, 2014)

ijunn said:


> Peairtach said:
> 
> 
> > When the Bible speaks about people like Noah being "perfect", and David being "a man after God's own heart", it is speaking about the sincere yet imperfect sanctification and good works that do not justify, but are accepted by God in Christ.
> ...



If you're wrestling with assurance of faith, see the relevant threads on the PB. 

You'll never be perfectly righteous in this life, so you can only look to Christ for justification.

Sent from my HTC Wildfire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Scott1 (May 15, 2014)

ijunn said:


> Indeed, well thats what I don't understand. All the previous posts have not adressed the fact that Peter said to Cornelius that those who fear God and do good (do righteousness) are acceptable to God.
> 
> Again,
> you are reading your own conclusion based on your own presupposition in. The text, in context does not say that.



Ian,
You are not understanding the posts. Are you reading them?

You are presupposing that a phrase (in the ESV) "acceptable go God" means that God saves sinners based on their own works. As has been pointed out, read the context of Acts 10, it does not mean what you presume there, let alone within the context of the whole of Scripture.

Doing some, many or most things "righteously" does NOT mean one is justified by them.

What is your definition of justification?

You seem to be presuming that a few works or works generally somehow override any and all sin one has committed. The Bible does not teach that.

Acts 10 does not teach that about Cornelius.


----------



## ijunn (May 15, 2014)

Well, I am sorry that I don't see the context as you see it, and I am sorry that it makes you think that that's a proof that I am not reading the posts. Not sure how you go there anyway.. but never mind. I am having a hard to time to read the Bible in it's context, cause what is the right context and what is the right interpretation. To be quite honest, the context concerning salvation in the reformed sense is starting to make lesser and lesser sense. All the texts that speak of the things that are neccesary next to faith to be saved, almost outweigh the faith alone texts. I understand that the Bible speaks that faith alone is sufficient to be justified, but there is also such a thing as future justification, at the final judgment. I just don't see how faith alone fits in those texts, it's all about works, and Christ' work is not even mentioned in those texts.


----------



## a mere housewife (May 15, 2014)

Ian, others are more qualified to deal with your doubts that Christ is truly the end of the law for righteousness. A possible reading of the Acts passage is that Peter is not in fact, making a specific comment on Cornelius'.life, any more than his previous statement that he has been taught not to call any man common or unclean is specific to Cornelius and him alone. Peter is using the shorthand found throughout the OT for the what God requires of man -- a shorthand which was part of the sacrificial system and which was always meant to point people to their need of the one who would come and fulfill all those shadowy types. He then goes on as the OT leads to the New, to speak of Christ more directly.


----------



## Scott1 (May 15, 2014)

ijunn said:


> but there is also such a thing as future justification



What do you mean by that?


----------



## Toasty (May 15, 2014)

ijunn said:


> Still having a hard time to get arround bible texts that speak of justification according to works. Were the reformers right that the law demands perfection? Paul in Romans 2 does not seem hypotetical when he says that there are in fact gentiles who are doers of the Law (makes me think of cornelius). That doers of the Law will be justified seems in perfect line with bible texts that speak of the final judgment according to works. How does one know that he has done the law enough and have enough works. All I have when I read the bible, and verses like: they who have done good, and who have been this and that etc. all seem to point me to the fact that it is not faith alone. I guess I am becoming kinda tiring for some people, but I am really close to stop caring anymore :S. I read the testimony of Chris Rosebrough, and it sounds like he had the same struggle as I have. Lutheran theology sounds freeing when it speaks of Law and Gospel, yet I can't help but noticing that such interpretations seem kinda forced on texts that are clear of themselves. I find plenty of examples of people who are not perfect (in the sense that they try to obey Gods law as much as possible) who are being rendered as doers of the Law (David, Zacharia, Elizabeth, etc.)Help plz.



Romans 2:13 is speaking hypothetically. Paul is not contradicting himself in the Book of Romans. In later chapters, Paul goes on to teach that none are righteous and that we are justified by faith alone. If a person wants to be justified by keeping God's law, then he would have to keep it perfectly. He would have to be perfect. However, we cannot keep God's law perfectly. Romans 3:10 says that none are righteous. Sinners do not have their own righteousness. Sinners cannot keep God's law perfectly. Since sinners cannot keep God's law perfectly, sinners are justified by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 15, 2014)

If we want to know whence came the spiritual impulses within Cornelius to, v2, "fear God," "give alms generously," and "pray to God always," it will require the _anthropology and soteriology_--the doctrines of man and salvation--which is taught by the rest of Scripture.

It is a false inference, a faulty anthropology, to begin this chapter by assuming that Cornelius had made initiative toward God, to which God reacted. Instead, we rightly begin by recognizing that God _reacts_ (so to speak) to his own prior work in Cornelius and his household.

The angel in the vision engages Cornelius at the level of his human experience--not by teaching him about the long trail of Providence that had finally brought him to live as a "godfearer' beside his Jewish neighbors--but simply by stating, v4 & v31, that his "prayers and alms" had been received by God.

At the level of Cornelius' experience, God answers his devotion by giving him instruction to summon a particular minister (Peter) for further guidance. At the level of eternal purpose, God is fulfilling his own decree of election that encompasses all the means foreordained to bring the gospel of Cornelius' salvation to him at the appointed time.

v22 contains the judgment of men (which is again at the level of human perception) concerning the reputation of Cornelius. In their experience, a devout Jew (which they presume Peter to be) would seldom risk ceremonial defilement by going into the uncleanness of a Gentile dwelling (cf. v28, also Jn.18:28). They make their request for Peter's presence using the best human and divine inducements they know.

So, do vv34-35--which begins a record (epitome) of Peter's message that day--mean to teach that here and there in the world, there are people who prepare _themselves_ somehow for God to act? V35 considered simply as a statement, connected with v34, doesn't actually say a single thing about *prior conditions* at all, but is an observation that God is not only the Propitiator of Jews (marked by devotion), but the Propitiator of every nation.

How does it come about that anyone, of any nation, fears God and works righteousness, in any degree? Peter doesn't refer to divine causation, _but not mentioning it doesn't mean he doesn't believe it is so, and that it is necessary._


People have a tendency to read-between-the-lines, especially when handling narrative texts. There is actually warrant for that, to some extent; because we ought to be reading narrative text _bearing in mind the beliefs of the narrative participants, as well as that of the narrator._ Narrative tells a story, and in the telling not every fact can be related--selection is necessary. But there is a whole network of beliefs that undergird the presentation.

The big problem in reading-between-the-lines is when it is done not with a biblical-theology informing "the gaps," but with *personal experience* taking that role. If the reader assumes at the outset that Peter's belief is (even before he opens his mouth in v34): Cornelius is already "accepted by God" to some degree on account of his works; then the reader will read the words of v35 a certain way.

But is that assumption _in keeping_ with a biblically complete and accurate anthropology and soteriology? I don't think so. There is a better way to read the text as given, with a better set of assumptions behind the reading filling in the gaps.

The fuzzy nature of interpolation is a major reason why we do not typically ground doctrine in narrative texts. It's true: Peter is engaged here in _didactic_ presentation. But that only underscores the importance of sticking _precisely_ to the propositions he makes (and limiting our assumptions as to what may be implied); and most importantly to observe that the _precise teaching purpose_ of the full speech comes out in vv36-43, not in the introductory and slightly biographical expressions of vv34-35.

The purpose of vv34-35 is to declare the opening of the divine call of grace to the Gentiles. It's purpose is not to teach preparationist doctrine, or that the purpose of evangelism is to go and find the god-fearers and do-gooders of the world, in order to get the gospel to the people who have prepared themselves. Yes, it's possible to read the text that way, but not consistently with the rest of Scripture.

Who are the godfearing and righteous people in God's sight (not in their own sight, or other men's sight)? They are believers in Christ. Any man who hearing the gospel rejects it, though he have a wonderful reputation with men, he is not godfearing and righteous in the sight of God. Apart from the grace of God, men are dead in trespasses and sins, and cannot please God. No man's prayer to God is due an answer, apart from the prior promise of God. All genuine seeking of God is prompted by divine initiative.

Such is Peter's biblical theology, in the light of which everything he says should be understood.


----------



## MW (May 15, 2014)

Prudent advice from John Owen might help orientate the reader of Scripture to see it in its pristine light:

Let the experience of them that do believe be inquired into; for their consciences are continually exercised herein. What is it that they betake themselves unto, what is it that they plead with God for the continuance of the pardon of their sins, and the acceptance of their persons before him? Is it any thing but sovereign grace and mercy, through the blood of Christ? Are not all the arguments which they plead unto this end taken from the topics of the name of God, his mercy, grace, faithfulness, tender compassion, covenant, and promises, — all manifested and exercised in and through the Lord Christ and his mediation alone? Do they not herein place their only trust and confidence, for this end, that their sins may be pardoned, and their persons, though every way unworthy in themselves, be accepted with God? Doth any other thought enter into their hearts? Do they plead their own righteousness, obedience, and duties to this purpose? Do they leave the prayer of the publican, and betake themselves unto that of the Pharisee? And is it not of faith alone? which is that grace whereby they apply themselves unto the mercy or grace of God through the mediation of Christ. It is true that faith herein worketh and acteth itself in and by godly sorrow, repentance, humiliation, self-judging and abhorrency, fervency in prayer and supplications, with an humble waiting for an answer of peace from God, with engagements unto renewed obedience: but it is faith alone that makes applications unto grace in the blood of Christ for the continuation of our justified estate, expressing itself in those other ways and effects mentioned; from none of which a believing soul doth expect the mercy aimed at.


----------



## ijunn (May 23, 2014)

Thank you all, for all reply's


----------



## pem (May 31, 2014)

ijunn said:


> Thank you all, for all reply's


Hi Ian - i see you are struggling with this issue. It is both difficult and simple at the same time and i understand how you feel (been there, done it , got the tea shirt etc etc ) I have recently purchased ; "Saved by grace ;The Holy Spirit's work in Calling and Regeneration " by Herman Bavnick (1854-1921) of the Reformed church in Netherlands. As you are in Holland its quite appropriate for you . The book discusses Eternal Justification and explains all views of this doctrine and many others - both pro and con . It will help you (i am half way through it and its fantastic). The Dutch Theologians look at this topic with ingrained "european" culture and insight which is of a different frame than that of Britain or America and provides some "new" insights. The book was only published in English for the first time last year but it was originally published in Dutch in 1903 . It costs around £6 English pounds on amazon and worth every penny . Meanwhile to whet your appetite please ponder on Jeremiah 1:5 and Luke 1:15 (KJV). Happy reading !


----------

