# Motivation for good works



## steadfast7 (Sep 23, 2011)

Doing good works _in order_ to be saved
and,
Doing good work _in order to prove_ you are saved

What's the essential difference that makes our theology something worth dying for, and the other theology worth anathematizing?

Do they have any point at all who say that ultimately, these two motivations are basically the same?


----------



## VictorBravo (Sep 23, 2011)

It boils down to who gets the glory. If you work in order that you can be saved, you've got a lot to boast about.


----------



## jwithnell (Sep 23, 2011)

We do what is right and good because we love our savior and want to become more like Him. You can wrap this in a full-blown discussion of sanctification and the law, but when it comes down to it, this simple explanation is at the heart of our loving obedience to Jesus.


----------



## py3ak (Sep 23, 2011)

How about,

Doing good works because you are saved and have respect for the authority of God, zeal for his glory, love for his law, and compassion for your fellow-men?


----------



## NB3K (Sep 23, 2011)

py3ak said:


> Doing good works because you are saved and have respect for the authority of God, zeal for his glory, love for his law, and compassion for your fellow-men?


----------



## Stargazer65 (Sep 23, 2011)

Dennis,

I'm not completely clear on how the two statements differ as you state them.

When you say "Doing good works in order to prove you are saved" is that the same as saying "good works are a result of salvation"?


----------



## ProtestantBankie (Sep 23, 2011)

Do good works that others may see Christ in you. As you are not the cause of your faith, nor of your good works. But the Grace of God - so determined before the foundation of the world - to reach down and redeem you.

How are you to witness for the Lord Jesus Christ if you do not produce fruit? Ultimatley our motivation for good works is not to be rewarded or to attain glory but to testify as to what Christ did for us and not what we did for ourselves.


----------



## Pergamum (Sep 23, 2011)

Dennis,


I would state a third reason - Doing good out of our *gratefulness* to God for saving us. 

And also a 4th reason, we do good because we are ontologically good (we do good because God has made us good).



I am re-re-re-re-re-re-re-reading William Secker's _Nonsuch Professor_, a most excellent book and here are some select points:



> *EIGHT REASONS WHY A CHRISTIAN SHOULD DO MORE THAN OTHERS:*
> 
> 1. Because more is done FOR him than for others.
> 
> ...






> As the disciples of Christ _are_ more than others - so the disciples of Christ _do_ more than others.







> Now where there is an overabundance of _privilege_ - there should be an overabundance of _practice_.




To whom much is given - of them much shall be required.




> Those should bless most - who are the most blessed.


----------



## seajayrice (Sep 23, 2011)

Maybe 18.3 has some application?

III. This infallible assurance does not so belong to the essence of faith, but that a true believer may wait long, and conflict with many difficulties, before he be partaker of it:[10] yet, being enabled by the Spirit to know the things which are freely given him of God, he may, without extraordinary revelation in the right use of ordinary means, attain thereunto.[11] And therefore it is the duty of every one to give all diligence to make his calling and election sure,[12] that thereby his heart may be enlarged in peace and joy in the Holy Ghost, in love and thankfulness to God, and in strength and cheerfulness in the duties of obedience,[13] the proper fruits of this assurance; so far is it from inclining men to looseness.[14]


----------



## Pergamum (Sep 23, 2011)

Dennis, 

I believe we are to do good IN ORDER to do good. Doing good is a good end in and of itself. Though, God who is rich in mercy also attaches other things as well.


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 23, 2011)

Stargazer65 said:


> Dennis,
> 
> I'm not completely clear on how the two statements differ as you state them.
> 
> When you say "Doing good works in order to prove you are saved" is that the same as saying "good works are a result of salvation"?


The statements do basically boil down our difference with the Roman church. One of the means of "testing yourself to see if you are in the faith" and "working out your salvation" is to do good works, which is the fruit of true faith.

Interestingly, if you really press RC and EO adherents, they will say that it is Christ who empowers and undergirds all prayers to the saints, all sacraments, all decisions of the Pope, etc, and that all glory is ultimately going to him alone. This makes things more complicated for dialogue because it causes some to wonder what the real difference is.


----------



## py3ak (Sep 23, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Stargazer65 said:
> 
> 
> > Dennis,
> ...



I'm not at all sure that this is accurate, Dennis. The fact that good works are evidences of grace does not mean that we do the good works in order to pile up evidence of grace - and at some point that easily crosses the line into having our consciences rest in our good works (or try to, since it's an uncomfortable bed). I think it would be far more accurate to distinguish between working for life and working from life, to acquire grace or as a response to grace. In other words, I think the reason you are having a hard time seeing the genuine difference between the positions is that you aren't representing the Protestant position accurately.


----------



## J. Dean (Sep 23, 2011)

NB3K said:


> py3ak said:
> 
> 
> > Doing good works because you are saved and have respect for the authority of God, zeal for his glory, love for his law, and compassion for your fellow-men?


+10

To use marriage as an analogy, are you good to your spouse because you love her, or good to her simply because you do not want a divorce?

We do good because we love God, and we know God loves us because of Jesus Christ. One who believes in good works for salvation does good because he believes (erroneously) that God will not love him (or save him) until he does good works.

And, as Luther said, God does not need our good works; our neighbor does.


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 23, 2011)

py3ak said:


> steadfast7 said:
> 
> 
> > Stargazer65 said:
> ...


I agree with your precision, but are we not positively commanded to make our calling and election sure, and that, by good works? Paul does not have in mind that we should eventually trust our works, but the command is there. is this not a biblical motivation to store up treasures and rewards for ourselves by doing good works?


----------



## py3ak (Sep 23, 2011)

Rewards are one motivating factor, certainly; I am not sure that I'd turn assurance into one of those rewards, though. And of course we are to give all diligence to make our calling and election sure; but is working to reassure ourselves a working that arises from faith? And if it does not arise from faith, can it be called a good work?


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 23, 2011)

Seems like the question actually is: _prove to whom?_


steadfast7 said:


> I agree with your precision, but are we not positively *commanded to make our calling and election sure*, and that, by good works? Paul does not have in mind that we should eventually trust our works, but the command is there. is this not a biblical motivation to store up treasures and rewards for ourselves by doing good works?


The verse you allude to is pointing to assurance of salvation. Who can have properly have reasonable confidence that he is in fellowship with God? The man who wallows in sin loving himself, or the man who loves his neighbor?

The fact of loving one's neighbor is a matter of the law, and cannot establish indubitable proof of the state of a man's soul. No one, in fact, loves his neighbor to God's standard. Even less does he love God. The laws of love to God and neighbor set the standard, and they measure our inevitable and constant shortcomings. God's people love his commandments because they love Him who commands. And they are not properly motivated to good deeds by thoughts that they need to prove to their _*Father*_ in heaven they are worthy of that love.

*If someone is worshipping such a "performance-oriented" God, is he worshipping the God of the Bible?* That's when the issue of "danger-to-the-soul" becomes paramount. Because if one has the wrong "God" or the wrong "Christ"--the wrong object of his faith--he's holding on to the millstone.

Our good works aren't going to "prove" to God that we're worthy of salvation in the end of our days. I feel sorry for the child who must "prove" his devotion to his father by performance. Did he get that idea from his father, or did he develop that idea by an improper judgment of his own? I'm not saying that a father shouldn't set standards, and expect them to be followed. I'm not saying fathers shouldn't enforce penal consequences for certain willful rebellions, or sometimes difficult discipline to train his child to rise to a challenge. But I pray MY children don't ever think that I love them less for failing to be what they should or could.

So, the "proof" of one's calling and election is in the _faith_ (no, not always or mostly or mainly in the deeds) and in the _behavior_ of believers. Election and calling are both prior to the men themselves--the elected and called. Those are God-works; they are "invisible" in themselves, only known by their effects. And the effects themselves are often too faint for good human evaluation. No one doubts the salvation of the one thief on the cross, simply because he had no "works" to speak of. Who was he going to "prove" his worth to, himself? No one ever had less reason for confidence in the flesh. To God? He doesn't need proof of his own work; what, will he check to see if it "took"? Others? angels, demons, saints, the damned? God will openly acquit him in the Day of Judgment, not because he paid his own debt, but because he's clothed in the righteousness of the Son who died next to him.


Nothing in my hands I bring;
Simply to the cross I cling.
Naked, come to thee for dress;
Helpless, I cry out for grace!​

We are invited and encouraged to engage ourselves in the work that God is doing. God doesn't want the children of the family of God to feel "left-out" of the progress of redemption. And if we are moping in the corner, or off chasing our own purposes, we aren't going to be "sure" of anything worthwhile.


----------



## toddpedlar (Sep 23, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Doing good works _in order_ to be saved
> and,
> Doing good work _in order to prove_ you are saved
> 
> ...



I think both are wrongheaded. They're not the same, but each is deadly. 

Clearly the first is wrongheaded... I don't think there's any reason to discuss why - we all understand that works do not save. 

The second is also exceedingly problematic. If you are doing good in order to attempt to PROVE you are saved, then at the very least you are having some kind of rhetorical argument with some perceived conversation partner - and your aim is proving something, not glorifying God. Good works are to be those that we perform in gratitude for what we have received... it is the natural response of one who has been rescued from death to walk as one thankful for that rescue. We do good things because we know it pleases Him who saved us, and because we are convicted and convinced that it is right to do so. It should never be about us seeking to prove ourselves saved - because if that is our aim, then we are (in a twisted way) trying to justify ourselves (at least before men). Justification before men HAPPENS but it is not to be our aim. Good works do, in fact, prove our right standing before God... to be sure. However, the congratulations of men is never something we ought to seek in doing good.


----------



## Peairtach (Sep 23, 2011)

py3ak said:


> How about,
> 
> Doing good works because you are saved and have respect for the authority of God, zeal for his glory, love for his law, and compassion for your fellow-men?





You have to remember also, Dennis, that our good works can't save us/justify us; only Christ's good works do that.

At best our rather filthy and smelly good works, cleaned up through Christ, don't earn us Heaven but ultimately earn us extra rewards _in a mysterious sense on top _of receiving Heaven, Christ and Happiness, because God graciously rewards true but imperfect good works in Christ.

Of course we do not really _earn_ anything by our good works. Since we are saved sinners we do not inherently deserve anything, and cannot intrinsically merit anything, for our good works, but God graciously wills to reward them in Christ.

See e.g. parables such as the Talents:


> *For to everyone who has will more be given*, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. (Matt 25:29, ESV)



The Holy Spirit witnesses with our spirits using the Marks of Grace e.g. love for the brethren, love for God's Word and law, love and concern and sorrow for the lost, love for God's Day, hatred of sin, etc, etc, etc, to work assurance of faith in us.


----------



## moral necessity (Sep 23, 2011)

The way I understand it, "making our calling and election sure" is much different from "making sure of our calling and election". The first involves making something become immovable, resolved, and certain. The second involves becoming convinced of something that you doubt. 

To "make your calling and election sure" is not (in my opinion)a call for us to examine if we are believers or not, but is rather a call for us do what we can to not put ourselves in a position that makes the way of our calling and election seem to waiver. We are to not put stumblingblocks in the way of our faith being built up. We are to not do what leads to those dark seasons of life, that hinder the Spirit's work in us and leads us to doubts and despair, and for some, even a falling away. Rather, we are to do what places us in the paths of grace, so as to make our way "sure". Do you see how that word "sure" is also used? We are to make our way sure...to make our calling and election sure...to make it immovable...certain. We are to "add these things to our faith", Peter says, "for in doing so, we will neither be barren nor unfruitful,...we are to make our calling and election sure, for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall."

That's how I tend to read the passage...

Blessings!


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 23, 2011)

It seems to me that before we can produce good works in a response of gratitude for being saved, we need to be sure we are truly saved. Scripture motivates us toward good works as a means to this end. How do we know we are born of God unless we love the brethren? The bible is not beyond motivating us with things that immediately or eventually benefits us. There are rewards to be gained and assurances to be had.


----------



## py3ak (Sep 23, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Scripture motivates us toward good works as a means to this end.



I think this is the point at which your thesis falls apart. You are correct that doubt and uncertainty hinder gratitude; but that doesn't mean that our works come in between our salvation to complete our gratitude which, somewhat ironically, makes us capable of working. We know we believe, first of all, by the reflex act of faith.


----------



## itsreed (Sep 24, 2011)

Calvin's emphasis on the role of love is helpful here. The focus is taken off of self, something both your statements have in common. Love puts the focus outside of self, onto God. He is both the source of the love in which the good works are grounded and the good works themselves. Any explanation for doing good works, it seems, needs to be focused on God, not us.


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 24, 2011)

py3ak said:


> steadfast7 said:
> 
> 
> > Scripture motivates us toward good works as a means to this end.
> ...


 what is this reflex of faith?


----------



## Scott1 (Sep 24, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> It seems to me that before we can produce good works in a response of gratitude for being saved, we need to be sure we are truly saved. Scripture motivates us toward good works as a means to this end. How do we know we are born of God unless we love the brethren? The bible is not beyond motivating us with things that immediately or eventually benefits us. There are rewards to be gained and assurances to be had.



To quote Mr. Luther:

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

When God changes the constituent nature of a human being, "good" works (those both outwardly and inwardly obedient to God) are a natural byproduct. They _will_ happen, because God has now "made" you to do them. Though a remnant of the sin nature persists, over time, the good works will become more apparent. Not perfection in this life, but over time, evidence of God's grace will become _more_ apparent because He has first changed you. This is one basis of church discipline.

The motivation for doing those good works?

Again, they are a natural byproduct of a changed nature. A fish will show a tendency toward water. The creature will, more and more try to do things for the honor and glory of God.

Also, within that, there are rewards at the judgment seat of Christ (positive), every creature gives account at the judgment seat (both positive and negative), and the believer suffers all the temporal misery of their sin in this life (negative). Particularly acute for the believer is sin causes a sense of isolation from fellowship with God (negative).

Conversely, obedience builds faith, increases our sense of assurance, and "proves out" our calling and election.


----------



## Peairtach (Sep 24, 2011)

When your heart is made new by the Holy Spirit, you have a new motive of love for the One Living and True God, from which good works, however inchoate will inevitably flow.



> And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.(Ezek 36:26, ESV)



If a person with a new heart lacks assurance of faith, to the extent that he doubts that he is a true Christian, his _self-conscious_ motivation for doing good works i.e. that he is grateful to God, because he knows and is sure that God has saved Him, will be clouded and impaired.

But since the seed of the new life is in him, however unassured he is, good works will out.

*Dennis*


> How do we know we are born of God unless we love the brethren?



Is that, How do we know that we are born of God unless we love the brethren _perfectly_ or _generally and genuinely_?

You can see that we will never reach assurance of faith if we measure ourselves by God's law, but will be in a permanent state of lack of assurance.

All true Christians have the marks of grace in measure, but no true Christian can look at his good works and be satisfied with them, or look at his sins to find assurance of faith.

That is why the marks of grace - genuine but imperfect marks that God has done a work in the heart and life - are the true means by which the Holy Spirit shows us that we are God's people, rather than us measuring our dirty and smelly good works and our remaining sins by God's perfect law.

I consider measuring my good works or lack thereof, which, in themselves, are nothing but filthy rags - against God's standards - a very poor way of finding assurance of faith.


----------



## MarieP (Sep 24, 2011)

py3ak said:


> How about,
> 
> Doing good works because you are saved and have respect for the authority of God, zeal for his glory, love for his law, and compassion for your fellow-men?



I don't think I could have summed it up any better than this!!

I would also add 2 Cor. 5:9-10, "Therefore we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad."

---------- Post added at 09:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:06 AM ----------




Pergamum said:


> And also a 4th reason, we do good because we are ontologically good (we do good because God has made us good).



AMEN! Way to put the indicative before the imperative, brother


----------



## py3ak (Sep 24, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> what is this reflex of faith?



Saving faith has two acts: a direct, and a reflex. The direct act is of course concerned with the object of faith; the reflex act is basically faith's self-consciousness. So Turretin writes (_Institutes_, XV.17,12):


> ...faith...has a twofold act (as was seen above): a direct and a reflex. By the direct, it is borne into the promise itself, but by the reflex into its own apprehension and thus not only believes, but also knows that it believes (just as in the natural life, the soul not only understands, but is also conscious of its own operation and knows that it understands--which is the peculiar privilege of the rational soul). Thus in the spiritual life, the regenerate soul has this peculiarity--that it can not only elicit acts of faith and love, but also turning them in upon itself, know that it elicits them and is thoroughly persuaded of them. Nor ought a reason to be sought for this persuasion more than of that by which man knows that he lives and understands.


Signs of grace do not precede, at least not usually and in the order of knowledge, this reflex act of faith.


----------



## moral necessity (Sep 24, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> It seems to me that before we can produce good works in a response of gratitude for being saved, we need to be sure we are truly saved. Scripture motivates us toward good works as a means to this end. How do we know we are born of God unless we love the brethren? The bible is not beyond motivating us with things that immediately or eventually benefits us. There are rewards to be gained and assurances to be had.



Your conscience regarding salvation appears to be looking for its rest in an internal change, rather than in the simple persuasion that God is your Father. Listen to Calvin:

"In the tenth chapter, they inveigh against what they call The Vain Confidence of Heretics. This consists, according to their definition, in our holding it as certain that our sins are forgiven, and resting in this certainty. But if such certainty makes heretics, where will be the happiness which David extols? (Ps.32) Nay, where will be the peace of which Paul discourses in the fifth chapter of Romans, if we rest in anything but the good-will of God? How, moreover, have we God propitious, but just because he enters not into judgment with us? They acknowledge that sins are never forgiven for Christ's sake, except freely, but leaving it in suspense to whom and when they are forgiven, they rob all consciences of calm placid confidence. Where, then, is that boldness of which Paul elsewhere speaks, (Eph.3:12,) that access with confidence to the Father through faith in Christ? Not contented with the term confidence, he furnishes us with boldness, which is certainly something more than certainty. And what shall we say to his own occasional use of the term certainty? (Rom.8:37.) This certainty he founds upon nothing but a mere persuasion of the free love of God. Nay, they overthrow all true prayer to God, when they keep pious minds suspended by fear which alone shuts the door of access against us. "He who doubts," says James, (James1:6,) "is like a wave of the sea driven by the wind." Let not such think that they shall obtain anything of the Lord. "Let him who would pray effectually not doubt." Attend to the antithesis between faith and doubt, plainly intimating that faith is destroyed as soon as certainty is taken away.

But that the whole of their theology may be more manifest to my readers, let them weigh the words which follow under the same head. It ought not to be asserted, they say, that those who have been truly justified ought to entertain an unhesitating doubt that they are justified. If it be so, let them teach how full assurance can be reconciled with doubt. For Paul makes it the perpetual attendant of faith. I say nothing as to their laying down as a kind of axiom what Paul regards as a monstrous absurdity. "If the inheritance is by the law, he says, (Rom.4:14,) "faith is made void." He argues that there will be no certainty of faith if it depends on human works - a dependence which he hesitates not to pronounce most absurd. And justly; seeing he immediately infers from it that the promise also is abolished.

I am ashamed to debate the matter, as if it were doubtful, with men who call themselves Christians. The doctrine of Scripture is clear. "We know," says John, (I John 4:6,) "that we are children of God." And he afterwards explains whence this knowledge arises, viz., from the Spirit which he hath given us. In like manner Paul, too, reminds us, (I Cor. 2:12,) "That we have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit which is of God, that we may know the things which are given us of God." Elsewhere it is said still more explicitly, "We have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father." (Rom. 8:15.) Hence that access with confidence and boldness which we mentioned a little ago. And, indeed, they are ignorant of the whole nature of faith who mingle doubt with it. Were Paul in doubt, he would not exult over death, and write as he does in the eighth of the Romans, when he boasts of being so certain of the love of God that nothing can turn him from the persuasion. This is clear from his words. And he assigns the cause, "Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given to us." By this he intimates that our conscience, resting in the testimony of the Holy Spirit, boldly glories in the presence of God, in the hope of eternal life. But it is not strange that this certainty, which the Spirit of God seals on the hearts of the godly, is unknown to sophists. Our Saviour foretold that so it would be. "Not the world, but you alone in whom he abideth, will know him." (John 14:17.) It is not strange that those who, having discarded the foundation of faith, lean rather of their works, should waver to and fro. For it is a most true saying of Augustine, (in Psalm 88,) "As the promise is sure, not according to our merits, but according to his grace, no man ought to speak with trepidation of that of which he cannot doubt." 

They think, however, that they ingeniously obviate all objections when they recommend a general persuasion of the grace of Christ. They prohibit any doubt as to the efficacy of Christ's death. But where do they wish it to be placed? In the air, so as to be only in confused imagination. For they allow none to apply grace to themselves with the firm assurance of faith, as if we had to no purpose received such promises as these, "Behold your king cometh;" "Ye are the heirs of promise;" "The Father is pleased in thee;" "The righteousness of God is unto all and upon all them that believe." (Matt. 21:5; Zech. 9:9; Acts 2:39; Luke 12:32; Rom. 3:22.) Surely, if they admit that by faith we apprehend what God offers to us, Christ is not set before me and others, merely that we may believe him to have been the Redeemer of Abraham, but that every one may appropriate the salvation which he procured. And how improper is it to assert that "no man can know with certainty of faith that he has obtained the grace of God." Paul and John recognise none as the children of God but those who know it. Of what knowledge can we understand them to speak, but that which they have learned by the teaching of the Holy Spirit? Admirably says Bernard, (Serm. 5 in Dedicat. Temp.,) "Faith must here come to our aid; here truth must lend us succour; that that which lies hid in the heart of the Father respecting us may be revealed by the Spirit, or the Spirit may persuade our hearts that we are the children of God; and persuade by calling and justifying us freely by faith." But if Paul, when he exhorts the Corinthians to prove themselves whether they be in the faith, (II Cor. 13:5,) pronounces all reprobate who do not know Christ dwelling in them, why should I hesitate to pronounce them twice reprobate, who, not allowing the Church to enter on any such proof, abolish all certainty concerning the grace of God?" - John Calvin Tracts and Letters; Volume 3, pp.125-127.

Blessings and prayers!


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 25, 2011)

The idea that works are, and can be, motivated upon a desire to prove or be sure of one's salvation is not foreign to Reformed theology. Listen to Heidelberg:


> Question 86. Since then we are delivered from our misery, merely of grace, through Christ, without any merit of ours, why must we still do good works?
> 
> Answer: Because Christ, having redeemed and delivered us by his blood, also renews us by his Holy Spirit, after his own image; that so we may testify, by the whole of our conduct, our gratitude to God for his blessings, (a) and that he may be praised by us; (b) also, *that every one may be assured in himself of his faith*, (c) by the fruits thereof; and that, by our godly conversation others may be gained to Christ. (d)


 There are manifold reasons that motivate us to good works, and some of them are for our benefit. This has been my main point.


----------



## Scott1 (Sep 25, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> The idea that works are, and can be, motivated upon a desire to prove or be sure of one's salvation is not foreign to Reformed theology. Listen to Heidelberg:
> 
> 
> > Question 86. Since then we are delivered from our misery, merely of grace, through Christ, without any merit of ours, why must we still do good works?
> ...



I don't think it is quite correct to say, nor to say that the Heidelberg Confession here is saying, that our motivation to do good works is "to prove or be sure of" one's salvation.

The appropriate result of God having saved us, is a life of gratitude and obedience. The motivation is gratitude and an obedient heart in light of what God has already done- not to secure something that God alone can (and has) done.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Sep 25, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Doing good works in order to be saved
> and,
> Doing good work in order to prove you are saved


False dilemma. The Christian motivation is neither.

We do good works because we are united to Christ by faith.

http://www.puritanboard.com/content/dead-sin-alive-Christ-rom-6-1-11-58/


----------



## moral necessity (Sep 25, 2011)

Dennis,

Works done from an uncertain heart regarding salvation are works done without faith. They can't grant any assurance. That's all I was trying to say. 

If they are works done from faith, they can serve to add additional comfort regarding God working in us. Maybe this is what you're getting at? But, I'm not sure that we do works for a self-focused reason. It seems to me that a higher motivation should be sought for instead, namely, "to glorify God and enjoy him forever", wouldn't you think? And, good works should flow from us naturally because we are having his law written on our hearts. Don't know if you'll agree with all of that, but I pray you will find clarity in the things you are studying. 

Blessings!


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 25, 2011)

Semper Fidelis said:


> We do good works because we are united to Christ by faith.


No doubt true, in an ultimate sense, that it is Christ who works in us, through us, and to him alone belongs the glory for any and all of our work. I'm simply saying that Scripture, and Reformed theology, provides us with other helps and motivators as well.


moral necessity said:


> Works done from an uncertain heart regarding salvation are works done without faith. They can't grant any assurance.


Charles, what do you mean by 'uncertain' here? Surely, infallible assurance of salvation does not always come immediately, so many real believers will be 'working' out of a place of uncertainty for a period of time. As to whether works can help to bolster assurance, I think the Catechism is clear about this. Again,

Since then we are delivered from our misery, merely of grace, through Christ, without any merit of ours, *why must we still do good works?*

Answer: Because Christ, having redeemed and delivered us by his blood, also renews us by his Holy Spirit, after his own image; that so we may testify, by the whole of our conduct, our gratitude to God for his blessings, and that he may be praised by us; also, *that every one may be assured in himself of his faith*, by the fruits thereof; and that, by our godly conversation others may be gained to Christ.


----------



## MW (Sep 25, 2011)

To date we have had union, justification, sanctification and assurance brought into the description. All we need now is the adoption perspective and all the parts will have been set in perfect opposition to each other. A transcendent perspective is needed which will unify all the parts together. "Man's chief end" should provide that perspective. Glorifying God and enjoying Him for ever must be taken together and in their order. It is not the former without the latter, as with Moralism. It is not the latter as the means of the former, as with Hedonism. It is the former first, as foremost, and the latter following, as consequent. This is Christian Theism. As a transcendent principle it applies to union, justification, adoption, sanctification, and all the benefits which accompany or flow from them.

God is glorified; man is saved and blessed in Him. Doing good works glorifies God; doing good works is also a part of the salvation and blessing of the person who glorifies God. The latter doesn't cease to be a consideration simply because the former is foremost. At the same time, the latter is only properly considered when the former is given its foremost place.


----------



## CharlieJ (Sep 25, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> Since then we are delivered from our misery, merely of grace, through Christ, without any merit of ours, *why must we still do good works?*
> 
> Answer: Because Christ, having redeemed and delivered us by his blood, also renews us by his Holy Spirit, after his own image; that so we may testify, by the whole of our conduct, our gratitude to God for his blessings, and that he may be praised by us; also, *that every one may be assured in himself of his faith*, by the fruits thereof; and that, by our godly conversation others may be gained to Christ.



I'm not sure that the Heidelberg phrase should be interpreted: "Do good works, so that you who are doubting your faith may no longer doubt." Rather, it may be that in 2 Pet. 1:9-10 fashion, the loss of assurance of salvation follows neglecting good works. Thus, practice good works and save yourself that angst.

I think it would be very poor, even deadly, counsel to tell a doubting Christian that he needs to do more good works in order to stop doubting. Works can serve as secondary testimonies and helps to faith, but they are never the ground nor the focus of faith or assurance. We might put it another way. Assurance is a part of faith. Christ is the principal object of saving faith. Therefore Christ is the principal object of assurance. 

So, to bring this back to the OP, the Christian does not do good works in order to prove that he is saved, but he can acknowledge his good works as secondary evidences of the grace of God in his life. An analogy might be empirical arguments for the validity of the Old Testament historical record. Our faith is not grounded on them, nor do we seek them in order to validate our faith, but if we know them, they can become additional sources of comfort and boldness.


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 26, 2011)

CharlieJ said:


> I'm not sure that the Heidelberg phrase should be interpreted: "Do good works, so that you who are doubting your faith may no longer doubt." Rather, it may be that in 2 Pet. 1:9-10 fashion, the loss of assurance of salvation follows neglecting good works. Thus, practice good works and save yourself that angst.


 I think your interpretation of the Heidelberg is a little softer than is warranted in the actual text, but the answer is probably somewhere in between our positions. First, it does not give warnings against a _lack_ of good works, but positively answers of why we _DO_ good works. Second, it does not ask, "what are some of the general benefits of doing works"? It asks, why _MUST_ we do good works. Unless someone can pipe in on the archaic English use of the word "must", how else are we to understand the obvious force of what the HC is saying? that is, 'One of the ways to be assured of your interest in Christ is to do good works.'



> I think it would be very poor, even deadly, counsel to tell a doubting Christian that he needs to do more good works in order to stop doubting. Works can serve as secondary testimonies and helps to faith, but they are never the ground nor the focus of faith or assurance. We might put it another way. Assurance is a part of faith. Christ is the principal object of saving faith. Therefore Christ is the principal object of assurance.


 Very right, which is why the order of this particular question in the catechism demonstrates incredible wisdom. Before speaking of works, it asks, "_Since then we are delivered from our misery, merely of grace, through Christ, without any merit of ours_ ...."


> So, to bring this back to the OP, the Christian does not do good works in order to prove that he is saved, but he can acknowledge his good works as secondary evidences of the grace of God in his life. An analogy might be empirical arguments for the validity of the Old Testament historical record. Our faith is not grounded on them, nor do we seek them in order to validate our faith, but if we know them, they can become additional sources of comfort and boldness.


Agreed. I think it is definitely a secondary evidence, but a powerful one, and a required one, at that.


----------



## moral necessity (Sep 26, 2011)

steadfast7 said:


> moral necessity said:
> 
> 
> > Works done from an uncertain heart regarding salvation are works done without faith. They can't grant any assurance.
> ...



What I was meaning was that faith involves being certain (Heb. 11:1.) Now, faith may be weak faith, or it may be strong faith. But it cannot exist without certainty on some level. Calvin addressed that in my post above. The OP asked about doing works to prove you are saved. It seemed to me, why would you need to prove this to yourself unless you were uncertain about it? 

Blessings!


----------

