# "Genuine" Does Not Equal "Perfect"



## InSlaveryToChrist (Feb 22, 2011)

I believe born-again Christians can do genuine good works. As I understand the term "genuine" in its Biblical context, it means "with pure/clear conscience" or "in total conformity to the conscience." That we can be in total conformity to our consciences does not mean our consciences can be in total conformity to God's law -- at least not in this life. So, that we walk in accord to our consciences does not mean we walk in accord to God's law. To do genuine good works, then, is to do good works after the standard of the conscience -- we are regarded as good by the conscience (not God).

I believe born-again Christians cannot do perfectly good works. As I understand the term "perfect" in its Biblical context, it means "without sin" or "in total conformity to God's law." Due to total depravity (the Fall) sin creeps in _every_ part of our soul and body. That we are _partly_ sanctified does by no means mean that some part(s) of our soul or body is now totally free from sin. No, rather it means that the sin in all the parts of our soul and mind is progressively _weakened/mortified/lessened_. 

So, even when we _genuinely_ repent, that is, repent _with pure conscience_, we don't repent _perfectly_, that is, _without sinful thoughts_. We are blind to our sins that are unnoticed by the conscience. The Bible calls them "secret faults." (Psalms 19:12) And these secret faults/sins dwell in all the parts of our soul and mind. They are probably even greater in amount than the sins that we are aware of! And even our misery, which is a product of sin, should tell us we are not even close to perfection! We may think so, when our conscience does not accuse us of anything, but we must remember our conscience is not the same as God's law -- it is not in total conformity to God's law. And that's why we should not only go to God's Word when our conscience accuses us, but even when it excuses us! We should always be self-doubters and not lean to our own understanding in the least.

Okay, that's all I had to say, and I said it because the terms "genuine" and "perfect" are so often confused. Please, let me know if my understanding doesn't fit yours.


In Christ,
Samuel


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Feb 22, 2011)

Joshua said:


> I've never thought of genuine and perfect being equated or thought of as the same. Were you speaking with someone or reading something that purported such a thing?


 
Actually, I was watching a sermon on Youtube regarding good works. The pastor, who holds to the Heidelberg Catechism, gave me the impression that genuine good works are acceptable before God in and of themselves, not solely because of the merit of Christ. You might want to watch it yourself. I'm still half-through it.

YouTube - Rev McGeown - What About Good Works 1 of 5

Furthermore, I see this kind of confused thinking a lot among Christians -- even the Reformed!


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Feb 22, 2011)

Joshua said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > he pastor, who holds to the Heidelberg Catechism, gave me the impression that genuine good works are acceptable before God in and of themselves, not solely because of the merit of Christ.
> ...


 
That's unnecessary. I realized I misjudged him. I should have listened the whole thing before arguing.


----------



## jambo (Feb 22, 2011)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> Actually, I was watching a sermon on Youtube regarding good works. The pastor, who holds to the Heidelberg Catechism, gave me the impression that genuine good works are acceptable before God in and of themselves, not solely because of the merit of Christ. You might want to watch it yourself. I'm still half-through it.



I am reminded of a quote by Richard Steele as found in his Remedy for Wandering Thoughts During the Worship of God who says "The sacrifice of a broken heart doth please him but the sacrifice of a broken Christ alone doth satisfy him."


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Feb 22, 2011)

jambo said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, I was watching a sermon on Youtube regarding good works. The pastor, who holds to the Heidelberg Catechism, gave me the impression that genuine good works are acceptable before God in and of themselves, not solely because of the merit of Christ. You might want to watch it yourself. I'm still half-through it.
> ...


 
When the Bible says God won't despise a contrite spirit, surely this doesn't mean God is pleased in what He sees in man, but who He sees in this man, namely, Christ. Why does He see Christ in a contrite spirit? Because a contrite spirit is a repenting spirit, and any reformed believer understands repentance and faith walk hand in hand; there is no way a person repents and does not believe, or that a person believes but does not repent. This is why God is pleased in one who is of godly sorrow -- not because the person repents, and not even because he believes, but because due to his faith in Christ God sees His beloved Son in him.


----------



## Peairtach (Feb 22, 2011)

If you look at some of the standard Systematic Theologies e.g. Berkhof or Dabney, they explain the good works of the believer in Christ quite well.

We are justified by faith in Christ's shed blood and perfectly righteous life alone and thus made right with God and accepted for Heaven on Christ's merit alone.

Also in the Covenant of Grace God graciously accepts of the good works of believers in and through Christ, which good works are never perfectly good. God graciously deigns to reward these good works or "good works" even although the person producing them - in and of themselves - deserves Hell itself.

*Louis Berkhof*


> P.542: Scripture clearly teaches that the good works of believers are not meritorious in the proper sense of the word. We should bear in mind, however, that the word "merit" is employed in a twofold sense, the one strict and proper, and the other loose. Strictly speaking a meritorious work is one to which, on account of its intrinsic value and dignity, the reward is justly due from commutative justice. Loosely speaking, however, a work that is deserving of approval and to which a reward is somehow attached (by promise, agreement, or otherwise) is also sometimes called meritorious. Such works are praiseworthy and are rewarded by God. But however this may be, they are surely not meritorious in the stricty sense of the word. They do not, by their own intrinsic moral value, make God a debtor to him who performs them. In strict justice the good works of believers merit nothing.



The former type of merit is _condign merit_ and the latter is _pactum merit_, explained very well here by PB's own Rev. Lane Keister:

http://www.puritanboard.com/f31/condign-congruent-pactum-merit-66235/


----------

