# Old Testament Saints



## johnny_redeemed (Aug 9, 2004)

Were Old Testament Saints saved by grace through faith in God, or by grace through faith in Christ?

please give biblical bases for you answer. i am grateful for any help you could offer.

:thumbup:


----------



## Ranger (Aug 9, 2004)

Grace through faith in Christ, I believe. Galatians 3:6-8 and Acts 4:12 are clear that salvation is only through Christ, and there are some examples of Old Testament saints looking forward in faith to Christ as well. One example is Hebrews 11:26 showing that Moses considered the reproach of Christ greater than the riches of Egypt. Another is how Job looked to a future Redeemer and resurrection(Job 19:23-26). 

We also know that the faith of many Old Testament saints was credited to them as righteousness, and the book of Hebrews is filled with examples. Also, just look at Abraham and compare Genesis 15:6 to Romans 4:1-4. Only by the death of Christ can this imputed righteousness take place.

Furthermore, Christ was known in the Old Testament shadows and types. Also, from the beginning, the "seed of the woman" was known as being a future hope for salvation and triumph over Satan.


----------



## johnny_redeemed (Aug 9, 2004)

thanks kyle,
i looked up all the verses you listed and all of them were helpful. could you please go in to a bit more detail about Galatians 3:6-8. i do not see how that fits into faith in Christ?


----------



## Ranger (Aug 9, 2004)

My bad, I don't know why I put verses 6-8 (sorry, I was going on memory). Verse 16 is clear though that the promised seed of Abraham was Christ, and that the fulfillment of the faith of Abraham and his offspring comes in Christ alone. Chapter 3 as a whole is a good one for this topic because it talks about the purpose of both the promise and the law as leading to Christ. The promise and the law were in place during the times of the Old Testament saints and pointed to Christ for salvation.


----------



## Scot (Aug 9, 2004)

[quote:9584ae6920]Grace through faith in Christ, I believe. Galatians 3:6-8 and Acts 4:12 are clear that salvation is only through Christ, and there are some examples of Old Testament saints looking forward in faith to Christ as well. One example is Hebrews 11:26 showing that Moses considered the reproach of Christ greater than the riches of Egypt. Another is how Job looked to a future Redeemer and resurrection(Job 19:23-26). 

We also know that the faith of many Old Testament saints was credited to them as righteousness, and the book of Hebrews is filled with examples. Also, just look at Abraham and compare Genesis 15:6 to Romans 4:1-4. Only by the death of Christ can this imputed righteousness take place. 

Furthermore, Christ was known in the Old Testament shadows and types. Also, from the beginning, the "seed of the woman" was known as being a future hope for salvation and triumph over Satan.
[/quote:9584ae6920]

Ranger,

I agree, except I think that it was Christ's faith that was credited to them as righteousness, not their own. Of course, it becomes our own when it is given to us.


----------



## Ranger (Aug 9, 2004)

Removed for poor wording. - by Ranger


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 9, 2004)

> > Grace through faith in Christ, I believe. Galatians 3:6-8 and Acts 4:12 are clear that salvation is only through Christ, and there are some examples of Old Testament saints looking forward in faith to Christ as well. One example is Hebrews 11:26 showing that Moses considered the reproach of Christ greater than the riches of Egypt. Another is how Job looked to a future Redeemer and resurrection(Job 19:23-26).
> >
> > We also know that the faith of many Old Testament saints was credited to them as righteousness, and the book of Hebrews is filled with examples. Also, just look at Abraham and compare Genesis 15:6 to Romans 4:1-4. Only by the death of Christ can this imputed righteousness take place.
> >
> ...



Whoa! Christ did not have faith. No one is saved by the faith that Christ had. We are saved by the finished work of Christ, imputed to us by means of our faith. This was true both prospectively (OT saints) and retrospectively (NT saints).

To speak quickly of the faith of Christ is to wander into heretical waters. The search is still broken, but I found one of the threads that is on this very subject where I had much more to say: 

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1917

There are probably more in the Theological Forum and Calvinism Forum.

[Edited on 5/23/2005 by fredtgreco]


----------



## Ranger (Aug 9, 2004)

Okay, this is where message boards get confusing. Let me try to word this out correctly. I believe that faith is a gift from God and that a believer on his own will never come to faith. So the faith we have is the fatih given to us by Christ. It is not our own by origin. Therefore it is ours, yet from Christ. That is what I meant. Let me clarify that I'm not saying Christ had faith like the Word/Faith movement might claim, if that's what you were thinking. It did not originate with us though, but was a gift.


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 9, 2004)

Ok. Let me see if I can clarify. Faith is actually the work of the Holy Spirit, not of Christ (inasmuch as we can distinguish within the Trinity).

The Confession puts it this way:
[quote:950e2cbc08]The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts, and is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the word: by which also, and by the administration of the sacraments, and prayer, it is increased and strengthened. (WCF 14.1)[/quote:950e2cbc08]

Precision is one of the greatest tools of a theologian.


----------



## Ranger (Aug 9, 2004)

I agree completely, precision is greatly important, and you are correct in saying that within the trinity it is the Spirit of Christ who gives faith not the Person of Christ.


----------



## Ranger (Aug 9, 2004)

The confession (in my case the LBC, hehe) also makes it very clear that faith is completely the work of the Spirit both in origin and in growth. That's interesting.


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 9, 2004)

Good. Glad to see we are on the same page. The problem is that a movement is afoot again even within "evangelical" circles to make Christ's [u:85238532f3]faith[/u:85238532f3] rather than Christ's [u:85238532f3]work[/u:85238532f3] the ground of our salvation.


----------



## Ranger (Aug 9, 2004)

That's horrible. I was not aware of that. What is the movement called?


----------



## Scot (Aug 9, 2004)

O.k. guys, I don't want to be considered a heretic here. Fred (and everyone else), could you read over this article for me and tell me if you think it's heretical. Thanks.

http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/faithof.html


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 9, 2004)

[quote:bf85f79243="Scot"]O.k. guys, I don't want to be considered a heretic here. Fred (and everyone else), could you read over this article for me and tell me if you think it's heretical. Thanks.

http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/bible/faithof.html[/quote:bf85f79243]

Scot,

Yes it is. Warren is dead wrong on this, and outside of all the Confessions. I deal pretty extensively with his thesis in the thread I quoted to you.

Warren's thesis not only makes the believer's faith worthless, it makes his repentance worthless as well - they are anologous. In an attempt to label anything that man does as a meritorious work, he has thrown out the gospel. Stay away from this stuff.


----------



## johnny_redeemed (Aug 10, 2004)

fredtgreco,
are you saying that OT Saints are saved by grace through faith in Christ, not faith in God in general. i am all most certain this is what you are saying, i would just like to be sure. a simple yes would be fine if you do not have time. if you want to explain your answer that is cool too.


----------



## fredtgreco (Aug 10, 2004)

Johnny,

That is exactly what I am saying. The only difference between the OT saints and the NT saints in salvation is that the OT saints were saved by faith in the Messiah (they did not know his name) who was to come, the NT saints were saved by faith in the One whom they knew to be the Messiah, Jesus the Christ. That is why Peter makes such a point of preaching Jesus [i:0a60e25dc2]as the Christ[/i:0a60e25dc2] in Acts.


----------



## VanVos (Aug 10, 2004)

I agree with Fred on this. The way and means to salvation has always been the same, faith in the promise, the Messiah (or seed) Gal 3:8-9,16. Good comments Fred.

VanVos

P.S. Also isn't it interesting that PRCA (Warrens denomination) reject the idea that Adam was given a covenant of Works.


----------



## Scot (Sep 6, 2004)

Fred,

I'm not trying to resurrect an old debate, I'm just trying to understand both sides of this issue, so please don't think I'm arguing or trying to cause trouble here.

I've been going back and forth with some gentlemen that hold the same position as Mr. Warren and would like you to take a look at what one of them had to say:

[quote:1e5b98049d]Neither Mr. Warren or Ian Potts ("Grace and Truth Online") deny the faithful works of Jesus Christ; indeed, they emphasize His works were obedient unto death, which is the very Gospel. 

We believe that we have received the very attribute of faith of the Lord Jesus Christ, by which we were justified and reconciled with God the Father according to grace. We also believe that our human accountability before Holy God was met, according to grace, by the Man Jesus Christ in His perfect obedience and love manifested before the Father.

"For us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through Whom we live." I Corinthians 8:6

"Now when all things are made subject to Him, the the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all." I Corinthians 15:28

"As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man." I Corinthians 15:48&49

We have faith in God because Christ was faithful. 

We are declared righteous before God because Christ was perfectly obedient; even unto death. Human accountability has been met in the human Nature and Person of Jesus Christ.

"This is a faithful saying:

For if we died with Him, we shall also live with Him. If we endure, we shall also reign with Him. If we deny Him, He also will deny us. If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself.'" II Timothy 2:11-13

We do not believe these are heretical beliefs at all.

It is not heresy to give God all the glory for all things.
[/quote:1e5b98049d]

I do not believe that the men holding this position are denying man's responsibility or denying that we are saved by Christ's work. Wasn't it because Christ was FAITHFUL that he finished the work that the father gave him to do?

Just trying to understand here.


----------



## Scot (Sep 6, 2004)

[quote:c33c1e4cca]P.S. Also isn't it interesting that PRCA (Warrens denomination) reject the idea that Adam was given a covenant of Works.
[/quote:c33c1e4cca]

I don't know if Warren's denomination believes this or not. 

We won't get into AOG beliefs. :smug_b:


----------



## fredtgreco (Sep 6, 2004)

[quote:8645511a5a="Scot"]Fred,

I'm not trying to resurrect an old debate, I'm just trying to understand both sides of this issue, so please don't think I'm arguing or trying to cause trouble here.

I've been going back and forth with some gentlemen that hold the same position as Mr. Warren and would like you to take a look at what one of them had to say:

[quote:8645511a5a]Neither Mr. Warren or Ian Potts ("Grace and Truth Online") deny the faithful works of Jesus Christ; indeed, they emphasize His works were obedient unto death, which is the very Gospel. 

We believe that we have received the very attribute of faith of the Lord Jesus Christ, by which we were justified and reconciled with God the Father according to grace. We also believe that our human accountability before Holy God was met, according to grace, by the Man Jesus Christ in His perfect obedience and love manifested before the Father.

"For us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through Whom we live." I Corinthians 8:6

"Now when all things are made subject to Him, the the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all." I Corinthians 15:28

"As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man." I Corinthians 15:48&49

We have faith in God because Christ was faithful. 

We are declared righteous before God because Christ was perfectly obedient; even unto death. Human accountability has been met in the human Nature and Person of Jesus Christ.

"This is a faithful saying:

For if we died with Him, we shall also live with Him. If we endure, we shall also reign with Him. If we deny Him, He also will deny us. If we are faithless, He remains faithful; He cannot deny Himself.'" II Timothy 2:11-13

We do not believe these are heretical beliefs at all.

It is not heresy to give God all the glory for all things.
[/quote:8645511a5a]

I do not believe that the men holding this position are denying man's responsibility or denying that we are saved by Christ's work. Wasn't it because Christ was FAITHFUL that he finished the work that the father gave him to do?

Just trying to understand here.[/quote:8645511a5a]

Dan,

There are several things going on. First, faith and faithfulness are different things, different theological concepts. As soon as we begin conflating the two, we have huge problems with Pauline passages such as:

the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction...whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. (Romans 3:22, 25-26)

Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God (Romans 5:2)

What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith (Romans 9:30)

yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified (Gal. 2:16)

The problem is that if faith is read as faithfulness (whether of the believer, a-la NPP, or of Christ, a-la Warren), and not as rather the instrument whereby we have received the work and merit of Christ, then we have a problem with Rom. 3:22 and Gal. 2:16. Because there faith is instrumental. so we are left with two choices: (1) to eliminate anything that the believer does, whether by the power of God or not, and make it the faith of Christ (which is itself a heretical belief, because faith is part and parcel of a fallen man - for now we see be faith, not sight, but then face to face); or (2) make it faithfulness and keep the instrumentality (so, NPP) and works sneaks into our salvation.

But there is another problem with Warren's position - and that is with respect to repentance. For we read very clearly in the Scriptures of repentance for salvation (what the Confession calls "repentance unto life") and it would be indeed strange to make that the "repentance of Christ." But if it is our repentance, then how do we avoid Warren's scathing words:

[quote:8645511a5a="Warren"]"œThe most common distortion in the Church today of 'the doctrine of Grace' is in Christians attempting to make faith an action on our part, rather than humbly accepting that the faith we have is by the sovereign action of God. No one has faith of their own free will, faith comes by the divine will of God, through the gracious work of Christ. Yet in many circles we are continually told that the scriptures should read our 'faith in Christ,' rather than the 'faith of Christ.'
This in itself is curious because all Christian Theologians readily admit that faith is 'necessary' for Salvation, and yet many of them will just as readily (and illogically) conclude that this 'requirement' is not a work, nor any effort on their part. But how something can be required (meaning it's necessary to be done), and yet somehow not be an action required (work), bridges on the nonsensical. How can we possibly harmonize the conclusion that the faith to believe is 'our' faith (not the faith of Christ), and yet still profess that it is not an effort on our part? If it's our faith, then it's our effort. To say anything less makes the gospel both disjointed and contradictory. Moreover, we are commanded of God to have faith. And so how then is it not a work, when we are told that it is something which must be done?"[/quote:8645511a5a]

As I wrote before:
[quote:8645511a5a="Fred Greco"]God does indeed give faith (and repentance as well) to us, and it indeed becomes ours. But it is not a substance that God had to have before He could give it to us. Faith is [u:8645511a5a]not a substance[/u:8645511a5a]. It is nothing more (or less) than trusting the promises of God. That is why there will be no faith in eternity (cf. 1 Cor. 13; Romans 8:24), because where there is true sight, faith is not needed any longer (cf. Hebrews 11:1, where faith is the evidence of things unseen). A man such as Christ was (truly man as well as truly God) does not need faith, because He has SIGHT. The reason that sight is opposed to faith in the Bible is because now "œwe see through a glass dimly" (1 Cor. 13:12). Remember that Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever (Hebrews 13:8). We do not need His "œfaith;" we need His righteousness "" to put it in visual images, we need His clean robes. It is INSUFFICIENT for us to simply stand naked before the throne having our filthy rags removed. We need to be clothed in the righteousness of Christ[/quote:8645511a5a]

I don't necessarily object to what you quoted the person as saying, except that it is very imprecise and potentially misleading. Christ's works do save us. And they are faithful in the sense that (to use an earthly analogy) a soldier is faithful to do what he should. But they are not faithful in the sense that they took faith for Christ to perform them. He did not need faith. He was perfect, sinless and God. Only sinners need faith. Faith is not a substance that is passed from Christ to us. God graciously accounts Christ's work to us (Romans 5 AGAIN!! - this is a MUST text!!). But is not God's faith.

That is where the error is:

[quote:8645511a5a="The quoted person"]We believe that we have received the very attribute of faith of the Lord Jesus Christ, by which we were justified and reconciled with God the Father according to grace. We also believe that our human accountability before Holy God was met, according to grace, by the Man Jesus Christ in His perfect obedience and love manifested before the Father[/quote:8645511a5a]

The second sentence is true. The first is not. We did not receive faith. We received RIGHTEOUSNESS. We are not saved on account of faith (as some sort of substance). We are saved "by" or through" (instrumentally) faith. This is the battle cry of the Reformation. It might seem like a theological nicety, but it is not. Christ's works are counted as our own by God's grace, and come to use through OUR faith, which is the work of God IN US. Our sins are not simply waved away, they are PAID for by the work of Christ.

See my posts here for more detail:

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1917&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=55

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1917&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=57

http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1917&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=59


----------



## pastorway (Sep 7, 2004)

Note - Ian Potts was banned from this board for teaching and holding to heresy - aka another gospel! This false gospel was taught to him by John Metcalfe. They should all be shunned as the false teachers that they are.

Fred's quotes are more that adequate to set the record straight!

As for the question of this thread, OT saints were saved by faith in the Messiah who was coming, we are saved by faith in the Messiah who has come (and is coming again!).

Phillip


----------



## Scot (Sep 7, 2004)

Fred,

Thanks for the quick reply. I'll check out the other threads. Not tonight though, it's too late to think straight!


----------



## andreas (Sep 9, 2004)

***As for the question of this thread, OT saints were saved by faith in the Messiah who was coming,***


And the Lord said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name.Ex.33:17

And now for a little space grace hath been showed from the Lord our God, to leave us a remnant to escape, and to give us a nail in his holy place, that our God may lighten our eyes, and give us a little reviving in our bondage.Ezra9:8

For the Lord God is a sun and shield: the Lord will give grace and glory: no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.Ps.84:11

Surely he scorneth the scorners: but he giveth grace unto the lowly.Pro.3:34

God has only one salvation plan.Grace, pure golden grace,overflowing grace.
andreas.


----------



## Scot (Sep 9, 2004)

[quote:b368c16a6c]God has only one salvation plan.Grace, pure golden grace,overflowing grace. 
[/quote:b368c16a6c]

:thumbup:


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Sep 9, 2004)

[quote:cef510fd26="andreas"]
God has only one salvation plan.Grace, pure golden grace,overflowing grace.
[/quote:cef510fd26]
I agree with you here. But to clarify in light of this discussion, grace must be understood within the context of God's righteous requirements. God requires perfect obedience to his law. This was the covenant made with Adam. Adam's work in this covenant would be meritorious if he had succeeded. And it is this required work of the law which Christ himself performed for his people, as the second Adam. That is what was gracious about our salvation. Christ kept the covenant which Adam failed to keep. He didn't have to do it. But God graciously does it for the elect. The grace is defined within the context of required works. If we do not maintain this very important clarification, then the covenant of grace becomes a covenant of works or sways the other way to antinomianism, though perhaps very subtely.


----------



## pastorway (Sep 9, 2004)

Scot - are you the same Scot that posted part of Fred's reply to you on another forum? http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/yabbse/index.php?topic=839.0 

If so, you have taken what Fred said out of context and have misunderstood his whole point. You owe him an apology and need to correct things on the other forum as well. You have misrepresented Fred and his position.

Furthermore, if you are going to take quotes from posts on this forum for use in other debates we would ask that you notify the person you are quoting so that they will be able both to review what you quote, the context in which it is quoted, and so that they will be able to defend their position in a debate if necessary. 

In fact, we would ask this of all PB members - don't go quoting PB discussions all over the internet without letting people know that you are submitting their arguments and thoughts to other forums for critique. And give credit where credit is due. This is simple common courtesy.

In this case people are guilty of slandering an elder in the church(1 Tim 5:19 applies for starters).

Phillip


----------



## andreas (Sep 10, 2004)

***The grace is defined within the context of required works***.

"For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world".Heb. 4:3
andreas.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Sep 10, 2004)

Andreas,
I doubt Patrick's addendum to what you said was meant to imply anything was specifically lacking in your post regarding the context or place of works (as your reference to Ps. 84:11 shows). Earlier the discussion wandered into a by-way dealing with certain views that seem to deny the necessity of faith/believing for the reception of God's gracious salvation (which Heb. 4:3 also nicely teaches). Patrick was (I think) simply integrating what you said (re. the gracious character of salvation even in the OT) into the toto discussion. Patrick elaborates that grace is not merely God's condescension, or a disposition without a context, but his actually showing us his favor when we had merited (earned) his wrath.

And for further clarification to all:
"For we who have believed do enter that rest, as He has said: "So I swore in My wrath, They shall not enter My rest,'" although the works were finished from the foundation of the world." Heb. 4:3

N.B. 3:18: "And to whom did he swear that they would not enter His rest but those who did not obey." (NKJV)

Specifically, the works refered to in 4:3 are [u:600055d5c1]God's acts[/u:600055d5c1] of preparing a rest for man, a rest waiting and available for man from the earliest conceivable point--even the foundation of the world--yet persistently not entered into by man because of disobedience (3:18) and unbelief (3:19; 4:2).


----------



## Monergism (Sep 11, 2004)

I was wondering. . . . if saving faith for the New Testament saint includes believing in the deity of the Messiah, does that mean that the Old Testament saint had to believe in the deity of the Messiah as well?


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Sep 11, 2004)

Typologically, yes. 

If you run through the Scriptural conceptions of the Messiah that God would send throughout the OT, you would see clearly that the Messiah to come would be God Himself.


----------



## Scot (Sep 12, 2004)

[quote:0700fe9455]Scot - are you the same Scot that posted part of Fred's reply to you on another forum? http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/yabbse/index.php?topic=839.0 

If so, you have taken what Fred said out of context and have misunderstood his whole point. You owe him an apology and need to correct things on the other forum as well. You have misrepresented Fred and his position. 

Furthermore, if you are going to take quotes from posts on this forum for use in other debates we would ask that you notify the person you are quoting so that they will be able both to review what you quote, the context in which it is quoted, and so that they will be able to defend their position in a debate if necessary. 

In fact, we would ask this of all PB members - don't go quoting PB discussions all over the internet without letting people know that you are submitting their arguments and thoughts to other forums for critique. And give credit where credit is due. This is simple common courtesy. 

In this case people are guilty of slandering an elder in the church(1 Tim 5:19 applies for starters). 
[/quote:0700fe9455]

I've been away for a couple of days, so I just saw this post.

Yes, I'm the one that posted on the other forum.

If I'm guilty of what Pastor Way is accusing me of, then I am sorry Fred. 

I will say that it was unintentional. I, by no means meant to misrepresent Fred and his position. In fact, I appreciate his patience and his explanation of things. Understand that I am truly trying to understand both sides here. I would love to see it discussed by members of both boards. 

Again, if I misrepresented your position Fred, I truly am sorry.


----------



## pastorway (Sep 12, 2004)

Thanks for your response Scot....I look forward to Fred posting soon.

Phillip


----------



## fredtgreco (Sep 12, 2004)

I have not ignored this. I will post more after I put the kids to bed. Suffice it to say for now that you are forgiven, Scot, and I understand your intentions.


----------



## Scot (Sep 13, 2004)

Thanks Fred.


----------

