Temporal Merit

[classicalkev]

Hi all, I'm struggling with something pertaining to good works.

We know that our good works are not meritous towards eternal life, but my question is...

Are they meritous from a temporal standpoint?

If it be true that God grants us temporal blessings based on our obedience, then is this not making them meritous in a sense? But how can they be meritous if the fruits of righteousness are OF Christ (Phil. 1:11), and it is God who works in us the will and the doing of His good pleasure(2:13)? In other words, how can good works be
meritous even on a temporal scale, if they themselves are of the Lord?

But this raises another issue with which I struggle. If I feel that good works are meritous temporally speaking, then would this be labelled as Arminianism?

On the other hand, if good works are NOT meritous in some respect, then how can I expect to receive a temporal blessing from it?

This thought definitely introduces sanctification, and demonstrates how difficult it is to firmly grasp this subject; atleast with me anyway.

I would greatly appreciate your thoughts, brethren, and please tell me if I have erred in any way.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

Divorce all thoughts of merit from purely human works.

Our works are "meritorious" insofar as they are not ours, but the Spirit's in us. We are cooperative, but not in a meritorious manner. God rewards Christ in us, and not we in ourselves. He receives our (worthless) works as if they were done in perfection, as if they were done by Christ himself.

An illustration I've used in the past is that of a mother filling a pot with stew, and stirring it on the stove. The child wishes to help, "Let me, let me!" And mother graciously says, "here child, put your hand on this spoon," and the child works the pot--all the while mother's hand has never given up the spoon. The child's father comes in, and the child with an enormous smile announces, "I've made soup for you, papa!"

Did the child merit his claim to "make the soup?" The child made NO material contributions to the good work of the soup. There is nothing meritorious about him. However, it is the parent's pleasure to acknowledge his imperfect "contributions" as if he DID make the soup.

How do you and I come to expect temporal blessings from our good works? Why are they promised a reward? Because of the grace of God, and the merits of Jesus Christ. "It is God who works in you... to DO of his good pleasure."

 

[baron]

An illustration I've used in the past is that of a mother filling a pot with stew, and stirring it on the stove. The child wishes to help, "Let me, let me!" And mother graciously says, "here child, put your hand on this spoon," and the child works the pot--all the while mother's hand has never given up the spoon. The child's father comes in, and the child with an enormous smile announces, "I've made soup for you, papa!"

I'm sorry I do not quite understand your illustration. The mother starts by making stew and the child helps and ends up with soup. Now stew and soup are not the same thing at least where I live. Is that the point, I think. Are you saying we start with a good work and then the Holy Spirit jumps in and changes it, to make it acceptable? Or did you just mistype stew to soup?

 

[Peairtach]

Our good works done by the grace of God working in us and accepted in Christ are meritorious by pactum merit, not congruent or condign merit.

In and of ourselvelves we and our works merit nothing. We have sinned. It has to be all of grace.

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.

Dr Keister explains different kinds of merit

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

This is also true - in a sense - of everything human beings do. It is all done of common or saving grace. Yet it is also true that the labourer is worthy of his hire.

For who maketh thee to differ from another ? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it? (I Cor 4:7,ESV)

If a Spurgeon or a Calvin or an Owen or someone else has done more, by God's grace, with his gifts than me with mine, is it not right that his heavenly reward will be greater? E.g. Matthew 25:14-30.

The Reformed need not panic; we're not talking about absolute condign or congruent merit, but pactum merit whereby God in the Covenant of Grace graciously rewards His people for good works done by His grace in Christ.

The competitive need not panic; all God's people will receive Christ and happiness in the Heavenly Eschatalogical Kingdom.

 

[MarieP]

Very helpful, edifying thread!!

I also can think of some Scriptures to add:

Psalm 16:2- "O my soul, you have said to the LORD, 'You are my Lord, my goodness is nothing apart from You.'”

Hebrews 6
9 But, beloved, we are confident of better things concerning you, yes, things that accompany salvation, though we speak in this manner. 10 For God is not unjust to forget your work and labor of love which you have shown toward His name, in that you have ministered to the saints, and do minister. 11 And we desire that each one of you show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope until the end, 12 that you do not become sluggish, but imitate those who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

God didn't have to save us in the first place (all boasting is excluded!), but it would be unjust of God to not reward us for the works that His grace has enabled and caused us to do. It's not like we on our own can intrinsically merit anything. We're finite creatures, and God is our all-powerful Creator. But God as our Father isn't going to look at us in Christ and say that we don't do things that please Him and justly deserve a reward.

Would it be right to say that before God as our Creator, nothing we do has merit, but as Christians, before God as our Father, they do have merit (because we stand justified in Christ)?

 

[classicalkev]

Here's some good thoughts from Dabney's lecture on sanctification:

"Merit, Strictly What?

To clear up this matter, let us observe that the word merit is used in two senses, the one strict or proper, the other loose. Strictly speaking, a meritorious work is that to which, on account of its own intrinsic value and dignity, the reward is justly due from commutative justice. But when men use the word loosely, they include works deserving of approval, and works to which a reward is anyhow attached as a consequence. Now, in these latter senses, no one denies that the works of the regenerate are meritorious. They are praiseworthy, in a sense. They are followed by a recompense. But in the strict sense, of righteously bringing God in the doer’s debt, by their own intrinsic moral value, no human works are meritorious. The chief confusion of thought, then, which is to be cleared away, is that between the approvable and the meritorious. An act is not meritorious, only because it is morally approvable. Note further, that it is wholly another thing to do works which may fall within the terms of some covenant of promise, which God may have graciously bestowed. If the king is pleased, in his undeserved kindness, to promise the inheritance for the doing of some little service utterly inadequate to the reward, and if any creature complies with the terms exactly, then the king is, of course, bound to give what he has engaged. But he is bound by fidelity to himself, not by commutative justice to the service rendered; for that, intrinsically, is inadequate.

Strictly, No Creature Can Merit.

In the strict sense, then, no work of man brings God in the doer’s debt, to reward him. The work which is worthy of this must have the following traits: It must be one which was not already owed to God (Luke 17:10). It must be done in the man’s own strength; for if he only does it by the strength of Christ, he cannot take to himself the credit of it. "It is not he that liveth, but Christ that liveth in him." It must be perfectly and completely right; for if stained with defect, it cannot merit. Last, it must be of sufficient importance to bear some equitable ratio to the amount of reward. One would not expect a large sum of money as wages for the momentary act of handing a draught of water, however cheerfully done. Now, it is plain at the first glance, that no work of man to God can bring Him by its own intrinsic merit, under an obligation to reward. All our works are owed to God; if all were done, we should only "have done what was our duty to do." No right work is done in our own mere strength. None are perfect. There is no equality between the service of a fleeting life and an inheritance of eternal glory."

 

[MarieP]

The competitive need not panic; all God's people will receive Christ and happiness in the Heavenly Eschatalogical Kingdom.

I've heard it explained that rewards in heaven will be similar to the fulness of a thimble, a bucket, and the ocean. All will be full, but obviously a thimble holds less water than a bucket, and a bucket less water than the ocean.

 

[Peairtach]

R.L. Dabney

In the strict sense, then, no work of man brings God in the doer’s debt, to reward him. The work which is worthy of this must have the following traits: It must be one which was not already owed to God (Luke 17:10). It must be done in the man’s own strength; for if he only does it by the strength of Christ, he cannot take to himself the credit of it. "It is not he that liveth, but Christ that liveth in him." It must be perfectly and completely right; for if stained with defect, it cannot merit. Last, it must be of sufficient importance to bear some equitable ratio to the amount of reward. One would not expect a large sum of money as wages for the momentary act of handing a draught of water, however cheerfully done. Now, it is plain at the first glance, that no work of man to God can bring Him by its own intrinsic merit, under an obligation to reward. All our works are owed to God; if all were done, we should only "have done what was our duty to do." No right work is done in our own mere strength. None are perfect. There is no equality between the service of a fleeting life and an inheritance of eternal glory."

This leaves the task of comparing the nature of merit in Adam in the CoW, Christ in the CoW and the believer in the CoG, to further elucidate things.

Adam was capable of meriting eternal life for himself and his posterity by pactum merit because he had not yet sinned, but the CoW with Adam was of God's bountiful goodness to Adam and his offspring because God was not strictly obligated to His own righteousness to give Mankind such good terms and such a great reward for so little.

God was obligated by His own righteousness to treat Adam and Mankind righteously but the CoW went above and beyond this.

Christ in the CoW earns salvation for Himself and His people by condign merit plus. Condign merit because He wrought both the full active and passive righteousness to merit Heaven for Himself and His people.

"Plus" in the sense that His righteousness and sacrifice could save the whole world by its value and indeed multiple worlds, because He is God as well as the Image of God.

We have sinned, so any temporal or eternal benefits we "merit" after we're saved by faith in Christ flow from the saving grace of God to us in Christ, enabling the regenerate soul by God's grace to do imperfect good works which are accepted in Christ and graciously rewarded.

We acknowledge we don't deserve salvation and that it is all of God's grace to us in Christ, so any good works that we do after we're converted and which are rewarded by God; both the work done by us and the reward given to us, are all of God's saving grace to us in Christ.

 

[classicalkev]

I appreciate everyone's thoughts tremendously. This distinction between kinds of merit seems to be the key in understanding in what manner our works receive rewards and blessings, both eternally or temporally.

But what are some biblical passages in which this is taught? What you all are saying and the thoughts of the learned theologians mentioned above seems rock solid, but I want some scriptural passages or principles to support this distinction between various sorts of merit. In short, how might I demonstrate to another that the Bible teaches our works are not meritous in the strict sense of the term, but yet we still are given rewards? Are there explict bible passages which speak of it, or it is something we imply from knowing that we are saved by grace and not our works. Therefore, it CAN'T be meritous.