The Village Church
Are We Saved By Faith Alone?
Faith Alone. A query.
Locations & Times
1489 Village Way, Kronenwetter, WI 54455, USA
Thursday 5:00 PM
Commentary by Burton Coffman: "The Lutheran error of supposing salvation to be by faith only, sprang from overlooking the biblically stated truth that many people did "believe on" the Lord Jesus Christ but, through love of the world, refused to follow him. As to the thesis, then, that true faith automatically includes obedience, it is utterly disproved by the lives of millions in every age, including those cited in John 12:42,43. In this context, it is interesting to note that Christ said, "If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments" (John 14:15); but he did not say, "If ye have faith in me, ye will keep my commandments," the latter being categorically untrue. Precisely in this, then, is the outrage of teaching that salvation is "by faith alone." Far from leading people to obey the gospel, that false doctrine is actually made the ground and excuse of millions for not obeying it!
These two verses are among the most important in Scripture in regard to their bearing upon the question of whether or not one is justified by FAITH ONLY, making it impossible logically to believe that faith alone can justify.
Believed on him ... is alleged to have been faith of a DIFFERENT KIND from that required for salvation. Hovey called it "a rational conviction ... but not a saving trust in Christ." Gaebelein wrote, "But they had no true faith in God." Barnes has, "They were convinced in their understanding that he was the Messiah." Johnson says, "These rulers, not believing with the heart, did not make open confession." Morgan concluded that "The most illuminating sentence concerning this verse came from the pen of Bishop Westcott, who said, `This complete intellectual faith is really the climax of unbelief.'" Yet we have Westcott's own testimony thus:
It is remarkable that St. John uses of this belief the phrase which marks the completeness of belief. The belief only lacked confession, but this defect was fatal. Compare John 2:23, where belief complete in itself is practically imperfect.
It is astoundingly clear that many of the rulers had a COMPLETENESS OF FAITH, Westcott leaving no doubt whatever that the Greek New Testament teaches this. Therefore, the deduction must stand stark and mandatory that something beyond faith (even if one has a COMPLETE faith) is required for salvation. The device of supposing that one kind of faith comes from the heart and another kind from the mind, or intellect, is ridiculous, because the Scriptural HEART is the MIND. Furthermore, the Bible has absolutely nothing about KINDS of faith, distinctions of so-called varieties of faith deriving from human speculation and not from God's word. It must be rejected out of hand, therefore, that the faith of the rulers (in this verse) was anywise different from the faith of any man coming to Jesus Christ for eternal salvation. There was only ONE THING wrong with their faith. It was FAITH ALONE! Of course, this stands squarely opposed to the Lutheran heresy of justification by faith only; and this undeniable fact would appear to be the only reason why so many writers have labored to make the faith in this verse to have been some diverse kind or variety of faith. The thing lacking was not faith (they had it all) but obedience (they would not confess). Millions of men today are in the same category with these rulers. They believe but will not confess (obey). John's entire Gospel is in full harmony with what is taught here. See John 1:12; 2:23; 8:31; etc.
Lest they should be put out of the synagogue ... The social pressures in the community were sufficient to restrain some from acting in harmony with their faith in Christ. The same is true today.
They loved the glory, etc ... Regardless of the faith that may exist in the heart, it is the love of God which must sustain and activate it if it is to issue in any benefit to the believer. Love is greater than faith, even a complete faith; and the reason for this was announced by our Lord himself who said, "If ye love me ye will keep my commandments," a statement nowhere made concerning faith (John 14:15). How strange it is that men claim exactly the same thing for faith that Christ claimed for love, making faith the fulfilling of all the commandments. Any theory of justification by faith which omits love and obedience is a false theory."
These two verses are among the most important in Scripture in regard to their bearing upon the question of whether or not one is justified by FAITH ONLY, making it impossible logically to believe that faith alone can justify.
Believed on him ... is alleged to have been faith of a DIFFERENT KIND from that required for salvation. Hovey called it "a rational conviction ... but not a saving trust in Christ." Gaebelein wrote, "But they had no true faith in God." Barnes has, "They were convinced in their understanding that he was the Messiah." Johnson says, "These rulers, not believing with the heart, did not make open confession." Morgan concluded that "The most illuminating sentence concerning this verse came from the pen of Bishop Westcott, who said, `This complete intellectual faith is really the climax of unbelief.'" Yet we have Westcott's own testimony thus:
It is remarkable that St. John uses of this belief the phrase which marks the completeness of belief. The belief only lacked confession, but this defect was fatal. Compare John 2:23, where belief complete in itself is practically imperfect.
It is astoundingly clear that many of the rulers had a COMPLETENESS OF FAITH, Westcott leaving no doubt whatever that the Greek New Testament teaches this. Therefore, the deduction must stand stark and mandatory that something beyond faith (even if one has a COMPLETE faith) is required for salvation. The device of supposing that one kind of faith comes from the heart and another kind from the mind, or intellect, is ridiculous, because the Scriptural HEART is the MIND. Furthermore, the Bible has absolutely nothing about KINDS of faith, distinctions of so-called varieties of faith deriving from human speculation and not from God's word. It must be rejected out of hand, therefore, that the faith of the rulers (in this verse) was anywise different from the faith of any man coming to Jesus Christ for eternal salvation. There was only ONE THING wrong with their faith. It was FAITH ALONE! Of course, this stands squarely opposed to the Lutheran heresy of justification by faith only; and this undeniable fact would appear to be the only reason why so many writers have labored to make the faith in this verse to have been some diverse kind or variety of faith. The thing lacking was not faith (they had it all) but obedience (they would not confess). Millions of men today are in the same category with these rulers. They believe but will not confess (obey). John's entire Gospel is in full harmony with what is taught here. See John 1:12; 2:23; 8:31; etc.
Lest they should be put out of the synagogue ... The social pressures in the community were sufficient to restrain some from acting in harmony with their faith in Christ. The same is true today.
They loved the glory, etc ... Regardless of the faith that may exist in the heart, it is the love of God which must sustain and activate it if it is to issue in any benefit to the believer. Love is greater than faith, even a complete faith; and the reason for this was announced by our Lord himself who said, "If ye love me ye will keep my commandments," a statement nowhere made concerning faith (John 14:15). How strange it is that men claim exactly the same thing for faith that Christ claimed for love, making faith the fulfilling of all the commandments. Any theory of justification by faith which omits love and obedience is a false theory."
Coffman again: "By works a man is justified ... The weight of this is seen in the extension to include all men who shall ever be saved. "A man" has the function of moving James' teaching away from Abraham as an illustration of it and making it inclusive of all men forever. Ward of course makes the works James mentioned "the evidence of justification,"[1] whereas James in this verse has reference to the "means of justification." We appreciate the candor of E. C. S. Gibson who left James 2:24 altogether out of his interpretation. This verse so dramatically and effectively refutes Solifidianism that it is actually amazing that any of its adherents would bother to comment on it.
What screams of outrage would arise if one dared to amend James' statement here to read, "By works only is a man justified"! And yet, that is exactly what men have done to the teachings of Paul in their false allegations that he taught "justification by faith only." There is just as much Scriptural authority for one of these propositions as there is for the other, namely, none at all.
There is another grave error which should also be refuted, namely, that the acceptance of what James here said makes such an acceptance tantamount to a man's thinking he can "earn salvation," or that humble recipients of God's word in this passage are guilty of making themselves "their own saviour," or that faithful working Christians think they are placing God in debt to them. How ridiculous is such nonsense! Even when Abraham met the test of offering his son Isaac upon the altar, he was still a sinner, the unworthy recipient of the grace of Almighty God; and so it is with all who ever were or ever shall be saved. Roberts summed up this verse as follows: "It was because Abraham had done this that the blessings followed. So works justify, not in themselves alone, but still they justify."[2]"
[1] Ronald A. Ward
[2] J. W. Roberts
What screams of outrage would arise if one dared to amend James' statement here to read, "By works only is a man justified"! And yet, that is exactly what men have done to the teachings of Paul in their false allegations that he taught "justification by faith only." There is just as much Scriptural authority for one of these propositions as there is for the other, namely, none at all.
There is another grave error which should also be refuted, namely, that the acceptance of what James here said makes such an acceptance tantamount to a man's thinking he can "earn salvation," or that humble recipients of God's word in this passage are guilty of making themselves "their own saviour," or that faithful working Christians think they are placing God in debt to them. How ridiculous is such nonsense! Even when Abraham met the test of offering his son Isaac upon the altar, he was still a sinner, the unworthy recipient of the grace of Almighty God; and so it is with all who ever were or ever shall be saved. Roberts summed up this verse as follows: "It was because Abraham had done this that the blessings followed. So works justify, not in themselves alone, but still they justify."[2]"
[1] Ronald A. Ward
[2] J. W. Roberts
J.W. Roberts Commentary: "Thus the doctrine of salvation at the moment of faith - without obedience - is not a Biblical teaching .... It is rooted in the conversion experience theology of early revivalism. It sets aside the plain teaching of the Bible on the doctrine of obedience and the works of faith."
Introduction: The Bible clearly affirms that the only power that can forgive man's sins is the blood of Jesus. His death and shed blood freed us from for our sins (Ephesians 1:7; Romans 5:6-9; Hebrews 9:14; 1 Peter 1:18,19; Rev. 1:5). The purpose of this study is to consider how and when this cleansing blood is applied to specific individuals.
Consider a sinner who has never been cleansed by Jesus' blood. If he is to be pardoned, there must be some point at which that cleansing power applies to him personally and forgives him. Something must happen in his life as an essential condition (or conditions) in order for God to grant him forgiveness. We seek to determine what these conditions are and at what point this forgiveness comes.
In order to cleanse dirt, soap must be applied to that which is unclean. For an electric lamp to give light, it must contact the source of power. So for the sinner to be forgiven, he must contact Jesus' blood. How and when does this happen?
A common religious doctrine is salvation by "faith only" or "faith alone."
This doctrine can be stated as follows:
"Wherefore, that we are justified by faith, only, is a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort" - The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church, 1972 Edition, p. 55.
"...faith is the sole condition to experiencing the new birth ...faith alone, without any added steps, assures the forgiveness of sin, the
promise of the indwelling Holy Spirit and the gift of everlasting life ... obedience ... has nothing to do with washing away sin or with a person's justification" - Sermon by an advocate of "faith only."
So sin is believed to be forgiven "the moment the sinner trusts Christ as his Savior," and faith is the only condition one must meet. Obedience is not required.
Is this doctrine true? What does the Bible say about the conditions for salvation, and what difference does it make?
I. Faith Is Essential To Salvation.
A. Many Passages Teach We Are Saved by Faith.
John 3:16 - Whoever believes on Jesus should have eternal life.
Romans 1:16 - The gospel is God's power to save all who believe.
Romans 5:1,2 - By faith we are justified and have access to grace.
Ephesians 2:8 - By grace are you saved through faith.
(See also Acts 16:31; 10:43; 15:9; 13:39; John 8:24; 3:36; 5:24; 6:40; 20:30,31; Romans 3:22-28; 4:3,16; etc.)
We conclude that faith is essential to salvation, and without faith no man can be saved.
B. But No Passage Says We Are Saved by Faith Alone.
We are told that verses like those above prove that faith is necessary but not obedience, since faith is mentioned but obedience is not. But which passage says we are saved by "faith only," or that faith is the sole condition for salvation, or that we are saved without obedience? None of them so state. They teach we are saved by faith, but they do not teach we are saved by faith alone without obedience.
By the same reasoning, many verses mention faith but do not mention repentance or confession. Shall we conclude these too are unnecessary? Someone says, "It's just understood that, to have saving faith, you must repent and confess." Yes, but how do you understand this? We know repentance and confession are essential, because other passages say so. But if there are also other verses that say obedience is essential, should we not likewise recognize the necessity of that obedience?
We will soon see that many things are essential to salvation. People misuse Scripture when they conclude some things are essential because some verses mention them, but they ignore other verses that say other things are essential.
C. Other Verses Show That, by Itself, Inward Faith Will Not Save.
John 12:42,43 - People "believed" in Jesus but would not confess Him, because they loved the praises of men more than the praises of God. Were they saved? (Cf. Rom. 10:9,10; Matt. 10:32,33.)
James 2:19,20 - Even devils believe. Are they saved?
James 2:14,24 - Can faith save without obedience? No, that is a faith that is alone--and thusly dead (v17,20,26). Man is not justified by "faith only." This is the only passage that mentions "faith only," and it says we are not justified by it! Men say justification by faith only is a wholesome, comforting doctrine; but the Bible flatly says we are not justified by faith only!
Some say these people were unsaved because they have the wrong kind of faith: They have intellectual conviction only. We are making progress! We now agree that faith is essential to salvation, but it cannot be alone! Faith is necessary, but there are other pieces to our puzzle, even when people believe in God and Jesus.
The issue then is: What must our faith have alongside of it? Does it include repentance, confession, obedience to Divine commands? Before answering, let us add more information.
II. Many Things Are Essential to Salvation.
A. Some Things that are Essential to Salvation
God's grace (Ephesians 2:4-10; 1:7; Titus 2:11,12; Acts 15:11)
Jesus' death and resurrection (Ephesians 1:7; Romans 5:6-10; 1 Peter 1:18,19; Revelation 1:5; 1 Corinthians 15:17; 1 Peter 3:21)
The gospel (Romans 1:16; 1 Peter 1:23-25; Acts 11:14; James 1:18,21; 1 Corinthians 15:1,2; John 8:31,32)
Learning God's will (Acts 11:14; John 6:44,45; Romans 10:17; 1:16; 1 Corinthians 1:21)
Faith (see the verses listed above)
Love (1 Corinthians 16:22; 13:1-3; Galatians 5:6; 1 John 4:7,8)
Hope (Romans 8:24)
Repentance (2 Corinthians 7:10; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 17:30; Luke 13:3,5; 2 Peter 3:9)
Obedience (Hebrews 5:9; Romans 6:17,18; 1 Peter 1:22; Acts 10:34,35; 2 Thessalonians 1:8,9; Galatians 5:6; James 2:14-26)
Confession of Christ (Romans 10:9,10; Matthew 10:32)
Faithfulness (Matthew 10:22; Revelation 2:10; 1 Corinthians 15:58; Matthew 28:20; Titus 2:11,12; 1 John 2:1-6)
Some of these are things God has done; others we must do. All are essential to our salvation. Later, we will study some of them further, but first this observation:
B. We Must Accept All that the Bible Requires.
Accepting some requirements, while ignoring others, leads to error and contradiction.
If a verse requires faith, that does not eliminate the other things that are required elsewhere. Likewise, many passages mention grace, blood, repentance, etc., but do not mention faith. Should we conclude this proves faith is unneeded? No, but that would be as reasonable as concluding we can be saved without obedience, just because it is not mentioned in some passages about faith.
Salvation by "faith only" (excluding obedience) is as unreasonable and unscriptural as salvation by repentance only, hearing only, or obedience only. We are not saved by any one thing alone, to the exclusion of other things required elsewhere.
Instead, we should accept everything the Bible requires.
Acts 3:22,23 - We must hear all Jesus says, or we will be destroyed.
Revelation 22:18,19 - If we take away part of God's word, He takes away our reward.
Matthew 4:4,7 - Live by every word God speaks, not just part of it.
We must never isolate a passage from the overall teaching of the Bible (see also Acts 20:20,27; James 2:10; Matthew 28:20.)
If we follow only one part of a set of instructions, we will not achieve the desired result. Suppose, for example, a driver's manual says, "To drive a car, you must have the key." If we get a key, but ignore the rest of the instructions, will we automatically be driving the car? No.
So faith is a "key" to salvation - it gives us power to become children of God (John 1:12). But we are not automatically and immediately God's children just because we have the key or the power to become such. We must consider all the requirements that God's word teaches.
III. Obedience Is Essential To Salvation.
The "faith only" doctrine says that faith is the only prerequisite to forgiveness. Acts of obedience all come after forgiveness, and none are essential to receive forgiveness. But consider:
A. Many Passages Say Obedience Is Necessary.
1 Peter 1:22,23 - We purify our souls in obeying the truth.
Romans 6:17,18 - Servants of sin must obey from the heart in order to be made free from sin.
Hebrews 5:9 - Jesus is the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.
James 2:24 - Man is justified by works, not by "faith only."
Acts 11:14; 10:34,35 - Peter told Cornelius words whereby he would be saved. But the first words He said were that, to be accepted by God, people must work righteousness. This is true for all people, for God shows no partiality!
Matthew 7:21-27; Luke 6:46 - To accept Jesus as Lord (ruler, master) and enter the kingdom of heaven, we must do what He says. We may believe and confess Him yet be rejected, because we did not obey.
2 Thessalonians 1:8,9; Romans 2:6-10 - Receiving eternal life requires us to do good. Those who do not obey will be destroyed.
1 John 5:3; John 14:15,21-24 - Loving God requires us to keep His commands. If we do not obey, we do not love Him. Can one be saved if he does not love God (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:22; Matthew 22:37-39)?
The doctrine of "faith only" denies the necessity for all obedience to commands. All the passages we have just studied show that such a view is false doctrine. (See also Rev. 20:12-15; John 5:28,29; 1 John 2:17.)
B. If Obedience Is Not Essential, Consider the Consequences.
Matthew 22:37-39 - Love is the greatest of all commands. If obeying commands is not necessary to salvation, then love is not necessary! Yet note 1 Corinthians 16:22.
Acts 17:30 - Repentance is a command. If keeping commands is not necessary, then repentance is not necessary to salvation! Yet note Acts 2:38; 3:19; Luke 13:3; 2 Peter 3:9.
Romans 10:9,10 - Confession with the word and deed is a command. If obeying commands is not essential to salvation, then confession is not essential! Yet the Bible says it is essential. And it is not just an inner act; it is an outward act done with the mouth and hands, in contrast to faith in the heart. Here is an outward, physical action that is essential to salvation.
1 John 3:23; John 6:28,29 - Faith itself is a command; it is a work God tells people to do. If works and obedience are not necessary, then faith itself is not necessary! But if faith is essential, then we must abandon the view that obedience and works are not essential!
Some claim that John 6:29 says faith is a work God does for us, not something we do. However: (1) 1 John 3:23 still says believing is a command to us (cf. Mark 16:15,16). (2) John 6:29 answers the question asked in v28: "What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?" So "works of God" here means works men do in obedience to God's commands. (3) 1 Corinthians 15:58 is parallel - the "work of the Lord" is work we abound in - our labor in the Lord (cf. "love of God" in 1 John 5:3). (4) If faith is entirely a work God does for us, then God is responsible for unbelievers. He causes some people to believe, but not others. This makes God a respecter of persons in contradiction to Acts 10:34,35 and Romans 2:11. Hence, John 6:29 says faith is something we do, which is essential to salvation.
Clearly, obedience is essential to forgiveness. So we must ask what commands we must obey? But first, consider some objections.
C. The Bible Describes Different Kinds of Works.
But what about the passages where the Bible says we are not saved by works? Many passages say obedience is necessary, yet other verses say we are not saved by "works." Since God's word does not contradict itself, we must conclude that there are different kind of works, just as there are different kinds of faith. Faith saves, but there are kinds of faith that do not save. So obedience is essential, but there are kinds of works that do not save. Consider different kinds of works in the Bible:
1. Works of the flesh or of darkness
These are sins, which do not save but condemn. (See Galatians 5:19-21; Romans 13:12-14.)
2. Works of Old Testament law or of human righteousness by which one earns salvation
The Old Testament is not binding today (Gal. 3:23-25; Heb. 10:9,10; Eph. 2:14-16; Col. 2:14-17; Rom. 7:1-7). However, it never could save, because it provided no lasting forgiveness (Hebrews 10:3,4).
The only way to be justified by that law, or any similar law, would be to live ones whole life without ever sinning (Galatians 3:10; James 2:10; Romans 3:20,23). Then one could boast that he had saved himself without needing forgiveness. He would earn his righteousness as a matter of debt, not grace.
But such works will save no one, because we all sin (Romans 3:23; 1 John 1:8,10; 3:4). Therefore, we all need a system of grace, whereby we can be forgiven, though we do not deserve it. This is the point of Romans 4:4; 3:27; 11:6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9; etc.
(See also Galatians 2:16; 3:11 - cf. 4:21-25; 5:3; Acts 13:39.)
3. Works of obedience to meet conditions of forgiveness.
These works of obedience are essential to salvation, as we have studied. But they are not works of human righteousness, whereby we earn eternal life by a sinless life. Instead, we admit we are sinners and come to God for forgiveness by His mercy and grace. Yet we must believe in Him enough to meet whatever conditions He lays down.
These conditions include faith, repentance, and confession. Obedience is not a work of human righteousness whereby we earn eternal life, any more than are these other acts. All are simply necessary conditions in order for God's grace to forgive unworthy sinners by Jesus' blood.
So when verses say we are not saved by "works," they are not referring to faith, repentance, confession. These works are all included in the obedience that is essential to receive forgiveness.
Interestingly, even "faith only" advocates usually give people something to do, so they can identify a "point of contact" when they contact God's forgiving power. They say, "Pray the sinner's prayer," or "Put your hand on the radio," or "Tell Jesus that you are trusting Him to save you." In all these examples the sinner does something to receive forgiveness.
So even "faith only" advocates admit that one may do something to receive salvation yet not earn it. The problem is that they have eliminated the activity that God commands and have substituted other activities of their own human invention. This is clearly forbidden in Matthew 15:9; Galatians 1:8,9; 2 John 9; Revelation 22:18,19.
IV. Saving Faith Requires Obedience.
We now know that saving faith includes repentance and confession, and we know that obedience is essential. We will now proceed to show that the reason saving faith includes repentance and confession is that saving faith includes obedience. We are saved by faith when that faith leads us to obey God's required instructions - not before.
A. Hebrews 10:39 and Chapter 11
Hebrews 11 gives many examples of people who "by faith" pleased God and received His reward (11:6). But the purpose is to show us how to be among "them that believe to the saving of the soul" (10:39). Now, does the faith that God rewards include obedience? That is, was obedience necessary in order for God to reward the people, or did He reward them before they obeyed or even when they did not obey?
Noah (11:7) - By faith Noah prepared an ark to save his house and become heir of righteousness according to faith. Was he saved by faith before he obeyed, or did God save him from the flood only after he obeyed? Would he have been saved if he had not obeyed?
Abraham (11:8) - By faith he obeyed God and went to the place God eventually showed him. Did God reward him before he obeyed, or only after he obeyed?
Israel at Jericho (11:30) - By faith the walls of Jericho fell. Did they fall before the people did what God said, or afterwards? Would the walls have fallen had the people not obeyed? The verse says the walls fell "after they were compassed about." (See also 11:4,17,24, etc.)
In every case, God rewarded people for obedient faith. They received the blessing "by faith," not before they obeyed or without obedience, but only after or as a result of their obedience. Yet when faith led to obedience, they received the reward "by faith."
Saving faith is faith that obeys. If your faith says that obedience is not necessary or that God will "save your soul" before you obey, then you have a faith that will not save. Consider this chart:
Blessings Received "by Faith"
Noah built the ark then his house was saved
Abraham obeyed to go then received inheritance
Israel marched then the walls fell
We obey conditions then receive forgiveness
Obedience comes first, then comes the blessing!
Observations
Faith can have different meanings.
"Faith" sometimes has a specific meaning, referring to inward conviction and trust, as distinguished from the acts of obedience that follow (cf. Romans 10:9,10). This "faith" is essential, but it will not save by itself, without the obedience. "Faith" can also have a more general or inclusive sense, so it includes all a person does to be forgiven of sins - including repentance, confession etc..
The same is true of the term "love." "Love" sometimes refers specifically to an attitude of good will toward others, as distinguished from acts people do (1 Corinthians 13:1-3; Galatians 5:6). In other cases "love" is said to be or to include the obedience that it produces (1 John 5:3).
We do similar things in everyday speech. We tell sick people, "You could get better if you would go to the doctor." Now "go to the doctor" could refer to the specific act of transporting yourself to where the doctor is. But in our illustration, it is understood that we mean all that is involved in being cured by the doctor, including what we do in response to his instructions (get a prescription filled, take medicine, change diet etc.) Likewise "faith" can be used specifically or inclusively.
Some people admit saving faith includes repentance and confession, but they deny it includes obedience. But if faith includes repentance and confession, then that it must be true that faith includes obedience, since repentance and confession are acts of obedience. Confession is even an outward, physical act. So "faith" includes these commands.
Some folks reply: "You're trusting your own works to save you, instead of trusting Jesus."
The truth is just the opposite. Noah was saved "by faith" when he obeyed God. Do you accuse him of trusting his own works instead of trusting God?
When Abraham and Israel pleased God by faithful obedience, did they trust their own works or God (Hebrews 11)? When people repent and confess to be forgiven, are they trusting in works or in Jesus?
Consider the bronze serpent Moses made to spare Israel from death. The people had to do something to be saved - they had to look at the serpent (Num. 21:9). Yet John 3:14-16 uses this to illustrate salvation by faith through Jesus. So even John 3:16 shows that saving faith includes obedience, it does not exclude it.
The truth is that saving faith leads people to obey Jesus because they trust Him, and they are not saved until their faith has produced the required obedience. When people think they can be saved without obeying what Jesus says, those are the ones who have a faith that will not save.
Consider a sinner who has never been cleansed by Jesus' blood. If he is to be pardoned, there must be some point at which that cleansing power applies to him personally and forgives him. Something must happen in his life as an essential condition (or conditions) in order for God to grant him forgiveness. We seek to determine what these conditions are and at what point this forgiveness comes.
In order to cleanse dirt, soap must be applied to that which is unclean. For an electric lamp to give light, it must contact the source of power. So for the sinner to be forgiven, he must contact Jesus' blood. How and when does this happen?
A common religious doctrine is salvation by "faith only" or "faith alone."
This doctrine can be stated as follows:
"Wherefore, that we are justified by faith, only, is a most wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort" - The Book of Discipline of the United Methodist Church, 1972 Edition, p. 55.
"...faith is the sole condition to experiencing the new birth ...faith alone, without any added steps, assures the forgiveness of sin, the
promise of the indwelling Holy Spirit and the gift of everlasting life ... obedience ... has nothing to do with washing away sin or with a person's justification" - Sermon by an advocate of "faith only."
So sin is believed to be forgiven "the moment the sinner trusts Christ as his Savior," and faith is the only condition one must meet. Obedience is not required.
Is this doctrine true? What does the Bible say about the conditions for salvation, and what difference does it make?
I. Faith Is Essential To Salvation.
A. Many Passages Teach We Are Saved by Faith.
John 3:16 - Whoever believes on Jesus should have eternal life.
Romans 1:16 - The gospel is God's power to save all who believe.
Romans 5:1,2 - By faith we are justified and have access to grace.
Ephesians 2:8 - By grace are you saved through faith.
(See also Acts 16:31; 10:43; 15:9; 13:39; John 8:24; 3:36; 5:24; 6:40; 20:30,31; Romans 3:22-28; 4:3,16; etc.)
We conclude that faith is essential to salvation, and without faith no man can be saved.
B. But No Passage Says We Are Saved by Faith Alone.
We are told that verses like those above prove that faith is necessary but not obedience, since faith is mentioned but obedience is not. But which passage says we are saved by "faith only," or that faith is the sole condition for salvation, or that we are saved without obedience? None of them so state. They teach we are saved by faith, but they do not teach we are saved by faith alone without obedience.
By the same reasoning, many verses mention faith but do not mention repentance or confession. Shall we conclude these too are unnecessary? Someone says, "It's just understood that, to have saving faith, you must repent and confess." Yes, but how do you understand this? We know repentance and confession are essential, because other passages say so. But if there are also other verses that say obedience is essential, should we not likewise recognize the necessity of that obedience?
We will soon see that many things are essential to salvation. People misuse Scripture when they conclude some things are essential because some verses mention them, but they ignore other verses that say other things are essential.
C. Other Verses Show That, by Itself, Inward Faith Will Not Save.
John 12:42,43 - People "believed" in Jesus but would not confess Him, because they loved the praises of men more than the praises of God. Were they saved? (Cf. Rom. 10:9,10; Matt. 10:32,33.)
James 2:19,20 - Even devils believe. Are they saved?
James 2:14,24 - Can faith save without obedience? No, that is a faith that is alone--and thusly dead (v17,20,26). Man is not justified by "faith only." This is the only passage that mentions "faith only," and it says we are not justified by it! Men say justification by faith only is a wholesome, comforting doctrine; but the Bible flatly says we are not justified by faith only!
Some say these people were unsaved because they have the wrong kind of faith: They have intellectual conviction only. We are making progress! We now agree that faith is essential to salvation, but it cannot be alone! Faith is necessary, but there are other pieces to our puzzle, even when people believe in God and Jesus.
The issue then is: What must our faith have alongside of it? Does it include repentance, confession, obedience to Divine commands? Before answering, let us add more information.
II. Many Things Are Essential to Salvation.
A. Some Things that are Essential to Salvation
God's grace (Ephesians 2:4-10; 1:7; Titus 2:11,12; Acts 15:11)
Jesus' death and resurrection (Ephesians 1:7; Romans 5:6-10; 1 Peter 1:18,19; Revelation 1:5; 1 Corinthians 15:17; 1 Peter 3:21)
The gospel (Romans 1:16; 1 Peter 1:23-25; Acts 11:14; James 1:18,21; 1 Corinthians 15:1,2; John 8:31,32)
Learning God's will (Acts 11:14; John 6:44,45; Romans 10:17; 1:16; 1 Corinthians 1:21)
Faith (see the verses listed above)
Love (1 Corinthians 16:22; 13:1-3; Galatians 5:6; 1 John 4:7,8)
Hope (Romans 8:24)
Repentance (2 Corinthians 7:10; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 17:30; Luke 13:3,5; 2 Peter 3:9)
Obedience (Hebrews 5:9; Romans 6:17,18; 1 Peter 1:22; Acts 10:34,35; 2 Thessalonians 1:8,9; Galatians 5:6; James 2:14-26)
Confession of Christ (Romans 10:9,10; Matthew 10:32)
Faithfulness (Matthew 10:22; Revelation 2:10; 1 Corinthians 15:58; Matthew 28:20; Titus 2:11,12; 1 John 2:1-6)
Some of these are things God has done; others we must do. All are essential to our salvation. Later, we will study some of them further, but first this observation:
B. We Must Accept All that the Bible Requires.
Accepting some requirements, while ignoring others, leads to error and contradiction.
If a verse requires faith, that does not eliminate the other things that are required elsewhere. Likewise, many passages mention grace, blood, repentance, etc., but do not mention faith. Should we conclude this proves faith is unneeded? No, but that would be as reasonable as concluding we can be saved without obedience, just because it is not mentioned in some passages about faith.
Salvation by "faith only" (excluding obedience) is as unreasonable and unscriptural as salvation by repentance only, hearing only, or obedience only. We are not saved by any one thing alone, to the exclusion of other things required elsewhere.
Instead, we should accept everything the Bible requires.
Acts 3:22,23 - We must hear all Jesus says, or we will be destroyed.
Revelation 22:18,19 - If we take away part of God's word, He takes away our reward.
Matthew 4:4,7 - Live by every word God speaks, not just part of it.
We must never isolate a passage from the overall teaching of the Bible (see also Acts 20:20,27; James 2:10; Matthew 28:20.)
If we follow only one part of a set of instructions, we will not achieve the desired result. Suppose, for example, a driver's manual says, "To drive a car, you must have the key." If we get a key, but ignore the rest of the instructions, will we automatically be driving the car? No.
So faith is a "key" to salvation - it gives us power to become children of God (John 1:12). But we are not automatically and immediately God's children just because we have the key or the power to become such. We must consider all the requirements that God's word teaches.
III. Obedience Is Essential To Salvation.
The "faith only" doctrine says that faith is the only prerequisite to forgiveness. Acts of obedience all come after forgiveness, and none are essential to receive forgiveness. But consider:
A. Many Passages Say Obedience Is Necessary.
1 Peter 1:22,23 - We purify our souls in obeying the truth.
Romans 6:17,18 - Servants of sin must obey from the heart in order to be made free from sin.
Hebrews 5:9 - Jesus is the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.
James 2:24 - Man is justified by works, not by "faith only."
Acts 11:14; 10:34,35 - Peter told Cornelius words whereby he would be saved. But the first words He said were that, to be accepted by God, people must work righteousness. This is true for all people, for God shows no partiality!
Matthew 7:21-27; Luke 6:46 - To accept Jesus as Lord (ruler, master) and enter the kingdom of heaven, we must do what He says. We may believe and confess Him yet be rejected, because we did not obey.
2 Thessalonians 1:8,9; Romans 2:6-10 - Receiving eternal life requires us to do good. Those who do not obey will be destroyed.
1 John 5:3; John 14:15,21-24 - Loving God requires us to keep His commands. If we do not obey, we do not love Him. Can one be saved if he does not love God (cf. 1 Corinthians 16:22; Matthew 22:37-39)?
The doctrine of "faith only" denies the necessity for all obedience to commands. All the passages we have just studied show that such a view is false doctrine. (See also Rev. 20:12-15; John 5:28,29; 1 John 2:17.)
B. If Obedience Is Not Essential, Consider the Consequences.
Matthew 22:37-39 - Love is the greatest of all commands. If obeying commands is not necessary to salvation, then love is not necessary! Yet note 1 Corinthians 16:22.
Acts 17:30 - Repentance is a command. If keeping commands is not necessary, then repentance is not necessary to salvation! Yet note Acts 2:38; 3:19; Luke 13:3; 2 Peter 3:9.
Romans 10:9,10 - Confession with the word and deed is a command. If obeying commands is not essential to salvation, then confession is not essential! Yet the Bible says it is essential. And it is not just an inner act; it is an outward act done with the mouth and hands, in contrast to faith in the heart. Here is an outward, physical action that is essential to salvation.
1 John 3:23; John 6:28,29 - Faith itself is a command; it is a work God tells people to do. If works and obedience are not necessary, then faith itself is not necessary! But if faith is essential, then we must abandon the view that obedience and works are not essential!
Some claim that John 6:29 says faith is a work God does for us, not something we do. However: (1) 1 John 3:23 still says believing is a command to us (cf. Mark 16:15,16). (2) John 6:29 answers the question asked in v28: "What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?" So "works of God" here means works men do in obedience to God's commands. (3) 1 Corinthians 15:58 is parallel - the "work of the Lord" is work we abound in - our labor in the Lord (cf. "love of God" in 1 John 5:3). (4) If faith is entirely a work God does for us, then God is responsible for unbelievers. He causes some people to believe, but not others. This makes God a respecter of persons in contradiction to Acts 10:34,35 and Romans 2:11. Hence, John 6:29 says faith is something we do, which is essential to salvation.
Clearly, obedience is essential to forgiveness. So we must ask what commands we must obey? But first, consider some objections.
C. The Bible Describes Different Kinds of Works.
But what about the passages where the Bible says we are not saved by works? Many passages say obedience is necessary, yet other verses say we are not saved by "works." Since God's word does not contradict itself, we must conclude that there are different kind of works, just as there are different kinds of faith. Faith saves, but there are kinds of faith that do not save. So obedience is essential, but there are kinds of works that do not save. Consider different kinds of works in the Bible:
1. Works of the flesh or of darkness
These are sins, which do not save but condemn. (See Galatians 5:19-21; Romans 13:12-14.)
2. Works of Old Testament law or of human righteousness by which one earns salvation
The Old Testament is not binding today (Gal. 3:23-25; Heb. 10:9,10; Eph. 2:14-16; Col. 2:14-17; Rom. 7:1-7). However, it never could save, because it provided no lasting forgiveness (Hebrews 10:3,4).
The only way to be justified by that law, or any similar law, would be to live ones whole life without ever sinning (Galatians 3:10; James 2:10; Romans 3:20,23). Then one could boast that he had saved himself without needing forgiveness. He would earn his righteousness as a matter of debt, not grace.
But such works will save no one, because we all sin (Romans 3:23; 1 John 1:8,10; 3:4). Therefore, we all need a system of grace, whereby we can be forgiven, though we do not deserve it. This is the point of Romans 4:4; 3:27; 11:6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9; etc.
(See also Galatians 2:16; 3:11 - cf. 4:21-25; 5:3; Acts 13:39.)
3. Works of obedience to meet conditions of forgiveness.
These works of obedience are essential to salvation, as we have studied. But they are not works of human righteousness, whereby we earn eternal life by a sinless life. Instead, we admit we are sinners and come to God for forgiveness by His mercy and grace. Yet we must believe in Him enough to meet whatever conditions He lays down.
These conditions include faith, repentance, and confession. Obedience is not a work of human righteousness whereby we earn eternal life, any more than are these other acts. All are simply necessary conditions in order for God's grace to forgive unworthy sinners by Jesus' blood.
So when verses say we are not saved by "works," they are not referring to faith, repentance, confession. These works are all included in the obedience that is essential to receive forgiveness.
Interestingly, even "faith only" advocates usually give people something to do, so they can identify a "point of contact" when they contact God's forgiving power. They say, "Pray the sinner's prayer," or "Put your hand on the radio," or "Tell Jesus that you are trusting Him to save you." In all these examples the sinner does something to receive forgiveness.
So even "faith only" advocates admit that one may do something to receive salvation yet not earn it. The problem is that they have eliminated the activity that God commands and have substituted other activities of their own human invention. This is clearly forbidden in Matthew 15:9; Galatians 1:8,9; 2 John 9; Revelation 22:18,19.
IV. Saving Faith Requires Obedience.
We now know that saving faith includes repentance and confession, and we know that obedience is essential. We will now proceed to show that the reason saving faith includes repentance and confession is that saving faith includes obedience. We are saved by faith when that faith leads us to obey God's required instructions - not before.
A. Hebrews 10:39 and Chapter 11
Hebrews 11 gives many examples of people who "by faith" pleased God and received His reward (11:6). But the purpose is to show us how to be among "them that believe to the saving of the soul" (10:39). Now, does the faith that God rewards include obedience? That is, was obedience necessary in order for God to reward the people, or did He reward them before they obeyed or even when they did not obey?
Noah (11:7) - By faith Noah prepared an ark to save his house and become heir of righteousness according to faith. Was he saved by faith before he obeyed, or did God save him from the flood only after he obeyed? Would he have been saved if he had not obeyed?
Abraham (11:8) - By faith he obeyed God and went to the place God eventually showed him. Did God reward him before he obeyed, or only after he obeyed?
Israel at Jericho (11:30) - By faith the walls of Jericho fell. Did they fall before the people did what God said, or afterwards? Would the walls have fallen had the people not obeyed? The verse says the walls fell "after they were compassed about." (See also 11:4,17,24, etc.)
In every case, God rewarded people for obedient faith. They received the blessing "by faith," not before they obeyed or without obedience, but only after or as a result of their obedience. Yet when faith led to obedience, they received the reward "by faith."
Saving faith is faith that obeys. If your faith says that obedience is not necessary or that God will "save your soul" before you obey, then you have a faith that will not save. Consider this chart:
Blessings Received "by Faith"
Noah built the ark then his house was saved
Abraham obeyed to go then received inheritance
Israel marched then the walls fell
We obey conditions then receive forgiveness
Obedience comes first, then comes the blessing!
Observations
Faith can have different meanings.
"Faith" sometimes has a specific meaning, referring to inward conviction and trust, as distinguished from the acts of obedience that follow (cf. Romans 10:9,10). This "faith" is essential, but it will not save by itself, without the obedience. "Faith" can also have a more general or inclusive sense, so it includes all a person does to be forgiven of sins - including repentance, confession etc..
The same is true of the term "love." "Love" sometimes refers specifically to an attitude of good will toward others, as distinguished from acts people do (1 Corinthians 13:1-3; Galatians 5:6). In other cases "love" is said to be or to include the obedience that it produces (1 John 5:3).
We do similar things in everyday speech. We tell sick people, "You could get better if you would go to the doctor." Now "go to the doctor" could refer to the specific act of transporting yourself to where the doctor is. But in our illustration, it is understood that we mean all that is involved in being cured by the doctor, including what we do in response to his instructions (get a prescription filled, take medicine, change diet etc.) Likewise "faith" can be used specifically or inclusively.
Some people admit saving faith includes repentance and confession, but they deny it includes obedience. But if faith includes repentance and confession, then that it must be true that faith includes obedience, since repentance and confession are acts of obedience. Confession is even an outward, physical act. So "faith" includes these commands.
Some folks reply: "You're trusting your own works to save you, instead of trusting Jesus."
The truth is just the opposite. Noah was saved "by faith" when he obeyed God. Do you accuse him of trusting his own works instead of trusting God?
When Abraham and Israel pleased God by faithful obedience, did they trust their own works or God (Hebrews 11)? When people repent and confess to be forgiven, are they trusting in works or in Jesus?
Consider the bronze serpent Moses made to spare Israel from death. The people had to do something to be saved - they had to look at the serpent (Num. 21:9). Yet John 3:14-16 uses this to illustrate salvation by faith through Jesus. So even John 3:16 shows that saving faith includes obedience, it does not exclude it.
The truth is that saving faith leads people to obey Jesus because they trust Him, and they are not saved until their faith has produced the required obedience. When people think they can be saved without obeying what Jesus says, those are the ones who have a faith that will not save.
Burton Coffman's Excursion on Solifidianism (taken from his commentary on James): "Solifidian, from which the noun Solifidianism is derived, means "one who maintains that faith alone, without works, is the one requisite to salvation (from Latin "solus", alone plus "fides", faith)."[58]
Under James 2:26 it was explained that Solifidianism is founded upon an altogether inadequate understanding of the true ground of justification, that ground being neither human faith nor obedience nor both of them together. The one and only true grounds are the perfect faith and obedience of the Son of God. In the light of this, the doctrine is a theological "faux pas" of phenomenal dimensions. It claims eternal salvation for sinners, along with eternal justification (in the highest sense), grounded upon a purely human act of obedience, that is, the subjective trust/faith of sinners. Thus it makes sinners their own saviour by grounding the hope of salvation upon what the sinners themselves do. Logically and theologically, this is an arrogant absurdity.
Even if the major thesis of solifidianism were provable (which it is not), it would still fall short of any ultimate justification. That thesis is that in some way "saving faith," as it is called, includes all necessary acts of obedience, or produces them, or issues in them, or even does them. This is considered by holders of the doctrine to be a vital element of it, as judged by so many varied and repeated assertions of it. First, we shall notice a sampling of such assertions, demonstrating their falsity; and then, it will be pointed out that even if allowed as true, the whole concept of justification as resting upon what sinners themselves either believe or do, or believe AND do, still makes man his own saviour and misses altogether the only possible justification "in Christ" our Lord.
Assertions relative to "saving faith's" (so-called) inclusion of all necessary works:
"Faith cannot be severed from works."[59] This cannot be true, because many of the rulers of the Jews "believed on" the Lord Jesus Christ (John 12:42); and B. F. Westcott assured us that the words there employed by the apostle John mean the completeness and fullness of faith.[60] Yet those same people were the ones who murdered the Son of God. They had every kind of faith there is; so faith can and often does exist without works, being therefore separated from works. See full comment on the text from John in my Commentary on John, pp. 305-307.
"Faith uses works as its means."[61] This is untrue because James represented works, not as something faith was using, but as something "working with," or "cooperating with" faith (James 2:22). Likewise, the author of Hebrews made faith and baptism (a work in the usual solifidian view) to stand as coordinates in the foundation of the first principles of the gospel (Hebrews 6:1,2).
"If faith is genuine, works will follow."[62] Again, John 12:42 refutes this. See above. Further, James' challenge to errorists refuted in this chapter carried no criticism of their faith, other than the fact of its being without works. If it had been true that those workless Christians did not have the "right kind of faith," James would have dealt with that instead of the need for works. The entire last section of James 2 proves that faith can, and did, exist apart from works; and that it is not true that where faith is genuine works will follow.
"Works are an expression of faith."[63] This is false because works are something done by the believer, not by his faith. Eternal justification, as viewed by Paul, was grounded (in one sense) upon what men do (Romans 2:6-10; 2 Corinthians 5:10, etc.). In those citations from Paul, it is not deficiency of faith, but the deeds done by the believer, that is stressed.
"Works are the necessary fruits of faith." [64]
"Faith bringeth forth works."[65]
"Faith always issues in good works."[66]
"Faith is bound to overflow in action." [67]
"There is no faith that does not issue at once in loving obedience ."[68]
"Obedience is the inevitable and immediate issue of faith."[69]
Not any of these statements is in the Bible, nor is a single one of them true. If such notions as these had been a fact, James would not have bothered to give his urgent exhortation to good works. If such statements as the above had been the truth, and there had been the "wrong kind of faith" in any of the Christians he addressed, he would have devoted his energies to correcting the deficiency of their faith, instead of ordering them to obey the precepts of the Master relative to good works.
"Not for faith plus works does James plead, but for faith at work."[70] Like most of the samplings noted above, this also is a clever remark, but it is not true. James did plead for "faith plus works," flatly declaring that there was no profit in the faith that did not have that "plus."
"Real faith unites a man with Christ."[71] Significantly, this particular error is rather seldom advocated, in all probability because it is so frontally contradicted by the New Testament which nowhere carries such a statement as this, but which does categorically state no less than three times that one is "baptized into Christ," or "into his body" (Galatians 3:26,27; Rom. 6:3-5,1 Corinthians 12:13). No amount of faith ever united a man with anything, the P.T.A., the Masonic Lodge, the Democratic Party, nor the spiritual body of Christ.
"James was pleading for the `work of faith.'" This statement found in a number of commentaries is true, the error lying in the misunderstanding of "the work of faith," which means not the work which faith does, but the work commanded by "the faith" in the objective sense. Paul mentioned "work of faith" (1 Thessalonians 1:3), but his reference carries the thought that the Thessalonians were obeying the commandments of God, not that their "faith" was doing all the work.
"The ground of justification is faith, and that only."[72] This type of statement is not merely untrue; it contradicts the word of God in James 2:24, which declares that a man "is justified ... and not by faith alone." This kind of statement is not nearly as common as it once was, because more and more who believe it are embarrassed by James' refutation of their theory; but instead, greater and greater reliance is rested in the type of statements examined above, where the common design is in every case that of declaring Solifidianism.
Over and beyond all of these efforts to prove the unprovable, however, there looms the cosmic fact that even if faith should be viewed as all-inclusive of everything else, the basing of justification upon it (in any final sense) would still be making man his own saviour, still predicating the reception of eternal life upon thoughts and deeds of fallible and sinful men. Who could believe it? The basis of the final and eternal justification of the redeemed has already been determined and announced by God himself, the same being the righteousness of God "in Christ," available to those and those alone who are truly "in him," and moreover are "found in him" at last (Philippians 3:9).
Nevertheless, it is still an interesting and important question of whether faith plus works (of some kind), or merely "faith alone" is required of sinners seeking justification on the secondary and lower level which must be achieved "by them" before they may even become eligible for entry "into Christ" where alone true justification is available. The whole problem then turns upon one question alone, and that is, "How are men truly united with and brought `into' Christ?" Fortunately, the Scriptures do not leave such a question open, announcing repeatedly that men are "baptized into him." This mountain fact lies behind Jesus' declaration in Mark 16:15,16. Thus, even upon that lower level of secondary justification regarding fulfillment of preconditions of redemption, "faith alone" is valueless, even for the initial phase of justification; and, after that, the necessity of remaining "in Christ," of being found "in him" at last, even this will be determined by one's "deeds" (Romans 2:6-10; 2 Corinthians 5:10), which have the utility, along with faith, of keeping one "in Christ." The all-important thing that must precede final and ultimate justification is that the one to be justified must be "in Christ" and found "in him" at the end of his probation.
Therefore, the whole question of "faith plus works of obedience" or "faith only" should never have been raised. This is true because "faith only," no less than "faith plus obedience" is a "work" performed by sinners (being also, in a sense, a work performed by God, in the sense that God commanded it); and the predication of justification upon either "faith only" or "faith plus obedience" makes what the sinner does the grounds of justification; and the solifidian who bases his supposed salvation upon subjective trust/faith, rather than upon an obedient faith, does not gain the slightest advantage in such a conception, everything, in the last analysis, depending upon whether or not at last he shall be found "in Christ." The impossibility of "faith only" entering one "into Christ" is the ultimate condemnation of Solifidianism.
The concept of "saving faith" (so-called) as a religious experience: This is positively the most irrational and unbiblical idea ever to invade Christianity. The concept, variously advocated, supposes that "at some particular moment," "with emotions better felt than told," "in answer to prayer, .... under the emotional appeal of revivalism," or in some other bizarre circumstance, the sinner suddenly "experiences FAITH." Boom! All of his sins are forgiven; he is transformed spiritually, born again and saved eternally! The word of God nowhere pictures any such "spiritual orgasm" as that! This is pure voodoo-ism. No Biblical precept, no apostolic example even hints at such a thing. That is not the way Paul was converted; no member of the historical church as reviewed in Acts of the Apostles ever came "into Christ" in the manner of this false conception. Unscriptural and erroneous as such a "conversion" truly is, the mistake is compounded and multiplied by the solifidian arrogance of making that the only thing necessary for salvation and claiming eternal justification on the basis of it! There has never been a religious teaching that cried any louder to Almighty God for a drastic correction than does this one.
The satanic thrust of this evil theory also registers in its hatred of all who seek salvation and justification (even on the level of fulfilling preconditions of redemption) through faith and obedience of the gospel, and its adamant opposition to all preaching of the New Testament plan of salvation, accusing the followers of the New Testament of lacking salvation altogether and of attempting to be their own saviour. The illogical nature of this attitude appears in the fact of their denial of salvation predicated upon FAITH AND OBEDIENCE, while claiming it for themselves on the basis of FAITH WITHOUT OBEDIENCE, overlooking the fact that FAITH AND OBEDIENCE surely has everything their method has AND MORE! The only thing the true method of redemption lacks which theirs has is the alleged "faith experience," which to them is everything. The incongruous assertion that "faith only" could have anything not found in "faith and obedience" is impossible of being taken seriously.
No "experience" that any man ever had could rival that of Paul on the Damascus road. He actually saw the Lord! But three days later, he was still a, praying, penitent, grieving sinner; and so he remained until he heeded the command of Ananias to "Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins!" (Acts 22:16). Too bad that Paul never knew anything about being saved by "faith only."
The alleged Scriptural support of Solifidianism is extensive and will be briefly examined here. Solifidian methodology is characterized by the employment of a number of devices, as follows:
1. There is the literalization of synecdoche. Synecdoche, a type of metonymy in which one thing stands for a group of related things, is frequently used (especially by Paul) in the New Testament; and one of his frequent uses of this figure of speech is that of making "saved by faith" a synecdoche, or short-form way of saying, "saved by faith, repentance, confession, baptism, hope, the blood of Christ, and all other great essentials of the Christian religion." In my Commentary on Romans, a large number of Pauline uses of synecdoche were pointed out, there being no doubt whatever of Paul's "saved by faith" always being inclusive of many other things also; never did he mean "faith alone." The device of literalizing the synecdoche is a denial of the word of God. Take the synecdoche: "Philip II had 1800 sails in his navy." "Sails" actually means "fully equipped and manned warships"; the solifidian misunderstanding of it would assert the meaning to be: "Philip II had no warships at all and had gone into the cloth business!"
2. Another popular device is that of making passages which attribute salvation to "faith without works" mean that nothing whatever is to be done by the sinner except to believe in Christ. The error of this is multiple. "Without works," in the Pauline usage, in the vast majority of instances, means "works of the Law of Moses" and faith means either (a) all the Christian requirements (synecdoche), or (b) "the whole Christian religion" (faith used objectively). Again, the solifidian misinterpretation reads "works" to include every conceivable kind of human activity, whereas the New Testament speaks of seven classes of works, including the "work of faith," deeds done in obedience to divine commandments," as necessary to salvation. It is a perversion of God's word to apply "without works" as meaning "without obedience to Christ."
3. The device of interpreting New Testament references to "faith" as meaning (subjectively) the unscriptural "experience of faith" in which instantaneous salvation results. Many have been deceived into thinking this meaning is in the New Testament; but it is not, the usual meaning of the word faith in the New Testament being simply that of "faithfulness" or "fidelity." See in my Commentary on Galatians (p. 44) for extended discussion regarding the error of construing New Testament references to "faith" as having the meaning of "subjective, sinner's trust/ faith." There are more than a hundred instances in the New Testament in which the solifidian bias of reading "faith" in the subjective sense has been imported and read into the text; one notable scholar even declared that 2 Timothy 4:7 is "best understood subjectively"! In that passage, how can it be denied that Paul's saying he had "kept the faith" means anything other than that he had been true to the holy religion of Christ?
4. Outright mistranslation of God's word is also used extensively to mutilate and alter passages which do not "fit" solifidian error. Thus, John 3:16 is perverted to read "SHALL have everlasting life" instead of "SHOULD have, etc." Romans 10:10, "Confession is made unto salvation," is perverted to read, "It is stating his belief by his own mouth that CONFIRMS his salvation" (Phillips). These are only two of many scores of such arrogant changes which solifidian scholars perpetrate against the sacred word. It is very difficult to believe that the consciences of those who commit this type of outrage could be easy in the doing of such things. The great plethora of "modern English" translations of the New Testament has many of them that in no sense may be legitimately called translations, being loaded with Solifidianism and other errors throughout.
5. The device of substituting sinner's trust/faith for "the faith of Christ (the faith Christ had) in Romans 3:22,26; Galatians 2:16,20, and many other places, carries the effect of making the sinner his own saviour (through his providing the "saving faith"); whereas the faith that truly saves is "the faith of Christ" PLUS the perfect obedience of Christ! See extensive discussions of this subject in Romans (my Commentary on Romans) and Galatians (my Commentary on Galatians), under above references.
6. Rejection of whole blocks of the New Testament that cannot be made to fit the solifidian straitjacket has, from time to time, been brazenly advocated. Martin Luther rejected James because he thought it contradicted Paul; whereas, it only contradicted what Luther erroneously alleged to be Paul's teaching. There is no logic at all in the allegation that it was actually James which was misunderstood by Luther, and that James does not contradict Solifidianism. Of course it does! Then, there is the case of Arthur Cushman McGiffert, the theological "giant" who rejected the Pastorals, grounding his case on the assertion that "Nowhere in them is `faith' used in the great Pauline sense (solifidian sense, of course)!" McGiffert was absolutely correct in seeing that Solifidianism is bluntly contradicted by the Pastoral epistles. Countless other examples of such behavior in smaller particulars could be pointed out, raising the question of what must be thought of a theory whose adherents seek to change the word of God, rather than give up their error?
7. Another device is that of bypassing the spiritual body of Christ in their doctrine of salvation "by faith alone:" Solifidian theology pays scant attention, if any, to the overwhelmingly important Pauline teaching of "salvation in Christ." The expression "in Christ" (in him, in whom, in the Lord, etc.) is used 169 times in Paul's writings. Forgiveness, eternal life, salvation, redemption of sins, hope, grace, love, etc. - in fact EVERYTHING is "in Christ." Therefore, when Paul speaks of "faith in Christ," what does he mean? Sinner's subjective trust/faith? No! That is not "in Christ," it is in the sinner! A number of Pauline references to "faith in Christ" mean "faith" exercised by one "who has been baptized into Christ," thus stressing the theater of faith, not the mere subjective trust/faith of sinners. No unbaptized believer has faith "in Christ," as long as he is "out of Christ." The hard logic of this basic truth shows the fundamental error of Solifidianism.
Throughout this series of commentaries, careful attention has been paid to solifidian mistranslations, perversions and other devices used in allegations of Scriptural support of their error; and the above are only a few samplings from the wholesale outrages committed against the New Testament by unspiritual men who, under a pretense of "spirituality" are guilty of misrepresenting the word of God.
The candid manner of discussing Solifidianism, adopted here, should not be construed as a private judgment against "other Christians" (so-called). We do not maintain the position that intellectual error, even on so important a topic as this, may necessarily lead to final condemnation. In fairness, as noted earlier, it must be said that many solifidians, to the best of their ability, proceed to obey the teachings of the New Testament, in spite of their incorrect theory; and to the extent that they indeed "do believe and obey" the truth, they have exactly the same hope as all others who "believe and obey the gospel."
However, and here is tragedy, countless "professed" Christians are not in any sense obeying the gospel, walking in the teachings of the New Testament, ordering their lives by the precepts and examples of the apostles, nor in any other sense exhibiting the character and conduct of genuine followers of Christ. Their lapse in this whole area of "doing" the religion of Christ covers all phases of it; from violation of Christ's commandment to be baptized, forsaking his word relative to the Lord's supper, denying any appreciation for the church which is his spiritual body - from all such violations as these, all the way to a total abandonment of ethical and moral behavior by living in gross sins such as drunkenness, adultery, fornication, falsehood, stealing, idleness - put in all the lists of sins in the New Testament. Such things are openly practiced by a very large portion of those in our nation today who, according to themselves, are "saved by faith alone." It is in this frame of reference that this rather extensive discussion of the key error in modern theology is offered.
[56] Ronald A. Ward, op. cit., p. 1229.
[57] J. W. Roberts, op. cit., p. 100.
[58] Britannica World Dictionary.
[59] Walter W. Wessel, op. cit., p. 924.
[60] B. F. Westcott, The Gospel according to St. John (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971), p. 186.
[61] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 591.
[62] Ronald A. Ward, op. cit., p. 1229.
[63] Ibid., p. 1228.
[64] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 1035.
[65] T. Guthrie, Biblical Illustrator, op. cit., p. 254.
[66] Many commentators use this statement.
[67] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 78.
[68] R. V. G. Tasker, op. cit., p. 69.
[69] Ibid., p. 70.
[70] T. Carson, op. cit., p. 576.
[71] R. V. G. Tasker, op. cit., p. 63.
[72] Albert Barnes, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1953), p. 48."
Under James 2:26 it was explained that Solifidianism is founded upon an altogether inadequate understanding of the true ground of justification, that ground being neither human faith nor obedience nor both of them together. The one and only true grounds are the perfect faith and obedience of the Son of God. In the light of this, the doctrine is a theological "faux pas" of phenomenal dimensions. It claims eternal salvation for sinners, along with eternal justification (in the highest sense), grounded upon a purely human act of obedience, that is, the subjective trust/faith of sinners. Thus it makes sinners their own saviour by grounding the hope of salvation upon what the sinners themselves do. Logically and theologically, this is an arrogant absurdity.
Even if the major thesis of solifidianism were provable (which it is not), it would still fall short of any ultimate justification. That thesis is that in some way "saving faith," as it is called, includes all necessary acts of obedience, or produces them, or issues in them, or even does them. This is considered by holders of the doctrine to be a vital element of it, as judged by so many varied and repeated assertions of it. First, we shall notice a sampling of such assertions, demonstrating their falsity; and then, it will be pointed out that even if allowed as true, the whole concept of justification as resting upon what sinners themselves either believe or do, or believe AND do, still makes man his own saviour and misses altogether the only possible justification "in Christ" our Lord.
Assertions relative to "saving faith's" (so-called) inclusion of all necessary works:
"Faith cannot be severed from works."[59] This cannot be true, because many of the rulers of the Jews "believed on" the Lord Jesus Christ (John 12:42); and B. F. Westcott assured us that the words there employed by the apostle John mean the completeness and fullness of faith.[60] Yet those same people were the ones who murdered the Son of God. They had every kind of faith there is; so faith can and often does exist without works, being therefore separated from works. See full comment on the text from John in my Commentary on John, pp. 305-307.
"Faith uses works as its means."[61] This is untrue because James represented works, not as something faith was using, but as something "working with," or "cooperating with" faith (James 2:22). Likewise, the author of Hebrews made faith and baptism (a work in the usual solifidian view) to stand as coordinates in the foundation of the first principles of the gospel (Hebrews 6:1,2).
"If faith is genuine, works will follow."[62] Again, John 12:42 refutes this. See above. Further, James' challenge to errorists refuted in this chapter carried no criticism of their faith, other than the fact of its being without works. If it had been true that those workless Christians did not have the "right kind of faith," James would have dealt with that instead of the need for works. The entire last section of James 2 proves that faith can, and did, exist apart from works; and that it is not true that where faith is genuine works will follow.
"Works are an expression of faith."[63] This is false because works are something done by the believer, not by his faith. Eternal justification, as viewed by Paul, was grounded (in one sense) upon what men do (Romans 2:6-10; 2 Corinthians 5:10, etc.). In those citations from Paul, it is not deficiency of faith, but the deeds done by the believer, that is stressed.
"Works are the necessary fruits of faith." [64]
"Faith bringeth forth works."[65]
"Faith always issues in good works."[66]
"Faith is bound to overflow in action." [67]
"There is no faith that does not issue at once in loving obedience ."[68]
"Obedience is the inevitable and immediate issue of faith."[69]
Not any of these statements is in the Bible, nor is a single one of them true. If such notions as these had been a fact, James would not have bothered to give his urgent exhortation to good works. If such statements as the above had been the truth, and there had been the "wrong kind of faith" in any of the Christians he addressed, he would have devoted his energies to correcting the deficiency of their faith, instead of ordering them to obey the precepts of the Master relative to good works.
"Not for faith plus works does James plead, but for faith at work."[70] Like most of the samplings noted above, this also is a clever remark, but it is not true. James did plead for "faith plus works," flatly declaring that there was no profit in the faith that did not have that "plus."
"Real faith unites a man with Christ."[71] Significantly, this particular error is rather seldom advocated, in all probability because it is so frontally contradicted by the New Testament which nowhere carries such a statement as this, but which does categorically state no less than three times that one is "baptized into Christ," or "into his body" (Galatians 3:26,27; Rom. 6:3-5,1 Corinthians 12:13). No amount of faith ever united a man with anything, the P.T.A., the Masonic Lodge, the Democratic Party, nor the spiritual body of Christ.
"James was pleading for the `work of faith.'" This statement found in a number of commentaries is true, the error lying in the misunderstanding of "the work of faith," which means not the work which faith does, but the work commanded by "the faith" in the objective sense. Paul mentioned "work of faith" (1 Thessalonians 1:3), but his reference carries the thought that the Thessalonians were obeying the commandments of God, not that their "faith" was doing all the work.
"The ground of justification is faith, and that only."[72] This type of statement is not merely untrue; it contradicts the word of God in James 2:24, which declares that a man "is justified ... and not by faith alone." This kind of statement is not nearly as common as it once was, because more and more who believe it are embarrassed by James' refutation of their theory; but instead, greater and greater reliance is rested in the type of statements examined above, where the common design is in every case that of declaring Solifidianism.
Over and beyond all of these efforts to prove the unprovable, however, there looms the cosmic fact that even if faith should be viewed as all-inclusive of everything else, the basing of justification upon it (in any final sense) would still be making man his own saviour, still predicating the reception of eternal life upon thoughts and deeds of fallible and sinful men. Who could believe it? The basis of the final and eternal justification of the redeemed has already been determined and announced by God himself, the same being the righteousness of God "in Christ," available to those and those alone who are truly "in him," and moreover are "found in him" at last (Philippians 3:9).
Nevertheless, it is still an interesting and important question of whether faith plus works (of some kind), or merely "faith alone" is required of sinners seeking justification on the secondary and lower level which must be achieved "by them" before they may even become eligible for entry "into Christ" where alone true justification is available. The whole problem then turns upon one question alone, and that is, "How are men truly united with and brought `into' Christ?" Fortunately, the Scriptures do not leave such a question open, announcing repeatedly that men are "baptized into him." This mountain fact lies behind Jesus' declaration in Mark 16:15,16. Thus, even upon that lower level of secondary justification regarding fulfillment of preconditions of redemption, "faith alone" is valueless, even for the initial phase of justification; and, after that, the necessity of remaining "in Christ," of being found "in him" at last, even this will be determined by one's "deeds" (Romans 2:6-10; 2 Corinthians 5:10), which have the utility, along with faith, of keeping one "in Christ." The all-important thing that must precede final and ultimate justification is that the one to be justified must be "in Christ" and found "in him" at the end of his probation.
Therefore, the whole question of "faith plus works of obedience" or "faith only" should never have been raised. This is true because "faith only," no less than "faith plus obedience" is a "work" performed by sinners (being also, in a sense, a work performed by God, in the sense that God commanded it); and the predication of justification upon either "faith only" or "faith plus obedience" makes what the sinner does the grounds of justification; and the solifidian who bases his supposed salvation upon subjective trust/faith, rather than upon an obedient faith, does not gain the slightest advantage in such a conception, everything, in the last analysis, depending upon whether or not at last he shall be found "in Christ." The impossibility of "faith only" entering one "into Christ" is the ultimate condemnation of Solifidianism.
The concept of "saving faith" (so-called) as a religious experience: This is positively the most irrational and unbiblical idea ever to invade Christianity. The concept, variously advocated, supposes that "at some particular moment," "with emotions better felt than told," "in answer to prayer, .... under the emotional appeal of revivalism," or in some other bizarre circumstance, the sinner suddenly "experiences FAITH." Boom! All of his sins are forgiven; he is transformed spiritually, born again and saved eternally! The word of God nowhere pictures any such "spiritual orgasm" as that! This is pure voodoo-ism. No Biblical precept, no apostolic example even hints at such a thing. That is not the way Paul was converted; no member of the historical church as reviewed in Acts of the Apostles ever came "into Christ" in the manner of this false conception. Unscriptural and erroneous as such a "conversion" truly is, the mistake is compounded and multiplied by the solifidian arrogance of making that the only thing necessary for salvation and claiming eternal justification on the basis of it! There has never been a religious teaching that cried any louder to Almighty God for a drastic correction than does this one.
The satanic thrust of this evil theory also registers in its hatred of all who seek salvation and justification (even on the level of fulfilling preconditions of redemption) through faith and obedience of the gospel, and its adamant opposition to all preaching of the New Testament plan of salvation, accusing the followers of the New Testament of lacking salvation altogether and of attempting to be their own saviour. The illogical nature of this attitude appears in the fact of their denial of salvation predicated upon FAITH AND OBEDIENCE, while claiming it for themselves on the basis of FAITH WITHOUT OBEDIENCE, overlooking the fact that FAITH AND OBEDIENCE surely has everything their method has AND MORE! The only thing the true method of redemption lacks which theirs has is the alleged "faith experience," which to them is everything. The incongruous assertion that "faith only" could have anything not found in "faith and obedience" is impossible of being taken seriously.
No "experience" that any man ever had could rival that of Paul on the Damascus road. He actually saw the Lord! But three days later, he was still a, praying, penitent, grieving sinner; and so he remained until he heeded the command of Ananias to "Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins!" (Acts 22:16). Too bad that Paul never knew anything about being saved by "faith only."
The alleged Scriptural support of Solifidianism is extensive and will be briefly examined here. Solifidian methodology is characterized by the employment of a number of devices, as follows:
1. There is the literalization of synecdoche. Synecdoche, a type of metonymy in which one thing stands for a group of related things, is frequently used (especially by Paul) in the New Testament; and one of his frequent uses of this figure of speech is that of making "saved by faith" a synecdoche, or short-form way of saying, "saved by faith, repentance, confession, baptism, hope, the blood of Christ, and all other great essentials of the Christian religion." In my Commentary on Romans, a large number of Pauline uses of synecdoche were pointed out, there being no doubt whatever of Paul's "saved by faith" always being inclusive of many other things also; never did he mean "faith alone." The device of literalizing the synecdoche is a denial of the word of God. Take the synecdoche: "Philip II had 1800 sails in his navy." "Sails" actually means "fully equipped and manned warships"; the solifidian misunderstanding of it would assert the meaning to be: "Philip II had no warships at all and had gone into the cloth business!"
2. Another popular device is that of making passages which attribute salvation to "faith without works" mean that nothing whatever is to be done by the sinner except to believe in Christ. The error of this is multiple. "Without works," in the Pauline usage, in the vast majority of instances, means "works of the Law of Moses" and faith means either (a) all the Christian requirements (synecdoche), or (b) "the whole Christian religion" (faith used objectively). Again, the solifidian misinterpretation reads "works" to include every conceivable kind of human activity, whereas the New Testament speaks of seven classes of works, including the "work of faith," deeds done in obedience to divine commandments," as necessary to salvation. It is a perversion of God's word to apply "without works" as meaning "without obedience to Christ."
3. The device of interpreting New Testament references to "faith" as meaning (subjectively) the unscriptural "experience of faith" in which instantaneous salvation results. Many have been deceived into thinking this meaning is in the New Testament; but it is not, the usual meaning of the word faith in the New Testament being simply that of "faithfulness" or "fidelity." See in my Commentary on Galatians (p. 44) for extended discussion regarding the error of construing New Testament references to "faith" as having the meaning of "subjective, sinner's trust/ faith." There are more than a hundred instances in the New Testament in which the solifidian bias of reading "faith" in the subjective sense has been imported and read into the text; one notable scholar even declared that 2 Timothy 4:7 is "best understood subjectively"! In that passage, how can it be denied that Paul's saying he had "kept the faith" means anything other than that he had been true to the holy religion of Christ?
4. Outright mistranslation of God's word is also used extensively to mutilate and alter passages which do not "fit" solifidian error. Thus, John 3:16 is perverted to read "SHALL have everlasting life" instead of "SHOULD have, etc." Romans 10:10, "Confession is made unto salvation," is perverted to read, "It is stating his belief by his own mouth that CONFIRMS his salvation" (Phillips). These are only two of many scores of such arrogant changes which solifidian scholars perpetrate against the sacred word. It is very difficult to believe that the consciences of those who commit this type of outrage could be easy in the doing of such things. The great plethora of "modern English" translations of the New Testament has many of them that in no sense may be legitimately called translations, being loaded with Solifidianism and other errors throughout.
5. The device of substituting sinner's trust/faith for "the faith of Christ (the faith Christ had) in Romans 3:22,26; Galatians 2:16,20, and many other places, carries the effect of making the sinner his own saviour (through his providing the "saving faith"); whereas the faith that truly saves is "the faith of Christ" PLUS the perfect obedience of Christ! See extensive discussions of this subject in Romans (my Commentary on Romans) and Galatians (my Commentary on Galatians), under above references.
6. Rejection of whole blocks of the New Testament that cannot be made to fit the solifidian straitjacket has, from time to time, been brazenly advocated. Martin Luther rejected James because he thought it contradicted Paul; whereas, it only contradicted what Luther erroneously alleged to be Paul's teaching. There is no logic at all in the allegation that it was actually James which was misunderstood by Luther, and that James does not contradict Solifidianism. Of course it does! Then, there is the case of Arthur Cushman McGiffert, the theological "giant" who rejected the Pastorals, grounding his case on the assertion that "Nowhere in them is `faith' used in the great Pauline sense (solifidian sense, of course)!" McGiffert was absolutely correct in seeing that Solifidianism is bluntly contradicted by the Pastoral epistles. Countless other examples of such behavior in smaller particulars could be pointed out, raising the question of what must be thought of a theory whose adherents seek to change the word of God, rather than give up their error?
7. Another device is that of bypassing the spiritual body of Christ in their doctrine of salvation "by faith alone:" Solifidian theology pays scant attention, if any, to the overwhelmingly important Pauline teaching of "salvation in Christ." The expression "in Christ" (in him, in whom, in the Lord, etc.) is used 169 times in Paul's writings. Forgiveness, eternal life, salvation, redemption of sins, hope, grace, love, etc. - in fact EVERYTHING is "in Christ." Therefore, when Paul speaks of "faith in Christ," what does he mean? Sinner's subjective trust/faith? No! That is not "in Christ," it is in the sinner! A number of Pauline references to "faith in Christ" mean "faith" exercised by one "who has been baptized into Christ," thus stressing the theater of faith, not the mere subjective trust/faith of sinners. No unbaptized believer has faith "in Christ," as long as he is "out of Christ." The hard logic of this basic truth shows the fundamental error of Solifidianism.
Throughout this series of commentaries, careful attention has been paid to solifidian mistranslations, perversions and other devices used in allegations of Scriptural support of their error; and the above are only a few samplings from the wholesale outrages committed against the New Testament by unspiritual men who, under a pretense of "spirituality" are guilty of misrepresenting the word of God.
The candid manner of discussing Solifidianism, adopted here, should not be construed as a private judgment against "other Christians" (so-called). We do not maintain the position that intellectual error, even on so important a topic as this, may necessarily lead to final condemnation. In fairness, as noted earlier, it must be said that many solifidians, to the best of their ability, proceed to obey the teachings of the New Testament, in spite of their incorrect theory; and to the extent that they indeed "do believe and obey" the truth, they have exactly the same hope as all others who "believe and obey the gospel."
However, and here is tragedy, countless "professed" Christians are not in any sense obeying the gospel, walking in the teachings of the New Testament, ordering their lives by the precepts and examples of the apostles, nor in any other sense exhibiting the character and conduct of genuine followers of Christ. Their lapse in this whole area of "doing" the religion of Christ covers all phases of it; from violation of Christ's commandment to be baptized, forsaking his word relative to the Lord's supper, denying any appreciation for the church which is his spiritual body - from all such violations as these, all the way to a total abandonment of ethical and moral behavior by living in gross sins such as drunkenness, adultery, fornication, falsehood, stealing, idleness - put in all the lists of sins in the New Testament. Such things are openly practiced by a very large portion of those in our nation today who, according to themselves, are "saved by faith alone." It is in this frame of reference that this rather extensive discussion of the key error in modern theology is offered.
[56] Ronald A. Ward, op. cit., p. 1229.
[57] J. W. Roberts, op. cit., p. 100.
[58] Britannica World Dictionary.
[59] Walter W. Wessel, op. cit., p. 924.
[60] B. F. Westcott, The Gospel according to St. John (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971), p. 186.
[61] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 591.
[62] Ronald A. Ward, op. cit., p. 1229.
[63] Ibid., p. 1228.
[64] J. R. Dummelow, op. cit., p. 1035.
[65] T. Guthrie, Biblical Illustrator, op. cit., p. 254.
[66] Many commentators use this statement.
[67] William Barclay, op. cit., p. 78.
[68] R. V. G. Tasker, op. cit., p. 69.
[69] Ibid., p. 70.
[70] T. Carson, op. cit., p. 576.
[71] R. V. G. Tasker, op. cit., p. 63.
[72] Albert Barnes, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1953), p. 48."
Coffman: "Even so faith, if it have not works, is dead in itself. As Ward said, "Faith alone in James 2:24 and faith without works in James 2:26 correspond with what is said here."[30]
Is dead in itself ... The dead do not do anything, the same being analogous with trust/faith without works. But is this not equivalent to the proposition that faith without works is not "real faith"? Indeed no. Is a dead body no longer a body? Is a dead body not real? Is a dead body different in nature from a living body? Is a single characteristic of a body lost by the mere fact of death? Thus, a faith that is genuine enough in itself, when dead, is not essentially different. Thus, there is no reason to make this place an excuse for affirming that those "without works" had the wrong kind of faith. The most marvelous body that ever lived may be compared with the most marvelous faith that ever existed; but if that marvelous faith is without works, it then has the same status as a dead corpse."
[30] Ronald A. Ward, op. cit., p. 1228.
Is dead in itself ... The dead do not do anything, the same being analogous with trust/faith without works. But is this not equivalent to the proposition that faith without works is not "real faith"? Indeed no. Is a dead body no longer a body? Is a dead body not real? Is a dead body different in nature from a living body? Is a single characteristic of a body lost by the mere fact of death? Thus, a faith that is genuine enough in itself, when dead, is not essentially different. Thus, there is no reason to make this place an excuse for affirming that those "without works" had the wrong kind of faith. The most marvelous body that ever lived may be compared with the most marvelous faith that ever existed; but if that marvelous faith is without works, it then has the same status as a dead corpse."
[30] Ronald A. Ward, op. cit., p. 1228.