LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF RELIGION

JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH AN ESSAY SUBMITTED TO PROF. GEORGE CARRAWAY PH.D.

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE STUDY OF ROMANS BIBLE 425-B04

BY STEVEN GOATLEY L224292 2

MOORESVILLE! NORTH CAROLINA O"#$%&' ()! 20(2

INTRODUCTION

This essay will examine the apostle Pauls statement of doctrine that one is justified by faith alone. This doctrine is found thread throughout his epistle to the Romans, but most cite chapter 5 verses !5 as the foundational passage Paul uses to ma"e this claim. The passage states# Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with $od through our %ord &esus 'hrist, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. (nd we rejoice in the hope of the glory of $od. )ot only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we "now that suffering produces perseverance* perseverance, character* and character, hope. (nd hope does not disappoint us, because $od has poured out his love into our hearts by the +oly ,pirit, whom he has given us. +ere, Paul clearly states, -we have been justified through faith./ 0ne can also loo" to Romans 1#5, -23ut to the one who does not wor", but believes in +im who justifies the ungodly, his faith is rec"oned as righteousness.24 +ere again Paul is very clear about his intentions that one is justified only by faith alone. %ater on in 5phesians 4#6!7, +e says you are saved by grace through faith and not of wor"s so that no man can boast. 8t is very clear that Paul absolutely believes that justification is by faith alone. 8n order to clearly understand what Paul is teaching this essay will examine the cultural and historical context that is the framewor" of Pauls letter to the Romans. 8t will also examine the ever popular argument that the writer of &ames contradicts Pauls letter .

The NIV Study Bible, 10th Edition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995) ! "bid
1

CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL CONTE*T

(t the time of Pauls writing the epistle to the Romans the church in Rome was in some conflict. 5arlier to the arrival of this letter, the &ewish people had been banished from Rome. This meant that the church in Rome that was probably originated by 9essianic &ews was left to the $entile members. These $entile members "new and understood the -new/ teachings of the gospel to a certain extent, but were not versed in the rich &ewish tradition that was so ingrained in their &ewish counterparts. +owever, there came a time when those 9essianic &ews were allowed to return. +olladay states, -8t is possible that some well!established $entile 'hristians were reluctant to welcome bac" to Rome returning &ewish 'hristians who earlier had been banished from the city by the emperor 'laudius./: 8t seems probable that this situation erupted in a conflict of sorts. )ews of this conflict concerning the returning &ewish 'hristians ;uite possibly reached Paul. +olladay continues to explain that this situation would have given Paul even more reason to -clarify $ods Purpose in extending the divine promise to $entiles and to show how his own apostolic ministry related to that purpose./1 +e goes on to say that Paul also needed to help clarify 8sraels role in the promise given the grafting in of the $entile believers. 8t also seems obvious from the way Paul forms some of his arguments that there was some, who were of the &ewish 'hristians, who were holding onto the old ways. <hile Paul scorns both groups for their treatment of the other, he is also very concerned about confusing $arl R Hollada%, A Critical Introduction to the New Testament (&ashville: 'bingdon Press, !005, p #(9) ( "bid
#

justification by faith with the "eeping of the %aw. This is not to say the Ten 'ommandments, but the entirety of the 9osaic %aw. This point will be clarified later in this essay.

JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH

'arson, 9oo and 9orris start out their chapter on Romans explaining that, -Righteousness of $od by faith is the theme of the first major section of the letter. Paul paves the way for this theme by explaining why is was necessary for $od to manifest +is righteousness and why humans can experience this righteousness only by faith. ,in, Paul affirms, has gained a stranglehold on all people, and only an act of $od, experienced as a free gift through faith, can brea" that strangle hold./5 This sin, has affected all people. (s the recipients of Pauls letter this would include both the $entile and &ewish 'hristians. 8t is easy to see that the $entiles have been affected as former pagans, but what about the &ewish 'hristians= (ccording to &ohnson, the very promise from $od they have enjoyed has brought them down by becoming a reason to boast. &ohnson brings to light the idea that the &ewish 'hristians seemed to believe that the Torah and the privileges given them as $ods chosen people led them to believe that they were somehow above their $entile brothers. +e states, -Paul does not deny the advantages given to the &ews by Torah.+is point is that these do not fundamentally give the an advantage with regard to their relationship with $od >i.e. righteousness?./@ <ith these things in mind, Paul asserts that all are e;ual within the confines of receiving the righteousness of $od or being found justified in the eyes of $od because it is only by faith in ) ' $arson, )ouglas * +oo and ,eon +orris, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 199!, p !#9) ,u.e /i0oth% *ohnson, The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation, Revised Edition (+inneapolis, +&: 'ugsburg 1ortress, 1999, #(9)
5

&esus 'hrist as their savior that this is possible. )o amount of "eeping the law or wor"s of the law will suffice. This is seen even more clearly by loo"ing at Romans :#46!:A, -Bor we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from wor"s of the %aw. 0r is $od the $od of &ews only= 8s +e not the $od of $entiles also= Ces, of $entiles also, since indeed $od who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one.2D CONFLICT WITH JAMES (t this point it is important to ta"e a moment and loo" at the popular argument that Paul and &ames are in conflict with one another when it comes to the doctrine of justification. )ot only is it important to understand what the texts are saying and how they are not in conflict, but the investigation of this matter will also shed more light on what Pauls teaching is concerning justification by faith. &ames 4# 1! D states# -<hat good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds= 'an such faith save them= ,uppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 8f one of you says to them, -$o in peace* "eep warm and well fed,/ but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it= 8n the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. 8t is easy to see that &ames is saying that faith alone is not enough to bring one into a position of being justified before $od. <ithout deeds, &ames states very clearly that faith is dead. &ames is not terribly specific with what deeds or -wor"s/ he is referring to. <hat is clear is that in his mind a faith that would be -alive/ is one that would be accompanied by some evidence. This evidence would be the deeds or wor"s he spea"s about above. 8f we are to accept what &ames is saying in this passage we must also accept the The NIV Study Bible, 10th Edition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995)
2

underlying meanings. 8f this is correct then if one is to decide that they do believe in $od and even that they believe in &esus as the 'hrist and tell their self or even others that they have placed their faith in the gospel, but have no deeds to give evidence to this decision* their faith is dead. 8f that faith is dead, it has no power to save. That is to provide salvation or place them in the position of being justified before $od. These terms of salvation and justification can be confusing. 0bviously this essay is concerned about justification by faith, but one cannot have a proper understanding of one without the other. 'arraway sheds some light on this. 8n his letter he explains that the issue here is whether or not a faith is a saving faith or not. This is to say that the $ospel has the power to transform the one who accepts, believes and places their trust in it. +e is also clear that this is not justification, but that justification is the declaration of a saving faith. That is that justification does not have the power of transformation, but that it is the position one is place in after being transformed by the $ospel through saving faith.6 Enderstanding this concept is very important to realiFing that &ames and Paul are actually in agreement.

ABRAHAM 3oth Paul and &ames discuss (braham while asserting their points. &ames points to the day that (braham offered his son upon the alter to give supporting evidence to his point that wor"s must accompany faith to be counted as righteousness. This is another way of saying he was justified. &ames 4#4 !41 states# George Ph ) $arra4a%, 56ibl (!5 'nnoun7e0ents,5 iberty !ni"ersity Blac#board, 8ept 11, !01!, http:99bb2 libert% edu94ebapps9portal9:ra0eset ;sp< tab=tab=group=id>=!=1?url>@!14ebapps@!1bla7.board@!1eAe7ute @!1laun7her@#1t%pe@#)$ourse@!-id@#)=13#-9#0= (a77essed B7t 5, !01!)
3

-<as not our ancestor (braham justified by wor"s when he offered his son 8saac on the altar= Cou see that faith was active along with his wor"s, and faith was brought to completion by the wor"s. Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, -(braham believed $od, and it was rec"oned to him as righteousness,/ and he was called the friend of $od. &ames ma"es a good argument here that faith was not found to be wor"ing alone in the case of (braham. 8t is important to note that &ames states the (brahams faith was made complete by his wor"s. Paul also addresses (braham and specifically the same passage of scripture that &ames ;uotes above. Paul argues in Romans 1# !5# -<hat then shall we say that (braham, our forefather according to the flesh, discovered in this matter= 8f, in fact, (braham was justified by wor"s, he had something to boast aboutGbut not before $od. <hat does ,cripture say= -(braham believed $od, and it was credited to him as righteousness./ )ow to the one who wor"s, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. +owever, to the one who does not wor" but trusts $od who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness./ &ames argued that (brahams faith was completed by his wor"s, but Paul argues that it was his faith alone that saved him. +e presses the issue farther that if it were due to (brahams wor"s, he then would have something to boast about. (s a sideline, this reflects the issue above concerning the &ewish 'hristians and their boasting about the Torah. (gain, it would seem that the argument is a draw. 0ne seems to say wor"s and the other faith. The passage that seems to diffuse this seeming conflict is next. WOR+S OF THE LAW To truly understand the how this all culminates it is important to ta"e a loo" as another passage in Pauls epistle to the Romans. Paul spells out more clearly what it is he is saying and it becomes clear that the wor"s that he and &ames are tal"ing about are two entirely different 2

things. Romans :#4 !4@ states# -3ut now apart from the law the righteousness of $od has been made "nown, to which the %aw and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in &esus 'hrist to all who believe. There is no difference between &ew and $entile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of $od, and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by 'hrist &esus. $od presented 'hrist as a sacrifice of atonement, through the shedding of his bloodGto be received by faith. +e did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunishedG he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in &esus./ Paul is spea"ing about wor"s of the %aw. That is to say, "eeping with the %aw will not provide salvation. The %aw cannot justify one. Paul is ma"ing it clear that this only possible through the redemption made available through &esus 'hrist. (nd this is given freely to all who believe. 3ecause of this there is no difference between &ew and $entile and therefore no basis for the conflict between them and spo"en of at the beginning of this essay. &ames on the other hand is spea"ing of wor"s in general. +e is not concerned with the wor"s of the law that Paul is because he is spea"ing to a different audience. &ames is tal"ing about the wor"s that will naturally follow a transformative and saving faith, which is alive. These wor"s he is spea"ing of would be those that are done out of love and adoration to $od who is %ord of ones life. Bollowing the evidence and the scriptures clearly shows that there is not conflict between the writings of Paul and &ames. 8n fact, they are very much in agreement. The deciding or deciphering factor is understanding each writers meaning of wor"s andHor deeds. 0nce that issue is cleared up, the conflict dissolves. CONCLUSION 3

8t should be clear at this point that the Paul did indeed teach a doctrinal belief that justification is by faith alone. That faith is a transformative faith in the gospel of &esus 'hrist, that brings about salvation and places one in the position of being justified before $od or having their faith counted as righteousness. This faith would not be the dead faith that &ames warns about but a living faith that will demonstrate deeds not of the %aw, but of righteousness. These deeds are not what bring about salvation or the declaration of justification, but the evidence thereof. 3ecause justification is by faith alone, Paul does indeed demonstrate that there is no difference between &ew and $entile. (ll are indeed found to come short of the glory of $od and in need of a savior. <ithout that savior, &esus 'hrist, who was given as the perfect sacrifice to atone for the sins of man, all humanity would be lost. Burther, it is only by faith in &esus 'hrist as %ord and ,avior, apart from the %aw, that justification can be found.

Bibliography
'bington Press The $pistle to the %omans& Col 9, in The Interpreter's Bible, b% *ohn DnoA and Gerald R $ragg, edited b% &olan 6 Har0on, #55E--3 &ashville: 'bington Press, 195( F The Interpreters (ne)Volume Commentary on the Bible& Edited b% $harles + ,a%0on &ashville: 'bingtion Press, 1921 6oa, Denneth, and Gillia0 Druidenier *olman New Testament Commentary: %omans& Edited b% +aA 'nders Col - 1! vols &ashville: 6road0an ? Hol0an Publishers, !000 $arra4a%, George Ph ) 56ibl (!5 'nnoun7e0ents 5 iberty !ni"ersity Blac#board& 8ept 11, !01! http:99bb2 libert% edu94ebapps9portal9:ra0eset ;sp< tab=tab=group=id>=!=1?url>@!14ebapps@!1bla7.board@!1eAe7ute @!1laun7her@#1t%pe@#)$ourse@!-id@#)=13#-9#0= (a77essed B7t 5, !01!) $arson, ) ' , )ouglas * +oo, and ,eon +orris An Introduction to the New Testament& Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 199! Enslin, +orton 8 etters to the Churches& Col 13 !! vols ,ondon, &e4 Hor., &ashville: ,utter4orth Press, 'bingdon Press, 19-# 1ore0an, Denneth * The aymans' Bible Commentary& Edited b% 6al0er H Dell% Col !1 !5 vols Ri7h0ond, C': *ohn DnoA Press, 19-1 Henr%, +atthe4 +atthew *enry's Commentary on the Whole Bible& Col - vols &e4 *erse%: 1le0ing H Revell $o0pan% Hollada%, $arl R A Critical Introduction to the New Testament& &ashville: 'bingdon Press, !005 *ohnson, ,u.e /i0oth% The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation& Revised Edition +inneapolis, +&: 'ugsburg 1ortress, 1999 ,ohse, 6ernhard A Short *istory of Christian ,octrine& /ranslated b% 1 Earnest 8toe::ler Philadelphia: 1ortress Press, 19-# ,uther, +artin Commentary on %omans& Grand Rapids: Dregel Publi7ations, nd ,utIer, Er4in The ,octrines That ,i"ide- A .resh oo# at the *istoric ,octrines That Seperate Christians& Grand Rapids: Dregel Publi7ations, 1993 +oo, )ouglas * The NIV Applicatioin Commentary- .rom Biblical te/t&&&to Contemporary ife& Grand Rapids: Zondervan, !000 The NIV Study Bible& 10th Edition Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995

10