I preached this sermon at Ryker’s Ridge Baptist Church on the morning of November, 13 2011. In this message, I speak of Paul’s gracious calling as an apostle, his gracious welcome to the churches at Galatia, and his gracious warning to those who are believing and teaching a false gospel. Grace is something that characterizes Paul’s ministry, and it should ours as well.

I sincerely hope you benefit from this message!

SERMON: Grace to You and Peace – Galatians 1:1-10

This post stands as the final installment to my five part series, which has dealt with the doctrine of justification and the differences that exist between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism concerning this doctrine. In my first post, I introduced the debate, explaining what is at stake and gave some context to the issue (read it here). In the second post, I attempted to define and articulate the Roman Catholic teaching on justification—righteousness infused through the sacraments (read it here). In the third post, I sought to define and explain the Protestant doctrine of justification—imputed righteousness (read it here). In the last post, I intended to present a critique of the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification (read it here). In this final post, my goal is to respond to some of the most common objections that Rome has raised against the Protestant doctrine of justification.

[...]

Roman Catholics and Protestants have many doctrinal commonalities. However, they differ, and differ tragically, when it comes to their soteriology and their views of justification. In the first entry to this series, I introduced the discussion, explaining what is at stake and gave some context to the issue (see this post here). In the second entry, I sought to define and articulate the Roman Catholic teaching on justification—righteousness infused through the sacraments (read it here). Last time, I attempted to define and explain the Protestant doctrine of justification—imputed righteousness (read it here). In this post, I intend to present a critique of the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification.

The grave and historical error made by Rome is that they have failed to understand and believe the true message of the gospel: that man is saved by grace alone through faith in Christ alone. The damning flaw in Rome’s doctrine lies in its denial of this great truth. Since the Reformation, the most important criticisms of the Catholic view of justification have had to do with its inclusion of and need for meritorious works. While Rome seeks to emphasize that its views on merit should be understood in concert with God’s grace, it neglects the scriptural teaching that grace and meritorious works are mutually exclusive. The faulty Catholic doctrine of justification has much to do with the many problems in their teachings on merit.

[...]

The Protestant understanding of the doctrine of justification is undoubtedly very different from that of the Roman Catholic Church. Does this difference matter? Should those during the Reformation have made such a large deal about it? Should Protestants and Catholics today just forget about it all and be friends? Or, should we adopt the mindset of the Reformers and stand for the one true Gospel against any opposing and false gospel? This post stands as the third entry into this series in which I am attempting to articulate and defend the Protestant doctrine of justification over and against the one presented by the Roman Catholic Church.

In the first entry, I introduced the matter as a whole and explained what is at stake, giving some context to the issue (see this post here). Last time, I sought to define and articulate the Roman Catholic teaching on justification—righteousness infused through the sacraments (read it here). In this post, my goal is to define the doctrine of justification as is held my post Protestants—imputed righteousness. Generally speaking, the Protestant doctrine can be defined as follows: “Justification is an instantaneous legal act of God in which He thinks of our sins as forgiven and Christ’s righteousness as belonging to us, and declares us to be righteous in His sight.”[1] There are a number of elements inherent to this definition that must be discussed.

[...]

Have you ever wondered why Martin Luther and the rest of the Protestant Reformers made such a fuss over the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church during the Reformation? The Reformers certainly disagreed with the Catholics over a number of doctrinal and practical issues, but nothing was more important than their differing views regarding the doctrine of justification. This post stands as the second entry in this five-part series. Last time, I introduced the matter, explained what is at stake, and gave some context to the issue (see this post here). In this post, my goal is to define and articulate the Roman Catholic teaching on justification—righteousness infused through the sacraments. In upcoming posts, I intend to do the same with the Protestant doctrine of justification—imputed grace. I will, furthermore, argue that the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification is mistaken and that the Protestant view of justification is most faithful to Scripture. In doing so, I will also provide a critique of the Roman Catholic position and respond to Roman Catholic objections against the Protestant doctrine of justification. For now, let us turn our attention to the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification.

[...]

The debates that led to the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century were not over minor details of theology. Of the debated issues, the doctrine of justification became the most divisive and controversial issue in the history of Christendom. R.C. Sproul is correct to point out that “both the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers understood that what was at stake in the controversy was nothing less than the Gospel itself.”[1] It was upon this conviction that Martin Luther, in his 1537 Schmalkaldic Articles, singled out the teaching of justification as “the article upon which the Church stands or falls.”[2] In similar fashion, John Calvin regarded justification sola fide as “the main hinge on which religion turns.”[3]

The Reformers of the Protestant Reformation were willing to face anathematization for their dissenting beliefs concerning justification.[4] Today, however, not everyone within Protestant circles are willing to take such a stand.[5] Some Evangelical leaders have referred to this doctrine as the “small print” of the Gospel, that it is “nothing more than a large misunderstanding,” and that the seemingly major issue of the sixteenth century is “no longer a matter of serious debate.”[6] In Evangelicals and Catholics Together, many scholars from both camps have agreed that there are “some differences within both the Evangelical and Catholic communities.” However, they have affirmed that, “All who truly believe in Jesus Christ are brothers and sisters in the Lord and must not allow their differences, however important, to undermine this great truth.”[7] [...]

Not only does justification find its expression and stamp in works, but as stated above it seems that James also speaks of faith in Jesus leading to the living out of works in all of life through wisdom.  I argue that the key verse for understanding how wisdom, works, and justification come together in the Book of James is found in 3:13, which states, “Who is wise and understanding among you?  By his good conduct let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom.”  It seems that James is alluding to more than just a progressive sanctification view of how wisdom works in the lives of believers, but speaks more poignantly of how works are displayed in the lives of those who are justified by faith in Jesus.  If one is justified by faith in Jesus, one’s works will show the world their faith, but James seems to use works and wisdom together in showing that one is justified before God through the blood of Jesus.  Bryson continues concerning James’ view of wisdom,

“James challenged the readers to show wisdom.  “By his good life let him show his works in the meekness of wisdom” (3:13).  The real wisdom will manifest itself in the type of life lived.  The word translated “life” is anastrophes and means life not in the sense of being alive but of conduct.  It could be rendered the “manner of one’s living.”  The “show” (deixato) was used in James 2:18 where it was a call to demonstrate its godliness by the manner of living.  James made clear that wisdom was shown in the manner of “meekness” (en prauteti).  A meek person according to the New Testament is a person willing to submit life to the control of God.  Meekness is that attitude where a person is willing to be taught.  Such a person will gain godly wisdom and show it in the manner of living.”[1]

  [...]

As stated above, a cursory reading of the Book of James might stem questions of contradictory when discussing justification with that of Paul.  Why does James speak so much of works?  Why does James speak so much about being a doer of the word instead of being simply a hearer?  James states in 2:14, “What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works?  Can that faith save him?”  He continues in verse 17 saying, “So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.”  At first this seems to have slight contradiction to what Paul is saying above.  Paul says one is justified simply by faith in Jesus being Lord.  Faith in Jesus being Lord and believing in a physical and bodily resurrection is, for Paul, enough to justify someone before a good and sovereign God and for God to not count one’s sin against them.  Albeit, it seems for James that without works ones faith is useless… it is dead.  Do we have a contradiction here? 

[...]

            The Pocket Dictionary of Theological terms defines justification as a

“a forensic (legal) term related to the idea of acquittal, justification refers to the divine act whereby God makes humans, who are sinful and therefore worthy of condemnation, acceptable before a God who is holy and righteous.  More appropriately described as “justification by grace through faith,” this key doctrine of the Reformation asserts that a sinner is justified (pardoned from the punishment and condemnation of sin) and brought into relationship with God by faith in God’s grace alone.”[1]

As we have seen above, justification is by faith alone through grace alone.  Justification is the act of a good and sovereign God making humans not guilty before him by pardoning their punishment and placing it on Jesus, God the Son. 

[...]

There has been much scholarly debate in New Testament studies concerning the issue of justification in the Book of James.  With a cursory reading of the letter and little knowledge of Paul’s doctrine of justification it might seem that James argues for justification by works.  Does James differ from Paul in his understanding of justification, or is James simply re-stating what Paul has already fleshed out in Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians?  This series argues that both Paul and James have the exact same understanding of justification, and that faith in Jesus leads to living out faith through works in all of life through the meekness of God-given wisdom (James 3:13; Proverbs 2:5-7). 

First we will look at whether or not the Book of James is wisdom literature or not.  Secondly, we look at the allusions to the book of Proverbs that James uses throughout his letter.  Thirdly, we will discuss whether or not the use of wisdom should be allowed into the conversation of justification in James, as I will argue that faith in Jesus is made manifest in works through wisdom. Obviously, I am not arguing for justification through wisdom as a condition for salvation in itself.  I am though stating that there is no biblical wisdom outside of justification as defined in Scripture, and there is no justification outside of an expression of works in the meekness of biblical wisdom as defined by Scripture. We must ask, what is justification, and what is biblical wisdom?  Yes, justification is by grace through faith (Eph. 2:9-10)[1] alone, but is justification the beginning of wisdom as wisdom is defined in Scripture or is wisdom simply a result of progressive sanctification, or both?  And, finally, I will argue that wisdom is the primary theme in James, as James continues to allude to wisdom literature, and that the primary theme in the Book of James is indeed living wisely through wisdom in all of life.