We are often told by many religious people that the book of James is proof that there are things we must do in order to be saved or in order to assure our salvation. They tell us that we must do things to "make grace available". I have heard it said that God, "only helps those who help themselves" and such like.
Does james stand in contrast to the Pauline epistles? Here is my take on the oft misunderstood passage, of James 2:24. Look at these two seemingly contradictory verses...
Jas 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
The above verses seem to stand in opposition to each other. How can both be true? The answer is that there is a semantical range of meaning for many words in the new testament. Many of the errors we tend to make when reading our bible is in assuming that a word means the same thing every time we come across it. This is not so, and a simple look at the biblical uses of the word "justify" makes that obvious. There are two types of justification in the bible when speaking of man. Understanding that will help you a great deal.
There is god justifying man and there is man justifying himself. god justifies man through imputed righteousness received through faith. Man justifies himself through works. That is the justification spoken of in James. the justification in James 2:24 is Not man receiving justification from God because of works. It is man proving or showing his faith by his works.
Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
This verse is speaking of God justifying man and no man will attain it by works.
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
This is how we attain God's justification, through faith. This is saving justification.
Luk 10:29 But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who is my neighbor?
Here a man is attempting to justify himself by trying to illicit a particular answer from Christ.
Luk 7:35 But wisdom is justified of all her children.
Here wisdom is justified.
1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Here Paul speaks of Christ being justified.Do you see how justify is not always synonymous with salvation?
Jas 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
Rom 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
Both of the verses above about Abraham are true, because the definition of the word justify is different in each case. James speaks of man justifying his faith by his actions. It is showing what you believe by what you do. Don't let people tell you that there is anything you have to do to be saved. God did it all for you. James calls us to demostrate our faith by our actions, as in "faith working by love." God justified us when we believed. That is the only justification we need for salvation.
(for more on this topic, see a book by Michael Pearl : Justification and the book of James)
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Repentance
Satan is hard at work making the Gospel more difficult than it has to be, keeping people lost, and keeping saved people from resting in the finished work of the Cross. I would like to shed some light on his lies.
Repentance:
How can I know that I repented enough?
Scriptures speak of repentance being a necessary aspect of salvation. Once I am saved, how can I be sure I will not be one to whom Christ says, 'I never knew you, depart from me...'?
How can I be sure that I have repented enough?
The answer is simple, as is the majority of the Gospel. The problem with this approach is that I am assuming there is something for me to 'do' when repenting. Religious people, such as our Catholic friends, will tell us that we must feel sorry for our sins and continually repent and forsake them or we are in danger of losing our salvation.
This was a heavy burden for me when I was first converted. I went around trying to conjure up sorrow for my sin, and when that didn't work, feeling sorry that I wasn't sorry. It was ridiculous and I was making repentance into a work.
Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Repentance is a 'turn toward God.' It is nothing more. The object of my turn is more important than the turn. the sincerity of my turn is second to simply turning. I cannot rest in wholeheartedness to turn, I just need to turn.
Act 26:20 But showed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
Turning toward God always results in a turn from sin, but the focus of the turn is always God-ward, not away from sin. I do not get saved by stopping my sin. I cannot stay saved by not sinning. I must simply turn to God.
Repentance is also a turn from unbelief. I must repent of dead works, repent of false God's, repent of self-righteousness.
Mar 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
Repentance and belief are two sides of the same act, one stated negatively (stop believing in false systems, Gods for salvation etc) and one stated positively (start believing the Gospel of Jesus Christ.)
The Gospel of Christ is simple, turn to God for that which I could never earn, deserve, or work through. Christ came to save sinners, of whom I am chief. The salvation that God offers all of humanity through the Blood of Christ is so simple it is a stumblingblock to the religious, those that would rather do it their own way. It is foolishness to the wise, who see Christ and His people as fools believing fables.
1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness
Don't let satan tell you there is work left to be done. If you are in a church that says there is, leave.
Joh 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said,It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
Thank Christ for doing what you could never do. Then live your life out of love for the God who became man to save you and me.
Repentance:
How can I know that I repented enough?
Scriptures speak of repentance being a necessary aspect of salvation. Once I am saved, how can I be sure I will not be one to whom Christ says, 'I never knew you, depart from me...'?
How can I be sure that I have repented enough?
The answer is simple, as is the majority of the Gospel. The problem with this approach is that I am assuming there is something for me to 'do' when repenting. Religious people, such as our Catholic friends, will tell us that we must feel sorry for our sins and continually repent and forsake them or we are in danger of losing our salvation.
This was a heavy burden for me when I was first converted. I went around trying to conjure up sorrow for my sin, and when that didn't work, feeling sorry that I wasn't sorry. It was ridiculous and I was making repentance into a work.
Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
Repentance is a 'turn toward God.' It is nothing more. The object of my turn is more important than the turn. the sincerity of my turn is second to simply turning. I cannot rest in wholeheartedness to turn, I just need to turn.
Act 26:20 But showed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
Turning toward God always results in a turn from sin, but the focus of the turn is always God-ward, not away from sin. I do not get saved by stopping my sin. I cannot stay saved by not sinning. I must simply turn to God.
Repentance is also a turn from unbelief. I must repent of dead works, repent of false God's, repent of self-righteousness.
Mar 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
Repentance and belief are two sides of the same act, one stated negatively (stop believing in false systems, Gods for salvation etc) and one stated positively (start believing the Gospel of Jesus Christ.)
The Gospel of Christ is simple, turn to God for that which I could never earn, deserve, or work through. Christ came to save sinners, of whom I am chief. The salvation that God offers all of humanity through the Blood of Christ is so simple it is a stumblingblock to the religious, those that would rather do it their own way. It is foolishness to the wise, who see Christ and His people as fools believing fables.
1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness
Don't let satan tell you there is work left to be done. If you are in a church that says there is, leave.
Joh 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said,It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
Thank Christ for doing what you could never do. Then live your life out of love for the God who became man to save you and me.
Kindom of God/Heaven
In this post, I would like to discuss the differences between the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven. Most people just read that line and are already thinking that I am more than a little confused. I hope you will read on.
First of all, the main difficulty at finding the truth to this seemingly difficult topic is a lack of understanding on the basics of Scripture. Let me also say I was once an ammillennial preterist. Please allow me to state my view of Scripture in two brief statements before going further:
1) The Word of God is perfect. Not only in 'the original manuscripts' but the also the bible translated into English in the form of the King James Bible. We can believe every word of it, just as it is written. Jesus proved this with several of His own 'proof texts' such as 'Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead but of the living.' Jesus based His answer on life after death and the authority of Scripture on the tense of one verb. The debate over translations (and reliability notwithstanding) is a debate for another thread, but suffice it to say that anyone who believes in the God of the Bible, who created and sustains the world, and then tries to tell me that God can't preserve His own testimony of Himself much less speak in English has some difficulties understanding the nature of God.
2) Every word in Scripture has significance. The above note makes that point but it is worth stating here. When the Bible says one thing, it means it. Many modern Bibles attempt to make the Bible more clear, by exchanging words, reversing the original Greek order of words etc. While this does in some instances offer some casual readers clarity, it hinders the nature of the Word and its' original intent. Making the Word more clear simply results in it becoming less accurate.
With that being said, the Scriptures make it clear that the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven are not the same things. What you say!!!???
(Before you get too worked up, please note that this is not something new. Rather, this is the position of many Bible commentaries of old. Do a quick search online and you will find many things that deal with this subject.)
We can tell they are different first of all by the fact that they are spelled different. (Now you can see why I went to such great pains to explain my position on Biblical accuracy.) This fact is often overlooked as insignificant. It is not.
The main difficulty in telling them apart is the various parables that are found in multiple gospels with seemingly similar stories and outcomes, with the only variable being Kingdom of God being transposed over Kingdom of Heaven. If we look closely at the various accounts, there is a slight variance that lends itself to the difference.
Before we look at a difference for illustration, allow me to make another observation that has great significance for our discussion. The phrase, 'Kingdom of Heaven' occurs 32 times in the New Testament, 31 of which are in the Gospel account of Matthew. It is widely understood that the book of Matthew was written for the Jews, and some suggest was originally written in Hebrew. Some say this is simply because Matthew did not want to use the name of God, since he did not want to offend his Jewish audience. This is not so as I will show briefly.
Let us look briefly at one such difference in a parable found both in Matthew and Luke:
The parable of the talents in Matthew 25. We are all hopefully familiar with this parable so allow me to skip to the important points:
Mat 25:28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
Mat 25:29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.
Mat 25:30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Notice that this parable is a Kingdom of Heaven Parable of which there are 12. Notice also that this servant of the Kingdom, who is unwise with his talent and was therefore thrown into hell.
Now let us look at the same parable in the account of Luke:
Luk 19:24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.
Luk 19:25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)
Luk 19:26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.
Luk 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Again, with casual reading this difference would be overlooked. But clearly there is a difference in the two accounts. Here in the Kingdom of God account found in Luke, the unfaithful servant simply has his pound taken from him and is not cast into hell.
There are more such differences with the gospel accounts. They are all subtle but they offer a glimpse into the differences between the two kingdoms. The kingdom of God is spiritual, but the Kingdom of heaven is a literal place wherein Christ will reign for 1000 years.
I will give a few brief verses to demonstrate this point of a difference:
Mat 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
First of all, the kingdom of heaven can be taken by force. This is exactly what has happened since the beginning of creation. The Jews in the OT, the Pharisees and the Sadducee's took the kingdom from Israel by force through the killing of the prophets and the eventual crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Mat 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
Mat 21:38 But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
They 'shut up the kingdom of heaven against men'. They killed Christ in order to take what will one day be given to Him. No man can ever shut up the Kingdom of God for it is spiritual. Likewise, the Kingdom of God cannot be taken by force. The kingdom of heaven, being a literal and earthly kingdom, can be and has been.
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elijah, which was for to come.
Once again, Jesus said, If ye will receive it. The Jewish nation did not receive it. One day they were waving palm branches crying Hosanna and the next they were crying Crucify Him. They sent Him to the cross in ultimate rejection of the Kingship of Jesus.
Part of the reason Jesus was not received by the Jews was the misunderstanding of the two advents of Christ. They saw only those that spoke of him ruling and restoring and that is what they looked forward to. They did not see the verses that spoke of Him dying etc. The disciples looked forward to the restoration of Israel and asked Him:
Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
Jesus did not correct their assumption, simply their timeframe saying, '
Acts 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.'
Notice Christ did not correct the question, but refused to give them the time. The question was accurate, but the time is only known of the Father. Lastly, I would like to look briefly at the verse in Revelation:
Rev 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
The contention with these verses in the use of the phrase '1000 years.' In trying to deny the literal use of the time period of 1,000 years here in Revelation, we will often hear people refer to the following verse:
Psa 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.
It is obvious in the above verse that the intention of the phrase "thousand hills" is intended to denote totality, and not that the cattle on all other hills does not belong to the Lord. We cannot in this instance however apply that use of the phrase and define the use of the thousand years spoken of in Revelation the same. The reason is quite simple. In Revelation 20:5, we see that the thousand years will end!! If the 'thousand years' was intended to denote forever, it would be foolish for it to come to an end. If we believe what the bible says where and how it says it, the matter is certain.
Jesus is coming again to rule on the throne of David, and with the twelve disciples, one over each tribe, will rule Israel and restore all things. Even so, Come Lord Jesus!!
(for more on this topic, see 'Eight Kingdoms' by Michael Pearl. See also 'Dispensational Truths by Clarence Larkin. You can also google Kingdom God/Heaven)
First of all, the main difficulty at finding the truth to this seemingly difficult topic is a lack of understanding on the basics of Scripture. Let me also say I was once an ammillennial preterist. Please allow me to state my view of Scripture in two brief statements before going further:
1) The Word of God is perfect. Not only in 'the original manuscripts' but the also the bible translated into English in the form of the King James Bible. We can believe every word of it, just as it is written. Jesus proved this with several of His own 'proof texts' such as 'Mat 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead but of the living.' Jesus based His answer on life after death and the authority of Scripture on the tense of one verb. The debate over translations (and reliability notwithstanding) is a debate for another thread, but suffice it to say that anyone who believes in the God of the Bible, who created and sustains the world, and then tries to tell me that God can't preserve His own testimony of Himself much less speak in English has some difficulties understanding the nature of God.
2) Every word in Scripture has significance. The above note makes that point but it is worth stating here. When the Bible says one thing, it means it. Many modern Bibles attempt to make the Bible more clear, by exchanging words, reversing the original Greek order of words etc. While this does in some instances offer some casual readers clarity, it hinders the nature of the Word and its' original intent. Making the Word more clear simply results in it becoming less accurate.
With that being said, the Scriptures make it clear that the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven are not the same things. What you say!!!???
(Before you get too worked up, please note that this is not something new. Rather, this is the position of many Bible commentaries of old. Do a quick search online and you will find many things that deal with this subject.)
We can tell they are different first of all by the fact that they are spelled different. (Now you can see why I went to such great pains to explain my position on Biblical accuracy.) This fact is often overlooked as insignificant. It is not.
The main difficulty in telling them apart is the various parables that are found in multiple gospels with seemingly similar stories and outcomes, with the only variable being Kingdom of God being transposed over Kingdom of Heaven. If we look closely at the various accounts, there is a slight variance that lends itself to the difference.
Before we look at a difference for illustration, allow me to make another observation that has great significance for our discussion. The phrase, 'Kingdom of Heaven' occurs 32 times in the New Testament, 31 of which are in the Gospel account of Matthew. It is widely understood that the book of Matthew was written for the Jews, and some suggest was originally written in Hebrew. Some say this is simply because Matthew did not want to use the name of God, since he did not want to offend his Jewish audience. This is not so as I will show briefly.
Let us look briefly at one such difference in a parable found both in Matthew and Luke:
The parable of the talents in Matthew 25. We are all hopefully familiar with this parable so allow me to skip to the important points:
Mat 25:28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.
Mat 25:29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.
Mat 25:30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
Notice that this parable is a Kingdom of Heaven Parable of which there are 12. Notice also that this servant of the Kingdom, who is unwise with his talent and was therefore thrown into hell.
Now let us look at the same parable in the account of Luke:
Luk 19:24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.
Luk 19:25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)
Luk 19:26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.
Luk 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Again, with casual reading this difference would be overlooked. But clearly there is a difference in the two accounts. Here in the Kingdom of God account found in Luke, the unfaithful servant simply has his pound taken from him and is not cast into hell.
There are more such differences with the gospel accounts. They are all subtle but they offer a glimpse into the differences between the two kingdoms. The kingdom of God is spiritual, but the Kingdom of heaven is a literal place wherein Christ will reign for 1000 years.
I will give a few brief verses to demonstrate this point of a difference:
Mat 11:12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.
First of all, the kingdom of heaven can be taken by force. This is exactly what has happened since the beginning of creation. The Jews in the OT, the Pharisees and the Sadducee's took the kingdom from Israel by force through the killing of the prophets and the eventual crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Mat 23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
Mat 21:38 But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.
They 'shut up the kingdom of heaven against men'. They killed Christ in order to take what will one day be given to Him. No man can ever shut up the Kingdom of God for it is spiritual. Likewise, the Kingdom of God cannot be taken by force. The kingdom of heaven, being a literal and earthly kingdom, can be and has been.
Mat 11:14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elijah, which was for to come.
Once again, Jesus said, If ye will receive it. The Jewish nation did not receive it. One day they were waving palm branches crying Hosanna and the next they were crying Crucify Him. They sent Him to the cross in ultimate rejection of the Kingship of Jesus.
Part of the reason Jesus was not received by the Jews was the misunderstanding of the two advents of Christ. They saw only those that spoke of him ruling and restoring and that is what they looked forward to. They did not see the verses that spoke of Him dying etc. The disciples looked forward to the restoration of Israel and asked Him:
Act 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
Jesus did not correct their assumption, simply their timeframe saying, '
Acts 1:7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.'
Notice Christ did not correct the question, but refused to give them the time. The question was accurate, but the time is only known of the Father. Lastly, I would like to look briefly at the verse in Revelation:
Rev 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand.
Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
Rev 20:3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
Rev 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
Rev 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
The contention with these verses in the use of the phrase '1000 years.' In trying to deny the literal use of the time period of 1,000 years here in Revelation, we will often hear people refer to the following verse:
Psa 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.
It is obvious in the above verse that the intention of the phrase "thousand hills" is intended to denote totality, and not that the cattle on all other hills does not belong to the Lord. We cannot in this instance however apply that use of the phrase and define the use of the thousand years spoken of in Revelation the same. The reason is quite simple. In Revelation 20:5, we see that the thousand years will end!! If the 'thousand years' was intended to denote forever, it would be foolish for it to come to an end. If we believe what the bible says where and how it says it, the matter is certain.
Jesus is coming again to rule on the throne of David, and with the twelve disciples, one over each tribe, will rule Israel and restore all things. Even so, Come Lord Jesus!!
(for more on this topic, see 'Eight Kingdoms' by Michael Pearl. See also 'Dispensational Truths by Clarence Larkin. You can also google Kingdom God/Heaven)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
