There are so many voices in the so-called evangelical world who are starting to deny one of the primary doctrines of the Reformation--the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

John Piper has just preached a sermon on this that is posted at this site:

http://theologica.blogspot.com/2006/08/piper-sermon-on-justification.html An excerpt:

Piper Sermon on Justification

The manuscript (and the audio) of John Piper’s sermon on justification, delivered this past Sunday upon his return from Cambridge, is now available online. An excerpt:

“Do you see why I would spend weeks of my sabbatical laboring to understand why so many teachers in the church today are replacing the righteousness that Christ has in himself with the righteousness that Christ creates in us as the basis for our justification? People who trust in the righteousness that God has worked in them for the basis of their acceptance and acquittal and justification do not go down to their house justified. People who really believe that the righteousness that God helps them do in this life is a sufficient basis for their justification, Jesus says, will not be justified. Bethlehem, this is serious. We are not justified by the righteousness that Christ works in us, but by the righteousness that Christ is for us.”

While growing up SDA, I was terrified of God and judgment, and we never could be given assurance of salvation, because we were in the end justified by our works, and had to pass the Investigative Judgment.

The whole heart of the gospel and our joy in Christ is being safe and secure in Christ’s righteousness, not our own.

Stan

Stan,

Martin Luther said that the doctrine of justification by faith alone is “the doctrine upon which the church stands or falls.” John Calvin called this doctrine is the “hinge” of the Reformation.  You are absolutely correct that the doctrine of justification by faith alone is under attack from many quarters in the evangelical Christian church.  Rick Warren is one of the most powerful voices within Christianity today, achieving phenomenal success with the “Purpose Driven” books.  Here is what he had to say recently about the Reformation: “I am praying for a second reformation of the church that will focus more on deeds than words.  The first Reformation was about beliefs. This one needs to be about behavior. ... We’ve had a Reformation; what we need now is a transformation.” http://www.biblicalrecorder.org/content/news/2005/7_28_2005/ne280705warren.shtml

Granted, Warren is not saying he believes in justification by works, but he does marginalize the Reformation “beliefs” as somehow inferior to a new reformation of “deeds.” I believe he makes a fundamental mistake here in drawing a distinction between beliefs and works.  While we are justified by faith alone, we are not justified by a faith that is alone.  Saving faith in Jesus Christ will never exist in isolation or apart from the fruit of salvation.

Paul builds the case for justification by faith alone in the first four chapters of Romans.  Having solidly established that our righteousness is as filthy rags and it is only in Christ’s righteousness that we are justified through faith, he turns to the imperatives or “therefores” that flow from the life of one who is born again.

“Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?  By no means!” (Romanas 6:1b-2a ESV)

“Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions.  Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness.” (Romans 6:12-13 ESV)

“For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification.” (Romans 6:19b ESV)

“..now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life.” (Romans 6:22 ESV)

There is no justification in works, but there is no faith apart from works.  The classic mathematical expression of this is “Faith = Salvation + Works,” which stands in stark contrast to all man-centered belief systems from Roman Catholicism to historic Adventism expressing this equation as “Faith + Works = Salvation.”

Geoffrey Paxton’s book “The Shaking of Adventism” (available online here: http://www.presenttruthmag.com/7dayadventist/shaking/) examined the Adventism claim of succession to the Protestant Reformation.  Paxton makes a compelling argument that the historic Adventist doctrine of justification is closer to Roman Catholicism than it is to Protestantism.

“...we must beware of being wiser than Paul and the Reformers in this matter of righteousness by faith.  More than once this author has come across the mentality which says, ‘Sure, that is how righteousness by faith is used in Paul, but we Adventists have chosen to use it this way [i.e., to include both justification and sanctification].’ This type of approach carries great dangers:

1. The chief danger is that the distinctive Adventist use of the expression will drastically alter the Pauline-Reformation use.  We believe this has happened.

2. This type of approach encourages the suspicion among evangelicals that Adventists want to stand over the Bible instead of under the Bible.

3. Even if the different use of a biblical expression did not ultimately alter its meaning, such a use should still be questioned--especially when the expression is one that lies at the heart of the biblical message.  This author is reminded of all too many sermons on biblical texts.  Although they may not be saying something incorrect, they are not saying what the text says.  While they may state theological truth, the use of the text confuses people about what the Bible is saying.  People are thus encouraged to move away from the biblical message” -Paxton, p. 148-149.

There are many within Adventism who have repudiated the historic teaching of justification by faith and works, but the church still labors under the weight of it.

Greg

Absalom Backus Earle (1812-1895) was an American evangelist who during his 64 years of ministry traveled 325,000 miles, preached 19,780 times, and witnessed 160,000 conversions to Christ.  He influenced 400 men to enter the Christian ministry.  He authored seven books on evangelism and Christian living.

A. B. Earle was not a great preacher.  His skill was average. He wasn’t highly emotional, and his grammar and rhetoric were faulty.  But his listener’s were gripped by God’s presence and power when he spoke.  After his meetings, people often would be seen praying at midnight in the streets. 

The secret of Earle’s power was the Gospel message, in the power of the Holy Spirit.  In one of his books, he wrote about the source of his success:

“I have found that the severest threatenings of the law of God have a prominent place in leading men to Christ.  They must see themselves LOST before they will cry for mercy.  They will not escape danger until they see it.  I have reason to believe a single sermon I have often preached on ‘The Sin That Hath Never Forgiveness’ (Mark 3:29) has been the means of more than 20,000 conversions.  I have known scores to give themselves to Christ under this sermon again and again.  The wicked will never flee from the wrath to come until they are fully satisfied there IS wrath.”

Bob,
That is an excellent A.B. Earle quote about the importance of showing a sinner that they stand condemned by the Law of God, and under the wrath of God. This message will drive them by grace to the cross for forgiveness

Stan

Here is the exact link to john Piper’s web site with a transcript of this most powerful sermon on justification by faith alone:

http://www.desiringgod.org/library/sermons/06/080606.html

Here are some more excerpts from this sermon:

Missing the Redeemer, Then and Now

“Which brings us now to Luke 18:9-14. Here is Jesus looking right into the eyes of people who are religious and do not understand and haven’t experienced what I just said. They talk endlessly about God, and do not know how to be right with God. They don’t know that everything written about God in the Old Testament was pointing to a Redeemer, a Savior, a Sacrifice, the Righteous One on whom their sins would be laid and in whom they would become the righteousness of God. Jesus came to reveal all this, and they stumbled over the stumbling stone. “Being ignorant of the righteousness that comes from God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness” (Rom. 10:3). They knew about God. They knew about grace. They knew about righteousness. But they missed it. They did not understand justification by faith alone on the basis of the Redeemer alone.

When I finished working on the book on Jesus’ commands at Tyndale House, I spent the rest of my study time on this precious doctrine. Because the Pharisees are not the only ones who are missing it. The doctrine is being turned upside down by many today, and I have chosen this text because it unites so much of what has burdened me in both parts of the sabbatical–the Jesus part and the justification part.

A Parable Completed and Fulfilled in the Cross
Let’s read this parable with the understanding that it is completed and fulfilled in the cross–the final obedience of Jesus in shedding his blood.

He also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt: 10 “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.’ 13 But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

You can tell by the way the parable comes to a climax in verse 14 (“This man went down to his house justified”) that the parable is about how to be justified and how not to be justified. Of course the story is incomplete because Jesus had not finished his work yet when he told this story. He has not died for our sins and been raised for our justification. So what we are seeing is not the whole story of how we are justified before God, but one of the key dynamics in how it happens.

The Pharisee’s Righteousness

There are three things we need to see about this person who “trusts in himself that he is righteous.” First, his righteousness is moral. Second, his righteousness is religious or ceremonial. Third, he believes his righteousness is the gift of God.

First, his righteousness is moral: Verses 10-11, “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee [that’s the one that trusts in himself that he is righteous] and the other a tax collector [who had a terrible reputation for cheating the people]. 11 The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.” Notice how he presents his righteousness: “I am not like others, extortioners (that is, robbers, thieves, cheaters), unjust, adulterers.” In other words, “I am financially honest, just in all my dealings, and sexually faithful to my wife.” That is what I mean by moral righteousness. He was a morally upright man. This is what Jesus meant when he said that he trusted in himself that he was righteous: He was a morally upright man, he kept the commandments (like the rich young ruler, ten verses later, Luke 18:21).

Second, the Pharisee’s righteousness was religious or ceremonial. Verse 12, “I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I get.” These are what you might call “religious” or “ceremonial” acts: fasting and tithing. They relate to spiritual disciplines before God, and not so much to how you treat other people. This too was part of his righteousness. He was a morally upright and religiously devout man.

Third, he believed that this righteousness was the gift of God. Verse 11: “The Pharisee, standing by himself, prayed thus: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men.’” He gives God the credit for making him upright and devout like he is. “I thank you that I am morally upright and religiously devout.” In other words, this man is not what theologians call a Pelagian–a person who believes he can make himself righteous without God’s help. He may not even be what theologians call a semi-Pelagian–a person who believes that God’s help is needed but the human will is decisive and can resist God’s help. None of that is mentioned here. It’s not the point or the problem.

The Pharisee’s Problem
The problem is not whether the man himself has produced the righteousness he has or whether God has produced it. The problem is: He trusts in it. Verse 9: “[Jesus] also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous.” Now make sure you see what this is saying. It is not saying that he is trusting in himself to make himself righteous. No. He says explicitly he is thanking God for that. He is not trusting in himself to make himself righteous. He is trusting in himself that he is righteous with the righteousness that God has worked in him. That is what he is trusting.

As far as we know, this Pharisee was a total lover of the sovereignty of God. As far as we know he would have said, “Not I but the grace of God in me has worked this righteousness.” He says, “I thank you, God, that I have this righteousness.” That was not his mistake. His mistake was that he trusted in this God-produced righteousness for justification. When it came to justification–for that is the issue, as verse 14 shows–this man was trusting in the wrong thing. He was looking at the wrong basis for his righteousness before God. He was looking at the wrong ground for his righteousness before God. He was looking at the wrong person and the wrong righteousness. He was looking to his own righteousness–and it was his, not because he created it, but because he acted it. It was in his will and in his heart and in his actions. It was his, and it was put there by God, he believed. That is what he was trusting in.

He is not presented as a legalist–one who tries to earn his salvation. That is not the issue. One thing is the issue: This man was morally upright. He was religiously devout. He believed God had made him so. He gave thanks for it. And that is what he looked to and trusted in for his righteousness before God–for his justification. And he was dead wrong.

The Problem Today
And so are so many people today, who are turning away from the doctrine of justification by faith alone on the basis of Christ alone. What Jesus wants us to see here is that how righteous you are, or how moral you are or how religious you are or whether God has produced that in you or you have produced that in yourself–that is not the basis of your justification before God. That is not how you are accepted and declared righteous in God’s law court.

The issue is: Are you looking totally away from yourself? When you see yourself standing before the holy Judge, and you know that to escape condemnation you must be found righteous in this all-knowing, infinitely-just court, what are you going to look to and trust in? I am pleading with you on behalf of Jesus this morning that for your justification you not look at or trust in what God has worked in you. But that you look at and trust in Christ alone and all that God is for you in him.

How the Story Ends
I say it like that, because I know how the story ends. I see the shadow of the cross over this parable. But we see the clear pointer to this end in the way the tax collector is justified before God. Verses 13-14: “But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ 14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other.” What did the tax collector do? He looked away from himself to God. He trusted in nothing in himself. He trusted in God. And Jesus said, “God declared him righteous in his law court.” That’s what “justified” means.

And now, on this side of the cross, we know more. We know how God provides righteousness for sinners who are not righteous. “God made him to be sin who knew no sin so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21). By trusting Christ alone and all that he did for us and all that he is for us, we are united to him. And because we are “in him,” what he is counts for us, his righteousness, his morality, his devoutness. (See Phil. 3:9; Rom. 3:28; 4:4-6; 5:18-19; 10:3-4; 1 Cor. 1:30; Gal. 2:16).

Be careful, lest you say, well of course the tax collector looked away from his own righteousness to God for mercy–he had no righteousness. That’s exactly what the Pharisee was saying. “He doesn’t look to God like I do for help in becoming righteous. So he has none, but God has made me righteous, and I will not scorn the gift of God but trust in it that I am righteous with the righteousness that God has worked in me. And this is the righteousness that I will present in the law court as the basis of my justification. It is God’s righteousness because he created it in me. It will be a good basis for my justification.”

Four Words: “Rather Than the Other”
Don’t miss the terrifying four words in the middle of verse 14 for this Pharisee, “I tell you, this man [the tax collector] went down to his house justified, rather than the other.” The Pharisee, the righteous one, the one thanking God for his righteousness, was not justified. He was condemned.

Do you see why I would spend weeks of my sabbatical laboring to understand why so many teachers in the church today are replacing the righteousness that Christ has in himself with the righteousness that Christ creates in us as the basis for our justification? People who trust in the righteousness that God has worked in them for the basis of their acceptance and acquittal and justification do not go down to their house justified. People who really believe that the righteousness that God helps them do in this life is a sufficient basis for their justification, Jesus says, will not be justified. Bethlehem, this is serious. We are not justified by the righteousness that Christ works in us, but by the righteousness that Christ is for us.

Give Jesus Christ His Full Glory
Would you receive this, and glory in this, and pray toward this, and stand for this? I summon everyone in the hearing of my voice: Give Jesus Christ his full glory–not half of it. Give him the glory, both as the one who is perfect righteousness for us–which we have by faith alone–and the one who, on the basis of justification, works progressive righteousness in us. Don’t rob him of the glory of his role as your righteousness. He is your righteousness. And because he is your righteousness, he can, and will in time, make you righteous. Look to Christ alone, trust in Christ alone–not your righteousness–for your right standing in God’s court and your acceptance with him. Amen.

Hey guys, you may already have seen this blog article by Harold Camacho. The link was posted by Agapetos on the FAF Forum, but if not, read it!  This gave me an exciting new understanding of what Matthew 16:27 really means!

http://supergoodnews.blogspot.com/2006/08/matthew-1627-rewarded-according-to.html

I have pasted in the article here:

Matthew 16:27 “Rewarded according to works"… WORKS???!!!!

Matthew 16:24-27: Then Jesus said to His disciples, If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. (25) For whoever desires to save his life shall lose it, and whoever desires to lose his life for My sake shall find it. (26) For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? (27) For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his works.”

Both those who promote the gospel of grace and those who defend the law are guilty of closing their eyes to texts that do not support their point of view.

Those who advocate grace don’t have very good explanations for the texts that seem to support the observance of the law. Those of the law try to say that grace is given precisely so that they can obtain the victory over sin and keep the law, thus producing the works necessary to pass the judgment test.

Thus those of us who proclaim the gospel of grace have to take very much into consideration those texts and biblical passages that would seem to teach that in the final analysis, salvation is based on works. We have to pay attention to texts such as the one above, that when the Lord Jesus returns, he will “reward each one according to his works”.

Christianity has traditionally interpreted this phrase according to its own particular spin, without taking into account the meaning of all the words involved. In particular, Christianity in one way or another has interpreted this text as meaning the performance of good deeds, as the fruit of faith.

This interpretation has been given as if v. 27 had nothing to do at all with the entire context (the words spoken by Jesus previous to the phrase “reward each one according to his works"). This phrase is interpreted as if Matthew had somehow forgotten to include it and decided to insert it here in v. 27 as an afterthought.

Those who advocate the gospel of grace try to build an entire doctrine of “rewards” on the basis of this text. They teach that these words do not really teach salvation by works, but refer to the reward of the righteous. The righteous will be rewarded according to their works. They believed in Christ through faith for salvation. But after being saved, their works were so wonderful and good, and much better than those of others saved, that upon His coming Jesus would reward them in a special way, “according to their works”. Although this doctrine begins with grace, it ends in works, teaching that in the end there will be a special category of saved people, those who had better and bigger works than their brothers and sisters in the faith. This doctrine does nothing but pits fellow believers in competition with each other under their leaders who somehow control the rules of the competition - all with the goal of presenting themselves with their good works before Jesus at His coming, and receiving their just reward.

Another teaching of evangelical Christians is that this text is not talking about the believers’ works but the works of Jesus. The believing Christian will receive the reward of the works of Jesus, because they have been covered with the righteousness and the obedience of Christ. Although this doctrine has biblical foundation elsewhere, it is not the primary teaching of Matthew 16:27.

Those who defend the law and the necessity of good works for salvation of course see in this text powerful ammunition against the gospel of grace alone. They declare that in the end, these words of Jesus support the words of James. Show me your faith through your works. Therefore believers must dedicate themselves to the keeping of the law and to the doing of good deeds because without them there will be no reward.

It’s amazing that for Christians who in their good deeds are not even to let their left hand know what their right hand is doing (Matthew 6:3), the motivation and interest according to these notions is the reward - and according to their works!

What then does Jesus teach in Matthew 16:27? What was our Lord talking about when He declared that at His coming, He would repay each one according to His works?

The Meaning of “works” in New Testament Greek, and in Matthew 16:27

It is incredible how the translators of the New Testament overlooked the most common meaning of the Greek word that is translated here as “works”.

The word “works” in Matthew 16:27 is the Greek word “praxis” (due to its grammatical place in the sentence it is literally “praxin"). The translators consistently and incorrectly translated this word as “works”.

However in New Testament Greek and generally in the Greek culture of Jesus’ day, the word “praxis” did not principally mean “works”.

“Works” is an interpretation of the meaning according to the translators of the word “praxis”, but it is not the literal and precise meaning of the word “praxis” as it was commonly used in the Greek world of those days.

The word “praxis” (??????) came from the common people. In particular, it was a word that was commonly used in the market place.

This word came from the bartering, from the give and take between seller and buyer. The seller exacting a higher price for his own gain, and the buyer offering a lower price for his advantage. Finally, when buyer and seller had come to an agreement, they had struck a “praxis”.

Yes! That is the primary meaning of “praxis”, which in Matthew 16:27 is translated as “works”.

Surprised? The truth is always surprising.

The Greeks concluded that a favorable deal for the buyer had been a “good or successful praxis”. If it had been to the seller’s disadvantage he had been involved in a “bad praxis” - a bad deal in our words today. To this entire transaction the more general meaning of “work” was given. A good deal had been a “good work”, a bad deal had been a “bad work”. In English we would say the transaction “worked out to be a good deal” or it “worked out to be a bad deal”.

Surprised again? The truth always surprises.

The word “praxis” then, came from the transaction, the interchange resulting from an agreement between two parties. The result came from a negotiated agreement, a favorable transaction both for the seller and the buyer.

Human behavior was also understood in terms of an exchange of expected results. A person exchanged the results of a good deed for the results of a bad deed. Good behavior exchanged the results of bad behavior in order to receive the results of good behavior.

Praxis: A deal between two parties exchanging goods or services favorable to either seller, buyer, or both. The result was a “work”, adjudged good or bad according to each one’s perception. But the meaning of the “work” referred primarily to the deal, the agreement, the transaction and its results. Such is the meaning of the word “praxis” in the New Testament which in general the translators have rendered simply “works”.

Since we are persuaded that the New Testament was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, we must also assume that this meaning of “praxis” must fit perfectly with the context or the verses preceding Matthew 16:27.

Let us try and see how this verse fits into the entire passage of Matthew 16:21-17.

The theme of Matthew 16:13-20 is that Jesus is the Christ, the anointed one of God, “the Son of the living God”.

Verses 21-23 declare that Jesus the Christ must suffer and die in Jerusalem and rise from the dead at the third day.

The Exchange of Lives: The Theme of Matthew 16:24-26

In these verses Jesus declares that in order to follow Him, and being at peace with God, it is necessary, indeed a must to transact a series of exchanges.

In order to follow Him, it is necessary to deny following one’s own life path (v. 24). One has to exchange one’s life for a cross and follow His path instead of one’s own.

Verse 25 clearly announces the need for another exchange. This exchange seems paradoxical, or contrary to common logic: “If you want to save your life, you will destroy it. But if you give up your life for me, you will find it” (CEV). One has to exchange one own’s life, lose it, in order to receive His. According to the Greek text, the phrase “for my sake” does not mean a commitment to a certain cause, but simply the commitment to lose one’s life in exchange for His life.

The issue of the exchange of lives is clarified even more in v. 26 when Jesus poses two questions, leaving the answers to His hearers’ reflection. “For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” This last question in fact contains the Greek word “antallagma”, which is the object that is being traded in an exchange. It referred to the object exchanged in the trading places of the market. Without an “antallagma” the parties could not arrive at a “praxis”. Without an object of value in exchange, a transaction could not take place.

The question posed by Jesus presupposes a response to the negative: “No, a human being cannot give anything from himself that can in any way save his life.” He cannot do enough, be enough, nor obtain enough of the necessary value to save his own life. He needs an “antallagma” of greater value than his own life. This “antallagma”, this object of supreme value is the life of Jesus, which a human being may present in exchange for his own life. Only the perfect, pure, and totally loving life of Jesus is that which he may bring in exchange (antallagma) for his or her own life. All else is insufficient, it lacks sufficient value. Everything else that is not the person of Jesus Christ, devalues the individual for eternal salvation.

With this meaning of the exchange of lives, Christ pronounces His categorical statement in v. 27: “For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He shall reward each one according to his praxis (praxin). In fact “praxis” is here in the singular, not the plural, that is why it is incorrect to translate this word as “works” (in the plural).

What Jesus intended to teach is that when the Son of man comes in the glory of His Father and of His angels, He will pay to each according to the exchange, or the transaction, that each person has agreed with God.

If the person asked God to exchange His life for the life of Jesus, such will be repaid with the eternal life of Jesus.

Each one has before him or her this transaction, this exchange, this “praxis” to transact.

Will he waive the right to present his own life, exchanging the life of Jesus for his or her own? In such a case, the same will be awarded the award given to Jesus.

Did he hang on to his own merits, his own obedience, his own good deeds (actions not praxis), or did such a person hold on to the merits and obedience of Jesus in exchange for his own merits and obedience? Such person will be repayed according to his transaction, his exchange, the agreement that he made with himself and with God.

Thus the meaning of Matthew 16:27 is: The only life of eternal value before God is the life of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, that takes away the sin of the world. He lays down His life so that all persons may take up His life in exchange for their own. All are responsible for making this transaction with God, presenting the perfect life of Jesus instead of their own. When the Son of Man returns with the glory of the Father and the angels He will reward all according to what they have transacted with God.

Further on, in Matthew 20:27, 28, the Lord repeats the lesson of the exchange of lives, and with greater clarity: “And whoever desires to be chief among you, let him be your servant; even as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many”.

The prophet Isaiah prophecied about this marvelous exchange or praxis: “Come now, and let us reason together, says Jehovah; though your sins are as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall be like wool” (Isaiah 1:18).

Praised be the name of Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior, for His marvelous grace!

Note: For further study on “praxis” as a Greek noun and its related verb form please see Henry George Lidell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, in the following links: “praxis” (noun): http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0058:entry=#27252; “prasso” (verb) http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=#86185.

posted by Haroldo Camacho @ 11:09 AM

Comments:
knight777 said…

Very interesting article (this is leslie btw). I always despair somewhat when I read things like this. Why? How can someone not intimately versed in Hebrew and Greek possibly understand things if this is indeed correct?

It would mean the vast majority of Christian scholars over the centuries have incorrectly translated this passage and probably others.

As a layperson who has no chance of ever learning greek or hebrew, its a bit discouraging to think of everything else I might be missing out on.

6:52 AM

Haroldo Camacho said…

knight777: Thanks for your comment. It is indeed very likely that most biblical translators over the centuries have overlooked the relationship of “praxis” as “transaction” and the immediate context. Not only the translators but also I cannot think of one Bible Commentary anywhere which has caught this nuance.

However, what first led me to doubt the meaning of “works” as the adequate translation was not my immediate knowledge of the Greek “praxis” as “transaction”.

What stirred my suspicion that something was off in the translation of “praxis” as “works” was that “works” just didn’t fit the context. It seemed like this text had gotten “cut and pasted” from some ancient parchment Matthew was working with, and included it there because there just happened to be space in that particular place of the parchment he was working with. Of course I was not happy with that conlusion, so I sought other alternatives.

The same is true with v. 28. That is another verse that has riddled Christian Biblical scholars over the years with multiple explanations. However, that text is also very closely tied to the context, to vv. 21-27. I’ll post that as soon as I finish that particular study.

My suspicion that something was wrong with the translation of “praxis” as “works”, was that the text didn’t fit there. That led me to re-study every single word in the Greek text in that entire passage. To my amazement, when I came to “praxis” it didn’t take long to find out in a reliable Greek Lexicon (the one cited in the end note was just one of them)that indeed the word meant “business transaction”. Once I discovered that meaning imagine my surprise when I went back to the entire context and found how well it interpreted the entire passage, particulary with the use of another market place word,"antallagma" (object of exchange) in the previous verse (v. 26). Luther was right, the Bible is its own best interpreter.

However, the Holy Spirit is the one who brings the things of Christ to our own dense minds, and through the glory of the cross cuts through the fog showing us the workings of His marvelous grace toward us in the love of Jesus Christ our Lord.

Here is a sermon by Martin Luther on John 6:44:

http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/reformationink/mlonfaith.htm

The doctrine of election undergirds the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

Stan

I especially like this portion of the sermon preached by Martin Luther posted above:

. Thus you learn from the first utterance in today’s Gospel that this knowledge must come from God the Father; he must lay the first stone of the foundation in us, else we will never do anything. But this is accomplished in the following
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE SERMONS OF MARTIN LUTHER, VOL. III, PAGE 400

way: God sends us preachers, whom he has taught, to preach to us his will. First he instructs us that our entire lives and characters, however beautiful and holy they may be, are before him as nothing, yea, are as abomination, and displeasing; this is called a preaching of the Law. Then he offers us grace; that is, he tells us that he will not utterly condemn and reject us, but will receive us in his beloved Son, and not merely receive us, but make us heirs of his kingdom, lords over all that is in heaven and upon earth. This is called preaching grace or preaching the Gospel. But God is the origin of all; he first awakens preachers and constrains them to preach. This is the meaning of St. Paul’s words when he says to the Romans: “So belief cometh of hearing, and hearing by the Word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). This truth the words of the Lord in today’s Gospel also declares, when Christ says: “It is written in the prophets, And they shall all be taught of God. Every one that hath heard from the Father, and hath learned, cometh unto me. Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he that is from God, he hath seen the Father.”

9. Now, under the first preaching, the preaching of the Law, namely, that we with all our works are condemned, man is restless and fearful before God, and knows not what to do with his life and deeds. He suffers from an accusing and timid conscience, and if relief from some source were not to come quickly he would have to despair forever. Therefore, we must not long delay with the other preaching; we must preach the Gospel to him and lead him to Christ as the one whom the Father has given to us to be our mediator, that we should be saved solely through him, out of pure grace and mercy, without any works or merit on our part. The heart rejoices at this word and runs to such grace as a thirsty deer to the water. This longing David keenly experiences when he says in Ps. 42:1-2: “As the heart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God, my soul thirsteth for God, for the living God.”

10. Now, when one comes to Christ, that is, to his Gospel, he hears the personal voice of Christ the Lord, which confirms the knowledge God taught him, namely, that God is nothing"…

Great stuff and very pertinent for today,

Stan

Stan,

Thanks for that ‘mini-sermon’ on the Pharisee and the tax collector. I never looked at it in that way before. We have a tendency to make the Pharisee completely selfish and self-serving but he was a pious man who believed that God was doing great things in him and that was enough.

I’ll have to send it to my brother to look at.