Okay, it's Romans lecture number 10, Romans lecture number 10, and we're on Romans chapter 4, and verses 1 to 5. Now, we titled Romans chapter 4, justification by faith is taught in the Old Testament. So Paul's showing that what he is teaching is not new, and it doesn't oppose the Old Testament scriptures. The New Testament, yes, salvation is made more clear, but it's the same salvation message that's given in the Old Testament. Verses 1-5, Paul argues that Abraham's righteousness, the righteousness he received, was apart from works. Verses 6-8, Paul argues that David's righteousness, the righteousness he received, was apart from works. Verses 9 to 12, he argues that Abraham's salvation or righteousness was apart from circumcision, and verses 13 to 15, that Abraham's righteousness was apart from the law. Then in verses 16 to 22, the passage we're covering right now, Paul states that Abraham trusted in God, he did not trust in himself. He was too old to have a son, his wife Sarah was barren, so Abraham trusted in God. God had promised him a son, and Abraham knew that God is able to raise the dead. He knew that God had the power to create the universe from nothing, therefore God would not break his promise. When Abraham looked at himself, he saw an old man, but when he looked at the stars, he saw the infinite power of God. So Paul is emphasizing the biblical teaching that salvation is by God's grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. Ephesians 2.8.9 makes that real clear. That reads, for by grace you have been saved through faith. And that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not as a result of works, that no one should boast. John 3.16-18 also tells us where that faith must be directed. It is not the power of our faith that saves us, but it is the power of the object of our faith, the Lord Jesus Christ, both able and willing to save us. But salvation is by God's grace alone, through faith alone, and Christ alone. We are saved by God's grace. The word for grace is charis. We get our word charity from it. It means God's unmerited favor. Something we cannot earn. We accept God's grace by faith in Christ. Through faith in Christ. Through trusting in Jesus alone for salvation. We cannot work our way to heaven and therefore we have no reason to boast. So Abraham trusted in God. Now in verses 23 to 25, Paul brings a point of application in here that yes, Abraham trusted in God and God credited that to him as righteousness. In other words, man is saved not by good works, but by trusting in God to keep his promise to save us. And so then Paul argues in verses 23 to 25 that Abraham is an example for all believers. Take a look at verses 23 to 25. Now not for his, that's Abraham, now not for his sake only was it written that it was reckoned to him but for our sake also to whom it will be reckoned as those who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. He who was delivered up because of our transgressions and was raised because of our justification. And so Abraham is an example for all believers. You see, the Old Testament was recorded not just for the sake of the Old Testament saints, but also for our sake, for the sake of the New Testament saints and the church-age believers. Look at 1 Corinthians 10, verses 1-6. Paul says, For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them, and the rock was Christ. Nevertheless, with most of them God was not well pleased, for they were laid low in the wilderness." Now these things happen as examples for us. that we should not crave evil things as they also crave. So these Old Testament accounts are recorded as examples for us to learn from. Then in verse 11 of 1 Corinthians 10, talking about more of these Old Testament examples, now these things happen to them as an example as they were written for our instruction upon whom the ends of the ages have come. And so the Old Testament was recorded for our sake, so we can learn from Abraham. Abraham was not the only guy who was going to be credited as being righteous because he believed. That example is an example, Abraham's example is an example we need to follow. So the Old Testament gives us examples to follow in our Christian walk. We, like Abraham, should believe in the God who gives life to the dead. He rose Jesus from the dead, and he'll raise us from the dead if we trust in Christ. We should understand even what Abraham could not clearly foresee. Now Abraham already acknowledged that God could raise the dead, God could give life to the dead. And we should believe, trust in God to give life to our mortal bodies. It's easier for us to see that because he rose Jesus. That was before Jesus even died. You know, about 20,000 B.C., somewhere in that time frame. But we should clearly understand even what Abraham could not clearly foresee. That Christ died for our sins, that Christ rose to justify us. You know, I want to say this, I think that the Old Testament saints had much more, true believers in the Old Testament had much more knowledge than we give them credit for. I think that a true Old Testament believer was a Messianic Jew who was looking forward to the day when God would send the Jewish Messiah who would be the perfect Lamb of God who would die for the sins of mankind. So I'm not saying that Abraham didn't see that the Messiah would have to come and die someday. What I'm arguing though is that he did not clearly, you know, he didn't know his name was going to be Jesus. He didn't know when it was going to occur and that type of thing. But I think it was rather vague, but I think there was the idea in animal sacrifices even before the Mosaic Law and the Proto-Evangelion the promise that the seed of the woman would someday crush the head of the serpent while the serpent bit his heel and the animal sacrifices all pointed to the day when the Messiah the perfect Lamb of God would die would be sacrificed for the sins of mankind but even so Abraham could not clearly foresee how all these things would be brought about. But we have a greater understanding of how Christ died for our sins. He died for our sins. He was punished for our sins. In verse 25 it says He was delivered up, so He died because of our transgressions, our sins. There it's talking about willful sins in In contrast to Hamartia, a mere missing the mark, although there are scriptures that say that he died for our Hamartia, those type of sins. But he died for our transgressions and was raised for our justification. He rose to justify us. And of course, Paul makes it amply clear in 1 Corinthians 15 verses 14 and 17 that Christ's death without the resurrection, if Christ died on the cross for our sins but then did not rise from the dead, it would have been useless. 1 Corinthians 15 and verse 14, and if Christ has not been raised and our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. And in verse 17, and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless, you are still in your sins. So if Jesus Christ died on the cross but did not raise Himself from the dead, then preaching and our faith in Him would be useless, our faith would be worthless, we'd still be in our sins. How could He conquer death for us if He could not conquer death for Himself? And so Christ's death without the resurrection would have been useless. He died for our sins and then He rose to justify us, to give us His righteousness. He conquered death for us. Now, that's Romans chapter 4. We've got a conclusion that I want to look at. I want us to look at a few other verses and all. But before we get to that, Paul here uses Abraham as an illustration. that justification is by faith alone. And so Romans 4, we need to reconcile that with James chapter 2 verses 14 to 26. Now we've seen what Paul said. Paul's view in Romans 4, He said that a man is saved by trusting in Jesus for salvation. He stated that Abraham was declared righteous, was justified when he first believed in Genesis 15. And that man is saved by faith alone. Let's take a look at what James says. James chapter 2 and verses 14 to 26. James 2 and verses 14 to 26. What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, go in peace, be warmed and be filled, and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so, faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself. But someone may well say, you have faith and I have works. Show me your faith without the works and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that God is one. You do well. The demons also believe and shudder. But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? You see that faith was working with his works. And as a result of the works, faith was perfected. And the scripture was fulfilled which says, And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness, and he was called a friend of God. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. And in the same way was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way. For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead. Now, at first glance, we see what appears to be a direct contradiction between James and Paul. So if they are both writing and delivering to us the word of God, how do we reconcile the view on justification of Paul with James' view of justification? Now, take a look at Galatians chapter 2. In Galatians chapter 2, verses 6-9, I just want it to be emphasized here that James and Paul did reconcile this. Now, there were many times that there were Jews from James that had sat under James' teachings and would butt heads with the disciples of Paul. So there was an apparent contradiction between their teachings. But could this apparent contradiction be reconciled so that we would find that it appears to be a contradiction but it is in fact not a contradiction? That maybe they're just using different terminology. By the way, James is real tough on righteousness because his older brother was righteousness. He knew what righteousness was. He grew up with righteousness. No matter how much good James did in his life, I'm sure that Mary and Joseph would often ask him, why can't you be more like your big brother Jesus? James' brother was the perfect God of Abraham. He knew righteousness personally, and so it only makes sense that his letter would stress righteousness. James was the kind of guy, he would tell you, don't tell me that you believe, show me that you believe. Don't call yourself a believer. If I don't see a change in your life, as far as I'm concerned, you're as unsaved as demons are. But look at Galatians 2, verses 6 to 9. Paul is speaking and he says this, or he writes this, but from those who are of high reputation, what they were makes no difference to me, God shows no partiality, while those who are of reputation contributed nothing to me. What he's saying is the apostles did not give Paul his gospel. Paul got his gospel directly from Jesus. Verse 7 of Galatians chapter 2. But on the contrary, seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised, for he who effectually worked for Peter in his apostleship to the circumcised, to the Jews, effectually worked for me also to the Gentiles. And recognizing The grace that had been given to me, James, that's James the brother of Jesus, because James the brother of John had already died, James and Cephas, that's Peter, and John, that's John the Apostle, who were reputed to be pillars, they were pillars in the church, James the brother of Jesus, Peter and John the Apostles, These three gave to me, gave to Paul and Barnabas, that's the right hand man of Paul, gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that we might go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. Then verse 10 says, they only asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do. So what it's saying is, Paul's saying there were rumors, there were rumors going around that James is preaching a different gospel than Paul. that the Gentiles are starting a whole different church than the true Christian church that was started by Peter and now is headed by James in Jerusalem because Peter and John left Jerusalem because of persecution. And so Peter goes to Jerusalem for a meeting with these guys and They're there, and I can tell you, you probably could have cut the air with a knife. I mean, there's James, a stubborn Jewish theologian, the brother of the incarnate God. Staring down the apostle Paul, another stubborn Jewish theologian who was trained as a Pharisee under Gamaliel. And I'm sure... He came and probably said, you know, there's rumors going around that you say that we should continue in sin that grace might increase. Is that true? And Paul said, no, that's not true. It's not what I, it's not what I preach. And then Paul explained himself. And then Paul probably looked at James and Paul wouldn't take a backseat to anybody. You know, he even says in that same passage in Galatians, he corrected Peter. when Peter was refusing to eat with the Gentiles, just because some Jewish brethren had come along. So then James, Paul probably looked at James and said, you know, there's rumors going around that you're saying that a man can't be saved through faith in Christ alone, that the man has to also get circumcised, even if he's a Gentile, he's got to get circumcised and obey the works of the law. Is that what you're saying? And James said, no, that's not what I'm saying. So Paul doesn't say what it came down to but from knowing Paul, from reading Paul's writings and from reading James, James had a reputation, his knees looked like the knees of camels because he had spent so much time on his knees in prayer. Paul was persecuted throughout his life and finally beheaded. James was taken up to the temple and was supposed to The Pharisees told him, tell the people to stop worshiping your brother. He got up there and preached a fire and brimstone message about his brother Jesus. And the Pharisees got mad, they threw him off the temple, he fell to the ground, he was still alive, and then when they went down at the bottom, they stoned him. These were two stubborn men who would never compromise. So I think it was a time of the roll of the sleeves and I don't think they literally came to blows, but you had here a tremendous theological debate. The Church of Jerusalem versus the Gentile Church. to see whether or not they were preaching the same gospel message. Well they finally came to the conclusion they extended the right hand of fellowship and came to the conclusion that they were in fact preaching the same message. So they reconciled it. Now what we have to do is take their writings in their proper context and find out what exactly how we can reconcile their two views to see that Paul and James are actually preaching the same gospel. They reconciled it, now let's see if we can as well. First off, in Paul's view he defines faith and justification differently than James does. Paul says a man is saved by faith alone. James said a man is not saved by faith alone. A man's faith has to have worse. If his faith is alone, that man is not saved. In James' view of faith, even demons can believe. Demons believe God is one, but they're not saved. They shudder. Martin Luther, there's a statement by Martin Luther that both Paul and James would have no problem accepting. Martin Luther said, man is saved by faith alone, but not the faith that is alone. And that's what James' emphasis was on, that man is not saved by faith that is alone. It has to be faith that is accompanied with works. He's not saying you're saved by faith and works, but he says you're saved by the faith that produces works. And Paul's emphasis was on you're saved by faith alone. But then he would explain later, this faith will produce good works in your life. And when it came to justification, Paul's view, Abraham was justified when he first believed. Genesis 15 verse 6. And Abram believed the Lord and God credited to him his righteousness. But James says that justification did not occur until seven chapters later in Genesis 22, probably, I don't know, 20-30 years later when Abraham was willing to offer up Isaac, though God cut that offering short. So how do we reconcile this? Number one, Paul, they were defining their terms differently. They were preaching the same gospel message. Keep in mind, Paul, James wrote so early, he wrote probably about 49 A.D. They were writing, you know, here was a new church. They had this born-again experience, this personal experience of the saving power of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, how do you put that into words? Now, the Old Testament used lots of different words for it. The fear of the Lord. Faith in the Lord was called the fear of the Lord. It was called trust in the Lord. Trust in the Lord with all your heart, lean on your own understanding. It was called... The word for faith in the Old Testament is amen, which means so be it. So if you say so be it to the promises of God, you are a believer. Habakkuk said that just shall live by faith. But it was said in many different ways. But there was so much of an emphasis on the Old Testament law, which was given to the nation of Israel, to determine whether or not God was going to bless them or curse them in the world. See, by the way, Once a man gets saved, the law is a good guide to live by. Because once you're saved, then you're empowered for the first time in your life to obey God's commands. Before you're saved, all the law does is show you that you can't obey God's commands and you need a savior. that the law reveals God's holy standards and man in his own sinfulness falls short, cannot keep God's holy standards, therefore man needs to look to God for the way of salvation. Man cannot save himself. But Paul and James trying to explain the salvation experience used the same terms but defined them differently. They said the same thing, the same message, but they used their terms differently. In Paul's view, when Paul used the word faith, pistos, in the Greek, he meant trust in Jesus. He meant saving faith, trusting in Jesus for salvation, a hard commitment in Christ. So when Paul meant faith, he meant saving faith, a hard commitment in Christ that will produce good works in the life of the one who has that faith. Romans 3.31. Do we then nullify the law through this faith? May it never be. On the contrary, we establish the law. So Paul says we don't nullify God's law through faith, even though we're not saved by the law. But through faith, we uphold the law. For the first time in our lives, we can obey the law. Romans 6, verses 14 to 17, he says we're slaves to sin. before we get saved. Once we get saved, we become slaves to righteousness so that the law will no longer, the sin will no longer have dominion over us. Now, Ephesians 2.8.9, we often read Ephesians 2.8.9, but many times we do not look at verse 10. So let's take a look. This is, in a nutshell, Ephesians 2.8.9 makes it look like Paul contradicts James, but then once you add verse 10... you see that that is the emphasis that James would put on it would be verse 10 Paul's usual emphasis is verses 8 and 9 although Paul does have that Romans 3.31 and Ephesians 2.10 emphasis throughout his writings as well but Ephesians 2.8-10 Paul says this, for by grace you have been saved through faith and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God not as a result of works that no one should boast For we are his workmanship, we're God's poem, we're God's poem, God's work of art. Created in Christ Jesus, see we're new creations in Christ, 2 Corinthians 5.17. Created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. You see, Paul is teaching that Christians don't do good works to get saved, Christians do good works because they are saved. Good works is not the root of salvation, but good works are produced by salvation. They are the fruit of salvation. And so, in Paul's view, faith is trust. He defines faith as saving faith, trusting in Jesus for salvation, and it will produce good works in your life. It will transform a person's life. Whereas James, in James' view, he defines faith differently. He means something different by faith. James, when he's talking about faith, he means mere intellectual assent. Agreeing with the mind that Jesus is God. Agreeing with the mind that Jesus died for our sins. Agreeing with the mind that He rose from the dead. Mere intellectual assent will say John 3.16 is true, but the person hasn't yet applied it to their life. Believing that Jesus is the savior of mankind and actually trusting in him for salvation are two different things. They're very closely related, but they're two different things. Well, James was defining faith as mere intellectual ascent. That's why he used an illustration that the demons also believe. Paul would never say the demons believe, because when Paul says belief, He's talking about saving faith. When James says believe, he's talking about mere intellectual assent. It's like believing a creed like the Apostle's Creed or the Nicene Creed. Mouthing the words and believing it with the mind, but not without the heart commitment in Christ. So James views that faith does not save because it's mere intellectual assent. If you ask Paul, does mere intellectual assent Does agreement of the mind with the doctrines of Christianity, does that save? Paul would say no, it's definitely a precondition for salvation, but it alone does not save. Before you can believe in Jesus for salvation, you have to make sure it's the true Jesus of the Bible. So you have to have the right propositional truths about Jesus. That Jesus is God, the second person of the Trinity, that he died on the cross for our sins, that he rose from the dead, that salvation comes only through him. And so you have to have the right beliefs about Jesus, the intellectual ascent, but then you need to not only believe that Jesus is fill in the blanks, but you also have to believe in Jesus. You see, I could believe that Joe Schmo is a loyal employee. Or I could believe that Joe Schmo is an employee. But to believe in him as a loyal employee is a whole different thing. One is just believing about the employee, the other is believing in him. So James' faith is believing the right things about God Paul is not only believing the right things about God, but it's also believing in this God to save you. And so with James, it's not saving faith, it's just faith about Jesus rather than faith in Jesus. So keep that in mind. So when James is using the word faith, it means a faith that is alone. A faith that doesn't produce good works. So that's why he would say, faith if it is alone cannot save. But when Paul is saying faith, he means a trust in Jesus that produces good works in your life. By the way, how does John use belief? He uses it both ways. The context will determine. You can have 5,000 people that Jesus multiplied to fish and to bread. John says that they believed in him. Okay? Or that they believed. But then you find them all leaving him, abandoning him, proving that they didn't really believe with saving faith. Well, what they did, they believed in him as the Jewish Messiah. They believed in him as a king who was going to put food in their belly, but they never reached saving faith. But also justifications. In Paul's view, justification means the moment a sinner first believes and at that moment that a sinner first believes he is declared righteous by God. So justification is the act whereby God declares a sinner righteous at the moment he first believes in Jesus. And so Paul says that Abraham was righteous from the moment he first believed. He was declared righteous by God. However, in James view, and by the way, the word for justification and for righteousness, in the Scriptures it's used in different ways. Sometimes it's used to be declared, judicially declared righteous, like being found not guilty in a court of law. That's the way Paul uses it. But even Jesus used it in the, to be vindicated. In other words, to be proven righteous. The way James defined justification is to be proven righteous before men. That's why he said that when Abraham offered up Isaac in Genesis 22, he was justified. It fulfilled what was said in Genesis 15. In other words, James would say Abraham was not righteous in Genesis 15. God declared him righteous. And then God worked within him so that by Genesis 22, when he was willing to offer up Isaac, he was actually righteous in the eyes of men. In other words, he still wasn't perfected in God's eyes, but he had reached the point where even his non-believing neighbors would have to agree that Abraham was a righteous man. In Paul's view, justification, you're declared righteous. In James' view, you're made righteous. In Paul's view, justification is by God, declared righteous by God. In Paul's view, it's proven or made righteous before men. So keep that, and then by the way, these are both, in fact, James, the way James defines justification is probably more common than Paul's usage of it, since the gospel message obviously wasn't real popular and all, but to say that a man was justified, well, although Paul's usage, as long as we, Paul's usage of being declared righteous rather than made righteous was a common usage of his day in a judicial setting if you remove God from the equation. Okay? But anyway, so we see that Paul defined faith and justification differently than James defined faith and justification. So once they defined Paul and James meant and they defined their terms, then they saw that what seemed to be two different gospels were in actuality the same gospel described in different terms. Now because Paul wrote a larger part of the New Testament than James did, we define ourselves, we use his terms. Theologically defined justification, we use Pauline terms. When we define faith, we use Pauline terms. But the fact of the matter, James taught the same gospel, he just defined those terms differently. And so at face value, at first glance, it appeared that they were teaching contradictory messages. but in the end they saw that they just defined certain terms differently and once they defined their terms they saw that they were actually... in other words, the terminology was different, but the concept was identical. Okay? And so when we define salvation as by God's grace alone, through faith alone and Christ alone, as long as we define our terms, the way Paul does, James, once he hears everything laid out on the table, would be in perfect agreement with that definition of salvation. By the way, the Catholic Church has chosen that the Council of Trent, the Council of Trent they chose to use James, define the terms like James did and it really caused a lot of It turned a black and white issue into a big grayish area even to the point where Alistair McGrath, a reform scholar, believes that Catholic theology teaches the same thing, the same doctrine of justification by faith as Catholic, as the reform theology. I disagree and what it comes out to is that the point where they break off on is they Justification, they're using James' terminology to a certain extent, but justification eventually means, in Roman Catholic theology, made righteous before God, not before men. So they're arguing along James' lines and then all of a sudden they insert the justification before God, not before men. If we held that James taught that Abraham was justified before God in Genesis 22, then that would be a contradiction. Because Paul said no, he was justified when he first believed. So, the Catholics, it makes it a very foggy issue. It makes the issue more complex by using James' terminology, but the fact of the matter is they move away from James' definition of justification when they make it be imprudent and righteous before God, not before men, which is not what James was arguing for. In conclusion, from Romans chapter 4, we should not trust in the law to save us, because it only condemns. We should not trust in our works to save us, because God demands perfection. and we will all sin and fall short of God's glory. We should not even trust in tradition to save us, such as circumcision or water baptism, even if it's good religious tradition in that God ordered us to do it, because even good religious tradition without belief in Christ is worthless. Instead, we should trust In the ultimate promise of God alone, we should trust in the Lord Jesus Christ alone, for he alone can save us. In John 14, verse 6, he said, I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes through the Father, but through me. And therefore, our trust should not be in ourselves. Our trust should be in Jesus Christ alone for salvation.