Thanks, Christian. I would see all of these as subsets under the Word of God. I disagree with the notion of prevenient grace and the notion of irresistable grace. The way the Father draws, Christ enlightens, and the Spirit convicts is through the Word, especially the preached Word. Without it, no life can be formed. I think the parable of the sower is very instructive here as well.

I read over my original article again this afternoon and I think I agree with your assessment that the bit from James sort of throws the conclusion into confusion. I’ll have to think on James some more to see how it fits into this. I am not sure that Paul and James actually use justification differently, but perhaps they do. I am certain that they mean the same thing about the word, ‘faith’, however, although there are some differences on the surface.

Thanks for the interaction. I don’t think you are going too far afield!

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

One might combine these into the grace of God (sometimes called preveinent grace), but normally preveinent grace is presented as present in every man at birth along with is depravity. I would not see this as an accurate portrayal. I see these graces as a process throughout life, therefore depravity is present at all times and these graces are divine external influences that penetrate the depraved mind, and heart . Without these gracious influences none would be saved; however, not all with these influences respond in faith. I do believe, based on the passages I have sited, that all men recieve these graces to whatever degree necessary for them to respond in faith — but again not all do.

I guess, I have taken this further than I needed to, but I hope my position is more clear.

As to the work of God that brings men to salvation, I think Paul tells us what that is in Romans 10. It is the Word of God. If someone has not heard, he cannot receive. If someone does hear, he may receive. But this point does demand really another post or two! So I’ll leave it with that for now.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

I would say, ” I believe that [the ability to have] faith is [possibly] a gift from God but that at the same time I am personally responsible to exercise saving faith. It is a choice I make but one that I would not make apart from [the work of God’s Spirit in me before I trust Him; this is] God’s grace.

But more later.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

I think I agree with you premise: Salvation is more than passive justification (ie God demands pre-justification faith). However, I got a bit lost when you went to James. My perception of James has been that we are dealing with very different aspect of faith — the effects (works) post-faith rather than pre-justification works. Secondly, and more importantly it has appeared to me that James is dealing with the perspective from earth (man’s) not from heaven (God’s). If you really have faith, prove it to me (James). God knows by our heart, but man knows only by our actions whether we really believe. Both Abraham and Rahab’s actions were proof of their faith — God does not need proof, but we do.

I think Romans 3 is enough for your point about justification; James (at least your explanation) seems to obscure it.

For His glory,
Christian Markle

So, I see Paul and James using the term justification in slightly different contexts. Paul uses justification as a forensic term when God declares guilty sinners righteous, imputing the righteousness of Christ to their account. The basis of that justification is the sinner’s exercise of saving faith in Christ alone. James uses justification as a forensic term to declare the actions (or works of faith) of justified-sinners as righteous (i.e., as conforming to the standard of how a man who has faith in Christ alone would exercise his faith).

As for your overall point, I believe that faith is a gift from God but that at the same time I am personally responsible to exercise saving faith. It is a choice I make but one that I would not make apart from God’s grace.

Hi Andy,

Yes, that is correct in point of time. But you will notice that James puts it second in order as he is citing them. Surely he has a reason for that. Then he cites Rahab as a second example.

I am not suggesting that they were saved by doing “good deeds”! (It could be argued that the deeds cited weren’t particularly good.) But the deeds they did James clearly says are works of faith. Not conforming to a law, but believing God.

What I am trying to dismiss is the notion of monergism such that we are never commanded to seek salvation (clearly not true) or that our faith is somehow not ours, but implanted by an external force. I don’t see these things taught in the Scriptures.

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

You wrote, “The result of these works of faith is the imputation of righteousness …”

Didn’t God impute righteousness to Abraham BEFORE he attempted to sacrifice Isaac? Isn’t that what vs 23 is saying, Abraham believed God and was thus imputed with the righteousness of God, and the ultimate expression of that faith, that justifies or demonstrates the reality of that saving faith, is that he was willing to obey God regarding his son Isaac?

Andy