Two Kinds of Justification. Matthew 25:31-46; James 2:18-24

We get into the topic of salvation; how is a person saved? By that I'm using the term in this introduction only, to refer to going to heaven when we die. There are approximately three views that are presented. One is that we get into heaven or nirvana or utopia or whatever that future state is by our morality, by our good works, by doing good things for people.

The exact opposite of that view is the view of biblical Christianity, the view that is set forth, and was recovered by a Roman Catholic monk by the name of Martin Luther and 1517 which started the Protestant Reformation and the recovery of the truth that was set forth in Galatians and Romans as he had studied them: that a person is justified before God, is made right before God, is declared righteous before God, not by his own works or his own efforts, but by faith alone in Christ alone.

The in between position states something to the effect of we are saved by faith, yes; but that must be accompanied by certain good works. There are two ways that is expressed. There is, what I call, the front door presentation of works, which are those who claim that you have to believe in Jesus, but you also have to be baptized, or you have to believe in Jesus and you change certain things—you have to join a certain church, you don't commit certain sins, and that way you know you're saved. Or there's the back door presentation, which says that you're saved by faith alone, but if it's genuine saving faith, if it's real faith, then there will be accompanying works that is the validation or vindication of that faith. And that's how you know you're saved; you have the right kind of faith.

And there are those who teach that there can be a faith in Jesus that isn't saving if it wasn't accompanied by the right kind of works. One of the basic problems of that (the basic problem is it is not biblical) view is it's attempting to quantify what that fruit is; it makes us fruit inspectors when many times we can't even figure out what we think about a lot of things, much less what we've done that may be of some value to God. These are the key issues.

When you come to the passage we've been studying in our study of Matthew and this judgment that is described at the end of Matthew 25, referred to as the judgment of the sheep and goats, it is a passage frequently taken out of context. In fact, there are many who say that this is the most difficult passage in the Scripture to interpret, and as I pointed out, one commentator identified 32 different interpretations. Fundamentally, the problem there is that they identify this as the as a final judgment, and it's not the great white throne judgment. But they identify that as the final great white throne judgment and say that the reason that the sheep are identified as such is because of the way they have treated "the least of these my brethren". We saw that that is a term for Jewish believers who will survive the Tribulation.

The confusion comes when many people say that it is because they fed them when they were destitute, clothed them when they had no clothing, visited them when they were in jail. In other words, the reason the sheep are separated and identified as the sheep is because of their good works, and their good works are emphasized because that shows that they had genuine saving faith. Now that raised the question for us that needs to be addressed: what is the relationship of faith to works? That's why we started last time looking at James chapter 2 and we are back there this morning for a couple of reasons. One is, I didn't quite finish going through it last time. I was giving a flyover, more of a summary of the passage, and one of the problems that I run into as a pastor who teaches the Word is that often I am accused of being obsessed with detail. Why is he going into so much detail? The reason I go into detail is the reason I'm going to go back over some things and go back into detail is because if I don't, I will get a slew of questions where I have to go back in order to answer those questions. If I go into detail I don't get that many questions, but if I go don't go into detail I will. What about this, and what about that, and what about this other thing?

This is an extremely important passage and, as several commentators have pointed out, the central interpretive hinge for the passage is in verses 18 and 19, which has some real technical issues in it. I think that we have to spend a little time talking about that. These are words of an objector to what James is saying, and it's important. If you understand that it helps to understand the entire passage.

What we are going to see here in answering three important questions related to Matthew 25 is understanding that there are two different kinds of justification. We have to address the question, what is the relation of faith and works? What are they really believing? Then within that passage it calls them "the righteous"; the sheep are the righteous. How did they become righteous? And then the penalty is going to be condemnation. The goats are sent to eternal death, and those who are the sheep are sent to eternal life. Is the lake of fire really eternal? Why does God judge people eternally? Those are the three questions.

Last time we looked at these questions in the context of Matthew 25, and now I'm going to focus on probably three and four, and that is, what is the relationship between faith and works and how did the sheep become righteous? Did they become righteous by their works, by taking care of the poor, by taking care of clothing those who were without clothes, taking care of those who are in prison and visiting them, or is that something different?

The second question on the list is, what is the gospel? I reminded you that there are basically three Gospels in the Bible. The first is the Old Testament gospel, the gospel that looked forward to a future provision of a Savior and salvation. In the Old Testament the sacrificial system wasn't a means of salvation, but it was a training aid to understand the nature of salvation—that there needed to be a death, a penalty that had to be paid for sin, and that this could not be paid for by any human being. It had to be paid for by someone who was perfect, pictured by the Lamb who was without spot or blemish.

Then there was the second gospel, the gospel of the kingdom. The first gospel is by faith alone in the Messiah alone—the future promised Messiah. But it's future; it's not looking back, it's looking forward. In the gospel of the kingdom it is still faith alone in the Messiah alone, but there's something that's new in the concept of Messiah, and that is that He's coming, He's present, and he's offering the kingdom. Believing in the gospel of the kingdom was to respond to the message of John the Baptist and Jesus and his disciples at the first part of His ministry: Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand; calling the Jews to turn back to God because the King was at hand in the person of the King who is offering the kingdom.

Since that kingdom was rejected the offer was withdrawn, postponed. Jesus was rejected as the Messiah, He was crucified buried, rose from the dead, ascended to heaven to sit at the right hand of the Father as the Son of Man, waiting to be given His kingdom and establish his kingdom in the future.

Then there's the church age gospel, which is believe that Jesus is the Messiah, who died on the cross for your sins. And by trusting in Him and Him alone you have salvation forever and ever.

That which ends the church age is the Rapture. All those were dead in Christ will be resurrected from the grave, then we who are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds. That is followed by a seven-year Tribulation, which is the final seven years in God's plan purposes for the nation Israel to bring them to turn, to accept their Messiah. And what we see in Matthew 24:14 is that the gospel that is preached in the Tribulation is the gospel of the kingdom. So the gospel of the kingdom entails believing the Messiah has come, He's died for our sins and He's about to return to establish His kingdom. It is a Jewish Messiah who is going to establish a Jewish kingdom that will be centered in Israel with the capital and His throne in Jerusalem. To accept that gospel means that you cannot be anti-Semitic, and so when Jesus says whoever does these to the least of these my brethren, He's talking about "my brethren" in terms of an ethnic sense, those who are Jewish. But "the least of these"—that term we also saw is one that describes disciples of Jesus—is a term to describe Jewish believers in the Tribulation.

So we saw that these verses were critical for understanding the gospel today. The gospel is always on the basis of grace through faith. Ephesians 2:8, 9 says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast." Works are not part of the package. We are not saved by doing good deeds; we are not saved by trying to measure up to the righteous standard of God. There is nothing we can do as constitutionally corrupt sinners that can ever measure up to the absolute perfection of God's standard. If we are going to be perfect, which is what God demands, what His character demands, then we must have someone give us that righteousness. That's the picture of salvation.

Jesus gives us His righteousness when we trust in Him and we are saved on the basis of His righteousness, not our righteousness. Titus 3:5 says, he saved is not on the basis of works which we have done in righteousness—not on the basis of works which we've done in righteous. Works are not the basis for God saying, you are righteous; it is the possession of Christ's righteousness.

In Romans 11:6 Paul says, if it is by grace, and it is, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. If you add anything to it Paul says it's not grace. That's why in Galatians chapter one Paul says if anyone preaches another gospel, a gospel that is different from grace-based salvation—by grace through faith alone—then let him be accursed. That is a false gospel. Faith plus anything equals nothing; no deal. God is strict: my way or no way.

So what's the relationship then between faith and works? And this is the claim by many in the Matthew 25 passage; that the sheep are saved by works. They believe that faith without works (without good deeds) is a false faith, a pseudo-faith, an inadequate faith and not a faith that saves. Therefore, in their view, we are saved by faith plus good works.

It was pointed out to me by several in the congregation who listen to me that at any Roman Catholic funeral, because they believe you're saved ultimately by works, this passage in Matthew 24 is cited: that this is how you're saved. If you read anything that tries to relate the social gospel, or social programs, social justice, socialism, to Christianity, they always cite this passage and take it out of context.

The key passage for asserting this relationship to faith and works is in James 2:14-26. Just a reminder: justification in Scripture is faith alone, faith minus works. Works are not an inherent part of the gospel and there is not a necessary connection between works and faith. It is faith alone in Christ alone.

Then there's the view that justification is the result of faith plus works, in combination with works. And then there's the view that it is faith plus works as the necessary result. So if you don't see the works you aren't saved. The danger that is that that people then say that the way you know you're saved is the evidence in your life. That is not what the Bible says. The Bible says the way you know you're saved is you believe the promise of God. And the focus is on the promise of God, not on our response to the promise of God, other than faith alone in Christ alone.

So James chapter two can be broken down into three sections. The first section is in verses 14-17 where James is basically saying that faith--by faith he means not the action of believing, but what is believed. That is, when you say, I believe X, and you believe it, it doesn't really do you any good if you don't apply what you believe. What he is saying is that doctrine or faith, or what you believe, is useless if you don't apply it.

Then in verses 18-19 there's the presence of this objector. That's why the verse is very difficult. In fact, on one hand I told you that there's this commentators said there were these 32 different positions on Matthew 25 and that's clearly the most difficult passage in the Bible to interpret, until you get to James to 18 to 19, and then you will read in almost every commentary, "This is the most difficult passage in the Bible to interpret". So when you deal with these kinds of things you have to take a little more time to understand what's going on here so that people won't be confused. The objector is basically saying, all you need is faith; you don't need a works. He's trying to avoid having to apply Scripture in his life: all that matters is what you live and what you say, it doesn't matter what you do, just that you say the right things.

And then James gives two illustrations, one from Abraham and one from Ahab in the Old Testament, and concludes by saying that faith without works, i.e. saying what you believe without application is useless; it doesn't help you spiritually. It doesn't mean you're not saved because were not talking about salvation; we are talking about spiritual life.

So James begins at 2:14 saying, "What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works, can faith save him". We know that he's talking to believers because he calls them "my brethren". In fact, throughout the epistle he refers to those to whom he is writing as "my brethren" or "my beloved brethren". He is talking to them as believers. He uses this phrase APHILOS, which he will use again in verse 16, which shows the connection, the internal unity of this whole section. "What benefit is it, my brethren, if someone claims to believe certain things (and maybe they do) but doesn't have works (application)?"

You see what is happened in the structure of this epistle is back in verse 19 James says to them, "So then, my beloved brethren, let every man"… this is his command of them…"be swift to hear, slow to speak, and slow to wrath". That's the outline of James. From verse 21 to 2:26 he's talking about what it means to be swift to hear. In the first part he talks about hearing the Word and doing it or applying it. It is not Christian service; it is application of what the Word says. If the Word says to pray without ceasing you pray and make it a habit pattern in your life. If the Word says give thanks in all things, then you apply it by giving thanks in all things. If the Scripture says you are to love one another as I have loved you, then you love one another as Christ has loved you. It is not talking about Christian service; it's talking about applying the Word here. You are to be swift to hear, so you hear and do.

Then he gives an example of where they're not doing, which is their showing favoritism to the wealthy and ignoring the poor. Then he comes back and talks about hearing and doing, but now he uses the words faith and works, but faith is analogous to hearing and works is the same as application. He is talking about the same thing with two different words. That goes to verse 26, and then he says, "be slow to speak". Chapter 3 is talking about the sins of the tongue, and then he says, "Be slow to anger", and that is representative of all of the mental attitude sins. Chapter four, down through 5:6 talks about being slow to speak, and then he comes back to his major theme, which is to endure and persevere in the Christian life. So that ultimately, when we as Christians appear before the judgment seat of Christ, we will have rewards and not shame.

So he says here, "What value is it if you claim to believe certain things (I'm paraphrasing), if you say you claim to believe certain things but you don't have application, can that faith save?" This word saved is one that many times we think that it means getting into heaven when we die, because that's how we use it in our evangelical idiom; but the Bible uses the term in different ways.

James 1:21 tells us that this is a focal point of his overall application. He's augmenting swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger, and he says therefore lay aside all (in the old King James it was "superfluity of naughtiness") filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted Word." I'm not getting into all the details of that verse, but what he is saying is, "Receive the word into your life". In other words, study the Word, learn it, and believe it, because that's able to save your soul. But they are already justified, because in verse 18 he said, "Of His own will He brought us forth by the Word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of His creation". He is saying that they are already justified; they've already been born again; they are regenerate; they have eternal life. So what kind of salvation is this? This is growth, spiritual growth.

Salvation is used three ways in the in the Bible. At phase one salvation when we trust in Jesus, we receive His righteousness, we are declared righteous, and we are saved from the eternal penalty of sin. It happens just like that when suddenly you realize Jesus died for you and you believe Him, believe He alone saves you, and from that point on you have eternal life. You are saved from the penalty of sin, eternal condemnation, but after that we have to be saved from the power of sin in our life, and that is ongoing. We are to work out our salvation, as Paul says in Philippians 2, with fear and trembling. It is living out the implications of being a declared righteous, being a new creature in Christ. And so now we are being saved from the power of sin. When we die we get are glorified. We no longer have a sin nature so were saved from the presence of sin.

So he is writing to them. They are believers; they have been brought forth by the Word of God; they are the firstfruits among His creatures; they are "my beloved brethren"; they are believers. But now they have to learn to apply the word.

In James 1:22, he says, "But become appliers, doers of the Word (apply what you're learning) and not merely hearers (not merely listeners) who delude themselves." And then he gives us an illustration from what the problem is. They are ignoring the poor and not applying the love of Christ to those who are impoverished. In fact, they're treating them with a lack of respect and care and their fawning over those who are who are wealthy.

He uses the same word at the conclusion of verse 16 that he used in verse 14. He says, "What value is that, if all you say to them is go in peace, be warm and be filled; you're not doing anything to help them, you're not applying what you say you believe".

So I paraphrased it this way. "What spiritual benefit is it, my brethren, if someone claims to have doctrine—I've got doctrinal notebooks, etc. I know all this—but they're not applying what they learn". Can that doctrine deliver them from the deadly and destructive consequences of sin in our present life?

That takes us up to where we stopped last time, and his conclusion in that section and as stated in 2:17 where he says, "Thus also, faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead". I pointed out that for it to be dead it first had to be alive, which means they were saved, but now it's of no value. What it means by being dead is, it's nonproductive; it's a sterile faith; it's not a living or vital faith that is making any difference in the spiritual life.

Now we get to the fun part, verses 18 and 19, but this is the voice of the objector: 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.”

Now, as I stated in the introduction to this, these are a couple of verses that many will say are the most difficult to interpret in the Scripture. They are difficult; there are a lot of details we have to address here.

The first thing I want to point out is the word "someone" doesn't appear here for the first time in this passage. James says, but someone that someone is an objector, someone who isn't agreeing with him. But he has used this word, it's a pronoun in the in the Greek, and it's used at the very beginning in verse 14 of this section. "What is it profit, my brethren, if someone says …" This is the objector; he has already raised one question: "If someone says he has faith but does not have works, can faith save him?" What if someone says this? And it stated again in verse 16. It's not clear in your English because he says, "and one of you says to them". There's the word "someone". So this word "someone" appears two or three times there, so he is using this as a rhetorical device to talk about what some other people say.

Now the question is, are the words of this someone in verses 18 and 19 found only in the first part of verse 18, the whole of verse 18, or both verses 18 and 19. The second question that should be asked is, who exactly is this someone? What are they arguing for? What's their position?

We look now at four translations. Moffat was a scholar, wrote several commentaries and published his own translation of the New Testament, and if you will notice, he has the words of the objector as only the first six words. "Someone will object and say, 'And you claim to have faith'." In the second example, the New King James, any TSV, RSV, and NIV, the words of the objector are little bit longer. There you have, "You have faith and I have works." Then after that you would assume that's the voice of James. In the third example, from the New American Standard Bible, you have, "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." In this translation, it appears that all of verse 18 is the words of the objector, and you see why people would be confused. There are no punctuation marks in the Greek. They didn't use punctuation marks, so it is an interpretation based on numerous factors, and in this case, especially theology, to decide where this guy's voice begins and ends.

The trouble is that there is clear indication in the language as to where this goes. This is seen in the fourth example, which I believe is correct, which is Williams New Testament translation and also reflected in Young's literal translation. And according to this understanding, the voice of the objector includes both verse 18 and verse 19. So James isn't saying verse 19. He's not saying, "You believe the God is one, you're right; evil spirits also believe this in shudder." He's not saying that, that's in the still in the voice of the objector.

Now why do I say, in contrast to the Bibles you read, that the quotation marks should go all the way through verse 19? Well first of all, we see that this is a typical rhetorical device that is used in much of Greek literature. It is called a diatribe, and this diatribe is often presented where you have words initially introducing the objector, and then there is another statement that is made that indicates that the original writer is taking up his cause.

For example, in Romans 9:19 is an example of this diatribe. Paul says, You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” To counter that Paul clearly indicates that he's now back speaking, and he says, [20] "On the contrary, who are you, O man [the objector], who answers back to God? …"

There is another example in 1 Corinthians 15:35, 36 similar to what James says: But someone will say [might object], “How are the dead raised? And with what kind of body do they come?” Then the voice of Paul: "You fool! That which you sow does not come to life unless it dies."

So this diatribe, which was very common in Greek literature, is a sophisticated argument where the writer uses the voice of someone else in a debate type format to express an objection, and then he answers that objection. It is also seen in Luke 4:23; Romans 11:19, and various examples in Josephus and also in the in the Septuagint.

Another thing that indicates this just structurally is verses 14-17 are a unit, as indicated by what's called in literature an inclusio: you have a statement made at the beginning and a statement at the end, which, in artillery terms, brackets the target. Verse 14 raises the question: if someone says he has faith but does not have works. In verse 17 it says faith itself, if it does not have works. So the beginning of the section talks about faith without works; the end of this section says faith by itself without work. That's a unit of thought.

In James 2:20 the question is asked: "But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?" So the question that is asked verse 20 focuses on faith without works as being dead. And in verse 26 it says repeats that phrase, faith without works is dead. That's an inclusio. So if 14 through 17 is a unit, and 20 to 26 is a unit, that means 18 and 19 must be the unit in between.

Now that is really important because one of the questions I got last week after the message focused on is very thing. A person said, I've had trouble talking to people, helping them understand this. How do you really understand what's going on here with these demons in verse 19. It's very confusing for a lot of people, and if you don't understand who is talking then you can't really understand how to interpret that passage.

In verse 18 we have the introduction of this objector. James says, "But someone (somebody who doesn't agree with me) may well say, You have faith and I have works, show me your faith from …" No this is another little problem. There is a textual variant. What a picture variant means is that we have over five thousand today over 5000 original language manuscripts from the first through about the eighth or ninth century of the New Testament. They are manuscripts that are very ancient, but sometimes copyists would miss-copy, and so you have an error that comes in and you have some manuscripts that might have a different reading. What happens is you have some manuscripts that use the Greek word CHORIS for "from", and it's translated "without". But the vast majority of manuscripts, including many ancient manuscripts, don't have CHORIS here; they have the word EK. That's the word "from". So if it's EK here and EK here it makes much more sense.

What the objector is saying is, "You have faith; I have works. If you start with your faith, show me from faith your works, and I'll start with works and try to show my faith from the works". What he's arguing is there's not a necessary connection between what a person believes and what they do. He saying, "Your idea, James, that faith without works is useless; it doesn't work; it's nonsense because there is no necessary connection between what a person believes and what they do." And then he's going to give an example in verse 19. He says, for example, "You believe the God is one. What impact does that have on you that you believe the God is one?" You worship God. On the other hand you have demons; they believe the same thing. They believe that God is one and they shudder. Just because you believe the same thing doesn't mean you're going to have the same application. He is saying there is no connection between application and what you believe. He is trying to nullify James argument.

For the sake of argument, there are those who think that verse 19 is in the voice of James, but this is in the voice of the object door. But assuming their position, they will then say, see, this proves that real faith has some consequent action; even the demons believe, but they don't have the right kind of fruit.

Let me ask you question. Pop quiz: Is believing that God is one, the gospel? What you have to believe to go to heaven when you die? No, that's not the gospel. This isn't talking about a salvation proposition here. The demons clearly believe God is one. When Jesus came on the earth, and He cast demons out, what did they call Him? They called Him Lord; they call Him God. They knew who He was. Just believing that God is one is not going get you to heaven, so this is not a proposition at all that talks about salvation. The reality is does James object or simply saying, like many people today, I just need to study the Bible. If I just know that know the Bible, that's enough.

James is saying that maybe great to know the Bible, but if you're not applying it, it's not doing your spiritual life any good. You may still be saved but you're not growing. That's his whole point.

So he goes to the next level of his argument and says, "But are you willing to recognize O foolish fellow ..." See, in the diatribe it starts with an introduction, "But someone will say". But when the original speaker is coming back he makes some comment. In Romans 1:19 Paul says, "Oh man, how long will you do this?" In 1 Corinthians 15 Paul did the same thing as James; he calls the objector a fool. So you clearly know when the writer is coming back, That's why I asked how you know those quotation marks go all the way through verse, verse 19? Because of the way it's structured; it's basic to the literary structure of this kind of rhetorical device in Greek.

James is saying, "Are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?" He's not saying that they're not believers, it's that as believers they are not applying what they say they believe.

Then he gives two examples. The first example comes from Abraham. That's the only one I am going to talk about. James says, "Wasn't Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Now Abraham is the classic example of justification by faith alone. Paul will refer to him in Romans chapter 4. It's the first clear statement of justification by faith alone in the Old Testament, in Genesis 15:6. Genesis 15:6 refers to Abraham's original salvation. But this event when Abraham was told by God to sacrifice his son Isaac in Genesis 22 is 30 or 40 years, maybe 50 years later. In the interim Abraham is grown spiritually. He has come to understand that God is going to fulfill his promise to him. Many times he tried to fulfill that promise himself. That's why we got stuck with Ishmael. Now he understands a God can fulfill that promise through Isaac just as God had said, and even if he killed Isaac, he realized God would bring them back from the dead.

God can fulfill his promise and so Abraham is like, "I finally got it. I believe God for his promise, not for salvation, but that he's going to provide me with an eternal seed, and in eternal people, and that's going to be through Isaac and nobody else. I am going to do what God says to do."

James 2:21, "Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar?" It's not his justification for salvation; it's his justification of his spiritual growth and maturity. He was justified by works when he offered Isaac, his son, on the altar.

James 2:22, "You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected." James says do you see that his faith was working together with his works are his application, and by works of faith was made perfect. Now that word "perfect" is really important. It's the word in Greek that means to be mature; not to be flawless, not to be sinless, but to be brought to maturity, to be completed. That's the base meaning of the word TELEIOO. So James is saying that by his application, his faith in God was matured. That's the subject of the whole epistle—how believers are to grow by hearing and applying the Word, and by being slow to speak and slow to anger.

James 2:23 and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “AND ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS,” and he was called the friend of God.

That word account [reckoned] is from the Greek word meaning to impute or credit someone to his account. James 2:23 is quoting from Genesis 15:6.

His conclusion is, James 2:24 "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone."

What is important there is, you'll see that there's a little bit of a difference there between the way I translated that and what you might have in your Bibles. That is because of a misreading of a Greek term the translated "only". In the Greek it is an adverb. This is why grammar is important. It drives some of you nuts, I know, but this is why it's important. An adverb modifies what kind of word? A verb. So if you're reading this in most translations, it says, "You see, then, that a man is justified by works and not by faith only." What kind of word is faith, noun or verb? It's a noun. Nouns are modified by adjectives. So this is an adverb, it's not there to modify the noun faith; it's modifying a verb that is left out. It's already supplied by the context, but it is applied.

Just as a side note, this is called ellipsis. We do it in English all the time. You hear people say, wait for me, I'm going to come with". What are they saying? I'm going to come with you. They left out the word "you", but we understand that. Listen to British English in some of these murder mysteries and how many times they leave out words, because it's understood what the word is.

When James says, you see then that a man is justified by works, he has already given us the verb, and then he is saying, "and not justified", and that's where the adverb would come, "not justified only by faith". There are two kinds of justification. Paul says the same thing in Romans 4:1. Now this is important. Paul says, "What then shall we say about Abraham our father has found according to the flesh. For "if" Abraham was justified by works …" That's a first class condition in the Greek; that's a way of expressing a condition that he expected to be true. So he is saying, "Yes, Abraham was justified by works, but not before God". It's a justification before man; it's a vindication of his salvation originally.

So this takes us to the fourth question, which is, how did the sheep become righteous? This is simple. You go back to Genesis 15:6 and just walk it through the Old Testament. Abraham believed in the Lord and it was imputed or counted to him as righteousness. It is not what he did, but what he believed. Justification is by faith alone.

Isaiah in the Old Testament says, "For all of us have become like one who is unclean", and includes himself. Remember in Isaiah chapter 6 before the throne of God, he says, "I am a man of unclean lips". He says we are all unclean, we are all sinners, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment. All of our righteousness is like filth. So how do we become righteous if all of our good deeds—not our bad deeds but all of our good deeds—are garbage? We do it through God.

Isaiah 50:8 says, "He who vindicates Me is near; Who will contend with Me? Let us stand up to each other; Who has a case against Me? Let him draw near to Me".

This is talking about justification as seen by the Messiah, the Servant, and seen in Isaiah 53:11, "He shall see the labor of his soul". That is the suffering Servant will see the labor or the work of his soul. And actually, this is God the Father saying, "He shall see the labor of his soul, The servant. He the Father shall see the labor of His soul (the Son, the Servant) and be satisfied. By his knowledge …" That is, by knowledge of the Father. "… my righteous Servant shall justify many. He will make them righteous, for He shall bear their iniquities".

This is the same point that Paul is making in Romans 4:3 and following. ^NASB "For what does the Scripture say? “ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS. Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due [debt]." In other words, you can't work to get to heaven. That's a debt, that's not going to get you there. "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness."

So in conclusion, how are we to be declared righteous before the throne of God? How did those sheep in the separation of the sheep and the goats get called "the righteous"? How did they become righteous? Not by doing good deeds, because all through the Scripture it says that doing good deeds doesn't make you righteous. "All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags". What makes you righteous is that you have believed in Christ as Savior. You believe the gospel, and the gospel during the Tribulation is the gospel of a messianic King who died for his people, who died for their sins, and He will come and bring a Jewish kingdom that will be centered in Israel in Jerusalem. And when that Jewishness of the gospel is understood then it will be impossible for those who believe a Jewish gospel, for a Jewish king and a Jewish Messiah, to reject aid to Jewish believers during the Tribulation period.

For us, the issue is believe in the Lord Jesus Christ word "Christ" is the word for Messiah. We believe that Jesus died on the cross for our sins, and by faith alone in Christ alone, by believing that He died for me. He paid my penalty on the cross; He is my substitute that when I believe in Him I'm credited with His righteousness, and on the basis of his righteousness, which I have by faith alone, I am declared righteous.

Slides