03.09.2013 Views

Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

were the case, faith would have to be regarded as a meritorious work of man. And this<br />

would be the introduction of the doctrine of justification <strong>by</strong> works, which the apostle<br />

opposes consistently, Rom. 3:21,27,28; 4:3,4; Gal. 2:16,21; 3:11. We are told indeed that<br />

Abraham’s faith was reckoned unto him for righteousness, Rom. 4:3,9,22; Gal. 3:6, but in<br />

view of the whole argument this surely cannot mean that in his case faith itself as a<br />

work took the place of the righteousness of God in Christ. The apostle does not leave it<br />

doubtful that, strictly speaking, only the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, is the<br />

ground of our justification. But faith is so thoroughly receptive in the appropriation of<br />

the merits of Christ, that it can be put figuratively for the merits of Christ which it<br />

receives. “Faith” then is equivalent to the contents of faith, that is, to the merits or the<br />

righteousness of Christ.<br />

It is often said, however, that the teachings of James conflict with those of Paul on<br />

this point, and clearly support the doctrine of justification <strong>by</strong> works in Jas. 2:14-26.<br />

Various attempts have been made to harmonize the two. Some proceed on the<br />

assumption that both Paul and James speak of the justification of the sinner, but that<br />

James stresses the fact that a faith which does not manifest itself in good works is no<br />

true faith, and therefore is not a faith that justifies. This is undoubtedly true. The<br />

difference between the representations of Paul and James is unquestionably due partly<br />

to the nature of the adversaries with which they had to deal. Paul had to contend with<br />

legalists who sought to base their justification, at least in part, on the works of the law.<br />

James, on the other hand, joined issue with Antinomians, who claimed to have faith, but<br />

whose faith was merely an intellectual assent to the truth (2:19), and who denied the<br />

necessity of good works. Therefore he stresses the fact that faith without works is a<br />

dead faith, and consequently not at all a faith that justifies. The faith that justifies is a<br />

faith that is fruitful in good works. But it may be objected that this does not explain the<br />

whole difficulty, since James explicitly says in verse 24 that a man is justified <strong>by</strong> works<br />

and not only <strong>by</strong> faith, and illustrates this <strong>by</strong> the example of Abraham, who was<br />

“justified <strong>by</strong> works in that he offered up Isaac” (verse 21). “Thou seest,” says he in verse<br />

24, “that faith wrought with his works, and <strong>by</strong> works was faith made perfect.” It is quite<br />

evident, however, that in this case the writer is not speaking of the justification of the<br />

sinner, for Abraham the sinner was justified long before he offered up Isaac (cf. Gen. 15),<br />

but of a further justification of the believing Abraham. True faith will manifest itself in<br />

good works, and these works will testify before men of the righteousness (that is, the<br />

righteousness of life) of him that possesses such a faith. The justification of the just <strong>by</strong><br />

works confirms the justification <strong>by</strong> faith. If James actually meant to say in this section of<br />

his letter that Abraham and Rahab were justified with the justificatio peccatoris, on the<br />

579

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!