Perplexed Protestant

[Socrates4Jesus]

Peace-bwu:

…
**St Augustine said “When God rewards our merits, he rewards his own gifts to us.” **

"He saved us… that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life" Titus 3:5,7

…

Peace be with you:

You left out the rest of St. Paul’s words. The full quote is:

“But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having hope of eternal life.” (verses 4-7)

I would be interested in reading any quotes you might know from St. Augustine that you think would be helpful. I found his Confessions profound.

One of my favorite quote of his:

“Our souls are restless, O Lord, till they find their rest in Thee.”

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Steve M:

Romans 4:4-5 is the obligation. There is a contract, the Law. If man follows the contract perfectly, God is obligated to pay him with salvation. It’s an employer employee type relationship. When you work, your boss has to pay you the agreed upon wage for that work. However, If you ask a friend to help you move, then you buy him lunch for helping you, that is your gift to him for what he did. Were you obligated to give it to him? Absolutely not. That’s the same as Romans 2:5-8. God asks us to live for him, and if we do his gift will be salvation. He is under on contract to provide it. He just gives it to those that follow him. That’s what he’s saying. If you follow the law perfectly I owe you this. You can’t follow it perfectly, so if that’s what you’re trying to do, you’ll fail. I love you and if you show me you love me by living the spirit of the Law, not the letter, then I’ll find it in the kindness of my heart to grant you a gift. That gift is salvation.

I hope that makes sense. I’m half way writing and half way doing work. You know the kind my employer is obligated to pay me for.

Steve:

You wrote, “That’s what he’s saying. If you follow the law perfectly I owe you this. You can’t follow it perfectly, so if that’s what you’re trying to do, you’ll fail.” And you also wrote something similar above, of which i have been considering.

I think your idea, which is clearly taught in Romans, may shed light on the passage:

“God ‘will give to everyone according to what he has done.’ To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. But to those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger.” (Romans 2:6-8)

Like you said, it’s true that everyone who follows the law perfectly “by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality” is deserving of eternal life. The problem is, no one is 100% persistent in doing good, so no one truly seeks glory, honor & immortality with complete consistency. Every time you or i sin, we may be said to not seek to give glory & honor to God. Rather, when we disobey Him, it is more like we are living as those who deserve eternal death & separation from Him rather than immortality forever with Him. So St. Paul follows the statement above with the words:

“'There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.” (Romans 3:10-12)

What you said is very true that “you can’t follow the law perfectly, so if that is what you are trying to do, you fail.” As St. Paul reasons:

“Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather through the law we become conscious of sin.” (Romans 3:20)

Could it be, then, that what St. Paul is teaching us in Romans 2:7 is not the way to heaven but the impossibility of making it to heaven in that way? Is it not impossible for you & me to have “persistence in doing good” & so that we really do not “seek glory, honor and immortality” with consistency?

================================

And please don’t let me take you away from meeting any obligations to an employer. I will wait for any answers till you have the time.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Dear Socrates,

Both faith and works are essential to salvation, period. The rest can be philosophized about for centuries but if this is what’s keeping you from the Catholic Church, then please come home.

Greg

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Greg_McPherran:

Dear Socrates,

Both faith and works are essential to salvation, period. The rest can be philosophized about for centuries but if this is what’s keeping you from the Catholic Church, then please come home.

Greg

Greg:

I understand what you believe is true. What i’m asking is why it is true. I do not think this request is unreasonable, for St. Peter wrote:

“…Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect…” (1 Peter 3:15)

I’m interested in considering what reasons you have to support your belief.

 

[Steve_M]

Socrates4Jesus:

Like you said, it’s true that everyone who “by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality” is deserving of eternal life. The problem is, no one is 100% persistent in doing good, so no one truly seeks glory, honor & immortality with 100% consistency.

This is why it’s a gift, because we’re not perfect.

Could it be, then, that what St. Paul is teaching us in Romans 2:7 is not the way to heaven but the impossibility of making it to heaven in that way? For isn’t it impossible for you & me to “by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality” since we are never truly persistent in doing good?

No. That’s they typical Protestant explaination, and was mine up until about nine months ago. (I was Southern Baptist for the first 33 years of my life) It simply ignores the difference between God being obligated, and God giving a gift. If you persist, you’ll keep trying to do what’s right. You may not always succeed, but you’ll keep trying. If you’re not trying, then whatever you call faith is basically worthless. God has no obligation to give us anything, but if we persist “in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality” we depend on God’s graciousness.

“Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather through the law we become conscious of sin.”

This is a reference to the Law. If we followed it perfectly we have a contract that God has to honor. In reality, we can never be righeous under any circumstances, but we can try. We must realize that our good works are not what is gaining our salvation, they are simply displaying our faith. That faith is in the graciousness of God to look kindly on us, not because we followed the Law, but because we displayed our faith in Him. This is what Paul is trying to get through to the Jews. You’ve got to put Paul’s writings in the context of why he’s writing. It’s the idea of being legalistic versus living their faith. He contrast the Law with good works. The Jews had the Law, but they were so concerned about following the letter of it, that they ignored the spirit of it. I think I mentioned that earlier.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Socrates4Jesus:

“…Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect…” (1 Peter 3:15)

I believe because I have seen the love of Jesus by His word and His deeds reported and recorded by the Catholic Church.

This has nothing to do with faith vs. works.

Socrates4Jesus:

Greg:

I understand what you believe is true. What i’m asking is why it is true.

Then that should not be an obstacle to becoming Catholic.

Greg

 

[Matt16_18]

Socrates4u

If you want to debate, that’s OK, for i do not mind doing so. However, my question in the 1st post is sincere, as i do not know how to resolve the paradox i mentioned at 1st & am asking for help. If you do not wish to help me, that’s OK. We may enjoy the argument. But, i will still hope that someone else may help me understand.

You are not being sincere. You played this same game not too long ago, pretending to wish to learn, but having a hidden agenda all along. Let’s cut to the chase, shall we? You strung along Catholics for over two hundred posts the last time you did this, and then you quit the debate once your hidden agenda was revealed and shown that it could not hold water.

You are not answering the questions that I gave you, you are only responding to my question with more questions.

Why can’t you give me a direct answer as to where you stand in the Lordship Controversy?

 

[RBushlow]

“But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy.” (verses 4-7)

Vers 4-7 of what?

Scripture also says:
“For [God] will reward every man according to his works: to those who by perseverance in working good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. There will be . . . glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality” (Rom. 2:6–11; cf. Gal. 6:6–10).

Also here’s something along these lines that I found:

twf:

The Church teaches that justification is by grace through faith and works. Sola fide (faith alone) is rejected by the Church as heresy, but sola gracia (grace alone) is upheld as sound teaching. We must realize that neither faith nor works can save us. All the faith in the world would be nothing, without grace. Likewise, all the works under the sun would be, as you said in the other thread, like filthy rags without grace. This is where the distinction must be made. Both faith and works are worthless if they do not flow from God’s grace. Our salvation is only made possible because Christ took our eternal penalty on the tree at Calvary; however, this perfect work of Christ must be applied to each of us. God has given us freewill, so we must accept this gift and co-operate with him. Not just once (the moment you accept Christ), but all through our lives. Catholics can say that we merit salvation, but only in a secondary and derivative sense. The grace that Christ gives us leads to faith. This grace-empowered faith leads to works. The two go hand in hand. Our faith and works become our way of co-operating with God’s plan for our salvation, and become worthy of merit before God because Christ’s merit is applied to us through his grace. The faith and works in and of themselves are nothing, but when they flow from the grace Christ has given us, they become creditable.

One thing that really hit home for me was the realization that even the Evangelical position requires human effort to obtain salvation. If we are to say that there is nothing we can do to be saved, then logically, all human beings should be saved automatically…as Christ’s grace would be universally applied; however, we know that this is not the case. Even in the Evangelical view, one must make an conscious act of the will, exert a mental effort, to decide to accept Christ and to repent of one’s sins. In a sense, this is a work, as it is an act of the will, and takes effort on our part. But this is only made possible by grace in the first place (remember, the Father must draw us to His Son before we can accept Him), so we can not take credit for it, even though our effort was involved. So once you realize that even the Evangelical view requires human effort, it falls into place (at least for me) that works, those that are the fruit of the grace God has given us, can also play a role in our part in salvation.

If you are to say that salvation involves no effort on our part, then even personal repentance should be unnecessary. Every step of the way, we must choose to continue to co-operate with God, or to reject His grace. We should not be terrified, however, for we trust that God will always provide us with the grace necessary to persevere.

I’m sure there are many more, but the following are some passages and verses that speak volumes against the idea of ‘sola fide’.
Matthew 7:19
Matthew 7:21-23
John 14:15
John 15:10
James 2:14-26
John 15:1-8
Matthew 18:23-35
Matthew 6:14-15
Matthew 25:14-46
Luke 13:6-9

Hope this helps. Yours in Christ.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Steve M:

This is why it’s a gift, because we’re not perfect.

No. That’s they typical Protestant explaination, and was mine up until about nine months ago. (I was Southern Baptist for the first 33 years of my life) It simply ignores the difference between God being obligated, and God giving a gift. If you persist, you’ll keep trying to do what’s right. You may not always succeed, but you’ll keep trying. If you’re not trying, then whatever you call faith is basically worthless. God has no obligation to give us anything, but if we persist “in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality” we depend on God’s graciousness.

…

Steve,

You have given me something to think about; thanks. I’m going to check out the Greek for the word persistence in Romans 2:7 to see if the meaning agrees with your explanation. I must admit, you seem to be talking sense.

I’m still troubled that St. Paul didn’t use the words “apart from faith” in the four passages (as we discussed above). I’m not sure i quite grasp the rest of what you are saying. Maybe i’m just too weary.

I used to hang out with some Baptists myself when i was in the U.S. Army & stationed in Italy. They were kind people (as you are) though they did have some strong opinions about Catholics, Evangelicals & others.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

RBushlow:

Vers 4-7 of what?

Scripture also says:
“For [God] will reward every man according to his works: to those who by perseverance in working good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. There will be . . . glory and honor and peace for every one who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality” (Rom. 2:6–11; cf. Gal. 6:6–10).

…

RB:

Sorry, i was quoting verses 4-7 of chapter 3 of St. Paul’s letter to the young priest Titus.

Thanks for the Scriptures; i really need to take a closer look @ Romans 2 & ask God for wisdom. Please pray for me if you feel led to do so.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Socrates4u
You are not being sincere. You played this same game not too long ago, pretending to wish to learn, but having a hidden agenda all along. Let’s cut to the chase, shall we? You strung along Catholics for over two hundred posts the last time you did this, and then you quit the debate once your hidden agenda was revealed and shown that it could not hold water.

You are not answering the questions that I gave you, you are only responding to my question with more questions.

Why can’t you give me a direct answer as to where you stand in the Lordship Controversy?

Matt:

You may have missed my post in the other thread where i mentioned that the class i was taking & commitments to work & family were requiring so much of my time that i had to take a break from the forum for awhile.

Perhaps you also missed my invitation to continue the conversation via e-mail?

It appears i offended you in some way; for that i am sorry. Please try to understand that it was not intentional.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Greg_McPherran:

…Then that should not be an obstacle to becoming Catholic…

Greg:

I’m not sure i follow you. Are you saying it is wrong to wait for a rational reason to accept what you are saying is true before i do?

 

[Steve_M]

Socrates4Jesus:

Steve,

I’m still troubled that St. Paul didn’t use the words “apart from faith” in the four passages (as we discussed above). I’m not sure i quite grasp the rest of what you are saying. Maybe i’m just too weary.

Keep in mind that the pasages you referred to are talking about the Law. Faith doesn’t play into following the Law. Paul generally uses the terms work, law, and works of the law when he’s referring to the Law. He usually uses the term good works when he referring to good deeds. If you look at it that way, along with the obligation and gift, you’ll see why they don’t contradict. That’s probably it for me this weekend. My parents are in town visiting. Have a good weekend.

 

[Peace-bwu]

Psalm45:9:

Circumcision, eating only Kosher foods, doing nothing on the Sabbath, making sin offerings when they have become useless. Basically Romans is saying the old law has been abolished by Christ. It is useless to sacrifice animals for sin, Christ has been sacrificed for sin. Eat of this sacrifice, not animals. As for the faith St. Paul is talking about in Romans. You can’t believe the old Mosaic laws have been abolished if you do not believe in Christ.

I have always understood it that Jesus did not come to abolish the laws of Moses but to fulfill them. He fulfilled the Jewish laws ie circumcision was replaced with Baptism. The sin offering was fulfilled with the, once for all perfect sacrifice of the lamb, Jesus Christ. The passover was fulfilled and Jesus became the Lamb, The passover was replaced with the Eucharist. Paul was putting the Jews “in their place,” because of the haughty attitude toward the gentiles regarding the laws. He was telling them that those laws and practices do not mean anything anymore so the gentiles should not be forced to be circumcised because Baptism is the new circumcision, etc. He is not talking about all the laws.

 

[Ptero]

I am soon to be taking RCIA and am strongly considering becoming catholic.

I have a step-dad who although he is very happy that I am experienceing a conversion to Christianity, he has sent me several videos and books that feature the protestant position of eternal security and justification by faith alone.

So, this topic is very timely for me as I am planning on visiting my Mom and step Dad soon and if these topics come up I’d like to be somewhat prepared to defend the catholic position.

Several things strike me as I read discussions like this one. One is how some protestants can hold so strongly to the view that we are saved by faith alone without ever seeming to account for all the scriptures that the catholics use to dispute this, such as:

Work out your salvation in fear & trembling

Faith without works is dead

He who endures til the end will be saved.

Another interesting thought is that perhaps there’s a confusion going on between what God does and what we do.

God provides us with the gift of salvation, we cannot get that for ourselves.

But as He offers the gift, we must say yes, take the gift, open it, use it, care for it, guard it at least as far as our personal life and personal relationship with God is concerned.

I am thinking too that another source of confusion is the human limitation of living in time, at least in this segment of life. If we lived eternally, by which I mean not merely time everlasting, but rather, without a sense of time at all as it would be in a timeless eternity that God exists in, we wouldn’t be so confused about what happens in the passing of time as we are now.

For us, the passing of time = death, at least death of the body, for an eternal being such as God is, there is an entirely different nature to reality that I cannot truly fathom.

The other thought I had, was that in Ephesians, when Paul is talking to the church about being chosen before the beginning of the world, he may mean in a general sort of way, that God’s salvation plan was always there for God. He saw it all, beginning, middle and end, and His choice was for us to be with Him in eternity, but the “us” God refers to is not a specific us, but rather His creation.

He also says, in Ephesians 1:10 that His plan is to “unite all things in Him.” This hardly supports any idea at all that God has predestined some people to be saved or go to Hell, but rather that all people will be saved yes? I am not saying this is what I believe, but that there’s a stronger argument in the scripture for the view of God willing all to be saved, then for Him to will some.

As for God’s sovereignty, God could just as easily make it such that all will be saved as He could make it that none or some are saved, so the argument that we are saved by what God does alone as opposed to us needing to do our part, whether that be having faith, or having faith and doing His will for us, we must have a part in the deal, or why wouldn’t God simply make us all either:

Without the capacity to Fall and or sin in the first place, so we can be united to Him

With that capacity, but only with the capacity to repent to please Him so as to be united to Him.

I don’t see where giving His creation some part in the deal, and some responsibility is taking away from God’s sovereignty anymore than any other view of the relationship.

Anyway, any tips on how to peacably have discussions with Baptists that firmly believe in “eternal security” would be appreciated!

 

[Peace-bwu]

Peace be with you:

You left out the rest of St. Paul’s words. The full quote is:

“But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having hope of eternal life.” (verses 4-7)

QUOTE]

Yes, I really like the full quote, thanks for posting it, I took the quote I used from Bible Study notes… sloppy of me, tired and cutting corners,:yawn: I can’t believe I did one of my pet peeves! I guess that’s what posting at 1am gets you! I enjoy this topic and it’s nice to find a thead of positive debate.

 

[Peace-bwu]

Ptero:

I am soon to be taking RCIA and am strongly considering becoming catholic.

I have a step-dad who although he is very happy that I am experienceing a conversion to Christianity, he has sent me several videos and books that feature the protestant position of eternal security and justification by faith alone.

So, this topic is very timely for me as I am planning on visiting my Mom and step Dad soon and if these topics come up I’d like to be somewhat prepared to defend the catholic position.

Several things strike me as I read discussions like this one. One is how some protestants can hold so strongly to the view that we are saved by faith alone without ever seeming to account for all the scriptures that the catholics use to dispute this, such as:

Work out your salvation in fear & trembling

Faith without works is dead

He who endures til the end will be saved.

Another interesting thought is that perhaps there’s a confusion going on between what God does and what we do.

God provides us with the gift of salvation, we cannot get that for ourselves.

But as He offers the gift, we must say yes, take the gift, open it, use it, care for it, guard it at least as far as our personal life and personal relationship with God is concerned.

I am thinking too that another source of confusion is the human limitation of living in time, at least in this segment of life. If we lived eternally, by which I mean not merely time everlasting, but rather, without a sense of time at all as it would be in a timeless eternity that God exists in, we wouldn’t be so confused about what happens in the passing of time as we are now.

For us, the passing of time = death, at least death of the body, for an eternal being such as God is, there is an entirely different nature to reality that I cannot truly fathom.

The other thought I had, was that in Ephesians, when Paul is talking to the church about being chosen before the beginning of the world, he may mean in a general sort of way, that God’s salvation plan was always there for God. He saw it all, beginning, middle and end, and His choice was for us to be with Him in eternity, but the “us” God refers to is not a specific us, but rather His creation.

He also says, in Ephesians 1:10 that His plan is to “unite all things in Him.” This hardly supports any idea at all that God has predestined some people to be saved or go to Hell, but rather that all people will be saved yes? I am not saying this is what I believe, but that there’s a stronger argument in the scripture for the view of God willing all to be saved, then for Him to will some.

As for God’s sovereignty, God could just as easily make it such that all will be saved as He could make it that none or some are saved, so the argument that we are saved by what God does alone as opposed to us needing to do our part, whether that be having faith, or having faith and doing His will for us, we must have a part in the deal, or why wouldn’t God simply make us all either:

Without the capacity to Fall and or sin in the first place, so we can be united to Him

With that capacity, but only with the capacity to repent to please Him so as to be united to Him.

I don’t see where giving His creation some part in the deal, and some responsibility is taking away from God’s sovereignty anymore than any other view of the relationship.

Anyway, any tips on how to peacably have discussions with Baptists that firmly believe in “eternal security” would be appreciated!

 

[Matt16_18]

Socrates4Jesus:

Matt:It appears i offended you in some way …

I find what you are doing here offensive because you are being dishonest with us. You are playing the same mind games that you have played before - pretending to be interested in learning what Catholics believe and wasting the time of people that are sincerely trying to help you.

It is interesting that there is a thread on this forum called Traps, lies, and deceptions Often fundamentalists and cultists use traps, lies, and deceptions to convert Catholics. I would be interested in hearing your stories of examples of this kind of behavior. That way we can warn each other and learn more about their tactics. …

Now you show up practicing the deception of being interested in learning from Catholics, while all the time having a hidden agenda. You are asking the same questions that you have asked before on these two threads:

How can I reconcile these apparent Scripture contradictions? I’m so confused!

I’m a Protestant who left the Roman Catholic Church as a teenager. Since then I’ve gotten married to my wonderful wife, became the father of two wonderful sons, & wandered from one Protestant church to another. I’m familiar with much of the Bible, especially the New Testament.

Oh poor baby, “I’m so confused”. Please give me your time and attention.

But your real agenda is exposed in this thread: Ticket to Heaven
I believe that the perfection of the believer is a past event (not a present process).

I really had three reasons for beginning this thread:

(1) To understand what the Catholic faith teaches is the way to heaven.

(2) To put my own belief regarding the way to get to heaven to the test.

(3) To put the Catholic belief to the test of Scripture.

… The two affirmations of the author of Hebrews do not contradict one another; they compliment each other. Still, i believe they are not describing the same thing–they are like apples & oranges.

(1) “For by one offering…” describes, of course, the crucifixion of our Savior Jesus.

(2) “he has made perfect forever…” explains that Jesus’ act of dying in your place & mine is what makes us perfect.

(3) “…those who are being consecrated” describes the only reaction a person in his right mind should have to the realization of what Jesus did for him.

One might say that God’s grace (or undeserved love) is the cause of (1), & (1) is the cause of our getting into heaven, & (2) is the result of that cause, & (1) & (2) also cause (3).

That’s why (2) is described in the past tense, i believe, for once a person understands why Jesus did (1) & what that may do for himself, he turns from a life of sin (repents & confesses his wrong way of living to God) & turns to a life devoted to Him (puts faith, or trust, in Christ). This repentance & faith then results in the changed life (3).

Do you really believe that you should be practicing deception in your attempts to evangelize Catholics? Does Jesus want you to go about the task of evangelization in a dishonest way? Why can’t you just be honest with the Catholics and be state that you believe that “the perfection of the believer is a past event (not a present process).” Catholics will be glad to debate you about that! There is no need for your deception, and it only makes people angry when they find out that you have been jerking them around.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

Socrates4Jesus:

Greg:

I’m not sure i follow you. Are you saying it is wrong to wait for a rational reason to accept what you are saying is true before i do?

Hi Socrates,

The reason game can go on ad infinitum. For every answer, someone can continue to ask “why?”.

There disagreement on faith and works between Protestants and Catholics is philosophical. Both Protestants and Catholics agree that faith and works are essential to slavation and both agree that faith motivates works and gives works their value. So all this arguing on this point is quite a waste of arguing about words as St. Paul warned not to do. If you want to philosophize about faith and works, that’s commendable, but you certainly can do that as a Catholic just as well as a Protestant.

As for Peter saying to give a reason, I already did. I am impressed by Jesus’ His death and resurrection for our sake. I am impressed with His words and deeds that lead me to believe in His sacrifice. I am impressed with the Church He left to make sure His words and deeds were recorded and witnessed to. His Church also leads me to believe in His sacrifice. Could we give more reasons for hours and hours, yes! There is so much that God has done for us. But for people who have never heard of Jesus, just telling them that God became a man and died and rose from the dead, is a good basic reason to convince a pagan they should believe. Obviously, teaching from there goes on for a lifetime.

You may other have questions why to become Catholic, but faith and works is not a valid objection.

To become Catholic would be evidence of fullness of faith.

If you truly have faith, then do the work of becoming Catholic.

If you have other questions, fair enough, but the faith vs. works discussion, like the free will discussion is a matter of contemplation and prayer and deepening of understanding. It is not a matter that can be claimed to be a point of contention. Because it is mysterious in nature, it is an easy thing to pick and argue about. JWs do that with the trinity - it’s a game.

Try explaining the trinity to a JW, it’s the same game.

Part of being an intelligent Christian is knowing how to stop the word games and participating in the true mission of Jesus.

Best,
Greg

 

[Psalm45_9]

p90:

I don’t understand your response to my question. I was asking, in light of Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:34, if there are any works which can justify man before God. Are you saying that these types of works can justify man before God?~Matt

Not at all, these are some of the mosaic laws that have been abolished by the coming of Christ. These are some examples of the “Works of Law” that men will not be saved by following. This is what St. Paul is alluding to in his epistle to the Romans.