Were the Jews justified by the works of the law?

[reccanboy]

Were the Jews under the Old Covenant, before the Incarnation, justified by faith and the ordinances of the Mosaic Law?

 

[Della]

No, for the writer of Hebrews wrote:

Heb.10
[1] For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices which are continually offered year after year, make perfect those who draw near.
[2] Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered? If the worshipers had once been cleansed, they would no longer have any consciousness of sin.
[3] But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sin year after year.
[4] For it is impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins.

This doesn’t mean that the righteous dead of the OT weren’t saved. They rested in Abraham’s bosom awaiting the redemption of Christ, which satisfied what the sacrifices of the OT couldn’t. Jesus took them with him to the Father as “captives” of his love.

 

[reccanboy]

No, for the writer of Hebrews wrote:

This doesn’t mean that the righteous dead of the OT weren’t saved. They rested in Abraham’s bosom awaiting the redemption of Christ, which satisfied what the sacrifices of the OT couldn’t. Jesus took them with him to the Father as “captives” of his love.

How were they justified, if it was not through their works, according to God’s Law?

Obviously Jesus was the basis of their salvation, but was their justification contingent upon faith alone, or also their works?

 

[Della]

How were they justified, if it was not through their works, according to God’s Law?

Obviously Jesus was the basis of their salvation, but was their justification contingent upon faith alone, or also their works?

Paul tells us that Abraham was justified by his faith. Sacrifices of animals could not fulfill the Divine justice, which is why Christ died for our sins. Then as now works are a part of faith, which is given to us by God’s grace. Neither the OT people nor we can earn our way into heaven.

 

[reccanboy]

Paul tells us that Abraham was justified by his faith. Sacrifices of animals could not fulfill the Divine justice, which is why Christ died for our sins. Then as now works are a part of faith, which is given to us by God’s grace. Neither the OT people nor we can earn our way into heaven.

So in the Old Testament, people were saved by faith alone?

 

[Della]

So in the Old Testament, people were saved by faith alone?

I didn’t say that–you did.

 

[reccanboy]

I didn’t say that–you did.

The Law of Moses doesn’t just include the sacrifices, but also the moral laws, judicial laws, and ceremonial laws.

So, were the Jews justified by performing any of these?

 

[Della]

The Law of Moses doesn’t just include the sacrifices, but also the moral laws, judicial laws, and ceremonial laws.

So, were the Jews justified by performing any of these?

No. According to St. Paul everyone who is saved is saved by God’s grace. Laws were meant to be teachers and guides not saviors.

 

[reccanboy]

No. According to St. Paul everyone who is saved is saved by God’s grace. Laws were meant to be teachers and guides not saviors.

Yet we are justified by works under the New Covenant?

You’re being inconsistent.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Were the Jews under the Old Covenant, before the Incarnation, justified by faith and the ordinances of the Mosaic Law?

---

Do you happen to know what are the works of the Law? That’s not something that’s done by the Law, but what
it’s done vis-a-vis the Law.

Yes, Reccanboy, the Jews, before Jesus was born, were justified by their obedience to the Law; and that condition did not change
with the coming of Jesus. Even Jesus had to obey the Law, as he
declared he did, down to the letter without any change. (Mat. 5:17-19)

Even to this very day, and it will always be, no one can be justified from his or her wrongdoings without satisfying the requirements of the Law. If you want to understand this truth the hard way, allow yourself to be taken to Court for having broken the Law, and try to tell the Judge that Jesus has already saved you from the condenation of the Law. Then, wait to hear what the Judge will tell you. If he or she has any knowledge of Paul’s bickering about the Law, he will say that’s all Pauline rhetoric. You’ll be forced to make the proper reparation before you go free. Why? Because according to Isaiah 1:18,19, the only way to set things right with God is by obedience to the Law.

Why don’t you open your Bible in Psalm 119 and read it wholy. You will come up with a different concept about justification by the Law. You break the Law, you go to jail. You obey the Law, you will stay free of trouble. If you are under the Law, you have nothing to fear. If you are out of the Law, you have no peace.
Above the Law, only God. And… perhaps… Philosophers? That’s what I thought after I read “Crime and Punishment” by Dostoyevsky.

Ben:

 

[Della]

Yet we are justified by works under the New Covenant?

You’re being inconsistent.

I never claimed we are justified by works under the New Covenant. Where did I state that?

Just for you 4/11: Grace is what saves us. Faith and works (not of the Law but the good works St. Paul speaks of in Eph. 2:10) are both products of grace–two sides of the same coin, so to speak.

So, the operative word for salvation is GRACE (as I stated in my last post). Does that clarify the issue?

 

[reccanboy]

I never claimed we are justified by works under the New Covenant. Where did I state that?

Just for you 4/11: Grace is what saves us. Faith and works (not of the Law but the good works St. Paul speaks of in Eph. 2:10) are both products of grace–two sides of the same coin, so to speak.

So, the operative word for salvation is GRACE (as I stated in my last post). Does that clarify the issue?

Paul’s problem with the Judaizers wasn’t that they rejected grace, because they didn’t.

They viewed circumcision as necessary for salvation, so the issue is not grace, it is faith and works.

 

[Nita]

Yet we are justified by works under the New Covenant?

You’re being inconsistent.

In Catholic teaching, we are justified by grace. Our works do not justify us. Neither does someone have to do good works to merit the reception of justifying grace in Baptism. **But, good works **(acts in obedience to God’s commands) **are **necessary to retain the grace of justification **God has freely given us. **

.

 

[JMartyr]

Hi, I’M JMartyr,

I’m sorry to interrupt, and i’m not sure where to post this, but i’d like some help. I’ve heard that Brother Bob Fishman, a frequent speaker on EWTN, has an apostolate called Torah of Christ Ministries. However, I haven’t been able to locate its site anywhere. Does it even have one? If anyone can help, i’d appreciate it.

Thanks.

 

[Della]

Paul’s problem with the Judaizers wasn’t that they rejected grace, because they didn’t.

They viewed circumcision as necessary for salvation, so the issue is not grace, it is faith and works.

I never claimed anything about the Judaizers and their beliefs. What the Judaizers believed about grace has nothing to do with faith and works. Faith and works are both the fruits of grace. That’s what we are discussing here, not what the Judaizers claimed about grace. Let’s not get off on tangents that lead no where.

It’s very simple. Paul was not saying that the good works we do through grace are ineffectual–he was saying the works of the old covenant are ineffectual. Judaizers or no Judaizers.

 

[Ben_Masada]

Were the Jews under the Old Covenant, before the Incarnation, justified by faith and the ordinances of the Mosaic Law?

The opposite is true. We are all justified by the Law. By faith, one can even get killed. Why? Because where faith begins knowledge ends; and for lack of knowledge, people perish.
That’s in Hosea 4:6. Don’t forget how the faithful of Jim Jones ended their lives. That was a good example of faith in action.

Ben:

 

[Della]

The opposite is true. We are all justified by the Law.

I agree. That really isn’t in question, to my mind. Anyone who does rightly and acts justly is acceptable in God’s eyes, as Peter told Cornelius. What Paul is talking about is how the Law can be kept–through the grace of God. What makes keeping the Law truly possible is grace. What he was fighting against was demanding the Gentiles be circumcised and keep the dietary laws, etc., which even today, as I understand it, Gentiles are not expected to do. Am I right?

By faith, one can even get killed. Why? Because where faith begins knowledge ends; and for lack of knowledge, people perish.
That’s in Hosea 4:6. Don’t forget how the faithful of Jim Jones ended their lives. That was a good example of faith in action.

Ben:

Well, I wouldn’t characterize faith by a few nut-jobs. Abraham had faith before the giving of the Law, and he did pretty well.

 

[Ben_Masada]

I agree. That really isn’t in question, to my mind. Anyone who does rightly and acts justly is acceptable in God’s eyes, as Peter told Cornelius. What Paul is talking about is how the Law can be kept–through the grace of God. What makes keeping the Law truly possible is grace. What he was fighting against was demanding the Gentiles be circumcised and keep the dietary laws, etc., which even today, as I understand it, Gentiles are not expected to do. Am I right?

Sorry Della, but you are not right. If what Paul was fighting against was the demand that Gentiles be circumcised, he would not teach the Jews themselves to abandon Moses, to stop circumcision of their own children and to renounce the Jewish customs. Read Acts 21:21.

Well, I wouldn’t characterize faith by a few nut-jobs. Abraham had faith before the giving of the Law, and he did pretty well.

In my opinion, I would not call faith what Abraham had but trust in God and hope that everything would be fine. Faith is of the faithful; hope is of the hoped-for. If you have faith about something which will fail you, you are to blame for having had a faulty faith. If you hope that something will happen and it doesn’t, there is no problem, you can hope again.

In 1844 in Washington, a group of religious people had misguidedly found out from the prophecies of Daniel that Jesus was supposed to return that year. One third hoped that it would be true and lived to hope again. One third was the third of the faithful, sold all
their belongs, gave them away to the poor and went out there with their guide Guillerm Miller to welcome Jesus. It became know as the Great Disappointment. Many of the group of the faithfull committed suicide. The last third, still headed by Mr. Miller, returned to their studies to find out the mistake and gave origin to the Seventh-Day Adventist Church.

Ben:

 

[Della]

Sorry Della, but you are not right. If what Paul was fighting against was the demand that Gentiles be circumcised, he would not teach the Jews themselves to abandon Moses, to stop circumcision of their own children and to renounce the Jewish customs. Read Acts 21:21.

Of course, this has to be read in context:

[22] What then is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come.
[23] Do therefore what we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow;
[24] take these men and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may shave their heads. Thus all will know that there is nothing in what they have been told about you but that you yourself live in observance of the law.
[25] But as for the Gentiles who have believed, we have sent a letter with our judgment that they should abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity."

Paul did what the Church council told him to do out of obedience. He still believed and taught that Jewish converts to Christianity need not keep the Law. Perhaps he also realized he couldn’t incite non-Christian Jews to not follow the Law regarding circumcision (and other practices) because he seems to have abandoned doing that. I’m not a Bible scholar nor an expert on Paul, so I am extrapolating from what I know about Paul and Church teaching. But what we are discussing is what makes the Law effective. If it isn’t God’s grace, what is it?

In my opinion, I would not call faith what Abraham had but trust in God and hope that everything would be fine. Faith is of the faithful; hope is of the hoped-for. If you have faith about something which will fail you, you are to blame for having had a faulty faith. If you hope that something will happen and it doesn’t, there is no problem, you can hope again.

In 1844 in Washington, a group of religious people had misguidedly found out from the prophecies of Daniel that Jesus was supposed to return that year. One third hoped that it would be true and lived to hope again. One third was the third of the faithful, sold all
their belongs, gave them away to the poor and went out there with their guide Guillerm Miller to welcome Jesus. It became know as the Great Disappointment. Many of the group of the faithfull committed suicide. The last third, still headed by Mr. Miller, returned to their studies to find out the mistake and gave origin to the Seventh-Day Adventist Church.

Ben:

I don’t think you can say that Abraham just had trust and not faith. With all due respect, I think your definitions too narrow and your example rather unnecessary. There are people in every faith who go off the deep end. That isn’t the sum total of what it means to have faith. Faith, according to Paul, is the “substance of things hope for” and the “evidence of things not seen” (KJV). And since it is the writings of Paul we are discussing, that would probably be the better way to define faith for our purposes.

 

[ryanoneil]

In Catholic teaching, we are justified by grace. Our works do not justify us. Neither does someone have to do good works to merit the reception of justifying grace in Baptism. **But, good works **(acts in obedience to God’s commands) **are **necessary to retain the grace of justification **God has freely given us. **

.

Good point. James 2:20-24

Even though Abraham was justified in Genesis 15, God still required him to sacrifice his son which justified him in Genesis 22. If Abraham would not have added this work to his faith, he would have fallen out of favor with God. Thus, James says that Abraham was justified by his works.