Sufficient Self's Bible Study Group

[Dace]

Can someone explain 'works' vs 'faith' to me as related to OT and NT?
I have heard this before but being new to the Bible, I really am not clear.. I am assuming it is behavior vs faith?

Works were required for salvation in the OT days as there was not a Redeemer to take our sins upon Himself. The act of sacrificing was the "works" that brought salvation. When Christ came, and died, He changed all of that.

NT works are no longer required for salvation. Salvation is through Christ. Works are required though, to show the love of Christ through you when you do works today. Our salvation now is through faith in Jesus Christ. Works are just an act of showing our faith in Him, and with the love of Christ...it comes pretty naturally

Ok, I posted before I read your response

 

[Wannabefree]

My take on Chapter 2:

It starts out Paul making trek back to Jerusalem after 14 years being gone. Travelling with him is Titus and Barnabas. He almost immediately seeks out those who are "of reputation" in the faith and to seek their opinions on the things he had been teaching, kind of touching base with fellow believers, grounding himself to stay on track. Remember Paul is the newbie here, Peter and others walked with the Lord. Paul's time comes after the crucifixion. Paul gets a big disappointment. He finds some of the Jews have been still adamantly teaching circumcision in verses 4&5. This was a point of derision in those days. Some wanted to continue to follow the Law of Moses which would keep them steeped in old traditions and doctrine of the Law, rather than grace through Christ.

Paul stated, "those who seemed to be something, added nothing to me." Meaning Paul wasn't buying it at all. The folks of influence he met, added nothing to him, because he felt they did not have, or were not teaching the truth. They were stuck in the Law, and the works of the Law rather than gaining spirituality through Christ. They thought that circumcision was necessary, even with Christ, which would make the Jews(the circumcised) exclusively the children of God. Not so, as Paul was sent by Christ to the Gentiles(the uncircumcised). Not to circumcise the Gentiles, but to minister to their spirits, to preach the message of the Savior. The faith in Christ is by no means a physical transformation, but a transformation of spirit. The Jews at this time did not see that, they were still so deeply rooted in the traditions of their fathers, they failed to note the changes to the covenant through the blood of Christ. The Law was what Paul called bondage in verse 6. It kept them from growing spiritually due to wanting to uphold portions of the Law relating to physical things. If that were so, and salvation comes through physical things, then sacrificing would still be necessary as well, and it is not. Following Christ is purely spiritual.

This is why in verse 11 Paul withstood(opposed) Peter "to his face because he was to be blamed." Peter had been catering to the Jews at the time, when "certain men"(some Jewish men) came he would eat with the Jews, but prior to that he would eat with the Gentiles. Peter was showing favoritism to the Jewish men, as Peter himself was a Jew. Jews did not "rub elbows" with Gentiles in those days. Gentiles were considered unclean. The fact that Peter was going back to the ways of his fathers, was a huge disappointment for Paul. Verse 13 says "And the rest of the Jews played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy." They were allowing themselves to stay immersed in the ways of their time. They were making a show of their Jewishness, rather than showing their Christianity and love for ALL people.

Paul asked Peter in front of the lot of them in verse 14 "If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of the Gentiles, and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?" Basically he is asking him if you live as Gentiles, among Gentiles, any other day, why not now? Why do you compel(set the example to) the Gentiles to live as Jews? Peter and several others there, were supposed to pillars of the church, supposed to be setting the example for the rest of the believers. It is important, that the example be set that ALL people were elligible to be saved through Christ, not just those of the circumcision, or Jewish heritage, but ALL people. Paul felt this was not the example being set by Peter, and the others were getting carried away with the same mentality that Jews were somehow, special, and that circumcision was of great importance.

Verse 16 brings it on home...a man is not justified by works of the Law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. And Pauls reminder to Peter and the others..."even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, FOR BY THE WORKS OF THE LAW NO FLESH SHALL BE JUSTIFIED.

He then goes on to say in verses 18-20 "If I build again, those things which I destroyed(the old nature, old ways) I make myself a trangressor. For I, through the law, died to the law, that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ, it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me."

The flesh is dead and the spirit is made alive. Nothing of the flesh can ever be spiritual. Nor spiritual things be made fleshly. It is either or, never both. For a man to live in the flesh is death to the spirit, and death of the flesh, is life to the spirit. Paul is saying live in all things spiritual, the flesh is not eternal. Focus on the things that are eternal. The law caters to things of the flesh, as much as Christ caters to all things spiritual.

Finally verse 21 I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.

Salvation is only through the Son of God, nothing to do with circumcision, or birthright, rich nor poor, nor any other physical, societal, or person attribute. No matter who you are or where you came from, Christ is the means for ALL to become a child of God. Christ did what the law could never do, save us eternally.

 

[miss_thenorth]

Dace, that is a loaded question you asked-- a great question!! I hope I have the ability to answer it correctly, and i also think that when Rebbetzin gets heres she will be able to clue us in on all the laws that the jews had.

There was alot more than just the ten commandments. Back when the israelites wandered the desert for 40 years, God gave them many laws that they had to follow. The whole reason they had to wander for 40 years, is because they had become so corrupted by the Egyptian life and their false gods-- really because of their lack of faith in the living God.

So God gave them the laws to follow, and they wandered for 40 years so that each and every one of them knew the laws and what God required of them for when they entered the promised land. I believe Joshua and Caleb were tho only original israelites from Egypt who made it to the promised land. All the rest died in the desert. A whole new generation of Israelites, who only knew god's law could enter the promised land. So, following the laws was the life of the jew. If yo look in Leviticus first 5 chapters, it goes in to detail about the offerings.

when Jesus died for us, he became the ultimate offering. (which in itself is very complex and a whole 'nother study worth getting into)

But.....

Ephesian 2:8-- "For by GRACE you have been saved through FAITH; and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God; not as result of WORKS, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for GOOD WORKS, which God PREPARED BEFOREHAND so that we would WALK IN THEM."

In my Bible, I have a little commentary to help understand the passage.

We become Christians through God's unmerited favour, not as the result of an effort, ability, intelligent choice, or act of service on our part. However, out of gratitutde for this free gift, we will seek to help and serve others with kindness, love, and gentleness, and not merely to please ourselves. While no action or work we do can help us obtain salvation, God's intention is that our salvation will result in acts of service. We are not saved merely for our own benefit but to serve Christ and build up the church. (see Ephesians 4:12) (Their responsibility is to equip God's people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ.

James 2:17 --

In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead."

1 John 2:4 --

Whoever says, I know him, but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person.


James 2:18 --

But someone will say, You have faith; I have deeds. Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.

 

[journey11]

Can someone explain 'works' vs 'faith' to me as related to OT and NT?
I have heard this before but being new to the Bible, I really am not clear.. I am assuming it is behavior vs faith?

Simply put: Works would be trusting in what you can do for God. Faith would be trusting only in what He can do for you!

In the OT, their works demonstrated their faith that God would send a Redeemer. (Check out the "OT Hall of Faith", in Hebrews 11.) In the NT, Jesus did all the work for us on the cross. There was no salvation in simply keeping the law (quite a task). It was to show that there is none righteous (for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Rom. 3:23) All the sacrifices, feasts, and even the construction of the Tabernacle were illustrations pointing to Christ--the perfect Lamb and final sacrifice for sin.

Works, to the blood-bought child of God, are an outward demonstration of our faith and the reaction of a heart of gratitude for what Christ did for us and in us. (Yea, a man may say, thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. James 2:18)

 

[BarredBuff]

I just read Chapter 2. Verses 17 and 21 really stuck out in my mind. I like 21 especially.

I do not treat the grace of God as meaningless. For if keeping the law could make us right with God, then there was no need for Christ to die.

And for some reason the part where Paul talked about how he was apostle to the gentiles and how Peter was apostle to the Jews. That fascinated me too. Im not sure why. Im especially liking Rebetizin being here. Its like us non Jewish represent the people Paul taught and she represents the people Peter taught. If that makes any sense...

But suppose we seek to be made right with God through faith in Christ and then we are found guilty because we have abandoned the law. Would that mean Christ has led us into sin? Absolutely not!

I like how the faith vs works was explained better in this chapter.

When they talk about circumsision they are still referring back to the covenant with Abraham, right?

 

[Wannabefree]

I just read Chapter 2. Verses 17 and 21 really stuck out in my mind. I like 21 especially.

I do not treat the grace of God as meaningless. For if keeping the law could make us right with God, then there was no need for Christ to die.

And for some reason the part where Paul talked about how he was apostle to the gentiles and how Peter was apostle to the Jews. That fascinated me too. Im not sure why.

When they talk about circumsision they are still referring back to the covenant with Abraham, right?

Im especially liking Rebetizin being here. Its like us non jewish represent the people Paul taught and she represents the people Peter taught. If that makes any sense...

Yes BB the circumcision they are meaning is of the covenant with Abraham.

Very insightful on that last note too little brother Very much like Peter and Paul representing us as a mixed group.

Anxious to hear Rebbetzin's take on this one myself....

 

[BarredBuff]

I just read Chapter 2. Verses 17 and 21 really stuck out in my mind. I like 21 especially.

I do not treat the grace of God as meaningless. For if keeping the law could make us right with God, then there was no need for Christ to die.

And for some reason the part where Paul talked about how he was apostle to the gentiles and how Peter was apostle to the Jews. That fascinated me too. Im not sure why.

When they talk about circumsision they are still referring back to the covenant with Abraham, right?

Im especially liking Rebetizin being here. Its like us non jewish represent the people Paul taught and she represents the people Peter taught. If that makes any sense...

Yes BB the circumcision they are meaning is of the covenant with Abraham.

Very insightful on that last note too little brother Very much like Peter and Paul representing us as a mixed group.

Anxious to hear Rebbetzin's take on this one myself....

Im anxious too!! I hope she gets on here tonight!!

 

[Dace]

Thanks to all who responded to my question

I am really enjoying reading everyone's thoughts and interpretations!

 

[Wannabefree]

Thanks to all who responded to my question

I am really enjoying reading everyone's thoughts and interpretations!

You're welcome, and ME TOOOOOOOO!!!! I am so LOVIN this thread! It is really helping me get more out of my studies!

 

[Dace]

Ya know, when I was 13 my aunt gave me a picture Bible which I read and enjoyed.
I have tried to read the Bible on my own but my head spins....so to have you all hear to help decipher it is a real blessing.

Thank you BB for starting this thread