Featured The biblical definition of "works"

The Biblical Definition of “works”



In the previous chapter it was established that Gods’ definition of “good” works are works that do not originate from fallen men. Good works are works that originate from a sinless source. Jesus Christ produced good works as He was a sinless source. His sinless works are the sole and only basis for our justification. Within regenerated men good works originate with the power of the Spirit of God from a sinless source (inward new man). This is the sole and only basis for our progressive sanctification.


However, what constitutes “works”? Many define “works” according to the Rabbinical definition during the days of Christ. They define “works” by external manifest actions.


Jesus spent much of his time refuting this externalized definition of works. In the Sermon on the Mount, he contrasted the traditions of the Rabbinical authors (traditions of the elders) to the proper interpretation of the Moral Law. When speaking of the oral traditions of the elders he said, “you have heard it said by them of old time.” He did not say “thus saith the Lord” or “It is written” but rather you have “heard” referring to the oral traditions of the elders. In contrast, as God in the flesh, he said, “but I say unto you” which is synonymous with “thus saith the Lord” as he claimed to be Lord over all.


He defined works to be the internal determinate actions of the heart and mind regardless if such internal determinative actions are ever manifested in words or physical deeds of the body. According to Jesus “lust” in the heart broke the law of adultery regardless if any kind of physical manifestation occurred or not. According to Jesus, evil words violated the law of murder regardless if any kind of physical actions accompanied those words or not. Evil works are characterized by the determinate actions of the heart and mind alone whereas bodily actions (words and deeds) are not necessary to define “evil” or “bad” works.


Later, Jesus speaking of the same invalid oral traditions that evil works began with the determine actions of the heart:


“For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:” – Mt. 15:19


Evil thoughts are determinate thoughts that may manifest themselves in evil actions such as “murders, adulteries, forniccations, thefts, false witnesses, blasphemies” or may not as God looketh upon the heart.


And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. – Gen. 6:5


Thus, the Biblical definition of works is characterized by the activity of the human will as the determinate expression of the heart and mind.


When Paul characterized salvation to be “by grace through faith” he further denied it was “of works” but rather a creative work by God – “not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are His workmanship created in Christ Jesus unto good works….”

The new birth is said to be of “the will…of God” and not of the “will of man” (Jn. 1:13; Jms. 1:17) because the activity of the human will is what characterizes the very Biblical definition of works.


However, many theologians wrongly treat the human will when it comes to choosing Christ as either some kind of entity independent of mind or emotions or something other than what epitomizes the Biblical center and characterization of works.


The will has no separate existence from the mind and emotions of man. It is simply the chosen intent of the mind or emotions. It has no existence apart from the mind and heart.


Indeed, both Greek terms used to translate “will” in the New Testament are descriptive of intellectual and emotional intent. The determinate action of the mind is represented by the Greek term boulomai (translated “will”) or the determinate intent of the mind. The emotional intent of the heart of man is represented by the Greek term thelomai (translated “will”).


The human will is simply the inseparable intent of the human heart. The intent of the human heart is determined by the moral state of the human heart. If the moral state of the human heart is evil so is its fruit. If the moral sate of the human heart is good so is its intent. Jesus states this simple truth as follows:


Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. – Mt. 12:33-35


Let’s consider the above text carefully. Jesus said “make the tree good….or else make the tree corrupt.” First, he defines the “tree’ as representing the human heart (“of the heart…..of the heart”) and its fruits representing its moral condition. Second, he is not suggesting that man can determine or “make” his own heart either “good” or “corrupt” but rather he is demanding there are only two possible contrasting alternatives to consider. You cannot have it both ways, so “make” it one or the other. Third, according to the condition of the heart it will bring forth that which corresponds to its moral condition “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh….out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things….out of the evil treasure of the heart bringeth forth evil things.” Therefore, the nature of the heart determines the nature of what comes forth from that heart not vice versa. They teach that an evil heart can bring forth faith as its fruit. Fourth, by divine omniscience he reveals the nature of their heart “ye being evil” cannot bring forth good things. He is clearly teaching that the state of the heart rather than what comes forth from the heart determines their nature.


Jesus is clearly teaching that the only things that can come forth out of the heart are those things that are consistent with the moral nature of the heart. Good things cannot come from an evil heart. Arminians teach the very opposite. They claim that saving faith can come forth from an evil heart. Indeed, they claim that such faith is the basis for God changing the evil heart to a good heart. Jesus is explicitly denying that as faith is a “gift” of God (Philip. 1:29; Eph. 2:8) and is “of grace” (Rom. 4:15) and Jesus is both the author and the finisher of saving faith (Heb. 12:2) as saving faith is the work of God (Jn. 6:29).

 

Faith is "of grace" (Rom. 4:16) and is a "gift" of God (Philip. 1:29; Eph.2:8) and Christ is both its "author and finisher" (Heb. 12:2) and thus it is "the work of God" (Jn. 6:29) not of man (Jn. 6:44). The point of my article is that if it were of men it would be a work but it is not of man but of God. It is not the product of the determinate will of man as no man is willing to come to Christ (Jn. 6:44).

 

I was quoting from memory, but the point I was making is that faith is of grace = by grace. No, grace being the prerequisite as faith is by means of grace as faith is "the work of God" (Jn. 6:29). It is the "work of God" because Christ is the "author and finisher" NOT YOU. It is the work of God because God gives a believing heart (Ezek. 36:26). We preach the gospel to the outer ear but God takes the gospel and empowers it as his creative word to remove the darkness of unbelief and replace it with the experiential light of knowledge (2 Cor. 4:6) thus the gospel comes to the elect "in power and in the Spirit and in much assurance" (1 Thes. 14-5).

 

Of course it is 'our" faith because it is GIVEN to us but it is His work "author and finisher" as we are not said to be the "author" or the "finisher" of our faith.

No, truth is not the soul reason for faith, truth is the "substance" and "hope" but truth has no power to produce faith in anyone as that is the work of the Holy Spirit (1 Thes. 1:5). In Romans 10:17 the term translated "word" is the Greek term "rhema" and means "word of command" and that command by God which produces faith in us is described clearly by Paul in 2 Cor. 4:6 - read it.

 

We are not far apart on this in at least this sense. I believe the "substance" of gospel faith is the "truth of the gospel" as well as its "hope."

Let me quote an article taken from my book on the part where we disagree and see what you think:

Much of modern evangelism functions on the assumption that all human beings have inherent ability to come to Christ by faith. They claim all humans have faith and they use it every day. They exercise faith when they sit down on a chair believing it will hold their weight. They exercise faith in friends and family to do what they promise. They exercise faith in government to protect their rights. They exercise faith in many of the things they do every day. Therefore, they assume they are also equally capable of coming to Christ by faith. They argue, why else preach the gospel unless it is assumed that man has ability to respond to it? These are persuasive arguments. However, natural faith is only possible where there is willingness to exercise faith in such things. It is equally true that people choose not to exercise faith in many things every day. Many do not choose to place their trust in government, politicians or in certain other people and things simply because they are not willing to do so. Willingness is always determined by how a person thinks or how a person feels toward a certain person or thing. If we don’t like someone or something, or have reason to be suspicious of someone or something, we will never be inclined to place our trust in that something or someone until our mind and/or feelings are positively disposed toward that someone or something. Therefore, inability to trust is due to the inward disposition of thought and feelings toward someone or something. The position of natural faith assumes that nothing affects the natural inclination of fallen men toward God, and therefore fallen man has no dispositional problems with God which would prevent willing trust in the gospel or God. However, if the fallen nature is 5 naturally disposed against God, then that would prevent willingness to trust or submit to either God or the gospel. There is sufficient Biblical evidence to demonstrate that the heart of fallen man is naturally disposed against God (Jn. 3:19-20; Rom. 8:7; 1 Cor. 2:14). The emotional (Jn. 3:19-20) and intellectual (Rom. 8:7; 1 Cor. 2:14) dispositions of fallen man are in opposition to God, so that he will not come to Christ by faith (Jn. 6:40). Indeed, the Scriptures demand that this internal opposition to God is irreversible by man but can only be changed by a supernatural work of God. This must be the case with all fallen men or why else would Christ say, “No man can come to me” (Jn. 6:44)? Christ did not say “some” men cannot come to me, but “no man” can. That is at minimal, an assertion of universal unwillingness to come to Christ. It is this unwillingness that is the root of man’s inability to come to Christ. He said no man “can.” The Greek term translated “can” is dunamis or the common Greek term translated “power” or ability. Jesus is saying in the clearest possible language that “no man IS ABLE to come to me.” If that were not true, then why would the exception clause immediately follow - “except the Father draw him”? This exception clause demands that only a supernatural work of God can change that natural inability to come to Christ by faith. Therefore, this proves that natural faith is not sufficient for men to come to Christ or else there would be no exception clause at all. Furthermore, in response to, why preach the gospel if men were not inherently able to come to Christ by faith, it may be equally argued that the gospel may be the chosen means (2 Thes. 2:13) through which God may choose to empower (1 Thes. 1:4-5) to change that inward disposition against God to a willingness to 6 come to Christ by faith and that is why we are to preach the gospel. Therefore, God hath “chosen” the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe! And who are they? As the following pages will demonstrate it is only those who have first been given by the Father to come to the Son in faith.

 

Truth is the sole BASIS (substance, hope) of faith but is not the sole reason for the existence or origin of faith. Man does not have the ability to believe the truth of the gospel (Jn. 6:44) and so the origin of faith is by divine revelation (2 Cor. 4:6). However, that divine revelation is the substance of true saving faith and so faith and truth are inseparable but both have their origin with God as the "author and finisher" of faith.

 

No, I do not. Romans 10:17 uses the Greek term "rhema" not "logos" and that term can mean "word of command" as in 2 Cor. 4:6. John 6:44 deals with saving faith. Hebrews 11:1 does not refer to "the faith once delivered" nor does Heb. 12:2. Neither does Philip. 1:29 or Eph. 28.

Saving faith has for its "substance" the truth of the gospel but it has for its origin the command of God (1 Thes. 1:4-5).

 

May I remind our poster that the OP has to do with the nature of works and does it include internal deliberative actions of the heart, mind and will or is it as the Pharisees taught to be excluded to only external actions? Please get back on topic.

 

I never said that! I said the term rhema "can" mean a word of command. In Romans 10:18 men command men to hear (obey) the gospel but verse 19 shows you that the word of command to repent and believe the gospel is without power. This is why Paul introduces 2 Cor. 4:6 by a clear comparison to the effectual call in Genesis 1:3 - " For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness,". Why does he introduce this verse in this manner by an effectual call? Because that is what he is conveying when he goes on to say - "
hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

He is speaking about God taking the gospel preached by men but then taken by God and made an effectual command that creates "the light of knowledge" in the human heart thus displacing darkness. That "knowledge" is revelatory knowledge imparted by God by divine fiat and it is that imparted knowledge that is the "substance" of saving faith as well as the "hope" of saving faith as this knowledge is manifested "in the face of Jesus Christ."

We are moving away from the OP. If you want to discuss the nature of saving faith then please open up another thread and I will accomodate you. But this thread is devoted to the nature of works.