Salvation 2.0: Part 6.4: Saved by Faith, Just Like Abraham

grace5Fifth point: The faith that saves is the faith of Abraham. Paul says so in Rom 4 and Gal 3. The one wrinkle is that, after the resurrection, Abraham’s faith in God becomes faith in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son. But it’s still faith in God.

Paul says that we’re saved by God’s promise to Abraham to count faith as righteousness.

(Rom 4:9-12 ESV) Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. … 11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well,  12 and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

(Gal 3:6-9 ESV) just as Abraham “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”?  7 Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham.  8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.”  9 So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

So Abraham is the spiritual father of the Gentiles who are saved by faith, thanks to God’s promise given to Abraham.

Faith saves because of God’s promise to Abraham — and yet God said nothing to Abraham (or Moses or David or the Prophets) about baptism. If a failure to be baptized correctly defeats faith, then we aren’t saved by faith under God’s covenant with Abraham.

But couldn’t God have modified his covenant with Abraham to add baptism as just as important and just as essential as faith? Well, no. After all, this is precisely the argument made by Paul’s Judaizing opponents regarding circumcision. Paul refutes their argument as follows:

(Rom 4:10-12 ESV)  10 How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised.  11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well,  12 and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

Paul points out that God’s crediting of Abraham with righteousness came first — by many years. Therefore, circumcision cannot be an additional condition for forgiveness and grace. If circumcision wasn’t required for Abraham to be saved because he was circumcised after he had faith, then the same logic applies to baptism.

In fact, Paul goes through his entire extensive argument regarding faith and works in Rom 1 – 4 and doesn’t once mention or allude to baptism — not until Rom 6. And in Rom 6 his point is that baptism should affect how we live as Christians.

(Rom 6:3-4 ESV) 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?  4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. 

“Walk in newness of life” refers to how we live as Christians, not to our forgiveness. (Compare Paul’s use of “walk” in Rom 8:4; 13:13; 14:15.)

The whole point of the argument is that Christians no longer belong in the world of death; Paul does not here suppose that one should wait until the final bodily resurrection (8:11) before beginning to “walk in newness of life,” and this “walk” is based on a present status, not merely anticipating the future reality. The argument of these verses is not simply that one has died to sin and hence must not live in it anymore, but that one is already “alive to God in Christ Jesus” (v. 11) and must now live accordingly.

N.T. Wright, “The Letter to the Romans,” in The Acts of the Apostles-The First Letter to the Corinthians (vol. 10 of New Interpreters Bible, Accordance electronic ed. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2002), n.p.

Remember: I’m saying that we’re normatively saved at the moment of water baptism — and Paul’s argument fits nicely with this position. But Paul’s argument is not about salvation but ethics.

About Jay F Guin

My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink. My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
This entry was posted in Baptism, Salvation 2.0, Soteriology, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Salvation 2.0: Part 6.4: Saved by Faith, Just Like Abraham

  1. Jay Guin says:

    Chris,

    When Paul speaks of works, he is referring to “works of the Law.” But his point is not that works damn but that only faith saves.

    When James speaks of works, he is speaking of works produced by faith. Remember: “faith” in the Greek includes the meanings faithfulness and trust — and a faithful, trusting follower of Jesus will produce good works (absent some physical or mental disability).

    Now, Paul also says that our faith will show itself in works. He just says it differently. For example,

    (Rom. 6:9-18 ESV) 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. 10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. 11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. 13 Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. 14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! 16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

    We are “slaves” of righteousness — meaning that we must not sin — which is a type of work. Right?

    (Rom. 8:12-14 ESV) 12 So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

    The receipt of the Spirit should be manifested by a changed life — where we defeat the “deeds of the body” by the Spirit.

    More positively, ALL of Rom 12:1-15:7 is about how we should live a Spirit-led Christians.

    And we’ll be judged by how we live —

    (Rom. 14:23 ESV) 23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

    And many other Pauline passages to that effect.

    So here’s the logic.

    Faith –> salvation –> receipt of the Spirit –> good works

    Faith/faithfulness/trust in Jesus saves, brings the Spirit, and produces good works — which ultimately are more from God himself, through the Spirit, than ourselves — although I wouldn’t be too absolute here.

    On the other hand, it is NOT TRUE that good works –> salvation. It’s other way ’round.

    True faith will inevitably produce good works. Hence, it’s a logical necessity (called the contrapositive) that the absence of good works –> no faith. Which is James’ point. If Abraham had not done good works, we would have good reason to doubt his faith, because true faith always produces good works. Hence, no good works means no faith.

    But it’s entirely possible to do good works and have no faith at all. Countless people do good works who have no faith, and they are damned in their sins.

    What does this have to do with baptism? Not much, really, despite a century of CoC arguing the case. While faith necessarily produces good works, it doesn’t necessarily produce particular good works. There will be people of faith who struggle with greed. There will be people of faith who struggle with anger. There will be people of faith who didn’t get baptized exactly right. But all of them will do good works — because they have faith, and all with faith do good works.

    But it’s fallacious to argue that faith –> good works therefore faith necessarily implies baptism, because baptism is a good work. I’m not sure that baptism is a good work at all, but it doesn’t matter. Even if it is, faith only implies that you’ll do good works, not particular good works, or else we’d all sell all our goods, sell our lands, evangelize like Paul, and otherwise do every single good work we read about in the Bible.

  2. Monty says:

    Laymond said, “I do know that it is written there is only one savior, God Almighty.”

    OK then Laymond then what about 2 Timothy 1: 10 “but it is now been revealed through the appearance of our Savior, Christ Jesus”…..Paul calls God (Savior) in 1 Timothy and in his second letter he calls Jesus(Savior). OOps! Maybe Paul is confused on who the real Savior is? Will the real Savior please stand up? God is Savior. JEsus is Savior, I’m so confused. (OR) could it be that both are true(because Jesus is God(the Son)? Hum! Any other way leaves Paul misspeaking and we all know he did not.

  3. Monty says:

    Laymond.

    I do not understand your question to me and how it applies to my post.

  4. Dwight says:

    Jesus says, “I am the way, the truth and the light” and “no man comes to the Father except through me”, so while God did provide a way to Him, Jesus is the way. Jesus is the savior. Luke 1:47 “And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior” and Luke 2:11 “For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.”
    Acts 5:31 “Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.”
    A savior is one who saves.
    Up to the point of Jesus coming God is accounted as the savior, then it switches to Jesus, because Jesus is the avenue for salvation.
    And yet if we sin, we pray to God through Jesus for forgiveness who gives us access.
    Both concepts of God and Jesus as saviors are true and valid.

Comments are closed.