Justification

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1511148' date='Apr 27 2008, 01:18 AM']When someone says something is of God, and it isn't you are gambling with your soul, because Iniquity is to say something is of the Lord when it is not, or doing something within the spirit without God's guiding you down that path.[/quote]

How do you know that Scripture is of God?

[dairygirl4u2c]

and how do you know your interpretation is of God?

ultimately... the argument must be that you individually have to decide whether the CC is true, or whether to do personally responsible. each is a choice.
if you're blindly taking dogma, then sure, that's not good.

but it's not an argument to say that they might be wrong, and so you won't be a member of that church, cause it's a matter of discretion taht must be determined by arguing the issues.

when i was at your level of understanding the CC... i was looking at my personal views as somewhat negligble cause they teach reasonable things. and then from there, wondering what their basis of authority is. that line of reasoning. which is what you should be doing.
you should AT LEAST be arguing the specific issues, even if you're not keen enough to argue the issues of authoirty.

it's a good point that you have to be cautious... but it's not an argument that says you should not be catholic.

Edited April 29, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1513085' date='Apr 28 2008, 06:45 PM']How do you know that Scripture is of God?[/quote]

[quote]Matthew 7 21-24.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:[/quote]

In this example, people are doing spiritually activities, like casting out demons and done wonderful works. But Jesus said, I never knew you, depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

If Jesus didn't know them, so, if he didn't know them, he wasn't telling them to do it, so they were involved in a spiritual activity that wasn't something Jesus wanted them to do. He didn't give them the go ahead to do that, so they are doing the things of God without God's permission to do so!

For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods.

[quote]Matthew 25

15And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.

16Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.

17And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.

18But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.

19After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.

20And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.

21His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

22He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.

23His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.

24Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed:

25And I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.

26His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:

27Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.

28Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.

29For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

30And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.[/quote]

In this Parable, the will of God was for these men to go out and gain talents. But the man who had one talent hid away, and then said it was not God's will to invest in what God gave him to make build up the kingdom. He is called a wicked servant, and like the person who was guilty of inquity, he is thrown into outer darkness, because he was unprofitable, and because he really did speak lies of God. He said God didn't want him to do what the others did!

So if you engage in a spiritually activity, including saying if something is of God or not, you better be 100 per cent motivated by the spirit, because if you do something of God, or say something is of God that isn't, you're in big trouble in God's eyes.

Luckily, the sin of iniquity is not unforgivable. I have committed iniquity quite a few times in my life, and I have asked God's forgiveness each time.

[LouisvilleFan]

That's a fine answer, but you still didn't tell me how you know those passages you quote from the Gospels are the inspired Word of God.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1513874' date='Apr 29 2008, 09:57 AM']That's a fine answer, but you still didn't tell me how you know those passages you quote from the Gospels are the inspired Word of God.[/quote]

The only way I can say is that I believe they are.

On the reasoning note, if the Gospels are not the inspired word of God, than the Roman Catholic church is in a massive conspiracy to control the human race. If it was, then why did all the Apostles die for their witness in Christ. If it wasn't true, they would recant and not go any forward.

So, if those Gospels weren't the truth, than the one who put those books together were trying to control the human race.

But hey, wait a minute, if that were true - putting in examples in the old testament where the children of Israel didn't have a king ruling over them was pretty much cutting off their nose despite their face. . .

Because if someone like me read that, I would say, if God didn't need an overriding ruler of men then, why does he need one now?

So, I know an intelligence other then men wrote the bible to teach us that we deserve to be free in God, and God is true freedom. Now, men of course try to live up to that example, at least quite a few men, but we fall short. Even I fall short on this.

So, yes, I am putting trust in God who was working through men, to decide which books should be going into the Bible.

Edited April 29, 2008 by JesusIsMySuperHero

[ardillacid]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1513085' date='Apr 28 2008, 07:45 PM']How do you know that Scripture is of God?[/quote]
Because the Bible says so.

[dairygirl4u2c]

"we know that the bible is true, because the bible says that the bible is true... and if you remember from earlier in this sentence... every word of the bible is true. now, are you following me here, or are you some kind of mindless zealot?"

Edited April 29, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1513888' date='Apr 29 2008, 12:12 PM']The only way I can say is that I believe they are.[/quote]

So if Martin Luther disagrees, is that alright?

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1513888' date='Apr 29 2008, 12:12 PM']On the reasoning note, if the Gospels are not the inspired word of God, than the Roman Catholic church is in a massive conspiracy to control the human race. If it was, then why did all the Apostles die for their witness in Christ. If it wasn't true, they would recant and not go any forward.

So, if those Gospels weren't the truth, than the one who put those books together were trying to control the human race.

But hey, wait a minute, if that were true - putting in examples in the old testament where the children of Israel didn't have a king ruling over them was pretty much cutting off their nose despite their face. . .

Because if someone like me read that, I would say, if God didn't need an overriding ruler of men then, why does he need one now?[/quote]

True. God never needed a ruler over Israel nor does he need a ruler over the Church. We, on the other hand... we do need tangible experiences and objects to help us. We have the waters of Baptism not because God needs water to cleanse us, but because he chooses to use water to symbolize the cleansing of sin so that we have a physical experience to associate with the unseen work of God. Likewise, the Pope serves as our spiritual Father on earth to provide a tangible sign of the Church's unity and to symbolize Jesus as the spiritual head of the Church.

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1513888' date='Apr 29 2008, 12:12 PM']So, yes, I am putting trust in God who was working through men, to decide which books should be going into the Bible.[/quote]

So it isn't such a stretch to think God could work through men to reveal other truths, right?

...thinking we've strayed from the topic of justification... oh well

[dairygirl4u2c]

the argument could only be that they worked through man once, but not again. and that shouldn't sound so bad given that scripture has always had a prominent role in jewish and christian life.
or so the argument goes.

not that i'm taking the catholic or protestant stand on this. i look at the bible as inspired and it should be looked up to, but what taht means, and whether it might have an error or two, i don't take a stand on.

it gives me solace that even the bible itself, at most, says that it's inspired, it's "profitable" but i don't think it claims too much more.

so people who like to joke about christians "true caseu it says it's true" are somewhat misled.... cause i don't think it says it's true.
(except that one spot, now that i think about it... taht says if you add or take away, you'll be in trouble. i guess taht coudl apply to revelations only where it came from or not. i never considered that verse, so i may have to rethink my position)

Edited April 30, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1514546' date='Apr 29 2008, 07:32 PM']the argument could only be that they worked through man once, but not again. and that shouldn't sound so bad given that scripture has always had a prominent role in jewish and christian life.
or so the argument goes.

not that i'm taking the catholic or protestant stand on this. i look at the bible as inspired and it should be looked up to, but what taht means, and whether it might have an error or two, i don't take a stand on.

it gives me solace that even the bible itself, at most, says that it's inspired, it's "profitable" but i don't think it claims too much more.

so people who like to joke about christians "true caseu it says it's true" are somewhat misled.... cause i don't think it says it's true.
(except that one spot, now that i think about it... taht says if you add or take away, you'll be in trouble. i guess taht coudl apply to revelations only where it came from or not. i never considered that verse, so i may have to rethink my position)[/quote]

It is in revelations, however, it is near the end of the books. If it is at the end of the books, don't you think God would meant the entire book.

As a side note, he also said at the end of the first five books, that we are not too add or take away from the law. So, if God has said it twice, and there is probably a third, I would say God says, do add or take away from anything in the Bible.

[rachael]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1511143' date='Apr 27 2008, 12:08 AM']Rachel, the Bible says one in two people will be taken in judgment, and that judgment will come at the end of the age when the angels reap the tares and throw them into the everlasting fire.

So, with that being said, one out of two people you meet will be thrown into everlasting fire by an angel, because they are a tare, and they are a wolf in sheep's clothing.

I know it is pretty hard to grasp and believe, but all you can do is just live, and remember, one person out of two is someone who you can trust, and the other person is probably plotting against you secretly.

Remember, Jesus said our enemies will come from our own families, and sons will betray fathers, and mothers daughters, and brothers will betray their sisters. So, how can you know that your own family member is not going to betray you, or is in fact betraying you right now. One day, all those acts done in the darkness will come out into the light for all to see, and we will see all those who truly were Christian, and all those who are faking, including the people on this board.[/quote]
I do so appreciate being called a filthy liar.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='rachael' post='1514603' date='Apr 29 2008, 08:27 PM']I do so appreciate being called a filthy liar. [/quote]

Rachael,

What are you talking about?

I never called you any such thing. I said one out of two people on this board a filthy liar. I didn't point fingers at all. I'm stating a fact out of the bible, and really in life. One out of two people are pretending to be something they are not. They shouldn't be trusted, and you have got to be lead by the spirit to know who to trust, and who to not trust.

So, I think you need to reread my posts, as I never pointed you out ever, I would never point anybody out.

[rachael]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1514605' date='Apr 29 2008, 09:31 PM']Rachael,

What are you talking about?

I never called you any such thing. I said one out of two people on this board a filthy liar. I didn't point fingers at all. I'm stating a fact out of the bible, and really in life. One out of two people are pretending to be something they are not. They shouldn't be trusted, and you have got to be lead by the spirit to know who to trust, and who to not trust.

So, I think you need to reread my posts, as I never pointed you out ever, I would never point anybody out.[/quote]
If that is what you meant, then alright. But it read a little different in my mind.

[ardillacid]

I'm curious as to what passage in the Bible says that one out of two is a filthy liar, or damned to hell, or if you are just pulling that out of your ass.

[the 13th papist]

On that whole being angry at contemporary Christians, i agree. I think we are the whore wife of Hosea, or unfaithful Israel in Jerimia, but thats a different topic.

I wrote my thesis on Justification and Salvation in the Bible. So if you want to learn something, here it is, but i doubt anybody will read it.

Biblical Arguments about Salvation in a Few Key Passages
I. Introduction
Ever since the Protestant Reformation, there has been, not always scholarly, debate about how a person obtains Christian salvation. It started with Luther’s interpretation that Romans and other epistles claimed that the only thing a person needs to be saved is faith, hence his phrase: sola fide, meaning ‘by faith alone,’ obviously in regards to salvation. The Council of Trent countered that claim with (a possible over-) emphasis on good works. There situation has been difficult ever since. But with the coming of inter-faith dialogue and a slightly less hostile exchange by Protestants and Catholics, there is a real need for honest exegesis of the texts in question. The following is an attempt at such a thing.
This paper is a discussion about the theology of Christian salvation in a few key passages from Galatians, Romans, James, and Ephesians. The mains subjects of the selected passages are “grace,” “faith,” “works of the law,” and “good works”. Through examination of these texts, its seems that salvation receives its merit from Christ’s action on the cross, occurs by grace, through faith, and requires good works in order to be in accordance with Christ’s life within a person.
A. Program
We will start with a treatment of Galatians because it branches out to some of the other important passages. It does this by mentioning that we are saved by faith apart from works (of the law) and by citing Abraham. I will search the Letter of Paul to the Romans for further clarity on the subject of justification, works of the law, and the curse of the law. Paul’s citation of will Abraham will bridge the discussion into the epistle by James, because both use the example to prove seemingly contradictory points. James will link back to Paul in his letter to the Ephesians.

B. Various Christian Doctrines on Justification and Salvation
It would be helpful to keep in mind the theologies of justification of the Catholic Church and a couple Protestant denominations, in this case Calvinism and Lutheranism, while the Scriptures themselves are studied.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church gives a rather terse theology if justification. The grace of the Holy Spirit has the power to justify us (CCC §1987) through our taking part in Christ’s Passion and Resurrection, which is the meritorious cause of our justification (CCC § 1988). We enter into this through Baptism, the sacrament of faith (CCC §1992). We give our assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites us to conversion (CCC §1993). Justification detaches us from sin, and allows us to accept God’s mercy (CCC §1990). Through the continual outpouring of grace, we are able to conform ourselves to Christ (CCC §2000).
The Heidelberg Catechism, a summary of Calvinist doctrine, says quotes Matt 22:37-40, saying that the Lord requires us to love Him and our neighbor, but because of original sin, we are incapable of this and of anything that is good (HC §4). No creature can expiate the debt our sin daily increases (HC §5, 13, 14). Therefore Christ was made man in order to save us from our sins (HC §16). It takes true faith to receive this blessing (HC §22). The 12 articles of faith are given, which are the Nicean Creed (HC §23). Questions 59 through 62 illustrate that only faith can make it so as we never sinned because no works, because they are all imperfect, can stand up in the tribunal of God. Faith comes through the Holy Spirit (HC §65). But after justification, our actions should show our thankfulness to God (HC §86). Those who continue their wicked deeds cannot be saved (HC §87).
Luther makes some comments concerning justification and salvation in his Greater Catechism. It says that we merit eternal damnation by our acts, but through the actions of Christ, we are saved (99). Baptism is a sign of faith, and faith alone makes a person worthy to receive baptism (134). He rejects that any works we ourselves may do may merit salvation (135). Luther’s catechism doesn’t have as much detail as the others do, but he makes it clear that works have nothing to do with justification, but he does not mention if they have anything to do with salvation. Modern Lutherans, would say that works don’t have anything to do with either.
II. Galatians 2:11-21
A. The Text
Paul Rebukes Peter at Antioch
[11] But when Cephas came to Antioch I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. [12] For before certain men came from James, he ate with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. [13] And with him the rest of the Jews acted insincerely, so that even Barnabas was carried away by their insincerity. [14] But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, "If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?" [15] We ourselves, who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners, [16] yet who know that a man is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ, and not by works of the law, because by works of the law shall no one be justified. [17] But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we ourselves were found to be sinners, is Christ then an agent of sin? Certainly not! [18] But if I build up again those things which I tore down, then I prove myself a transgressor. [19] For I through the law died to the law, that I might live to God. [20] I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. [21] I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose. (RSV)

B. Introduction to Galatians and Authorship
Paul is the undisputed author of the letter to the Galatians, by scholars of all times; it is clearly stated, in large writing, at the end of the letter that Paul wrote that section with his own hand (6:11). It is important to note that Paul in no way believes himself to be superior to Peter, whom he rebukes. This is made evident by Paul’s uses of the Hebrew Cephas, showing that he was well aware of Peter’s position as the rock upon which the Church was to be built. Paul is also rebuking Peter, not for doctrinal reasons, but because of Peter’s hypocritical actions.
C. Theme
In the beginning of this section of Galatians, 2:11-21, Paul is not writing about salvation proper but inclusion in the Christian community. However, because the end of being in the Christian community is justification (Gk. dikaiosune), salvation is brought up. Therefore, this section is applicable to the theme but must be kept in its proper context.
D. Treatment of the Text
The raging debate in Gal 2:11-21 is whether or not Gentiles need to be circumcised in order to be Christian. Paul argues that Gentiles need not be circumcised because it is a sign of the Old Covenant, characterized by the Torah, a law that dooms man, because it is unfulfillable. In this epistle, Paul is very specific when he writes about works of the law. Works of the law are not the same as good works or works of faith. Works of the law, as the name suggests, are works in accordance with the Torah, or observing the laws given by Moses. Because there has already been a ruling by the Church between Paul’s time and ours in favor of Paul, works of the law are no longer applicable to Christians who are under the New Law, the Torah having been fulfilled by Christ. Many of the Early Church Fathers are in favor of the interpretation that ‘works of the law’ refers primarily to Mosaic ceremonial rituals. This Jewish Law was cursed, as Paul points out in vv. 10 and 11. The reason for this is that, under the law, a man is only capable of doing what he is asked and no more; he is actually not even capable of living perfectly up to the law, and is therefore doomed by it. As scripture says, a servant is expected to do all that is asked of him, even after a long day’s work; if he does not, he is a wicked and lazy servant (Luke 17:7-10).
The heart of this passage is 2:16. This section has a three stage chiasm. The chiasm of v. 16 in the RSV translation is as follows:
A. that a man is not justified by works of the law
B. but through faith in Jesus Christ,
C. even we have believed in Christ Jesus,
B’. in order to be justified by faith in Christ,
A’. and not by works of the law
By repeating key ideas in close succession, Paul is able to emphasize his two main points: that a person is not justified by the law, and that a person is justified through faith in Christ. Verse 16 ends with a paraphrase of Psalm 143:2, which stated that no man shall be justified by the Law.
The root of the word “justification” is obviously “justice” and therefore needs to be related to it in some way. The idea of justification was taken from legal proceedings, whereby someone was declared innocent of the charges brought against him. Paul’s use is a little different.
“In Paul’s twenty-two uses of the term in the [New Testament], it has the dual effect of affirming that someone is not to be condemned (see Rom. 3:26, 8:1ff.), while it also declares that a person is viewed as righteous in God’s sight (Rom. 3:24). Both benefits are appropriated through faith in Jesus Christ.”
Even an evangelical Protestant commentary admits that for Paul faith (Gk. Pistis) is the channel through which justification by faith occurs; it is not the cause. This means that a man not only becomes just and but is declared just by God, with him now being a man capable of acting in accordance with justice.
Paul is contrasting works of the Jewish law and faith in Jesus Christ, but not just faith, everything that goes with it. That faith in Jesus is not accompanied with the term “grace” in this section makes it apparent that faith is meant to mean everything that goes with faith, because Paul writes that grace is what leads to faith in his other epistles. In order to be fully faithful to, as Paul puts it, “Christ who lives in me,”(2:20), a person must act as Christ acted, because it is no longer him who acts, but Christ who acts in him. The emphasis in the original Greek is on the ‘I’ and ‘Christ’ by placing them both at the end of their respective clauses. The placement of these two words puts emphasis in the concepts behind them, namely, our person responsibility and Christ’s actions. “The faith of Christ is received by acting always as he does.” Notice that this action follows justification proper. Christ acts only in us after we are justified through faith.
E. Conclusion of Galatians
An important point is made even if how we are justified remains a little cloudy: we are not justified by the Jewish Law, but through faith. The mentioning of Christ’s action through us keeps the door open for the argument that justification takes place not solely through a faith with no action. In fact, it indicated that after we are saved through faith, we must also accept the actions of Christ through us.



III. Romans 3 and 4 with Genesis 15:6
A. The Text
Jews and the Law
[17] But if you call yourself a Jew and rely upon the law and boast of your relation to God [18] and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed in the law, [19] and if you are sure that you are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, [20] a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth -- [21] you then who teach others, will you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? [22] You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? [23] You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? [24] For, as it is written, "The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you."
[25] Circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law; but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision. [26] So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? [27] Then those who are physically uncircumcised but keep the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law. [28] For he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. [29] He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal. His praise is not from men but from God.
[Rom 3:1] Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? [2] Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews are entrusted with the oracles of God. [3] What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? [4] By no means! Let God be true though every man be false, as it is written, "That thou mayest be justified in thy words, and prevail when thou art judged." [5] But if our wickedness serves to show the justice of God, what shall we say? That God is unjust to inflict wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.) [6] By no means! For then how could God judge the world? [7] But if through my falsehood God's truthfulness abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner? [8] And why not do evil that good may come? -- as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.

None is Righteous
[9] What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all; for I have already charged that all men, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin, [10] as it is written:
"None is righteous, no, not one;
[11] no one understands, no one seeks for God.
[12] All have turned aside, together they have gone wrong; no one does good, not even one."
[13] "Their throat is an open grave, they use their tongues to deceive."
"The venom of asps is under their lips."
[14] "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness."
[15] "Their feet are swift to shed blood,
[16] in their paths are ruin and misery,
[17] and the way of peace they do not know."
[18] "There is no fear of God before their eyes."
[19] Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. [20] For no human being will be justified in his sight by works of the law, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.
Righteousness through Faith
[21] But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, [22] the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction;
[23] since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, [24] they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, [25] whom God put forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins; [26] it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has faith in Jesus.
[27] Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On the principle of works? No, but on the principle of faith. [28] For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law. [29] Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, [30] since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith. [31] Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

The Example of the Faith of Abraham
[Rom 4:1] What then shall we say about Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? [2] For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. [3] For what does the scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness." [4] Now to one who works, his wages are not reckoned as a gift but as his due. [5] And to one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness. [6] So also David pronounces a blessing upon the man to whom God reckons righteousness apart from works:
[7] "Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins
are covered;
[8] blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not reckon his sin."
[9] Is this blessing pronounced only upon the circumcised, or also upon the uncircumcised? We say that faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness. [10] How then was it reckoned to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. [11] He received circumcision as a sign or seal of the righteousness which he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised and who thus have righteousness reckoned to them, [12] and likewise the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but also follow the example of the faith which our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
God’s Promise Realized through Faith
[13] The promise to Abraham and his descendants, that they should inherit the world, did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. [14] If it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. [15] For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.
[16] That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his descendants -- not only to the adherents of the law but also to those who share the faith of Abraham, for he is the father of us all, [17] as it is written, "I have made you the father of many nations" -- in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. [18] In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations; as he had been told, "So shall your descendants be." [19] He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead because he was about a hundred years old, or when he considered the barrenness of Sarah's womb. [20] No distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, [21] fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. [22] That is why his faith was "reckoned to him as righteousness." [23] But the words, "it was reckoned to him," were written not for his sake alone, [24] but for ours also. It will be reckoned to us who believe in him that raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, [25] who was put to death for our trespasses and raised for our justification. (RSV)

B. Introduction to Romans
My original selection from this epistle was quite a bit larger, chapters 3-8, but upon further review, it became evident that chapters five through eight were a different probatio which is on the new life and hope of those who have been baptized and have faith in Christ. Although chapters 5-8 do mention in passing that man is justified by faith, there is no new material in that regard introduced in these later chapters. Treatment of these two chapters will give a sufficiently thorough treatment of the theology of salvation in Romans. Verses 2:17 through 4:25 deal more precisely with our subject. In these verses, Paul is writing about faith in contrast to “works of the law,” and not faith in contrast to “works of faith” or “good works”. This contrast is similar to that in Galatians. Paul’s main argument is that “works of the law” can not justify. Even though he is not giving a theological dissertation on how one obtains salvation, he does give some hints.
C. Authorship and Background
I found no commentaries that made the smallest intimation that the authorship of Romans was in doubt. They all agreed that the name which the epistle currently bears is correct; the letter to the Romans was written by Paul. This is made obvious by the first verse of the epistle, which clearly states that Paul is the author. The integrity of the letter is somewhat disputed, some rejecting the last two chapters as not original. Their arguments, however, are not convincing, and those chapters are beyond the scope of the current subject, so no in-depth argument analysis will be given.
D. Language and Style
Paul uses a rather complicated argument to advance his position, which is sometimes hard to follow. He often branches off of his main argument into smaller sections, returning to the main argument later. Therefore the passage must be looked at as a whole and when verses are cited, the context must be kept in mind. One of these digressions is about salvation.
E. Treatment of the Text
Before we deal with this specific pericope, we must look at the arguments which preceded it. Romans 1:18-3:20 allows Paul to dismiss the objections to the equal status of Jews and Greeks in regards to retribution, and, therefore, they must also be equal in regards to justification.
The logical purpose of this section of the argument is to prove that all men have a need for salvation, a salvation which any law, be it the Torah, the law of a government, or the law of one’s conscience, cannot provide. Paul starts his argument in 2:17-29 by showing the often hypocritical nature of Jews under the Law who teach one thing but do the opposite. This hypocrisy is a rather extreme example of general failure to fulfill the Law by all Jews. He coordinates the concept of circumcision and being under the law, writing that neither guarantee salvation. Paul then explains and illustrates that the only circumcision that matters is that of the heart. Paul equates circumcision with being under the Law, as it was shone above. Just as circumcision must be of the heart, so must the Law be internalized, and not just observed outwardly. In the beginning of Chapter 3, Paul writes about how all people deserve to be condemned under the law according to justice, but God’s goodness is shown through his mercy toward us. In v. 9, Paul claims that both Jew and Gentile are under the law of sin, then goes on to prove it with Scripture. It becomes evident that we can’t boast that we are saved because it is not because of our own works, “works of the law”. It is again important to note that Paul uses “works” as shorthand for “works of the law,” if there are any exceptions, they will be noted. Paul does not overlook the fact that the Jews have a privileged position because they are the Chosen People, but none in regards to salvation.
The heart of the passage starts in 3:20. This is his digression about salvation. From v. 20 to 26, Paul is giving some characteristics of Christian justification. Lest we get confused about what is meant by the righteousness or glory of God, Theissen claims that this phrase means the perfection of God, which, given the context, refers to His perfect justice. With justice being a theme of the passage, this makes sense. Verse 21 in conjunction with the previous passages makes it clear that justification does not come by means of any law, which has already been stated and proven in this paper and in this epistle. This is because they can only tell a man what needs to be done, but it does not give any help in getting it done. The second point that Paul makes is that salvation is obtained through faith in Christ. There is a syntactical ambiguity in the original Greek. The translation of ‘faith in Christ’ could also be ‘the fidelity of Christ.’ One source suggests that this may be on purpose, so as to emphasize the reciprocity of our faith in Christ and Christ’s faithfulness to us. This salvation has its source in Grace. The contrast to the previous statement about sin in v. 23 suggests that being justified (dikaioumenoi) contains a significantly ethical element; that is, that believers are actually being “made righteous” as opposed to just being “declared righteous,” with this being done not with legal fiction, which would in effect be immoral or unjust, but through the grace of God effective in the salvific mission of Christ. Point three is that because all have fallen short, all are saved by the grace of God, without distinction. That is to say that, because all have fallen short, the only way to be saved is by grace. This is treated more thoroughly in the argument preceding this one. The last point, ending with v. 26, is that this salvation has its ultimate origin in the propitiatory death of Christ. This is a very import point to keep in mind while the debate about justification by faith and /or works rages. There would be no just salvation without the death of Christ on the cross.
Verses 27 through 31 serve as a kind of conclusion; the verses briefly review the previous arguments, stating that no man can boast because he his saved through faith and not the law, that faith can justify all people, and that justification through faith is not grounds to abolish the law. It is important to note that in the past there was no real justification, just God’s patient overlooking of sins, with him waiting for the redemption that would come through the horrible death of Christ. Also, Origen brought up a very good point, which was that to think that works after one has been justified by are of no account would be false. To make this supposition would be false on two accounts: Paul is concerned here only with obtaining justification, not with Christian life after justification; when Paul does speak about Christian life after justification in Chapters 12-14, he makes it very clear that good works are necessary to retain the justification originally obtain through faith.
In Chapter 4, Paul uses Abraham as an example of a man who was justified by faith. Abraham was justified and made righteous through his faith in God’s promise of a myriad of descendents. Abraham proved this faith through his willingness to sacrifice Isaac, Isaac being the only proof that this promise would be upheld. This example proves Paul’s point, because it is only after Abraham was declared righteous that he was circumcised, a sign of the Law. This same story will be used by James to prove a point which is different, but not contradictory.
F. Conclusion to Romans
Romans seems to reveal a kind of timeline for justification. First, justification is only possible through the actions of Christ on the cross. Second, because we are not capable of justifying ourselves through works of the law, we need to receive grace, which helps a person make the assent of faith, through which he obtains justification. Now that the man is justified, he needs to remain so by doing good works. Notice that this summary is very similar to the one of Galatians.
IV. James 2:14-26
A. The Text
Faith without Works Is Dead
[14] What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him? [15] If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, [16] and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? [17] So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead.
[18] But some one will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith. [19] You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe -- and shudder. [20] Do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren? [21] Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? [22] You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, [23] and the scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness"; and he was called the friend of God. [24] You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. [25] And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? [26] For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead. (RSV)

B. Introduction to James
To use verses from James as proof texts against other passages taken out of Romans would do an injustice to both books and the surrounding verses. Luther did this. He marginalized James because he interpreted James to be bringing Christians back to the Law. Luther saw James and Romans as contradictions, and in true Protestant style adopted the “either or attitude,” choosing Romans, which favored his own interpretation of salvation by faith alone. Interestingly, no where in the Bible does the phrase ‘by faith alone’ actually occur; it is Luther’s own added emphasis. However, Romans and James are not at all contradictory, despite what many commentators have written; they just have a different emphasis.
C. Authorship and Background
Leahy and Felder together provide a very good explanation of the authorship and composition, respectively, of this epistle:
According to its opening verse, the first of the Catholic Epistles is written by ‘James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.’ . . . The use of the title ‘servant,’ which suggests a church official, his presuming to address ‘to the twelve tribes of the Dispersion,’ and the unmistakable tone of authority throughout the letter all indicate someone of authority, well-known in the Church. This conclusion is confirmed by Jude I, where the writer refers to himself as the ‘brother of James.’ Such a person is identifiable in the [New Testament] as James, ‘brother of the Lord’ and leader of the Church in Jerusalem (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18; Gal 1:19; 2:9,12; I Cor 15:7; Mk 6:3 par).
Felder gives some defense against some of the reasons that biblical scholars might think that James was not the author:
My suggestion is that the original text was a sermon by James in the months prior to his martyrdom in Jerusalem. Then one skilled in the Hellenistic idiom edited and distributed James’s original sermon, now styled as an encyclical, probably in the late 80's or 90's. This missive was sent to churches of the Diaspora that were divided internally.
James also has phrases that are rare in the NT and appear in second century Christian and non-Christian literature. But these phrases are accounted for in Felder’s previous explanation.
D. Structure and Rhetoric
The passage divides into three sections: the proposition (v. 14-17); the argument (v. 18-25): and the concluding statement (v. 26). In regards to structure, this pericope has a parallel to the one before it, 2:1-13. Both start with a rhetorical question and then follow with a hypothetical case that ends in another rhetorical question. Also, in the first pericope, the readers are shown the inconsistency of their behavior, while in vv. 14-26, the claim that faith is separable from works is rejected through a reductio ad absurdum. The main difference in the two is that in v. 18 of this pericope James introduces an interlocutor, which he uses to prove his argument in classical Greek diatribal style.
E. Treatment of the Text
Verse 14 consists of two rhetorical questions followed by an illustration of a hypothetical situation, as previously stated. This illustration advances James’s arguments that indeed faith is dead if it doesn’t have anything to show for it. Therefore, “false is a faith that refuses to help those in need.” A working definition of faith in this case is as follows: “James means by faith the free acceptance of God’s saving revelation.” But the actions of works of faith, which is the subject, not to be confused with works of the law, reveal the faith behind the actions. The trend through all of these passages is a contrast between good works and works of the law. There is something grammatically interesting about v. 15. The two verbs are identified as passive by many commentators, with the understanding that the speaker is passing the responsibility onto somebody else, but there have been suggestions that the verb is to be taken reflexively as a Greek middle voice, meaning that the poor person himself should cloth and feed himself, as if it were that easy. Either way, the hypothetical person is passing the buck onto someone else, and is not responding to his hypothetical justification.
There seems to be some difficulty with the placement of the word ‘But' (alla) at the beginning of v. 18 because it could imply a following contradiction. "But the word alla can be taken to introduce a further argument reinforcing a previous one or a statement stronger than the preceding." Upon theoretically separating good works and faith in the previous three verses, James responds to the absurd proposition with an insistence on the indivisibility of the two. For in fact, "deeds do not replace faith; they complete it." The second sentence in v. 18 has a chiastic structure in its first and second clauses. This chiasm creates an inclusio with the word ‘works,' thus stressing their importance.
In rabbinical style, James appeals to proof texts. First, he refers to Abraham:
“Only when Abraham offered his son (21) was the word of Gn 15:6 fulfilled (cf v 23), because it was only then that faith showed itself to be ‘active along with his works and faith was completed by works’ (22). Gn 15:6 actually refers to Abraham’s faith on God’s promise of numerous posterity, which is also the way Paul understands it (Rm 4); in linking this text with the ‘works’ of Gn 22, James is following a later Jewish tradition (cf 1 Mc 2:52; Sir 44:20).”
Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice his own son was a fulfillment of Genesis 15:6. “Thus the translation of 2:21 might better be that Abraham was “shown to be righteous,” since the entire line of argumentation has involved demonstration (see v. 18).” “Here James makes it clear that he is not talking about works as the sole source of Abraham’s justification, as v. 21 taken out of context might lead one to believe. Instead, Abraham’s ‘faith and his actions were working together.’ Faith and works are inseparable.”
The second example is of another well-know Old Testament figure, namely, Rahab the Harlot. “James does not mention her faith, since it is evident from [Josiah] 2:11. Her fellow citizens also had a kind of faith (2:9-11); but she alone acted on her belief and was justified-was found pleasing before God and was saved (Jos 6:22-25).” The relationship between James and Paul is interpreted many different ways by different scholars.
And it is in light of James’s own demonstration that- rather than as a response to Paul on a completely different controversy- that his declaration in v. 24 should be understood. If ‘works’ are understood as the ‘works/deeds’ of faith itself-that is, as an expression of faith itself in acts of obedience- then it seems plainly the case that, as he says, a person is declared righteous on the basis of deeds and not only by faith.
But James, although not against Paul, does write against a misinterpretation of what Paul is writing. “James seeks to correct a current perverted understanding of Pauline teaching on justification by faith, one would, unlike genuine Pauline doctrine, make no moral demands on the believer.”
F. Conclusion to James
In conclusion, it becomes less murky how a man gets saved: “It is by faith and ‘by what he does’.” James makes it obvious that good works are needed for salvation. Gaebelein gives a very succinct statement on the overall theme of this passage: “This epistle leaves no place for a religion that is mere mental acceptance of truth.” James’s epistle adds stress to the need for good works, even though it has already become evident from the letters of Paul, which this epistle seems to contradict, that good works are required.
V. Ephesians 2:8-10
A. The Text
[8] For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God -- [9] not because of works, lest any man should boast. [10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them. (RSV)




B. Introduction to Ephesians
Paul’s letter the Ephesians has another statement about salvation. His formulation in this letter is very terse and requires much unpacking. He continues the discussion of salvation with many of the usual terms and even some very similar statements to those made elsewhere.
C. Authorship and Background
There are two main historical problems with Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians: authorship and audience. The Pauline authorship was unanimously held in antiquity. In modern times, however, there are both theological and literary arguments against the Pauline authorship, but neither is conclusive. However the added weight of all the factors have lead many exegetes to deny Pauline authorship. The heaviness of the style, that is, the amount of redundancy, is also different from the widely accepted Pauline authorship of Colossians. There are 42 word used in Ephesians that do not appear anywhere else in the New Testament, but the other books in the Pauline corpus also have a similar amount of unrepeated words. Most scholars who hold Paul as the author explain the differences in style from the other letters attributed to Paul as changes that occurred later in Paul’s life which make them believe that this letter was written from prison. However, those which do not hold Pauline authorship attribute the differences to the real deutero-Paul writer using Paul and a pseudonym and writing after Paul’s death. Because the arguments against Paul’s being the author are far from conclusive and because the refutations for these arguments are reasonable, there seems to be no good reason to contradict the ancient Christians in their belief that Paul was the author.
The heading is missing in many of the oldest transcripts, such as Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, where the address was written in by hand, while other manuscripts have the heading “to the Laodiceans.” It is believed that the letter was generic because of its lack of person addresses and because Paul’s intimate relationship with the Ephesians would probably yield something more specific or specialized, and therefore the address was just filled in by the letter-bearer.
D. Treatment of the Text
“Ephesians 2:8-10 has been called the most concise summary of Pauline theology in the New Testament. Terms such as ‘Faith,’ ‘Gift,’ ‘works,’ and ‘boast’ are central to Paul’s message. The opposition between faith and works is especially well known.” The first part of v 8 makes it clear that we are saved by grace. Grace is “the biblical term for (1) God’s favor and (2) God’s supernatural life. The former designates the conditions of its bestowal (a free and undeserved gift, Rom 6:23), and the latter designates the content of the gift we receive (a share in the divine nature, 2 Pet 1:4) (CCC 1996-2003)” Because of this, “Christian activity consists less in man’s action than in God’s action in man through Christ. Man’s role is to respond to that action.” This statement of Christ’s working through men harkens back to Galatians 2:20. Paul uses the Greek perfect participle which brings the idea justification, which is usually viewed as a future event, into the present; this eschatological view in Ephesians reminds the reader of John and the Ephesus tradition behind it.
Following the statement that we are saved by grace, Paul adds that it is through faith that we are saved by grace. This makes faith the instrument or path by which we are united to Christ and therefore saved.
“In the context of conversion, salvation is conferred through the instrument of Baptism (1 Pet 3:21), and salvation is received through the instrument of faith (Rom 3:24-25). For Paul, belief in Jesus Christ is a divine gift (Phil 1:29) that we exercise when we adhere to God with trust (personal aspect) and assent to the truth he has revealed in the gospel (propositional aspect) (CCC 177).”
Verse 9 emphasizes that we are not saved through works of the law, once again, something that has been made evident in the epistles treated previously. The fact that he is talking about works of the Torah is a key distinction. In verse 9, Paul is not talking about good works; he treats those in v. 10. “It is clear that Paul’s main purpose in using the language was to illustrate that the center of salvation was no longer works of the Jewish Law but now faith in Christ.”
The subject of v. 10 is good works. It is important to know what Paul is talking about here. As I mentioned in the previous paragraph, Paul is not talking about works of the law here, but a different kind of works, works that are necessarily good. Hahn and Mitch give a good definition of good works:
Works of righteousness that pertain to salvation (Rom 2:6-7). These are made possible by the grace of God empowering us from within (Phil 2:12-13; Heb 13:20-21). The second Council of Orange decreed in A.D. 529 that man, weakened by the Fall of Adam, is incapable of performing works worthy of eternal life by his own natural strength. Only by the supernatural help of the Spirit can we be humble, obedient, and loving in a way that truly pleases the Lord (Canons 1-25) (CCC 2008-11).
Verse ten is ‘by no means a subsidiary postscript to the paragraph. It is the outcome of the whole. It shows what salvation is for: it is intended to produce good works that attest to its reality. Works play no part at all in securing salvation. But afterwards Christians will prove their faith by their works.” However, these good works by themselves do not create a righteousness that will stand up to the judgement of God. To do good works is to accept the grace which God has given in order to do those things which he has set up for a person to do ahead of time. Paul rejects two errors: that we are saved by faith, and that we can be justified by our own free will; we can neither merit grace nor is grace presented through man himself. Opportunities are predestined, but we can choose not to do them.
E. Conclusion to Ephesians
Gaeblein paraphrases these three verses well:
Yet again Paul reminds his readers (as in v.5) that they owe their salvation entirely to the undeserved favor of God. Grace is at once the objective, operative, and instrumental cause. He expands the previous statement by adding that the subjective medium (or apprehending cause) of salvation is faith, which is also a necessary condition. Faith, however is not a quality, a virtue, or faculty. It is not something man can produce. It is simply a trustful response that is itself evoked by the Holy Spirit.
Gaebelein’s use of the term ‘instrumental cause’ is not the same as the other commentators’s, but the general summary, which follows, will clear up the discrepancy.
VI. Summation of Biblical Arguments
Salvation owes its merit completely to Christ’s expiation for our sins on the cross. He takes care of the penalty and wrath we would justly incur. Because of this event, God offers us grace in order to reunite ourselves to him. Through this grace, we are made righteous and therefore declared righteous. However, God does nothing to us without our free will; He can not force us to do anything. We must say yes to that grace and justification with our own will. We do this with faith. Faith then becomes the instrument or vehicle for our receiving justification. Lutherans would have the process stop there, but it clearly does not. Action is required after justification proper in order to maintain the Christ-life within us and to keep our salvation. We must act because we have accepted righteousness. If we do not, we reject the salvation which God had offered us. Therefore, when Protestants ask a hypothetical passerby if he is saved, if he is Catholic, he can answer “yes”, throwing in the caveot that he still needs to do work because it is never a secure thing, not a thing one can be sure about. For Christian life is not a stagnant acceptance of some faith proposition, but always a response to Christ living us.





Bibliography
Aletti, Jean-Noel. “Romans.” Pages 1553-1597 in The International Bible Commentary Edited by William R. Farmer. Collegeville: Liturgical, 1998.
Aquinas, St. Thomas. Commentary on Ephesians. Translated by Matthew L. Lamb. Albany: Magi, 1966.
Byrne, Brendan. Romans. vol. 6 of Sacra Pagina. Edited by Daniel J. Harrington. Collegeville: Liturgical, 1992.
Condon, K. “Commentary on James,” Pages 1239-1247 in A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture. Edited by Reginald C. Fuller. London: Nelson, 1969.
Easton, Burton Scott. “Faith and Works.” Pages 20-76 in The Interpreter’s Bible. Edited by George Arthur Buttrick; 12 vols. Nashville: Abingdon.
Elwell, Walter A., ed. Evangelical Commentary on the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989.
Felder, Cain Hope. “James.” Pages 1786-1801 in The International Bible Commentary Edited by William R. Farmer. Collegeville: Liturgical, 1998.
Grassi, Joseph A. “The Letter to the Ephesians.” Pages 341-354 in The Jerome Biblical Commentary. Edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy. Englewood: Prentice Hall, 1968.
Gaebelein, Frank E. ed. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978.
Hahn, Scott and Curtis Mitch, The Letter of St. Paul to the Romans: with Introduction, Commentary and Notes. San Francisco: Ignatius, 2003
_______, The Letters of St. Paul to the Galatians & Ephesians: with Introduction, Commentary and Notes. San Francisco: Ignatius, 2003
Holy Bible, The New American Bible (Whichita: Fireside, 2001)
Holy Bible, New International Version (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984)
Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, 2nd Catholic Ed. (San Francisco: Ignatius, 2006)
Johnson, Luke Timothy. “Deeds and Faith.” Pages 196-201 in The New Interpreter’s Bible. Edited by ed. Leander E. Keck. 12 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1998.
Leahy, Thomas W. “The Epistle of James.” Pages 369-80 in The Jerome Biblical Commentary. Edited by Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy. Englewood: Prentice Hall, 1968.
MacDonald, Margaret Y. “Ephesians.” Pages 1670-1687 in The International Bible Commentary Edited by William R. Farmer. Collegeville: Liturgical, 1998.
Matera, Frank J. Galatians. vol. 9 of Sacra Pagina. Edited by Daniel J. Harrington. Collegeville: Liturgical, 1992.
Orchard, B. “Commentary on Galatians.” Pages 1174-80 in A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture. Edited by Reginald C. Fuller. London: Nelson, 1969.
Perkins, Pheme. “Theological Reflection on Salvation in the Body of the Exalted Christ.” Pages 388-395 in The New Interpreter’s Bible. Edited by ed. Leander E. Keck. 12 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1998.
Swain, Lionel. “Commentary on Ephesians.” Pages 1181-1204 in A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture. Edited by Reginald C. Fuller. London: Nelson, 1969.
Tamez, Elsa. “Galatians.” Pages 1655, 1662 in The International Biblical Commentary Edited by William R. Farmer. Collegeville: Liturgical, 1998.
Theissen, A. “Commentary on Romans,” Pages 1082-1149 in A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture Edited by Reginald C. Fuller. London: Nelson, 1969.