1) Paul, in Romans 4:1-3, tells us that Abraham was justified by faith in Genesis 15:6. But Hebrews 11:8 says, “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to set out for a place he was to receive as an inheritance; and he set out, not knowing where he was going.” This is referring to Genesis 12:1-4, which happened before Genesis 15:6. If Abraham had faith and acted on it in Genesis 12, why did he have to wait until Genesis 15 to be justified? Doesn’t the evidence seem to point to justification as a process rather than a one-time declaration?
First of all, there is nothing anywhere in Romans, Galatians, Hebrews, James, or Genesis 12-15 that says that Abraham’s justification was a process. You want his justification to be a process, but there is not a sentence in inspired Scripture anywhere that says that it is. Whatever we make of the relationship of Genesis 12 and 15 the stubborn fact remains that according to Genesis 15:6, God made Abraham a promise and Abraham believed it. Because Abraham believed, he was counted righteous. According to Paul (an inspired interpreter of the Old Testament), Abraham was justified by faith apart from works. He was justified sola fide.
Secondly, your argument is really just an argument against Paul. No matter what you want to make of Hebrews 11:8 and Genesis 12, Paul the apostle of Jesus Christ says that Abraham was declared righteous in Genesis 15:6. Your argument is with Paul’s use of the Old Testament, not the Reformed doctrine of justification. Think about it for a minute. Paul is arguing that god justifies men by giving righteousness to them apart from the works of the Law (Romans 3:21, 22, 28, and 30) and apart from works altogether (Romans 4:2, 5, and 6-8). How would it serve Paul’s argument to take Abraham and say that he was justified over a period of time by both faith and works? Beware of your own theological position when you find yourself objecting to the Apostle Paul.
Just to recap Romans 3 and 4. God gives righteousness apart from the Law (3:21). He gives it by faith (3:22). Justification is a gift that is given by grace (3:24), and grace must be distinguished from works or else grace is no longer grace (11:6). The basis of our justification is the work of Christ. Christ died for sin and lived a perfect life so that God would be two things: (1) Just. God is just in declaring sinners righteous because Jesus paid the debt of their sin and lived a life of perfect obedience in their stead. (2) The justifier of the ungodly. God is able to now declare men righteous because Christ has a righteousness that is imputed to the believer. There is no boasting on our part because God gives this righteousness apart from works of the Law (3:27, 28). Abraham is the supreme example of this justification (4:1). If he was justified by works, he would have something to boast about (4:2). Abraham simply believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness (4:3; Genesis 15:6). Now if someone works for a wage, their wages are credited as a gift. It is credited to him because he is due it (4:4). But to the one who doesn’t work but believes, God credits righteousness (4:5-8).
2) Why was Abraham justified in Genesis 15:6? He didn’t accept God or begin to believe anything new about Him. All he did was believe that God would give him many descendants. How can this event qualify as the moment of justification in Protestant theology?
For this I would refer you to Galatians 3. In this chapter Paul explicitly says that in the revelation that God would bless the entire earth through the descendant of Abraham, God was in fact preaching the gospel to Abraham beforehand.
Even so Abraham BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS RECKONED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS. Therefore, be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham. 8 The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU." So then those who are of faith are blessed with Abraham, the believer.
Later in Galatians 3 Paul says that in the promise of a seed that would bless all nations, God had a singular person (Christ) in mind, rather than a plural group of people. The seen of Abraham that would be the blessing to the nations was the Lord Jesus Christ. Though the revelation of Christ was far less explicit than we have today, God was indeed making known to Abraham that a single seed of his would be a blessing to the entire world. This announcement was the gospel (3:8). Therefore this event makes perfect sense for the time of Abraham’s justification; it was the time he believed the gospel.
3) In Numbers 25:7-8, Phinehas kills a dissenting Israelite man and a Midianite woman, and Psalm 106:30-31 says that this act was credited to him as righteousness, using the same phrase applied to Abraham in Genesis 15:6. How can this be reconciled with sola fide?
I think this falls under the same error you make with James 2 and Paul in Romans 3 and 4. Authors can use similar terms and phraseology in different contexts to mean different things. I cite the words of John Murray here:
We must, however, recognize the difference between the two cases (Genesis 15:6, and Psalm 106:31). In the case of Phinehas it is an act of righteous zeal on his part; it is a deed. He was credited with the devotion which his faith in God produced-righteousness in the ethical and religious sense. But that which was reckoned to Abraham is of a very different sort. It is in Paul’s interpretation and application of Genesis 15:6 this becomes quite patent. Paul could not have appealed to Psalm 106:31 in this connection without violating his whole argument. For if he has appealed to Psalm 106:31 in the matter of justification, the justification of the ungodly (vs. 5), then the case of Phinehas would have provided an inherent contradiction and would have demonstrated justification by a righteous and zealous act. Though then the formula in Genesis 15:6 is similar to that of Psalm 106:31, the subjects with which they deal are diverse. Genesis 15:6 is dealing with justification, as Paul shows; Psalm 106:31 is dealing with the good works which were the fruit of faith. This distinction must be kept in view in the interpretation of Genesis 15:6, particularly as applied by Paul in this chapter.
4) Why does Paul say that we will be judged by our works in Romans 2:6-8?
If I understand the question, I think you’re ignoring Paul’s context altogether. In chapter 2, Paul is not explaining how an unrighteous person is made right with God. Paul is arguing that all men are guilty before God (both Jew and Gentile) in 1:18-3:18. The section breaks down into two groups. The Gentiles are shown to be sinners and condemned (1:18-32) and Jews are also condemned as sinners (2:1-29). Paul is removing ground for Jewish arrogance based solely on being Jewish. He is arguing for the impartiality of judgment on God’s part. Jews will fare no better on judgment day simply because they are Jews. That’s where 2:6-8 comes in. There are Jews who pass judgment on others while committing the same sins (2:1). Paul reminds them that they will face judgment for this. And this judgment will be impartial. If a Gentile or a Jew persists in doing good and seeking eternal life, he will see life. And if a Jew or Gentile persists in being selfish and rejecting God, they will see eternal death. All verses 6-8 are doing is showing that judgment is impartial. And this is proven by verses 9 and 10.
“There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.”
5) If James was not dealing with the same issue as Paul, then why did he use the same language? It would have been much clearer had he said that works prove our faith rather than say that works justify us. By saying, “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone,” he put faith and works on the same level, implying that they justify us in the same way. Where in his epistle does he indicate that he’s only saying that works accompany true faith rather than actually justify us?
It’s not my place to speculate why James used the language that he did. James wasn’t thinking about Paul at all when he wrote his epistle, so the relationship of their “language” has to be judged by the context. It may very well be true that Paul and James are discussing the same issue (I don’t think it is), but it is not proven simply because they use the same “language”. The meaning of terms is defined primarily by context.
Paul is dealing with the way a person is saved from the wrath of God revealed from heaven (Romans 1:16-18). Paul explicitly says that the justification he is writing about is the justification of sinners “in His sight” (God’s). The righteousness of God that is given to a sinner for his salvation (1:18) comes apart from works of the Law (3:21). In fact, by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified (3:20). We need justification from God because we have all sinned and fallen short of His glory. Again, we are justified apart from the works of the Law (3:28). Paul explicitly says that if Abraham were justified by works, he would have something to boast about (4:2). But Abraham wasn’t justified by works, he believed God and God counted him righteous. And as a matter of fact, God counts everyone who does not work, but believes (note that pesky contrast again) as righteous in His sight (4:4, 5). David even spoke of God crediting righteousness apart from works (4:6-8). Sola fide!
James has a completely different context. He begins by asking a rhetorical question to his brethren “what good is it if a man says he has faith and has not works, can that faith save him?” (2:14). James is dealing with the claim to faith apart from works. James says that saying you have faith without having works is like saying to a naked person “be clothed” without clothing them or saying to a hungry person “be filled” without feeding them. The words are empty, or to use James’ language, the “faith” is dead. James again brings up someone’s “claim” in verse 18. “But someone may well say…”. The context is still the claim to faith. He uses more terms of demonstration “show me your faith without the works and I will show you my faith by my works”. James then uses two famous Old Testament examples of people who had both faith and showed it by their works. Christians should have to do the same as well. That’s James’ point. If we are going to make a claim to having a faith that saves, we must also have works. So yes, Paul and James use similar language, but the context shows that they have very different agendas.
