According to Paul, the saved cannot boast about their salvation. But why? Two very different answers have been proposed: 1. The saved cannot boast about their salvation because their salvation did not result from anything that they did.
2. The saved cannot boast about their salvation because their salvation resulted from their faith and not their works.
Those who hold to the first view claim that "faith" is the anticedent for the demonstrative pronoun “that." The fact that faith is a gift is the basis for the assertion that no one can boast, for if faith were not a gift, then men could boast in exercising it. On this account, the text would read like this: "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that [faith is] not of yourself; [that faith] is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast [about attaining faith]."
Those who hold to the second view claim the demonstrative pronoun “that” references the salvation described in the previous verses. The fact that salvation is a gift is the basis for the assertion that no one can boast, for if salvation were not a gift, then men could boast in earning it. On this account, the text would read like this: "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that [salvation is] not of yourself; [that salvation] is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast [about attaining salvation]."
I think there is an easy way to determine which view is correct. Let’s simply look at Romans 3:27-4:5 and ask the same question: Why cannot the saved boast about their salvation?
Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law....What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.
Pretty simple, right? In this passage, there is none of the ambiguity that exists in Ephesians 2:8-9. Paul is obviously arguing that the saved cannot boast about their salvation because their salvation resulted from their faith and not their works.
When asked, “What must I do to be saved?” Paul did not reply, “Nothing.” He said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.” Faith is not a work. In exercising faith, we do not contribute one bit to the work of our salvation. Those who say otherwise blur the distinction between faith and works.
When asked, “What must I do to be saved?” Paul did not reply, “Nothing.” He said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.” Faith is not a work. In exercising faith, we do not contribute one bit to the work of our salvation. Those who say otherwise blur the distinction between faith and works.
4 comments:
Hi,
Since you do not know Greek I am not sure why you would disagree with the note you reference or speculate that the Greek is ambiguous. Neither your disagreement nor your speculation are correct.
The Greek text reads as follows:
τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι διὰ πίστεως: καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν, θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον
χάριτί (grace) is feminine.
πίστεως (faith) is feminine.
τοῦτο (that) is neuter.
Now you can see that the gender of τοῦτο (that) does not "match" the gender of χάριτί (grace) or πίστεως (faith). What this means is that "that" cannot refer to either "grace" or "faith" in particular. Obviously it cannot just refer to neither, so then it must refer to both. Looking at the context of the passage tells us this as well.
Salvation, which consists of both grace and faith, is not of ourselves, but is a gift of God, so we cannot boast. This does not exclude the fact that we really do exercise faith. It is just that God gives us that faith (like the man recognized who said, "Lord I believe, help my unbelief!" and like we recognize when we ask God to save others).
Hope this helps.
Hi Anonymous,
You misunderstand my post. I do agree with the NASB note.
The reason why I suggest the text is ambiguous is because I do not believe the gender of the demonstrative pronoun settles the issue as decisively as I have heard some claim. We are a good case in point. We both understand that the demonstrative pronoun is neuter and thus refers to salvation. And yet we still disagree about whether this verse teaches that faith is a gift.
You believe the salvation the pronoun refers to consists of grace and faith. I think that is a bit of a stretch. Salvation in this passage consists of regeneration (see 2:5), not grace and faith. Grace and faith are the basis and means by which salvation (regeneration) is given. Salvation is a result of faith; faith itself is not salvation.
"Salvation in this passage consists of regeneration (see 2:5), not grace and faith."
I'm sorry, the verse in question states that salvation *is by grace*. It also states that salvation *is through faith*. Grace and faith are hence necessary components of salvation.
There is no reason I can see for restricting salvation in 2.5 to regeneration alone. Regeneration is also a necessary component of salvation. Further, even if we could restrict salvation to regeneration in 2.5, it does not follow that we should do so in 2.8. Indeed, I've just demonstrated that the passage explicitly denies that we should!
Hope this helps.
Hi Anonymous,
I see that I never replied to your last comment. Sorry!
I do not see how you have demonstrated that "this" includes faith. If you have studied Greek, you probably have access to Dr. Wallace's textbook, "Greek Grammar: Beyond the Basics." Take a look at his discussion of this verse on page 335. He discusses the possibility that "this" references "the concept of a grace-by-faith salvation," and concludes that, on this view, one cannot determine from this verse alone whether or not faith itself is a gift.
Anyway, my point in this post was that even if the grammar is ambiguous, we can easily determine what Paul meant by comparing his statement in Ephesians to his parallel statement in Romans. I still have not heard your response to this argument.
Post a Comment