Understanding the Necessity of Works in the Believer's Life in Light of Christ's Resurrection

    Dr. Richard Gaffin, in his graduate thesis and later republished in a book, Resurrection and Redemption, asserts that the Christian's justification is based on Christ's resurrection rather than Christ's death.  The (so far as I know) lone biblical support for this understanding is from the phrase “raised for our justification” in Romans 4:25.  Now I admit that I have not read the material in question (and in fact would be quite happy to find out that I am wrong in regards to it), but unless someone corrects my understanding, I will hold to my position (especially considering I have heard both advocates and opponents of the view say that is in fact what he argues).  Now this view seems clearly unbiblical to me.  In the first place it is based on an improper interpretation of the ambiguous word “for”.  The proper understanding is that “for” should be understood not as “to procure”, as in “raised to procure our justification” as Dr. Gaffin takes it, but rather “because” as in “raised because of our justification”.  Second, it ignores the massive amounts of scriptural support for Christ's substitutionary death being the grounds of our justification and the fact that “without the shedding of blood [not the resurrection of life] there is no remission of sin”.  But belaboring this point is not the point of this post.  If you want a serious refutation of Dr. Gaffin's position I would refer you to the late Dr. John Robbins lecture series titled The Justification Controversy found at TrinityFoundation.org.  Rather, my purpose is first, to articulate a proper understanding of the resurrection, and second, to relate that understanding to works in the believer's life.

    If then Christ was not "raised to procure our justification" but rather “raised because of our justification”, what does that mean?  Here “because” is denoting why Christ was raised.  And that why is “our justification”.  Because we have been justified (or the necessary and sufficient groundwork has been laid once and for all for all the elect, past, present and future), the necessary preconditions for that justification (namely, a perfect voluntary sacrifice being made) had to have been met.  Now since those preconditions were met (by Christ alone), and since one of those preconditions is perfect obedience and sinlessness, Christ was necessarily sinless and perfectly obedient.  And since within God's moral economy the wages of sin is death and the wages of perfect obedience is life, Christ, being perfectly obedient and without sin, had to be raised.  Not because it was necessary to procure anything (His death was sufficient for all of that), but because God is just, and eternal life is the just recompense for perfect obedience.  It had to happen, not as a necessary condition for our justification, but as a necessary result and implication of His sacrifice actually being acceptable and He therefore being perfectly obedient and without sin.  If this were expressed in a sorites it might go something like this:

For justification to occur, a perfect sacrifice must be made.
Justification did occur.
Therefore a perfect sacrifice was made.
A perfect sacrifice is a sinless one.
A sinless one is one who is perfectly obedient.
One who is perfectly obedient has earned the wages of perfect obedience.
The wages of perfect obedience is eternal life.
Therefore one who is perfectly obedient must receive eternal life.
Death is the antithesis of life.
Therefore if one who is perfectly obedient suffers death, he must be brought back to life.
Being brought back to life is resurrection.
Therefore Christ was resurrected because of our justification.
Or, as Paul said it “He was raised for our justification.”

    In light of the title of this post, I hope you have already made the correlation.  Christ's resurrection is a perfect picture of the real necessity of works in the believer's life.  A necessity that is a necessary result and implication, rather than necessary precondition, to truly believing the gospel.  In fact, it is as logically necessary as belief, for both are absolutely necessary (yes, I know that is redundant, but I am not sure everyone actually knows what necessary means).  One (belief) is simply on the left side of the equation and the other (works) is on the right side of the equation.  However, they are both part of the equation.  If you leave either out, it is a different equation.  Let us look at salvation in terms of faith and works algebraically:

    The common phrase “saved by faith alone” can be symbolized as Salvation ← Faith.  Now if you remember from algebra, whatever you do to one side of an equation, you have to do to the other, so let us subtract Works from both sides:  Salvation – Works ← Faith - Works.  That is, Saved without Works by Faith without Works.  Now this seems to contradict James' statement that “faith without works is dead”.  This initial formulation seems to imply that “faith without works is simply unhealthy” in that it is salvation without works, but still salvation.  Let us try adding Works instead: Salvation + Works ← Faith + Works.  That is, Saved with Works by Faith with Works.  But this seems to contradict Paul's emphasis of faith alone.  Perhaps our initial formulation of our statement “saved by faith alone” needs improvement.  The Roman Catholic doctrine is “saved by faith plus works”.  Formulated that is: Salvation ← Faith + Works.  But by subtracting Works from either side to find out what Faith alone yields we get Salvation – Works ← Faith.  That is, Saved without Works by Faith.  But this not only contradicts the biblical texts but seems to imply exactly what Catholics are trying to oppose, that faith alone actually does yield salvation, an unhealthy salvation perhaps, but still salvation.  Perhaps our friends of 500 years ago can be of assistance.  The historical Reformation formulation of Paul's statement, “saved by faith alone”, was not merely “saved by faith alone” but “saved by faith alone apart from works”.  Here we have Salvation ← Faith – Works.  Now, if we add Works to both sides to find out what Faith alone yields, we get Salvation + Works ← Faith.  That is Saved with Works by Faith alone.  Ah, now we are getting somewhere.  Our two equivalent statements, Salvation ← Faith – Works and Salvation + Works ← Faith, are alone where Paul and James (and all the other writers) are reconciled.  Yes, Paul is correct that salvation is by faith alone apart from works, but that is what we are saved by, not to.  Yes, James is correct that faith without works is dead, but that is faith without resulting works, not faith without works as the precondition to salvation.

    So we see that the Catholic emphasis on the necessity of works (evidenced by explicitly referring to works and putting it in the equation) is well founded, however they are poor logicians and do not understand that a necessary implication is just as necessary as a necessary precondition.  If one exist, the other must.  They think that because works must necessarily exist, they must exist as a precondition.  Likewise, the common “evangelical” emphasis of faith alone (evidenced by not putting works with faith in the equation) is well founded, however, they are poor logicians as well and do not understand that a necessary implication is just as necessary as a necessary precondition.  If one exist, the other must.  However, they think that because works do not exist as a necessary precondition, they need not necessarily exist at all.

    Both of these views, which are the predominant understandings espoused in“Christendom” today, are incorrect.  Works are as much a necessary reality as faith in the true Christian, however, works exist as necessary implications and faith alone exists as the necessary precondition of salvation.  Just as Christ had to be raised from the dead, a Christian must have works.  But just as Christ's resurrection did not procure the believer's justification, neither does the believer's works procure his justification.  And just as Christ's resurrection was a necessary implication of His act of justifying sinners being acceptable and having taken place, the Christian's works are a necessary implication of his act of being justified having taken place.

    I urge you, make sure you have a proper understanding of the relationship of faith, works and salvation.  There may be no doctrine more misunderstood and attacked than the one I have put forth above.  But there is none more foundational.  It is for all the marbles.  A proper understanding and acquiesce is salvation.  A wrong understanding is damnation.