My allegory steadily progresses. Shepsema, shocked by the scolding of Thames and Spaulus, stammers, “My salvation is by faith! It’s dynamic!”

But Spaulus skillfully salvos, “Your faith is dialectic! You conditionalize it.”

Stung, Shepsema squabbles, “It’s by grace!”

Stouthearted, Thames and Spaulus stonewall: “Your justification is a process. It’s Roman Catholic! This is grace: Those whom God predestinated, he called; those whom he called, he justified; those whom he justified, he glorified.” Succeeding, Thames and Spaulus straightaway sing their sonnet, “In Christ’s coach we sweetly sing, as we to glory ride therein!”

Dear brethren and readers, here is another dissection of Shepherd’s diatribe about justification. I must confide that I am both weary and glad. Weary because it seems like I am reading the diary of Judas Iscariot; glad because God’s word is being vindicated. We are more than conquerors in unscrambling Shepherd’s sabotage of scripture. His work is basically refuted. The Way of Righteousness: Justification Beginning with James¹ can be retitled as The Way of Wretchedness: With Many There Be That Go Therein.

Some Housekeeping

Before I continue with my critique, let me first do some housekeeping. Here are some things I should polish.

First, Shepherd claims that James wrote of forensic justification in James 2:14–26. I demonstrated from scripture that Shepherd is wrong.²

Second, Shepherd claims that James referred several times to the last judgment. I demonstrated from scripture that Shepherd is wrong. James never wrote that either.³

Third, Shepherd claims that Matthew 25:31–46 teaches a forensic judgment by faith and works at the last judgment. I demonstrated from scripture that Shepherd is wrong. Matthew never wrote that.⁴

Fourth, Shepherd claims that 2 Corinthians 5:10 teaches that the last judgment will be by faith and works. I demonstrated from scripture that Shepherd is wrong. Paul never wrote that.⁵

Fifth, Shepherd claims that Paul’s justification is “the forgiveness of sins grounded upon the imputation of the righteousness of Christ” (33). I demonstrated that Shepherd is wrong because he falsifies the righteousness of Christ.⁶

Sixth, Shepherd claims that Christ’s righteousness is only his death on the cross and his resurrection. I demonstrated that Shepherd is wrong because Christ’s righteousness is also his lifelong divinely perfect obedience to and fulfillment of all God’s commandments, as explained by Christ’s “spotless” offering (Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19) and symbolized by the high priest’s wearing pure white linen from head to toe—the symbol of perfect purity—only on the day of atonement (Lev. 16:4; 23:26–32; Num. 29:11; Ezek. 9:2; Dan. 10:5; 12:6; cf. Zech. 3:3–4).

Seventh, Shepherd claims that Paul’s justification is only the forgiveness of sins. I demonstrated that Shepherd is wrong. Justification—based on Christ’s lifelong active and passive obedience unto death—is the imputation of our sins to Christ and Christ’s lifelong righteousness and substitutionary atonement imputed to the believer (2 Cor. 5:21), God then forensically declaring the believer forever forgiven of all his sins and eternally righteous before God (Rom. 8:1), thus providing permanent, bold, unconditional fellowship with God (Heb. 9:14; 10:19–20; 1 Pet. 1:19; 1 John 3:16; Rev. 5:9–10).

All Works of the Law Excluded from Justification

I have arrived at Shepherd’s last questions relating to Paul’s doctrine of justification. Shepherd asks, What works does Paul exclude from justification? Commenting on Romans 3:28, where Paul says, “A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law,” Shepherd says,

By “works of the law,” Paul refers to the Mosaic covenant as such…Paul is saying in Romans 3:28 that we are not justified by clinging to the Mosaic covenant as though it were still operative…

The point Paul is making is that if justification comes by works of the law even after the advent of Christ, then Gentiles cannot be justified or saved. The reason is not that the Gentiles cannot keep the law, but that they do not have the law…If now, under the new covenant, justification comes by the works of the law, then Gentiles would continue to be excluded from God’s saving purpose. That is Paul’s argument in verse 29. (41)

I believe none of this. But I start with these comments because I believe Shepherd stumbles here and continues to stumble throughout his chapter on Paul. But more important than Shepherd’s stumbling is the nice confirmation of Lord’s Day 7 of the Heidelberg Catechism and Belgic Confession 24.

So put on your large size thinking cap and enjoy a defense from the Reformed confessions.

Here is Romans 3:28 again: “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Focus on the words “a man.” Paul’s argument in verses 28–31 is this: when he writes, “a man is justified…without the deeds of the law,” someone might think that Paul refers only to Jews because they only have the law, as Shepherd claims. But Paul says no. The Gentiles are included in verse 28, even though they do not have the written law. How so?

Because Paul has written, “When the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: which shew the work of the law written in their hearts” (Rom. 2:14–15).

Paul has also written, “That which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (Rom. 1:19–20).

We see quite quickly that Shepherd is wrong. The Gentiles “do by nature the things contained in the law.” They “are a law unto themselves.” They know the works of the law, and they are without excuse for not keeping the law. That is why they cannot be justified by the deeds of the law. Shepherd is stumbling already.

Continuing his statement of Romans 1:20, that both Jews and Gentiles are without excuse, Paul lists all the wickedness of men (vv. 21–32). Carefully notice: all that wickedness is sin against the ten commandments!

Then Paul continues in Romans 2:1, “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest.” Paul writes about the sins of Jews and Gentiles, and he refers to both as “O man.” Both are inexcusable—“whosoever thou art”—for transgressing the ten commandments.

Then the statement “thou art inexcusable, O man”—which includes Jews and Gentiles—leads to Paul’s conclusion in verses 11–12: “For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law.”

There you see more of Shepherd’s stumbling. All throughout Romans 1 and 2, Paul includes both Jews and Gentiles. But particularly important is the fact that Paul says—contrary to Shepherd—that both have the law. Jews have it written by Moses, and Gentiles have it “manifest in them” (Rom. 1:19).

So far, the teaching of Paul in Romans is that the Gentiles cannot be justified by the deeds of the law, not because they do not have the law, as Shepherd claims, but because they cannot do the law; they suppress “the truth in unrighteousness” (1:18); “they are without excuse” (v. 20); “their foolish heart was darkened” (v. 21); and “God gave them up unto vile affections” (v. 26), so that they are filled with all unrighteousness (vv. 29–32; 2:12–24).

That leads to Paul’s conclusion in Romans 3:20: “Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified.” No flesh is Jews and Gentiles. No flesh can be justified because no flesh can keep the law. And then verse 23: “For all [Jews and Gentiles] have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.”

Carefully note, Paul lists the sins of the Jews and of the Gentiles against God’s commandments. Then, concerning those sins, Paul concludes: by the deeds of the law no flesh shall be justified. The deeds of the law are the deeds that God’s commandments demand, but neither Jews nor Gentiles can do those deeds. They are sinfully without excuse and, therefore, neither can be justified by (doing) the deeds of the law.

That clearly contradicts Shepherd’s claim: “By works of the law Paul means obedience to a limited selection of laws found in the Law of Moses and in tradition” (42). More stumbling.

Also false are the following statements of Shepherd: “Neither Jew nor Gentile will be justified by following ‘Jewish customs.’ You will not be justified by living according to Jewish religious regulations as prescribed in the old Mosaic covenant as though that covenant were still in force” (42). More stumbling.

At this point we are into some serious word games. Keep your hat on. By the previous statements Shepherd tries to make room for his “obedient faith.” Here is how his game goes: By making the deeds of the law to be some Jewish requirements that Paul rejects for justification, Shepherd introduces some other works that Paul supposedly allows for justification, namely repentance and obedience.

Here Shepherd spells out his word game:

There is a vast difference between the works of the law that Paul everywhere condemns and the obedience of faith that Paul everywhere commends and encourages…It is the difference between…works of the law…and doing justice, loving mercy, and walking humbly with your God. Therefore Paul does not come into conflict with himself when he declares that justification comes by a penitent and obedient faith, and not by works of the law. (45; emphasis added)

I call the reader’s attention to Matthew 23:23. Shepherd refers to this verse, but as usual he misses its importance (43). In this verse our Lord instructed the scribes and Pharisees that the more important works required by the law—which they did not do—are “judgment, mercy, and faith.” Remember, “judgment, mercy, and faith” are works (deeds) of the law, which our Lord did not condemn but commended, contrary to Shepherd. More stumbling.

Matthew 23:23 also contradicts this statement of Shepherd: “Works of the law are works done without faith” (43; emphasis added). Surely, “judgment, mercy, and faith” are works required of the law as Jesus just said, and surely those Jews whom Jesus addressed did not have faith, and just as surely they did not do those works! The opposite of what Shepherd says is true. Those works of the law require faith in God to do them. They cannot be done without faith! Can anyone imagine an unbeliever performing a spiritual work of true, God-glorifying mercy or faithfulness without faith? More stumbling. Shepherd is falling all over himself.

Remember he has said, “There is a vast difference between works of the law that Paul everywhere condemns and the obedience of faith that Paul everywhere commends and encourages.”

But this grand illusion is false because Matthew 23:23 instructs us that “judgment, mercy, and faith” are works of the law, which Paul would not condemn, that Jesus commended as works that the law requires. They are works that Jews and Gentiles cannot do; therefore, they cannot be justified by them.

That is precisely Paul’s conclusion in Romans 3:28: “We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.” Paul has more to say about that conclusion. Having explained that his statement in verse 28 applies equally to Jews and Gentiles, he confirms that with these words of verse 30: “Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.” Sadly, the English translation hides the full meaning of this verse. In it Paul uses very explicit Greek words to dramatize his point, which I will now explain.

Paul writes in verse 30, “God…shall justify the circumcision [Jews] by faith [ἐκ πίστεως], and uncircumcision [Gentiles] through faith [διὰ τῆς πίστεως].” Why does the Holy Spirit use two different prepositions to prove his point?

The first preposition, “by” (ἐκ), refers to the source of something. The second preposition, “through” (διὰ), refers to the means of something.⁷

The significance is that the first preposition (ἐκ) is used intentionally to contradict all Jewish self-righteousness. How? By using the preposition that distinctly and exclusively tells you the source of something. It is as if the Holy Spirit shouts at the Jews: “Look here! Here is the only source of justification. Faith!”

The Jews trusted that they were justified ἐκ circumcision—by their circumcision! That was their source of justification. Also, by their works of the law—ἐκ ἔργων νόµου. They believed that their covenant membership, signified by circumcision, and their (supposed) conformity to the law of Moses were their sources of justification (Acts 15:1, 5, 24; Rom. 2:17, 23; 4:13; Gal. 2:16; Phil. 3:3–6).

Therefore, by using the preposition that specifically indicates the source of something (ἐκ), the Holy Spirit contradicts the Jews’ self-righteousness. He uses the very same preposition (ἐκ) to forcefully redirect the Jews to the one, exclusive source of justification—by faith! Faith alone.

In Romans 3:30 not only are Jewish pride and presumption overthrown, but with them all works of the law are excluded for justification. All works fulfilling the law’s demands, such as “judgment, mercy, and faith,” as well as Shepherd’s penitent and obedient faith—all are excluded because they all are works (deeds) that God’s law demands.

Then, continuing with verse 30, because the Gentiles had nothing on which to base their justification—no covenant membership, no law of Moses—the Holy Spirit uses the ordinary preposition of means, that is, “through” (διὰ), to teach the Gentiles that their justification is by the simple means of faith, hence “through faith.”

Conclusion: justification for Jews and Gentiles is the same. It is by faith alone. All Jewish presumption is overthrown, and the truth of justification is established. Justification is by faith alone without doing any deed God’s law requires.

The Meaning of “Without the Deeds of the Law”

Now let us go deeper into the faith of Romans 3:28 that justifies “without the deeds of the law.” Thinking caps on again! From our Lord’s statement in Matthew 23:23, we are certain that “judgment, mercy, and faith” (faithfulness) are deeds of the law. And from Romans 3:28 those deeds cannot be part of—or done by—the faith that justifies because that justification is “without the deeds of the law.”

This is a most critical point in the road, theologically. The question is, in what sense does the word of God mean “without the deeds of the law” in Romans 3:28? Does the word of God mean that faith has done no works of the law when it justifies? That faith is alone? Without any deeds of the law? Or does God’s word say that in justification faith is not alone? That faith is accompanied by Shepherd’s repentance and obedience? Which is it? Alone—no works done (Belgic Confession)? Or not alone—repentance and obedience are present but apart from, that is, not included or counted when justifying?

I believe, with our confessions, that what follows is the true and correct understanding of Romans 3:28 and the meaning of “without the deeds of the law.”

We continue on in Romans because Paul defines what he means by faith alone in Romans 4:4–5: “Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”

Notice, there is a comparison of two persons: one “worketh,” and the other “worketh not.” For both, the Greek verbs translated as “worketh” are in the present tense, which means that the verbs denote action in progress. Therefore, we may translate the first verb as “to him that is working.” “To him that is doing!”⁸ Then the second person “worketh not.” The present tense with the negative denotes the negation of the same action. This person is not working. He is not doing. Therefore, the comparison is that one person is working, doing the deeds of the law (v. 4), while the other person is the opposite: he is not working; he is not doing the deeds of the law (v. 5).

Clearly, then, verse 5 means “to him that is not working—not doing the deeds of the law —his faith is counted for righteousness.” The faith that justifies is not working. It is doing nothing! It is not doing any of the deeds that God’s law demands. Faith is alone. This faith justifies “even before we do good works” (Belgic Confession 24, in Confessions and Church Order, 53).

Therefore, justifying faith does not include works of confession of sin, repentance, and the obedience of faith, as Shepherd teaches, because these also are deeds that God’s law demands, and the faith that justifies is without the deeds that God’s law demands. Faith “worketh not.”

Consider also the reverse: if, when being justified, the justified person would have Shepherd’s working faith—a faith including repentance and obedience, which are works of the law—that person would not be justified. That can be concluded also from Romans 4:4: “To him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.” This is the condemnation of Shepherd’s “obedient faith.” If it is working—and he says it is—then it is not justifying faith. If it is working, it can earn only the reward of debt, as Romans 4:4 teaches.

Again we see the seriousness of Shepherd’s errors. His justification denies the righteousness of Christ. Shepherd’s justification justifies no one! His working faith cannot justify. It justifies no one! His theory of James’ teaching justification by works, and not by faith alone, is false! Shepherd’s theory of Paul’s teaching justification by a penitent and obedient faith is also false!

Now let us go back to Romans 3:28 and notice another confirmation of the Reformed confessions. So far we have seen that faith, according to Romans 3:28, justifies “without the deeds of the law.” Thinking caps on again. Our Lord’s statement in Matthew 23:23 that “judgment, mercy, and faith” (faithfulness) are deeds of the law confirms to us that those deeds cannot be part of—or done by—the faith that justifies because justification is “without the deeds of the law.” We are justified before we do good works.

Now add to that Romans 9:11: “The children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth…”

In order for election to stand—not of works—God’s calling begins the accomplishment of God’s election in his children (2 Tim. 1:9). Notice that Paul’s example of the calling has no works in it (“the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil”). This divine calling is an effective work of God through his Word that draws the elect to Christ (John 6:44). This divine drawing creates a spiritual union, which includes the light of the Word (1 Pet. 2:9).

When God draws, the person is passive.⁹ God the husbandman grafts the elect branches into Christ the vine (John 15:1). After God engrafts us into Christ, we have life and light, the life of Christ is flowing in us, and we are enlightened by the Word that God used to call us. Consider now what that enlightening is.

God “hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Cor. 4:6). Our enlightening is Jesus’ face—his identity—that God shined in the heart.¹⁰ Enlightening involves receiving Christ.

The light God shined in us is the effective knowledge of the person of Jesus Christ! By that light—knowledge—the new heart “embraces Jesus Christ with all His merits, appropriates Him, and seeks nothing more besides Him” (Belgic Confession 22, in Confessions and Church Order, 49). That knowing Jesus effectively is “the hearing of faith” that justifies (Gal. 3:5).

Here is Paul’s explanation of that. In verse 5 Paul asks the Galatians if the source (again, ἐκ) of the Spirit’s working among them is their works or the “hearing of faith.” Then in verse 6 he writes, “Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”

The words “even as” are most significant. The Greek word καθὼς is not a simple conjunction like and but is a special coordinating conjunction like just as. Therefore, the conjunction “even as” is not simply joining verses 5 and 6. That special conjunction is coordinating two sentences, placing them side by side in meaning.¹¹ Thus the two sentences mean that the source of the Spirit’s working among the Galatians was not their works but the “hearing of faith,” just as the source of Abraham’s justification was also the “hearing of faith.” That is the doctrine of Galatians 3:6. “Even as” (καθὼς) the “hearing of faith” justified Abraham, the “hearing of faith” justified the Galatians.

God’s effective calling results in a faith characterized by a spiritual hearing of the word of Christ in the heart. That hearing of faith justifies. It is an effective hearing only. Not doing. Not working. Not obedient. Not penitent.

How do we know? We know that because justifying faith “worketh not.” That faith is an effective hearing about Jesus Christ, hearing what the gospel says about him and trusting it. “True faith is not only a certain knowledge, whereby I hold for truth all that God has revealed to us in His Word, but also an assured confidence, which the Holy Ghost works by the gospel in my heart” (Heidelberg Catechism, A 21, in Confessions and Church Order, 90).

Going on, we next observe what Shepherd writes about Romans 4:25: “In 4:25 Paul wrote, ‘[Jesus] was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.’” Shepherd then summarizes,

By his death Jesus paid the penalty for sin. His resurrection on the third day certifies that the penalty for sin has been paid in full and that therefore the justice of God has been satisfied. The death and resurrection of Jesus secure our justification, and that is to say, they secure the forgiveness of our sin. (34–35; emphasis added)

This paragraph exposes another tactic that Shepherd repeatedly uses. He alters biblical statements and then runs the altered version together with his misleading comments to support his theories.

Consider his treatment of the words “Jesus was delivered over to death” in Romans 4:25. Paul’s words “delivered over to death” are paraphrased by Shepherd and become “by his death” (34). Shepherd subtly makes a declarative phrase become an instrumental phrase—a very subtle change of meaning that most readers will miss.¹² But Paul’s “delivered over to death” states what happened to our Lord. It is explanatory. Shepherd’s paraphrase “by his death” transforms Paul’s words into the reason Jesus died. Jesus’ death becomes instrumental. Then, having made that subtle change, Shepherd uses that reworked expression to support his chain of misleading claims, that is, that Jesus’ mere death paid the penalty of sin, that Jesus’ mere death paid the penalty in full, that Jesus’ mere death satisfied the justice of God, and that Jesus’ mere death secured our justification.

In that subtle way Shepherd provides biblical support for his false and repetitious claim that Jesus’ death alone paid the penalty for sin. And by his questionable paraphrasing, he excludes Christ’s lifelong righteous fulfillment of the demands of God’s law. There is no lifelong righteousness included in Shepherd’s account of Christ’s death and therefore no lifelong righteousness imputed to God’s elect in their justification. While his paraphrase sounds good, it is not; it bolsters his system of conditional salvation. The elect have no lifelong righteousness imputed to them. They must secure their own righteousness by living in obedient faith; otherwise they lose their salvation.¹³ Shepherd’s transformation of Romans 4:25 lays a foundation for his conditional covenant.

The Meaning of Christ’s Blood

After mistreating Romans 4:25, Shepherd moves on to Romans 5:8–9: “God commendeth [demonstrates] his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.”

Again, under the cover of orthodox language, Shepherd singles out Christ’s blood as that which alone justifies. He is seriously wrong, as my previous article demonstrated. It’s a Nadab and Abihu act.¹⁴ But Shepherd repeats this false claim numerous times to cement his theory of justification in the reader’s mind. So intent is he on impressing his false notion that the “blood” (alone) justifies, that he repeats it five times in one paragraph (37) and thirteen times in four pages (34–37).

This should again be refuted. Therefore, I repeat the biblical explanation of Christ’s blood. The basic principle is this: scripture does not refer to the blood in isolation from all that Christ is, as Shepherd repeatedly claims, but scripture refers to the blood inclusively as the consummation of all that Christ, the Son of God in human flesh, has done. Christ’s death represents the completeness, the once-for-allness, the finality, and the ultimacy of Christ’s obedience (Isa. 53:10; Zech. 9:11; Matt. 26:28; Luke 24:26; John 3:14–15; 10:17; Rom. 5:8–9; 6:10; 14:9; 2 Cor. 5:15; Gal. 3:13; Heb. 1:3; 2:9–10; 5:8–9; 9:12, 16, 26; 10:10, 12, 14, 19; 12:2; Rev. 5:9–14; 12:11).

Here is more proof.

First, God reckons that the life of the sacrifice is in the blood (Lev. 17:11). Blood, therefore, represents Christ’s whole righteous life, which alone makes it acceptable to God for a sacrifice of atonement for sin (Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19).

Second, blood represents the satisfying fulfillment of God’s whole redemptive plan because God reckons that without the shedding of blood there is no remission (Heb. 9:22).

Third, a testament requires death—blood—to be in force (Heb. 9:15–17). Christ’s blood signifies that the whole new covenant is now in force. All of God’s prophetic word about it is fulfilled, and God is vindicated (Jer. 31–33; Heb. 8:10–13; 12:22–24). Specifically, Christ’s blood is “the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel” (Heb. 12:24).

Fourth, after Christ “offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, [he] sat down on the right hand of God” (Heb. 10:12). Blood speaks of the fact that Christ’s eternal reign of grace and glory has begun.

As stated before in my previous article, if Christ’s sacrifice did not include the lifelong divinely righteous obedience of the Son of God, his sacrifice was not a spotless offering but an unacceptable one rejected by God (Mal. 1:7–8). Then there was no propitiation. No atonement. No forgiveness. No display of God’s eternal justice and righteousness. Then Satan has mocked God. Satan has defeated the Son of God. There is no gospel. We are still in our sins. That is the seriousness of Shepherd’s teaching on justification. It is a victory for the devil. And, as I have said previously, Satan’s subtle debating seeks to overthrow the whole truth of God, not just part of it.

Therefore, in the words of the prophet Malachi, “Offer it [your sacrifice] now unto thy governor” (1:8), you who follow Shepherd, and see if the governor will be pleased with your unrighteous offering! Tell Shepherd that he has a faith that does not save! That his working faith does not justify. That it earns the condemnation of debt! Tell him that he is still in his sins! See if the governor will be pleased with your “blood” that does not cleanse! That does not forgive! (vv. 7–8).

A Few More Corrections

Just a few more corrections with Shepherd, and he is finished. After mistreating Romans 5:8–9, Shepherd repeats his theory of the kind of faith that justifies: “Justifying faith is not only a penitent faith but also an obedient faith” (38).

As I stated in my previous article, Norman Shepherd basically repeats what the Westminster Confession of Faith teaches: faith alone justifies, but faith is never alone; it is always accompanied by repentance and obedience (XI:2). My disagreement with that has already been stated.¹⁵

He supports his statement in a very shoddy fashion by recalling God’s long-suffering of Romans 2:4, which teaches that “the kindness and patience of God are designed to lead sinners to repentance” (37). Then patching that together with verse 7, Shepherd says, “The impenitent are storing up the wrath of God for the Day of Judgment; but the penitent, those who turn away from sin and persevere in doing good, will enter into eternal life” (37). Shepherd then ties it all together with this claim: “On this background it is inconceivable that justifying faith can be anything but a penitent faith” (37).

If we take this mouthful slowly, what are the facts?

First, God’s long-suffering is designed to lead sinners to repentance. Second, the penitent enter eternal life. Third, those not repenting are storing up wrath for the judgment day.

Where in these facts is anything stated about justification? The verses say nothing of justification. But Shepherd reads it into them because he supposes that there is forensic justification at the last judgment of Matthew 25:31–46. He assumes (falsely) that the last judgment is about forensic justification and that if the penitent have persevered in faith and enter eternal life, they must have been justified by that penitent faith at the last judgment.

I disagree with that whole fabrication. Why? Because the last judgment is not about forensic justification at all, as I have already demonstrated.¹⁶ There is no forensic justification by penitent faith at the last judgment. The last judgment is about the vindication of God and his divine justice that rewards the elect according to their good works with eternal life and damns the reprobate wicked for their sins with eternal destruction. Shepherd has nothing to back up his illusion of penitent faith.

After that failure Shepherd tries again, this time to prove that “justifying faith is not only a penitent faith but also an obedient faith” (38). He leans on Paul’s evangelistic message in Acts 17:30–31. Paul proclaims “a day when he [God] will judge the world with justice” (38). Taking hold of Paul’s statement, Shepherd repeats his previous falsehood: “Reference to the Day of Judgment brings us immediately into the sphere of justification. Paul is saying that if we do not repent of sin we will not be justified in the judgment of God” (38).

This is also false for the same reason as before. The final judgment of Matthew 25:31–46 is not about forensic justification. It is true that Paul refers to the final judgment. It is true that God will judge the world—elect and reprobate—with divine justice. But that judgment is not for forensic justification. That final judgment is about vindicating Jesus Christ, that he is the righteous one who always judges righteously! The elect were forensically justified long before that final day of judgment, as the reprobate were “condemned already” long before that day because they did not believe in Jesus (John 3:18).

Shepherd’s last attempt to prove his theory of obedient faith starts with this statement: “As faith and repentance are inseparably intertwined, so also repentance and obedience are inseparably intertwined” (38). He refers to Romans 1:5 and says that Paul was commissioned “to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith” (38).

But in this instance his Bible version does not help Shepherd. It does not say when that obedience comes from faith. Of course, obedience comes from faith, but to support him the text must say when that obedience is produced. It does not! No doubt, obedience is produced after forensic justification as a fruit of the Spirit because obedience is a doing of the law, and justifying faith is not doing works of the law. Also, if Shepherd thinks that obedience coming from faith appears for justification in the day of judgment, he is wrong again because there is no forensic justification in the day of judgment.

From Romans 1:5 Shepherd jumps to Romans 2:7, where Shepherd says, “Paul speaks of the necessity of repentance that becomes evident in doing good” (38). But Paul’s statement has nothing to do with justification. Notice that Shepherd says, “He [Paul] says God will give eternal life ‘to those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality’ (v. 7)” (38). Very true, but the action word in Romans 2:6–7 is “render [give]…eternal life” not justify! Giving eternal life is exactly what I have demonstrated regarding Matthew 25:31–46.¹⁷

Another of Shepherd’s “proofs” he hangs on Galatians 5:6. Remember, the Galatians were having difficulty with circumcision. After dismissing circumcision, Paul says that what “availeth any thing” is “faith which worketh by love.” Immediately, Shepherd throws this curveball at the reader: “Faith that expresses itself through love is an obedient faith, and this obedient faith is justifying faith” (39).

However, following God’s word—that “love” is the first of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal. 5:22)—we believe that love begins after justification in sanctification. The proof is that scripture has taught us that the faith that justifies does not work, and “love” is the first work that fulfills the demands of God’s law (Matt. 22:37–38).

Finally and gladly, this leads to the end, to Shepherd’s last stand.

Here is what he says: “Paul describes true believers as those who repent of sin and who seek to do what is good according to God’s law” (40). With that I agree. Next, he says, “They are recreated in Christ for this very purpose, and they will inherit eternal life” (40; emphasis added). With that I agree. But then he says, “This is what Paul declares in Romans 2:13, ‘For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous’” (40). With the words “inherit eternal life” and Romans 2:13, Shepherd has failed in his last attempt to prove that Paul teaches that obedient faith justifies.

Consider the words, “They will inherit eternal life.” These words are exactly the words of the Lord Jesus to his elect in the day of judgment: “Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you” (Matt. 25:34). Judgment day is the context of these words, and I have repeated numerous times that Matthew 25:31–46 is not about forensic justification by faith but is about the vindication of Christ in his righteous judgment of the elect and reprobate.

Next, Shepherd specifically says, “This is what Paul declares in Romans 2:13, ‘For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous’” (40; emphasis added).

Hats on! Because if works are involved in the words “those who obey the law,” James’ principle of interpretation is involved. Recall from my first article what James taught us: when the Greek word that means either to justify or to vindicate is used, the context decides the meaning. If the Greek word is connected with works, as in James 2:24, the word means to vindicate.¹⁸

Therefore, because works are involved, the Greek word in Romans 2:13 should be translated as vindicated. The verse should read: It is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be vindicated. We may be sure of this because in that very context Paul is speaking about the day of judgment: “In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ” (v. 16).

Therefore, when Shepherd says next, “Those who believe in Jesus with this kind of faith will be declared righteous” (40), he is wrong again. As noted many times already, in the judgment day there will be no forensic justification by any kind of faith. Christ will be exalted, and believers will “inherit the kingdom” (Matt. 25:34).

Then, finally, we come to Shepherd’s last pathetic words: “Romans 2:13 is really the Pauline equivalent of James 2:24” (40). Ironic justice! His last attempt is twice wrong.

No. Romans 2:13 and James 2:24 both do not speak of obedient faith being justified. Wrong once. Both verses speak of faith being vindicated. Wrong twice! What an appropriate ending.

It’s been quite an outing. After scampering though his forest of one hundred verses, what did Shepherd accomplish? A colossal failure! James is gone! Paul is gone! Matthew is gone! Oh yes, “The people imagine a vain thing.” But “he that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision” (Ps. 2:1, 4). Exactly. Shepherd’s trail leads nowhere. All the questions were in vain. All the answers were wrong. Like a mighty cloud of witnesses, these verses have testified against him and will be his accusers: Matthew 25:34; Romans 2:13; Romans 3:28, 30; Romans 4:5; Galatians 3:6; Galatians 5:22; Hebrews 9:14, 16–17, 22; and James 2:24.

Next time, the Lord willing, “Dismissing the Debate with the Devil.”