Wesley Corpus

Secondly, What is the faith which justifies?” (Pages 20, 21, 22.) “The works excluded are heathem and Jewish works, set up as meritorious. This is evident from hence,--that Heathens and carnal Jews are the persons against whom he is arguing.” Not so : He is arguing against all mankind: He is convicting the whole world of sin. His concern is to stop every mouth, by proving that no flesh, none born of a woman, no child of man, can be justified by his own works. Consequently, he speaks of all the works of all mankind, antecedent to justifica tion, whether Jewish or any other, whether supposed meritori ous or not, of which the text says not one word. Therefore, all works antecedent to justification are excluded, and faith is set in flat opposition to them. “Unto him that worketh not, but believeth, his faith is counted to him for righteousness.” “But what is the faith to which he attributes justification? That ‘which worketh by love;’ which is the same with the ‘new creature, and implies in it the keeping the command ments of God.” It is undoubtedly true, that nothing avails for our final salva tion without catwm &tious, “a new creation,” and consequent thereon, a sincere, uniform keeping of the commandments of God. This St. Paul constantly declares. But where does he say, this is the condition of our justification? In the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians particularly, he vehemently asserts the contrary; earnestly maintaining, that nothing is absolutely necessary to this, but “believing in Him that justi fieth the ungodly;” not the godly, not him that is already a “new creature,” that previously keeps all the commandments of God. He does this afterward; when he is justified by faith, then his faith “worketh by love.” “Therefore, there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus,” justified by faith in him, provided they “walk in Him whom they have received, not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Page 23.) But should they turn back, and walk again after the flesh, they would again be under condemnation. But this no way proves that “walking after the Spirit” was the condition of their justification. Neither will anything like this follow from the Apostle's.