Ephesians 2:8

For by grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not of works that no man should glory.

The jubilation with which some hail this text would be much more restrained by a little careful study of it. There is no release in this text from obligations God has bound upon sinners who desire to be saved. It cannot mean, nor does it say, that "faith only" saves sinners, and that even that faith is supplied by the Lord, not by sinners, being "not of yourselves"! Because of arrogant and persistent error which people strive to fasten upon this beautiful passage a careful study of it is included here.

The error of people in their interpretations of this passage is evident in such comments as "our salvation ... is appropriated by us through faith alone."[22] "Here is the basis for the watchword of Reformation theology: solo gratia, sola fide, "soli Deo gloria" (`by grace alone, through faith alone, to God alone be glory')."[23] The Old Testament injunction was "Thou shalt not yoke the ox with the ass"; but, in the so-called "watchword" of Reformation theology the ox is yoked with two asses, namely "solo gratia" and "sola fide". If salvation is by grace alone, it cannot, at the same time be of faith; and if it is of faith alone, it cannot, at the same time, be of grace also. Could a man be married to Ruth alone and to Ann alone at the same time? Thus, the "watchword" is a contradiction on its face; and, besides that, the so-called "Scriptures" grace only and faith only, are bastard Scriptures, being nowhere mentioned in the word of God, with the lone exception of James 2:24, where that sacred writer says "we are not justified by faith alone."

But what does the text say?

By grace have ye been saved through faith ... Some of the critical scholars declare the past perfect tense here to be un-Pauline; [24] but, while it is true that Paul often spoke of salvation as a continuing process (as in 1 Corinthians 1:18 and Romans 5:9), he was here speaking of being "saved" in the sense of having obeyed the gospel. Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16); and Paul was here addressing people who had believed and had been "raised with Christ" by baptism into newness of life (Ephesians 2:6); and, therefore, in the sense of Paul's thought here, it was mandatory to use the past perfect. The primary salvation accomplished when a sinner believes and obeys the gospel is complete, final and perfect, as regards his old sins. The use of the past perfect makes it certain that that primary salvation was referred to here.

By grace ... The connotations of this word as used in the New Testament include the principles: (1) of human beings (all of them) being unworthy of the salvation God provides; (2) of the impossibility of any man's meriting or earning salvation, even if he had a million lives to live; and (3) that salvation bestowed upon people originated in the heart of God and that it flows out from God to people, being from God and of God alone. It is clear then that God's grace is to all people, for all people alike, and that it is available for every person who was ever born on earth (Titus 2:11). If then, salvation is by grace only, all people are already saved; for God's grace has appeared to all. Christ himself, however, taught that all people will not be saved; and the only intelligent reconciliation of those twin facts lies in accepting the premise of human salvation's being conditional, that is, made to turn upon human acceptance of it through human compliance with the conditions upon which God through Christ and the apostles promised it. The Reformation heresy was simply that of removing or negating all conditions of salvation except the sinner's subjective trust/faith, thus proclaiming what was called "salvation through faith alone." Such preconditions of salvation as repentance, confession, baptism and the acceptance by the convert of his Christian obligations - all these are declared to be "works" and therefore unnecessary to be performed as conditions of salvation, and this despite the truth that none of them is a "work" at all, except in the sense that the sinner's faith is also a "work."

Through faith ... The most likely meaning of this phrase, as attested by the Emphatic Diaglott rendition of it, is "through the faith,"[25] that is, "through the Christian faith," or the Christian religion. One thing is absolutely certain: this cannot mean the subjective trust/faith of sinners. Three reasons deny such an interpretation: (1) the Diaglott rendition is supported by the Vatican manuscript which has the article (the); and furthermore the inclusion of it is often understood anyway so that the absence of the article in some manuscripts does not deny it; and, in all probability, the translators would have supplied it (as permitted) if they had properly understood the meaning of it. (2) The qualifying clause next given, "and that not of yourselves," absolutely denies that the faith of sinners is in view here. See under the clause below. (3) Recent extensive studies by George Howard of the University of Georgia disclose that the usual meaning of "faith" in the New Testament is not sinner's trust/faith at all, but fidelity.[26] "Faith" as used in the vocabulary of current theological jargon to mean sinner's trust/faith experienced inwardly and subjectively is not a New Testament concept at all. Also, it is impossible to reconcile such a perverted understanding of the word "faith" in this clause, because of the qualifier thundered in the next clause.

And that not of yourselves ... The placement of this modifying clause applies it to faith, no matter whether the word for "that" is rendered as here, or "this" as it should be rendered Both the Nestle Greek Interlinear Greek-English Testament and the Emphatic Diaglott translate the word "this" making it absolutely mandatory to understand "the faith" as being that which is "not of yourselves." Those who have already interpreted "faith" here as sinner's faith, however, are under the necessity of removing the meaning of this qualifier which so effectively denies their interpretation; and they have labored prodigiously in a losing cause:

(1) MacKnight injected a word foreign to the Greek text, mistranslating the verse thus, "By grace are ye saved through faith, and this affair is not of yourselves, etc." He added, "I have supplied this affair (making it mean)your salvation through faith is not of yourselves!"[27] Well, that's one way to deal with a troublesome text! Others have sought to base their objections to the obvious meaning upon grammatical considerations.

(2) Robertson made faith in this passage sinner's faith, saying, "Grace is God's part, faith is ours," basing his conclusion on the fact of the adverb, this (mistranslated that in the English Revised Version (1885)) being of neuter gender, and thus not corresponding to the word faith which is feminine gender, flatly affirming that there is no reference at all in this place to faith as used in that same clause, but referring to salvation as used in the clause before![28] Lenski called this "careless," and then used the same argument himself! The simple truth is that no rule of grammar requires an adverbial phrase to agree in gender with its antecedent. This writer has long insisted that it is grammar, not Greek, that foils the work of many interpreters. F. F. Bruce exposed the poverty of this argument from grammar thus:

The fact that the Greek word for faith ([@pistis]) is feminine, while the pronoun that is neuter here, is no barrier to regarding faith as the gift of God. The phrase "and that" is really adverbial! A similar usage by Paul is in Philippians 1:28 thus:

A token ... of your salvation, and that from God; and in that reference that is similarly neuter, while both token ([@endeixis]) and salvation ([@soteria]) are feminine.[29]

(3) Hendriksen and others, being aware of the total failure of the argument from grammar to sustain their thesis, support still another theory, credited to A. Kuyper, St., which makes "faith" in this verse to mean "faith exercised by the sinner" (which is the essential error in all of these theories) "is not of yourselves but is God's gift."[30] This, of course, is the prize winner, being, without doubt, the most unbelievable of all these false explanations. If allowed, it would make the New Testament say that people are saved by faith, but there is no need really for them to believe, since God himself gives the faith he requires! The human theories would then have to be revised to teach that people are saved by faith only; but people do not even have to believe, for God gives them faith! This to be sure would remove all conditions without exception, making salvation of all men to depend utterly upon the action of God. The conception that "faith" in this place means some kind of subjective (inward) faith exercised by a person must really be dear to its adherents who will subscribe to any theory as ridiculous, unscriptural and unbelievable as this.

There is only one possible way of understanding "faith" as the subjective response of a person (in this passage), and that is by referring it to the faith of Jesus Christ. If this is done, of course, then the availability of Christ's faith as the basis of human redemption is indeed the gift of God. Such an interpretation would have the grace of not contradicting the Scriptures; but, in all likelihood, the simple meaning here is "the Christian faith," which carne about as a gift of God to mankind, and not as a result of any human contribution whatever. See more on "faith of Christ" under Galatians 2:16,20.

Not of works, that no man should glory ... This refers to works of the Law of Moses, to nothing else; and the expression itself had become a kind of proverb in Paul's writings during those long years of his struggles against Judaizing teachers. It is simply outrageous that a scholar will ignore this and apply this verse (9) to mean that "God rejects every work of man."[31] Paul never taught anything like that. He said "work out your own salvation" (Philippians 2:12), and he also praised the Thessalonians for their "work of faith" (1 Thessalonians 1:3). If God rejects "every work of man," Paul never heard of it! Alfred Barry caught the true meaning here perfectly, thus:

In this verse we have the echo of the past Judaizing controversy; it sums up briefly the whole argument of Romans 3:27 to Romans 4:25. There is another reminiscence, but more distinct and detached in Philippians 3:2-9.[32]

That no man should glory ... This intention of the Father absolutely removes the primary steps of Christian obedience from any possibility of inclusion in the words "not of works," because there is nothing in any of the steps of primary obedience which by even the wildest stretch of human imagination can be construed as "glorying," or providing any basis for human glorying.

Faith ... not in one's self, but in the crucified Saviour - any ground of glorying here?

Repentance ... entails godly sorrow for sins committed, issuing in a reversal of the human will - any ground of glorying?

Confession ... is not a confession of how saved one is, or what wonders the Lord has done for one, but of faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God - any ground of glorying here?

Baptism into Christ ... In this act, which is the sinner's only in the sense that he is commanded to "have himself baptized," he is passive, silent, meek, helpless; with hands folded over a penitent heart, he permits his entire person to be buried in baptism, this action showing that he does not trust himself for salvation any more than he would trust a dead body, fit only to be buried - any ground of glorying here? NO! NO! NO! Those who are glorying in this generation are not those who are obeying the gospel in order to be saved, as the Scriptures teach; but, on the other hand, they are those who are screaming to high heaven that they are being saved in a better way, by doing nothing except "believing" or "trusting." They are glorying in being saved without "obeying the gospel"; and they are glorying against those whom they denounce and decry as "legalists" because they do render obedience to these primary commandments and strive to teach all people to do likewise.

This writer has never known a Christian throughout many years of preaching and teaching God's word who ever gloried in rendering primary obedience to the gospel, or who for one moment believed such obedient actions on his part "earned" salvation, or "placed God under obligations to him," or put him in a position of "deserving" or "meriting" eternal redemption. The implied (or stated) slander of Christians who believe that Christ meant what he said when he declared that "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" is not merely arrogant and dishonest, but it is also without love. Since the groups who believe and practice obedience to the primary conditions of redemption most certainly include "faith in Christ Jesus" as being the very first of those preconditions, are such believers then disqualified as Christians because they also obeyed the Lord's word in those areas? Such is the love that people have for their theory that they will denominate anyone who denies it as a Pharisee, a legalist and a truster in works. This evident hatred of those who accept for themselves and teach others the "obedience of faith" betrays the true allegiance and sonship of them that manifest it. They are the true Pharisees of our day. "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees."

[22] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 51.

[23] Ibid.

[24] Francis W. Beare, op. cit., p. 645.

[25] Emphatic Diaglott (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, n.d.), p. 649.

[26] George Howard, article: "The Faith of Christ" in Expository Times, Vol. 7, pp. 212-214, April, 1974.

[27] James MacKnight, op. cit., p. 282.

[28] As quoted by William Hendriksen, op. cit., p. 121.

[29] F. F. Bruce, op. cit., p. 104.

[30] William Hendriksen, op. cit., p. 122.

[31] Ibid., p. 123.

[32] Alfred Barry, op. cit., p. 26.