Saturday, November 13, 2021

The Problem Posted to Protestantism by Justified Old Testament Believers Offering Sacrifices

Commenting on Old Testament figures (who were in a justified/saved state) offering sacrifices, one Protestant wrote the following in order to salvage sola fide:

 

. . . sacrifices were an expression of commitment and obedience to God who said that He would cleanse the believer of sin when the believer brought such sacrifices. Mere sacrifices never saved anyone, but performing those sacrifices was the means of expressing faith, whereby God would cleanse one from sin and restore one to fellowship with God. This aspect of sacrifices falls under the category of sanctification rather than justification. It strikes the believer, not the unbeliever. (Matthew A. Cook, “Premillennialism and Worship in the Millennium,” in K. Neill Foster and David E. Fessenden, Essays on Premillennialism: A Modern Reaffirmation of an Ancient Doctrine [Camp Hill, Pa.: Christian Publications, Inc., 2002], 181-95, here, p. 186)

 

To understand the problem posed by Old Testament figures offering sacrifice, Robert Sungenis, a leading critic of Protestant soteriologies (plural) wrote:

 

The Relationship of Old and New Covenant

Sacrifices by the Justified

 

As we have discovered, sacrifice was a part of man’s relationship with God right from the beginning of history. Whether Gentile (Abel, Noah, Job), or Jew (Abraham, Moses, David), God required sacrifice as a propitiation for sins and to show appreciation for who He is. We also noted that, according to the New Testament, men such as Abel, Noah, Job and Abraham were justified by grace for salvation. Romans 4:1-17 and Gl 3:6-18 specify, for example, that Abraham was justified by faith within the grace provided by the promise of God in the New Covenant. In fact, most of the examples in the New Testament of those justified by grace through faith are extracted from the Old Testament (cf. Hb 11:1-39; 4:2-6; Gl 3:1- 29; Jm 5:10-17; 2Pt 2:4-10).

 

This raises an important issue. Protestants believe that justification is made possible by Christ’s atoning sacrifice and is imputed by grace through an individual’s faith. Because they believe salvation comes exclusively through faith, Protestants contend that personal sacrifices are not to be offered to God in an effort to seek forgiveness of sin nor to propitiate His wrath. . . . Protestant theology is left with the larger task of explaining why men who were justified by grace through faith in the Old Testament offered blood sacrifices to God. From a Protestant understanding of atonement, the sacrifices offered by men such as Abel, Noah, Job and Abraham would be superfluous, for each of them were already justified by grace through faith and thus their blood sacrifices would be as needless as Protestants claim the Catholic Mass to be. Pressing the logic further, the Protestant must conclude that, in being justified by grace, the blood sacrifices offered by the patriarchs were an insult to God’s sovereign prerogative to provide forgiveness and favor by “faith alone.”

 

The problem for Protestant theology becomes especially acute when it is confronted with Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac. The epistle of James makes clear that Abraham’s willingness to offer Isaac was an act of justification. In fact, the willingness to sacrifice Isaac was such a supreme act of sacrifice in the eyes of God that He finally swore an oath to Abraham that the blessing of the covenant would come to him and his progeny, which is something He had not done previously (Gn 22:1-19; Hb 6:13-18). James’ conclusion is: “Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar...you see a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (Jm 2:21, 24). It is clear that the attempt to sacrifice Isaac was a work that justified Abraham. This also means that the sacrifices of Abel, Noah and Job were works that justified them in the eyes of God, showing that sacrifice is one of the principle means of securing justification. In fact, James’ main argument in Jm 2:13-14 is that a person who claims to have faith but does not have works cannot be justified and will be condemned, and thus we must conclude that if Abraham had not offered Isaac, then his justification would have been nullified and the promise, without an oath, would have been rescinded. The relationship between individual sacrifice and justification is very clear. Sacrifice is what sustains and completes the justification process—a theme we will see more clearly as we move into the study of the relationship of the Catholic Mass to the cross of Christ. (Robert A. Sungenis, Not By Bread Alone: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for the Eucharistic Sacrifice [2d ed.; State Line, Pa.: Catholic Apologetics International Publishing, Inc., 2009], 50-51)

 

On the Protestant (non)responses to James 2, see:

 

Jeff Durbin on Luke 7:35, James 2, and Justification