Accountability for Misusing Works Texts in a Grace Dispensation
Question: I hear on TV and in the church about doing good works, quoting from James 2:17--18: "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works." They also use Matthew 28:19--20: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." These and other scriptures are used, often out of context, to press doing works. Will these people be held accountable for what they are teaching incorrectly?
James plainly states that "faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone" and insists that faith must be demonstrated by works. Taken at face value, and in its original context, James’s epistle presents a works-requiring message. Likewise, the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19--20 commands the disciples to teach the nations to "observe" all that Jesus commanded—"observe" meaning to do those commands. This includes commands to perform miracles, heal, and so forth.
If one does not rightly divide Scripture, it is natural to blend these passages into the present gospel message and insist that works are necessary to prove or secure salvation. Yet that conflation ignores the distinctions between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God, and it fails to reckon with the later revelation given to Paul, in which salvation is proclaimed as by grace through faith, not of works.
James was written before the revelation of the mystery entrusted to Paul. He writes within a pre-mystery context, addressing the twelve tribes, dealing with a believing remnant of Israel still under a kingdom-oriented program. He does not yet know the dispensation of the grace of God, which was "kept secret" and later revealed. To apply James directly as if it were instruction for the body of Christ in this age produces confusion and subtly reintroduces works into the message of grace.
Your question concerns whether teachers who fail to rightly divide, and thus misapply works texts, will be held accountable. If we treat the failure to rightly divide as disobedience to the biblical command to "rightly divide the word of truth," then it is indeed sin. The critical question is how God deals with such sins in this present dispensation.
Future Subscription: In the future a subscription may be required to read the full answer. But for now it is free!
According to 2 Corinthians 5:19, "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them." In this age He is not reckoning sins to the world in the manner of direct, immediate punitive response. He has entrusted to us "the word of reconciliation," not a message of accounting each trespass to a person’s record in the way Israel experienced under the law.
On this basis, I do not expect that God will hold these teachers accountable in the sense of judicial punishment in this dispensation, as if He were now actively striking them for every doctrinal error. The cross and the reconciling work accomplished in Christ stand over this entire period. Their sins, including doctrinal missteps, are covered by the same grace that covers all who are in Christ.
However, this does not mean their teaching is inconsequential. There are at least three sober realities.
First, they deprive themselves and their hearers of a clear understanding of God’s word. To mix kingdom works texts into the message of grace clouds assurance, obscures the distinctiveness of Paul’s gospel, and hinders spiritual growth. This will result in confusion, bondage to performance, and a diminished grasp of what God is doing today.
Second, there will be shame and regret when the truth is fully seen. Believers who have spent their ministry propagating a confused gospel or burdening others with wrongly applied commands will one day see, with perfect clarity, what they could have known had they been willing to question their assumptions and study more carefully. The loss may not be a loss of salvation, but a loss of joy, reward, and the satisfaction of having handled the word aright.
Third, there is a moral responsibility, especially for those who have been exposed to right division and know it is a serious interpretive alternative. It is one thing to be ignorant; it is another to know that a responsible hermeneutic exists and to refuse to investigate it because it might cost influence, position, or audience. That kind of willful neglect, though still covered under reconciliation, will carry a deeper personal accountability in terms of inner conviction and future embarrassment when the full truth is revealed.
In sum, God is not presently imputing trespasses in the way that would lead us to expect immediate punitive accountability for each doctrinal error. Yet teachers who misapply works texts will answer to their own consciences now and will experience future shame and loss of joy when the clarity of right division is finally seen. Meanwhile, those who understand these distinctions should patiently teach and expose others to a properly divided gospel, rather than simply condemning or dismissing them.
questiontransition