We have stated thus far that only the victorious saints in Sardis are worthy, because of their conduct as Christians, to walk with Christ in white. We have stated also that no promise of Revelation, Chapters Two and Three is given on the basis of a profession of faith in Christ. All are given on the basis of Christ-filled righteous works on the part of the believer in Christ.

Perhaps the greatest misunderstanding ever to affect Christian thinking is the defining of Divine grace as magic spectacles God wears so our continued unrighteousness is seen as Christ's uprightness, our moral filthiness appears as Christ's purity, and our stubbornness is transformed into Christ's meekness and obedience.

While a certain element of the above is true when the sinner comes to Christ, to prolong this concept past the time the sinner gets on board, such that we are dealing with an unscriptural, mystical dispensation of grace, is to wreck all God has set out to accomplish under the new covenant.

There was a believer in Corinth who was behaving immorally with his father's wife. According to current teaching Paul should have said, "There's no problem here. All God is seeing in our brother is the moral purity of Christ. He is saved by grace, not by works of righteousness he has done."

Friends, we have been deceived royally. The enemy is proving to be a personage of considerable skill in the war of righteousness.

Pretty strong statements! But how do they square up with Paul's teaching in the early part of the Book of Romans?

Paul, reacting against the Jews who were attempting to make the blood atonement of Christ a part of the Law of Moses, spoke eloquently of God's willingness to ascribe righteousness to us when we have no righteousness of our own to bring before Him. We Gentiles make much of this assigning of righteousness to us, righteousness given through Christ while we yet are sinners.

But if we will look closely at Romans, Chapters Three through Five, we will see that Paul was not showing us a way to go to Heaven without trying to do good, as one contemporary "translation" has it, but was seeking to convince the Jews they could receive righteousness by putting their faith in Christ apart from observance of the Law of Moses.

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: (Romans 3:21,22)

"The righteousness of God without the law," not the righteousness of God without righteous behavior!

The Jews, having been instructed in moral behavior from infancy, would understand that receiving Christ did not signify they no longer would have to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with God. This would be inconceivable to anyone who had any knowledge of the Lord.

The issue was circumcision, the feast days, and even the ten commandments provided it was understood the Ten Commandments would be obeyed to a far more comprehensive extent under the new covenant than was possible under the old.

We Gentiles, not approaching the new covenant from the Jewish perspective, have missed the point!

To be continued.