How Are We Made Right With God?

[francisdesales]

Joe and Drew, who was justified?

God desires a man of a humble heart. He does not REQUIRE perfect righteousness, obtained only by a legal fiction and an alien righteousness applied to our "account". That is only an idea found in those who seek righteousness through a perfect fulfillment of the Law. Either mine or Jesus.

Perfection is not required, according to God.

Jesus is not stating anything new here. He is reminding them the way it has ALWAYS been.

Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, [or] with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn [for] my transgression, the fruit of my body [for] the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what [is] good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Micah 6:7-8

Note, man has it within himself to please the Lord, there is no need to invent another's righteousness here. By God's graces, man can indeed seek out God and please Him, despite that seeking being imperfect.

I could cite numerous such things from the OT. External works are useless without internal humility and love of God and others. God does not require our perfect humility, He accepts what He has given us through His graces. (as I paraphrase St. Augustine).

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Philippians 3: 4 though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: 5 circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; 6 concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. 8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;


Think about it.

Oh, I have alright...

The "rubbish" is one's own proud efforts to gain righteousness by fulfilling the externals of the Law. Notice the "confidence in the flesh" remark in verse 4. Paul proudly pursued and had Christians killed, in the name of God, but without the internal dispositions of love and mercy, hallmarks of those in Christ. His zeal was for that "righteousness", not God's righteousness, found in humility.

Paul realized that external works are rubbish without internal dispositions of love, mercy, and a true seeking of the One God.

Regards

 

[Drew]

Drew, you're trying to use the old "Law of Moses" argument as if somehow that seperates things enough to say that this passage only applies to Jews and not us. But that argument doesn't hold water. The Law as it is used in scripture, especially in the OT, is in three classes. The moral Law is for everyone for all time. The ceromonial Law ended at Christ's death. The civil Law ended with the dispersion of the Jews, this was for the nation of Israel and visiters.

No. The Law of Moses is for Jews and Jews only (as well as "sojourners" in their midst), and this distinction between "moral", "ceremonial" and "civil" is, I suggest, something that is read back into the Bible.

There is a lot that can be said in support of the entirety of the "written code" was delivered to the Jews and the Jews only. To consider, for example, that the 10 commandments were intended, as a written code, to be for Gentiles in general is something that I challenge you to make a case for. If we consider the 10 commandments as "moral" law, we see that God gives these commandments to the Jew and the Jews only. To expand their applicability beyond the Jews is to add what the Scripture actually says. Note this material leading up to the delivery of the 10 commandments at Sinai:

In the third month after the Israelites left Egypt—on the very day—they came to the Desert of Sinai. 2 After they set out from Rephidim, they entered the Desert of Sinai, and Israel camped there in the desert in front of the mountain. 3 Then Moses went up to God, and the LORD called to him from the mountain and said, "This is what you are to say to the house of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: ....

And God spoke all these words:
2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

3 "You shall have no other gods before me....etc.
I suggest that the textual evidence is clear - the 10 commandments, and all the other elements of the Law of Moses, are for the Jews only. Now, please do not have me saying that I am saying that God is saying its OK for Gentiles to commit adultery and murder. I am saying no such thing. But we need to honour context - God delivered the 10 commandments, and all the rest of the written code to the Jews only.

There is much more to my case, not least the fact that Paul repeatedly refers to "the law" in epistles like Romans and Galatians without ever "splitting it up" into moral, civil, and ceremonial sub-sections.

 

[Dave...]

Joe and Drew, who was justified?

God desires a man of a humble heart. He does not REQUIRE perfect righteousness, obtained only by a legal fiction and an alien righteousness applied to our "account". That is only an idea found in those who seek righteousness through a perfect fulfillment of the Law. Either mine or Jesus.

Perfection is not required, according to God.

Jesus is not stating anything new here. He is reminding them the way it has ALWAYS been.

Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, [or] with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn [for] my transgression, the fruit of my body [for] the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what [is] good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Micah 6:7-8

Note, man has it within himself to please the Lord, there is no need to invent another's righteousness here. By God's graces, man can indeed seek out God and please Him, despite that seeking being imperfect.

I could cite numerous such things from the OT. External works are useless without internal humility and love of God and others. God does not require our perfect humility, He accepts what He has given us through His graces. (as I paraphrase St. Augustine).

Regards

But what does that passage have to do with justification before God? Of course believers will be chastised by God. And God would certainly be pleased with their obedience. You'll get no argument from me there.

Dave

 

[Drew]

Drew, you're trying to use the old "Law of Moses" argument as if somehow that seperates things enough to say that this passage only applies to Jews and not us. But that argument doesn't hold water.

Even apart from the many arguments that could be put forth as to how all of the Law of Moses was only for the Jews, the very context of Romans 10 shows that Paul is not critiquing the Jew for "trying to earn salvationb by good works" - he is critiquing the Jew for seeking salvation that is based on the ethnic exclusivity of the Law of Moses. Note how clear the following passage is - Paul is critiquing the Jew for believing that it is only those who are under the Law of Moses, that is Jews, who can be justified:

Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. 2For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. 3Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. 4Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

This is a Jew-Gentile argument, with Paul critiquing the Jew for believing that justification (and salvation) for Jews only. It is not argument about the futility of seeking to be saved by good works. The fact that Paul declares the end of the law shows that he must be referring to the Law of Moses, which he elsewheres declares has come to an end, bringing about the very end to this "Jews only can be saved" idea (see Ephesians 2). If Paul is talking about "good works" here, how do you make sense of his declaration of the "end of the Law"?

I expect to expand on this argument later.

 

[Dave...]

Drew, you're trying to use the old "Law of Moses" argument as if somehow that seperates things enough to say that this passage only applies to Jews and not us. But that argument doesn't hold water.

Even apart from the many arguments that could be put forth as to how all of the Law of Moses was only for the Jews, the very context of Romans 10 shows that Paul is not critiquing the Jew for "trying to earn salvationb by good works" - he is critiquing the Jew for seeking salvation that is based on the ethnic exclusivity of the Law of Moses. Note how clear the following passage is - Paul is critiquing the Jew for believing that it is only those who are under the Law of Moses, that is Jews, who can be justified:

Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. 2For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. 3Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God's righteousness. 4Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

This is a Jew-Gentile argument, with Paul critiquing the Jew for believing that justification (and salvation) for Jews only. It is not argument about the futility of seeking to be saved by good works. The fact that Paul declares the end of the law shows that he must be referring to the Law of Moses, which he elsewheres declares has come to an end, bringing about the very end to this "Jews only can be saved" idea (see Ephesians 2). If Paul is talking about "good works" here, how do you make sense of his declaration of the "end of the Law"?

I expect to expand on this argument later.

Drew, your interpreataion of that passage, it's just not there. I'm sorry, but it's not even close. That passage, it's very clear. I mean, just read it Drew, just read it. I gave you more context too. There are other passages in this discussion too.

Dave

 

[Dave...]

Philippians 3: 4 though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: 5 circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; 6 concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. 8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;


Think about it.

Oh, I have alright...

The "rubbish" is one's own proud efforts to gain righteousness by fulfilling the externals of the Law. Notice the "confidence in the flesh" remark in verse 4. Paul proudly pursued and had Christians killed, in the name of God, but without the internal dispositions of love and mercy, hallmarks of those in Christ. His zeal was for that "righteousness", not God's righteousness, found in humility.

Paul realized that external works are rubbish without internal dispositions of love, mercy, and a true seeking of the One God.

Regards

The fruit of the Spirit does not justify you before God. Catholic, huh?

Sorry, but your interpretation contradicts verse nine.

 

[Dave...]

Drew, you're trying to use the old "Law of Moses" argument as if somehow that seperates things enough to say that this passage only applies to Jews and not us. But that argument doesn't hold water. The Law as it is used in scripture, especially in the OT, is in three classes. The moral Law is for everyone for all time. The ceromonial Law ended at Christ's death. The civil Law ended with the dispersion of the Jews, this was for the nation of Israel and visiters.

No. The Law of Moses is for Jews and Jews only (as well as "sojourners" in their midst), and this distinction between "moral", "ceremonial" and "civil" is, I suggest, something that is read back into the Bible.

There is a lot that can be said in support of the entirety of the "written code" was delivered to the Jews and the Jews only. To consider, for example, that the 10 commandments were intended, as a written code, to be for Gentiles in general is something that I challenge you to make a case for. If we consider the 10 commandments as "moral" law, we see that God gives these commandments to the Jew and the Jews only. To expand their applicability beyond the Jews is to add what the Scripture actually says. Note this material leading up to the delivery of the 10 commandments at Sinai:

In the third month after the Israelites left Egypt—on the very day—they came to the Desert of Sinai. 2 After they set out from Rephidim, they entered the Desert of Sinai, and Israel camped there in the desert in front of the mountain. 3 Then Moses went up to God, and the LORD called to him from the mountain and said, "This is what you are to say to the house of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: ....

And God spoke all these words:
2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

3 "You shall have no other gods before me....etc.
I suggest that the textual evidence is clear - the 10 commandments, and all the other elements of the Law of Moses, are for the Jews only. Now, please do not have me saying that I am saying that God is saying its OK for Gentiles to commit adultery and murder. I am saying no such thing. But we need to honour context - God delivered the 10 commandments, and all the rest of the written code to the Jews only.

There is much more to my case, not least the fact that Paul repeatedly refers to "the law" in epistles like Romans and Galatians without ever "splitting it up" into moral, civil, and ceremonial sub-sections.

Drew, are you an athiest?

 

[francisdesales]

The fruit of the Spirit does not justify you before God. Catholic, huh?

Sorry, but your interpretation contradicts verse nine.

God justifies me when I approach Him with a humble heart. Isn't that the point of Luke's Gospel you cited??? Note there is no mention about an alien righteousness applied to the tax collector. Nor does God pretend the tax collector is righteous. God calls the man righteous for the man's inner dispositions of humility and a seeking forgiveness.

Yes, it is a fruit of the Spirit, but that is the INTENT of the Spirit in the first place - to make us righteous by coming to us and dwelling there!

On verse 9, not at all.

"My own righteousness" means righteousness that I ALONE generate as a result of my external actions.

Clearly, Philippians 2:12-13 tell us that God and I work together to do good deeds in Christ. THUS, they are NOT my "OWN". They are mine moved by God, and so, I cannot brag.

But they are indeed my righteousness, vivified by God's Spirit.

This is called synergy, a theme prevalent throughout the writings of Paul.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

But what does that passage have to do with justification before God? Of course believers will be chastised by God. And God would certainly be pleased with their obedience. You'll get no argument from me there.

Dave

Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, [or] with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn [for] my transgression, the fruit of my body [for] the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what [is] good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Micah 6:7-8

Try reading it again... I doubt you did, because it says nothing about chastisement...

It clearly says what THE LORD REQUIRES OF THEE, (o man). Man is to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly WITH God! This is righteous and well-pleasing to the Father.

It doesn't speak about legal fictions nor alien righteousness of someone else. The idea is preposterous. The Hebrew Judge does not give his righteousness to anyone when he declares the defendant "just". That would imply that the DEFENDANT is the one who is unbiased and impartial, concerned for the well being of the poor. The judge declares righteousness, and it is so.

It has everything to do with being found just/righteous in God's eyes.

 

[Drew]

[quote="Dave..."}Drew, your interpreataion of that passage, it's just not there. I'm sorry, but it's not even close. That passage, it's very clear. I mean, just read it Drew, just read it. I gave you more context too. There are other passages in this discussion too. [/quote]

Drew, your interpreataion of that passage, it's just not there. I'm sorry, but it's not even close. That passage, it's very clear. I mean, just read it Drew, just read it. I gave you more context too. There are other passages in this discussion too.

This is not any kind of a response to the material I posted. In fact, it appears to be a simple appeal that if I read the text again, I will see things your way. My argument is what it is. Please engage it.

In the Romans 10 passage which we are discussing, it is clear that Paul is critquing the Jew who thinks that righteousness is for the Jew only and he rebukes that position, asserting that righteousness is for everyone.

For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3For not knowing about (B)God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. 4For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

You seem to think that Paul is not critiquing the Jew here but is directing his comments to us all:

Drew, you're trying to use the old "Law of Moses" argument as if somehow that seperates things enough to say that this passage only applies to Jews and not us. But that argument doesn't hold water.

I do not see how it would be possible for Paul to be more clear - this passage is directed at the Jew:

Brothers, my heart's desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved.

Given that he is clearly addressing Jews here, how you defend your assertion that the passage subject is for all humanity? I would be particularly interested in how you can explain how this passage applies to all humanity when it is so clear that the passage critiques a group who thinks that salvation is for them alone and they need to be told it is for everyone. I cannot imagine how Paul would sensibly tell all humanity that they need to realize that salvation is not limited to them alone, but rather includes "everyone" - on your view, Paul is already addressing everyone.


Would you make a statement about, say, Hungarians, and expect your reader to assume that the statement applies to all human beings?

 

[Drew]

Drew, are you an athiest?

No.

Now please deal with the arguments. One of your last posts was a vague, contentless appeal that I see things as you do. And now this. The arguments are what they are - the case that Paul is saying something here to all humanity is really weak - he addresses Jews, says that Jews are seeking a righteousness of their own (i.e. for Jews only), and then goes on to state that righteousness is for everyone.

You have quite a challenging task - defending your claim that this Romans 10 material applies to all of us. Please make your case.

 

[Drew]

For a person (Jew or Gentile) to try to establish his own righteousness for justification, this puts him under the law (Galatians 3:9).

I disagree with this interpretation. Here is the text in context:

Consider Abraham: "He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." 7Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham. 8The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: "All nations will be blessed through you." 9So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith. 10All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." 11Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." 12The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them." 13Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." 14He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

I am quite surprised that you seem to deny what I thought was generally accepted by more or less everyone - that the Law of Moses is given to Jews and Jews only (and those Gentiles who happened to be integrated into their society). Paul is consistent - the Law of Moses is for Jews only (I realize this is, for the present, an unsupported assertion). However, note that the above text certainly could be read as being directed to Jews - you cannot simply assume that Paul believes that a Gentile can be under the Law of Moses that Paul is talking about. I have a similar obligation - I cannot simply assume that Paul is not talking about Gentiles. As above, I thought it was generally understood that the Law of Moses was for Jews only. I have already provided part of the case for this with the treatment of Exodus 19 and 20 (posted earlier).

But let's look back at Galatians 2. What is that chapter all about? It is about Paul's argument that Jew and Gentile now belong at the same table, despite the prescriptions of the Law of Moses that would countenance such a separation. Paul would not need to make this argument is the "law" was for everyone. It is precisely because the Law prescribed food practices for the Jew and the Jew only, that this is even an issue. Furthermore, we have this statement from Paul which reveals that Paul considers the Law as only applying to Jews:

We who are Jews by birth and not 'Gentile sinners' 16know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified...

This text makes no sense at all unless the writer believes that only Jews are subject to the Law. Otherwise, why does Paul clearly set the Jew apart from the Gentile and then declare that the Jew should know that he - the Jew - is not justified by the Law.

So I do not see how you have Paul thinking that a Gentile can "be put under the Law"

 

[elijah23]

How are we to be made right with the Lord?

Sooner or later I think we need to repent of our sin.

 

[Drew]

Galatians 4:21 Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?

This is not a statement directed generally at all people - it is a pointed remark to Jews.

Note these statements from chapter 4 showing that Paul is addressing Jews:

But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law, 5to redeem those under law, that we might receive the full rights of sons.

....a rather clear allusion to the fact that Jesus was born into a Jewish family - a family subject to the Law of Moses.

You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! 11I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you

....a rather clear allusion to the Jew who is still insisting on following the prescriptions of the written code in respect to special days and years.

One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves:

Verse 21 only makes sense if it is directed at those under the Sinai covenant.

That is, of course, Jews.

 

[Drew]

[quote="Dave...":cstreslq]Luke 18:9-14 Also He spoke this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.’ And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me a sinner!’ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.â€

Joe and Drew, who was justified?

The tax collector, of course. But I do not see your point.

What was the difference between the two men that Jesus noted?[/quote:cstreslq]
One has faith and the other did not. And one thought he would be justified by his own good works.

But as per an argument I have already provided in this thread, and to which you have not responded, this in no way establishes that we are not ultimately saved by good works, as Paul so clearly says we are in Romans 2, Romans 8, 2 Corinthians 5, if not elsewhere.

I suspect that you would conclude: "Aha - we are justified by faith so we cannot be justified by works".

I have already shown that such a conclusion cannot necessarily be sustained. To repeat: Men can indeed be declared to be justified at the point of belief precisely because the Spirit, given on the basis of faith and faith alone, transforms the believer into the kind of person who will most assuredly "pass" the good works judgement of Romans 2 and 2 Corinthians 5.

Now about the Pharisee. Any argument of the form "look, this text shows that works do not justify" does not damage my position in the slightest since, following Paul, I am not claiming that good works arising from unaided moral self-effort justify (please do not join the long legion of those who shamelessly bear false witness and misrepresent me about this). Instead, Paul is crystal clear that is only the works generated by the Spirit (Romans 8) that lead to life. So the case of the Pharisee does not show that "good works" do not justfy.

 

[francisdesales]

How are we to be made right with the Lord?

Sooner or later I think we need to repent of our sin.

Indeed, that is the invitation God gives every man, to the Jews first, and then the Gentiles.

Being made right with God is not something alien applied to us, but rather, our cooperation with the Spirit's work within us to call upon God humbly and ask for forgiveness - as the tax collector in Luke's gospel is contrasted with the man who already thought he was righteous by merely external works.

Regards

 

[Dave...]

The fruit of the Spirit does not justify you before God. Catholic, huh?

Sorry, but your interpretation contradicts verse nine.

God justifies me when I approach Him with a humble heart.

Philippians 3:9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;

Isn't that the point of Luke's Gospel you cited??? Note there is no mention about an alien righteousness applied to the tax collector. Nor does God pretend the tax collector is righteous. God calls the man righteous for the man's inner dispositions of humility and a seeking forgiveness.

One obeyed the Law and trusted in his obedience. That's self righteousness. The other was poor in spirit. He didn't trust in himself at all. He asked God for mercy, as a guilty sinner, in faith and was justified.

Yes, it is a fruit of the Spirit, but that is the INTENT of the Spirit in the first place - to make us righteous by coming to us and dwelling there!

That's not what the bible means by the righteousness of God. That was my point.

God demands perfect righteousness. God demands perfect sinlessness. Do you understand that God is constrained by His nature, or His attributes, which are all perfect? He cannot compromise any of them without ceasing to be God. These are not a separate standard, but the very essence of God Himself. His Law is a reflection of His character. Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever. That's speaking of the character of God. Every sin must be punished. God's word says so. His holiness drives justice. He's always just, and always righteous. Everything God created was and always will be created good. They may turn evil, and God even knows this, but God never created anyone evil. Even children are innocent due to their ignorance of good and evil.

God separated Himself from Adam and Eve by removing them from His presence because of one sin. Think about that. Every sin will be punished. Only Jesus fulfilled the Law, as He said He would. He didn't come to remove the Laws of the prophets, but to fulfill them. What is impossible for man (for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God), is possible for God.

God doesn't want our tainted efforts. He calls them filthy rags. If you go back to the OP you'll see this explained.

Also Jesus' command to love God with all of our heart, mind and soul, and to love our neighbor as ourselves did not replace the Law, but summarized it. He fulfilled it all. The righteousness of God is now revealed *apart* from the Law, being witnessed by it. Jesus did not come to remove the law, but to fulfill--and--establish it.

"For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to everyone who believes." " Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ." The Law will judge all unbelievers.

Romans 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Who justifies the ungodly, such as the tax collector in the Luke parable? Jesus does. He justifies---the ungodly. Faith alone, grace, not of ourselves, not of works. etc...

Philippians 3:9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;

Dave

 

[Dave...]

But what does that passage have to do with justification before God? Of course believers will be chastised by God. And God would certainly be pleased with their obedience. You'll get no argument from me there.

Dave

Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, [or] with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn [for] my transgression, the fruit of my body [for] the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what [is] good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God? Micah 6:7-8

Try reading it again... I doubt you did, because it says nothing about chastisement...

It clearly says what THE LORD REQUIRES OF THEE, (o man). Man is to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly WITH God! This is righteous and well-pleasing to the Father.

It doesn't speak about legal fictions nor alien righteousness of someone else. The idea is preposterous. The Hebrew Judge does not give his righteousness to anyone when he declares the defendant "just". That would imply that the DEFENDANT is the one who is unbiased and impartial, concerned for the well being of the poor. The judge declares righteousness, and it is so.

It has everything to do with being found just/righteous in God's eyes.

I'm not going to post all the scripture again. Read the next chapter in Micah and read verses 7:8-9 That's ustification by faith. Does God overlook sin? That's what you're really saying, right? That God accepts and justifies sinners as long as they are swell guys who love.

This quote will save me time. Ps 50:21 with commentary...

(Ps 50:21) "These things [sins] you [evil men] have done and I [God] kept silent; you thought I was altogether like you. But I will rebuke you and accuse you to your face."

"you thought I was altogether like you" =

God says to evil men 'You thought I was evil like you because men saw that I forgave some men for trusting in Me but without punishment for those sins which those men were known to have committed. Evil men thought that God was 'winking' at sins and would not really hold men accountable for any wrong doing.

So God's foremost purpose in the atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ was to demonstrate to the universe that His justice is satisfied by the atonement with respect to the sins of the past which were forgiven on credit. His holiness - His perfect righteousness - is not impugned for covering the sins of believers in the past until the atonement was completed by Jesus Christ on the cross. God's justice is upheld by His fulfillment to Abraham, (Gen 12:1-3; 15:1-6) - and the world - of a plan of salvation through Abraham's seed, God's Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, (Gal 3:16).
http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/eph4v9.htm

Romans 3:25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

 

[Dave...]

Drew, why do you accuse me of doing what you have been doing all along. Perhaps you should answer the points I made in my post in reply to your post, instead of cherry picking something to use a springboard to say what you already knew you wanted to say, which is the same thing over and over again about the same verse. Go back and read the thread for yourself and you'll see that everything you've accused me of you are the guilty one. I simply gave up on begging for a discussion that would honestly entertain my replies.