The Meaning Of Justified

[Jethro Bodine]

The 'obedience of faith' is not meritorious. One doesn't become justified one day, and then unjustified the next. 'He that hath begun a good work in you will peform it until the day of Jesus Christ; (Philippians 1).

Then explain Paul's warning to the Spirit-filled Galatians about turning back to the ceremonial law for justification and what that means in regard to being justified in Christ. Then explain why the repentant church of the Hebrews was also warned about turning back to the law.

It's amazing to me that we have these two clear examples in our Bibles right under our fat noses of saved people being warned not to turn back from the justification in Christ they have received, yet we insist either 1) it's impossible to do that, or 2) even if you do that you're still justified by faith in Christ's blood. Amazing to me.

(Chessman, I'm back to my work week that cuts my forum time to almost nothing, but this is what I wanted to say in response to your last post to me.)

Jethro:

But what makes you think that apostates were true believers in the first place?

Blessings.

You mean, for example, the potential apostates that Paul is warning in Galatians? This is why:

"3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? 4 Did you suffer so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain? 5 So then, does He who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith?" (Galatians 3:3-5 NASB)

"9 But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God..." (Galatians 4:9 NASB)

19 My children, with whom I am again in labor until Christ is formed in you..." (Galatians 4:19 NASB)

"28 ....you brethren, like Isaac, are children of promise." (Galatians 4: NASB)

31 "So then, brethren, we are not children of a bondwoman, but of the free woman." (Galatians 4:31 NASB)


They are clearly born-again, Spirit-filled brethren, yet Paul warns them what will happen if they go back to reliance on the law for justification, rejecting the justification in Christ they have received:

"2 Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision (for justification), Christ will be of no benefit to you. 3 And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. 4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. " (Galatians 5:2-4 NASB parenthesis mine)

But, OSAS says 1) it's impossible to fall from grace once you truly enter into that grace, and 2) if it appears that someone did they were never really saved to begin with. Galatians alone shows us both points are false.

 

[farouk]

Jethro: I don't understand what you mean by 'potential apostates'. An apostate Biblically is one who clearly exhibits apostate characteristics: those who have permanently rejected what they once professed. A weak believer who needs to clarify from Scripture what s/he believes is not an apostate, and this is the audience which Paul is addressing in Galatians, especially those who were in danger of falling back into the legalities of law-keeping.

And yes, I believe that a true believer does not fall from grace. Someone who apostatizes was never a truly born again in the first place. Paul says to the Philippians in chapter 1: 'He that hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ'.

Blessings.

 

[dadof10]

Yet u ask:


It's obvious he mentions their past state AND their current state BOTH in verse 5. And it's obvious that I recognized that as i actually put that very observation in parentheses. He also makes promises about their future in verse 7

Eph 2:7 (ESV) in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ . Yet your exegesis has it ALL about the past. That seems like an unsubtle and easy to spot false assertion toward the Eph 2 passage, in any context. Even the one verse has past and present tense.

Humm...All about the past? Here is the first "misrepresentation". Here is what I wrote, which you didn't paste or respond to:

"Yes, verses 18 and following are talking about the Christian and how both Jew and Gentile are members of God's "household", verses 1-3 are not and these are the verses that lead up to verses 4-6 which you erroneously claim proves that we can STOP BELIEVING AND BE SAVED ANYWAY. Verses 1-3 are concerning the person while he was "following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience" and he was "dead in the trespasses and sins" and they were "by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind".

That was then...This is now

"But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus."

This is pretty straightforward. Even though when they were "dead in trespasses" God made them "alive together with Christ". They were worthless sinners, as we all are, and didn't deserve the gift ("by Grace you have been saved") of faith, given while they were still in their sins".

Verses 1-3 are about Paul's audience BEFORE conversion. The verses you quote are DURING their Christian walk. You are trying to draw the false dichotomy that Eph. 2:5-7 somehow DISPROVE Jethro's contention. He wrote:

"Show me where it says I can stop calling on the name of the Lord for the forgiveness of sins and stop depending on the blood of Christ, and still be saved."

To which, you responded:

Ephesians 2:5-6
English Standard Version (ESV)
5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

What's "obvious" is that you think these verses counter Jethro's claim that if a person stops "calling on the name of the Lord for the forgiveness of sins" and stops "depending on the blood of Christ" he can't "still be saved."

Why else would you post it, and the others?

Actually, it's your turn to answer, but I'll go ahead and answer your question since you phrase it in a manner that misrepresents my case. Not to mention that you put your answer to it later and call it my answer.

Of course i do not think people that do not believe in Christ will be saved.

Nice try. I never once mentioned people who "do not believe in Christ", I asked you about people who "stop having faith", in other words (if you actually need them), people who are "saved" then apostacize, you know, what the entire thread is about. Should I cry about "misrepresentation" now? Should I question your motives?

Whether there are people that "stop" believing or not, i have no idea.

Have you ever known anyone who "showed" their "true faith" then apostacized? We are not talking about non-Christians here, but apostates, people who are once saved then reject Christ.

I can only speculate (which James says is evil), so i try not to. I admit, it's hard not to be judgmental of people. Even you.

James 2:4 (NIV)
4 have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?

Which leads me back to the question i had for you about Abraham that you never answered.

[
Your turn to answer. Does the Bible ever say that Abraham (after his name change) was un-saved?

Doesn't the Bible say he has "saving faith"? Isn't that what you agree with above? How do we disagree here? Are you saying he could have apostacized later? I don't get where you are going here.

My question is a yes or no question. You cannot answer it with four questions of your own.

I thought it was implied. You know it doesn't. If you need it spelled out, No. The Bible doesn't say Abraham was "un-saved". Now, I guess it's my turn. So what? what does this prove?

Do you have a Scripture that shows Abraham ever "stopped" believing in God to the point where the Bible says he became "un-saved"?

Again, no. And again, so what?

But you know what, just don't bother if you cannot reply without misrepresenting my case, statements, thoughts or opinions. As i've said to you at least 6 times. I pretty much know my own opinion and don't need you misrepresenting it.

See above. Remove the plank from you own eye first.

which you erroneously claim proves that we can STOP BELIEVING AND BE SAVED ANYWAY.

That's just stupid. I never said that. You did. It's one of those cases where i'm judging your motives here. But as you say, i just LoL.

Then why in the world did you post Eph. 2 in response to Jethro's contention above? Here it is again:

"Show me where it says I can stop calling on the name of the Lord for the forgiveness of sins and stop depending on the blood of Christ, and still be saved."

If I assume you are responding directly to Jethro's contention, I'll get labeled someone with shady "motives" or I'll hear whining about "misrepresentation", so why don't you just clear up how these verses tie into OSAS and how they relate to Jethro's contention above. Thanks.

 

[dadof10]

Why did Abraham have to fail in order to prove OSAS is not true? I don't get it.

Because the OP is making the argument that James 2:21 is a proof text that OSAS =no using Abraham as an example.

And one more misrepresentation. No he's not. He is (and has been through three threads) saying that IF the word "justify" means "shown to be righteous", then OSAS is false. He is NOT making any judgement about where Abraham is spending eternity. IF you think "justify" in James 2 means "shown to be righteous" instead of "made/declared righteous" then it's POSSIBLE for a person to show he is actually saved. Once this threshold has been crossed, and IF the person then apostacizes, OSAS is NECESSARILY FALSE because you can't use the lame, "stupid" excuse "he was never saved in the first place". HE HAS SHOWN THAT HE IS.

That's the "OP"'s argument and that's what you have to refute.

 

[turnorburn]

I've always believe thus: if i did nothing to earn my salvation then i can do nothing to lose it. Salvation is of God, we are saved by grace and grace alone, if your wondering where i got my information it came straight from my masters lips.

John 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.

36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.

37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Jesus said in verse 39 that it is the Fathers will that all that he has given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. We didn't choose Jesus he chose us, and we go to him because God the Father brought us special delivery.

tob

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jethro: I don't understand what you mean by 'potential apostates'. An apostate Biblically is one who clearly exhibits apostate characteristics: those who have permanently rejected what they once professed. A weak believer who needs to clarify from Scripture what s/he believes is not an apostate, and this is the audience which Paul is addressing in Galatians, especially those who were in danger of falling back into the legalities of law-keeping.

And yes, I believe that a true believer does not fall from grace. Someone who apostatizes was never a truly born again in the first place. Paul says to the Philippians in chapter 1: 'He that hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ'.

Blessings.

How are you missing it? Paul is warning Spirit-filled, born again brethren, whom he calls his children, against the danger of turning away from the justification they have in Christ to justification through law. Why is he doing this if OSAS is true and it's impossible for them to fall away from the justification in Christ they have, making Christ of no effect, and becoming severed from him?

You say a true believer does not fall from grace, yet Paul uses this exact phrase ("fallen from grace" 5:4) to describe what happens to these believers who turn to the law for justification and away from justification in Christ. This isn't just about obeying Mosaic laws, this is about obeying Mosaic laws to be justified by that effort, rejecting justification in Christ and being severed from him as a result--like the branches in Romans 11 who are 'cut off' from the vine and burned because of unbelief.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I've always believe thus: if i did nothing to earn my salvation then i can do nothing to lose it.

Then surely you'll agree with this:

If faith was how I got justified in the first place, I must continue in that faith to remain justified.

...if i did nothing to earn my salvation then i can do nothing to lose it.

You know the Bible talks about 'doing nothing' and how it relates to salvation. Hebrews says don't be lazy and inactive so you can gain the inheritance. And James says an inactive faith can't save.

What this means is the faith that justifies is the faith that acts. But sadly, virtually everyone in the church hears this as 'you earn your salvation by what you do' and reject this plain truth taught in the Bible and insist you can be saved by a faith that does NOT act--that saving faith is not really measured by what it does, even though the Bible plainly says this. Even exhorting us to validate our confession of faith as able to save by putting it to work.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

Why can't this mean that Jesus is capable of living up to the trust we put in him for our justification (2 Timothy 1:12 NASB)?

Why does it have to mean he won't let a true believer change his mind and walk away...especially since we see right in our Bibles the Galatians in danger of doing that very thing and Paul responding as though that possibility, and it's consequences, is very real?

 

[farouk]

Jethro: I don't understand what you mean by 'potential apostates'. An apostate Biblically is one who clearly exhibits apostate characteristics: those who have permanently rejected what they once professed. A weak believer who needs to clarify from Scripture what s/he believes is not an apostate, and this is the audience which Paul is addressing in Galatians, especially those who were in danger of falling back into the legalities of law-keeping.

And yes, I believe that a true believer does not fall from grace. Someone who apostatizes was never a truly born again in the first place. Paul says to the Philippians in chapter 1: 'He that hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ'.

Blessings.

How are you missing it? Paul is warning Spirit-filled, born again brethren, whom he calls his children, against the danger of turning away from the justification they have in Christ to justification through law. Why is he doing this if OSAS is true and it's impossible for them to fall away from the justification in Christ they have, making Christ of no effect, and becoming severed from him?

You say a true believer does not fall from grace, yet Paul uses this exact phrase ("fallen from grace" 5:4) to describe what happens to these believers who turn to the law for justification and away from justification in Christ. This isn't just about obeying Mosaic laws, this is about obeying Mosaic laws to be justified by that effort, rejecting justification in Christ and being severed from him as a result--like the branches in Romans 11 who are 'cut off' from the vine and burned because of unbelief.

...hypothetically to professing believers. Not to those who are supposedly saved today and lost tomorrow. Either they are truly born again. Or else they never have been.

 

[turnorburn]

I like this i really like this have you ever experienced exceeding great joy, its joy that feels as though your face will break if you don't stop smiling, like this.

Jude 1:24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,

25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

And Amen..

tob

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jethro: I don't understand what you mean by 'potential apostates'. An apostate Biblically is one who clearly exhibits apostate characteristics: those who have permanently rejected what they once professed. A weak believer who needs to clarify from Scripture what s/he believes is not an apostate, and this is the audience which Paul is addressing in Galatians, especially those who were in danger of falling back into the legalities of law-keeping.

And yes, I believe that a true believer does not fall from grace. Someone who apostatizes was never a truly born again in the first place. Paul says to the Philippians in chapter 1: 'He that hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ'.

Blessings.

How are you missing it? Paul is warning Spirit-filled, born again brethren, whom he calls his children, against the danger of turning away from the justification they have in Christ to justification through law. Why is he doing this if OSAS is true and it's impossible for them to fall away from the justification in Christ they have, making Christ of no effect, and becoming severed from him?

You say a true believer does not fall from grace, yet Paul uses this exact phrase ("fallen from grace" 5:4) to describe what happens to these believers who turn to the law for justification and away from justification in Christ. This isn't just about obeying Mosaic laws, this is about obeying Mosaic laws to be justified by that effort, rejecting justification in Christ and being severed from him as a result--like the branches in Romans 11 who are 'cut off' from the vine and burned because of unbelief.

...hypothetically to professing believers. Not to those who are supposedly saved today and lost tomorrow. Either they are truly born again. Or else they never have been.

Sic 'em, dadof10, sic 'em! Lol!

But seriously. I showed you that Paul himself reminds them of the genuine place in Christ they have. And which they will lose if they go back to reliance on the works of the law for justification.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I like this i really like this have you ever experienced exceeding great joy, its joy that feels as though your face will break if you don't stop smiling, like this.

Jude 1:24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,

25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

And Amen..

tob

Of course he is able, but why does this have to exclude the possibility that a believer can one day not rely on his ability? Especially, as I say, Paul warned the Galatians against turning from their reliance on Christ's ability, and back to reliance on the law.

 

[farouk]

Sic 'em, dadof10, sic 'em! Lol!

Jethro:

I don't understand your comment, but in any case we are going round in circles, I think. For what it's worth, a key to understanding how I read the various passages discussed is in terms of the true believer depending on the sustaining grace of God, and not his or her own efforts at law-keeping.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Why did Abraham have to fail in order to prove OSAS is not true? I don't get it.

Because the OP is making the argument that James 2:21 is a proof text that OSAS =no using Abraham as an example.

And one more misrepresentation. No he's not. He is (and has been through three threads) saying that IF the word "justify" means "shown to be righteous", then OSAS is false. He is NOT making any judgement about where Abraham is spending eternity. IF you think "justify" in James 2 means "shown to be righteous" instead of "made/declared righteous" then it's POSSIBLE for a person to show he is actually saved. Once this threshold has been crossed, and IF the person then apostacizes, OSAS is NECESSARILY FALSE because you can't use the lame, "stupid" excuse "he was never saved in the first place". HE HAS SHOWN THAT HE IS.

That's the "OP"'s argument and that's what you have to refute.

Glad you straightened that out. I started to in a post, but abandoned the effort.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Sic 'em, dadof10, sic 'em! Lol!

Jethro:

I don't understand your comment...

You said the very thing dadof10 is addressing over and over in this thread--the 'they were never saved in the first place' doctrine.

...but in any case we are going round in circles, I think. For what it's worth, a key to understanding how I read the various passages discussed is in terms of the true believer depending on the sustaining grace of God, and not his or her own efforts at law-keeping.

But why aren't you hearing me? These people ARE true believers. Paul says so in several places. I showed this. Yet he warns these true believers of 'falling away' and being severed from Christ by relying on a different source of justification--the effort of law. See?

Obviously, true believers CAN 'fall away' from a genuine relationship with God where they know Him, and He knows them (Galatians 4:9 NASB).

 

[turnorburn]

At the judgment seat of Christ man stands before Jesus pleading his case expounding on all of the wonderful religious projects he's been working on. When he finishes his maker looks him straight in the eye and says seven of the most horrible words imaginable can you tell me what those seven words are?

thanks..
tob

 

[chessman]

And one more misrepresentation. No he's not

Let’s discuss this and if you can justify where I’ve misrepresented you, I’ll apologize and even edit my comments so that the record is left without any misrepresentation of your argument. It's very important to me that I not misrepresent someone else's argument.

So, I said “Because the OP is making the argument that James 2:21 is a proof text that OSAS=no using Abraham as an example.â€
Please bear with me just a moment and answer these few questions:

1. Are you making an argument that OSAS=no?
2. Are you using James 2:21 for evidence (proof) within your argument?
3. Is not (in verse 2:21) James using the O.T. Scriptural example of Abraham?
​

 

[Jethro Bodine]

At the judgment seat of Christ man stands before Jesus pleading his case expounding on all of the wonderful religious projects he's been working on.

You're responding the way almost everyone does to this argument even when it's explained that this is NOT about being made righteous by what we do and in that sense earning our salvation. It's about our faith being validated as that which is able to justify by seeing what that faith does.

The faith that doesn't have the footprint of works to show how real it is is the faith that James says can not save. That does not mean we earn our salvation by what we do. We SHOW our faith as able to save by what we do. If you can't do that...you may well have a faith that can not save. The Bible's exhortation is to make every effort (yeah, it says that) to show the validity of your faith, so you can know with certainty that you have indeed passed from death to life and will receive a rich and warm welcome into the kingdom of God on that Day.

When he finishes his maker looks him straight in the eye and says seven of the most horrible words imaginable can you tell me what those seven words are?

"You were supposed to bring the donuts.":angry

(Am I close?)

 

[dadof10]

And one more misrepresentation. No he's not

Let’s discuss this and if you can justify where I’ve misrepresented you, I’ll apologize and even edit my comments so that the record is left without any misrepresentation of your argument. It's very important to me that I not misrepresent someone else's argument.

So, I said “Because the OP is making the argument that James 2:21 is a proof text that OSAS=no using Abraham as an example.â€
Please bear with me just a moment and answer these few questions:

1. Are you making an argument that OSAS=no?
2. Are you using James 2:21 for evidence (proof) within your argument?
3. Is not (in verse 2:21) James using the O.T. Scriptural example of Abraham?
​

Yes
Yes, WITHIN my argument. As PART of my argument.
Yes.

I am also using "I, will by my deeds, show you my faith" and Rahab to prove that It's possible for a human to "show" to other humans (to prove) that he HAS true, saving faith. That's it. I don't need to show that Abraham or James or Rahab apostasized or fell away from the faith or wound up in Hell to make my case.

Unless you want to try to make the point that nowhere in recorded history has there ever been a person who "showed" their saving faith, then rejected Christ and His teachings, my point stands.

Again, that Abraham stayed faithful until death and is in Heaven, is a moot point. it neither makes or breaks my argument.

 

[dadof10]

When he finishes his maker looks him straight in the eye and says seven of the most horrible words imaginable can you tell me what those seven words are?

"You were supposed to bring the donuts.":angry

(Am I close?)

:toofunny