The Meaning Of Justified

[dadof10]

I really don't know, Allen. James uses three examples, two pretty heroic and one pretty ordinary. I suppose its more of a lifestyle instead of counting good deeds. Like I said before. I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.

I'm trying to find an answer to this and this is what I've found.

1 John 4:6

"We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood".

Kinda vague. James is describing real, tangible DEEDS in James 2. I'm sure James would agree with you. I know I do, but this verse doesn't get us any closer to what exact deeds constitute "shown to be righteous". The point is, it's POSSIBLE to show ourselves righteous, IF you interpret "justified" here in that way.

 

[dadof10]

I don't know that much about Abraham's bosom or whether it still exists after the resurrection. I'm traveling now so I can't look it up. Do you think it still exists?

I know of no Scripture that would indicate a change of state and/or location for Abraham from pre-resurrection to post-resurrection. I didn't mean to add any additional discussion/debate/study of what “Abraham’s bosom†means or does not mean by using this term from Jesus' parable of "Abraham’s bosom" other than to just ask you if you thought Abraham is with the Lord now? I.e. “saved�

Let me ask the same question another way: Do you think Abraham is with the Lord now?

Yes. Your turn to answer my question now.

"Now, once a person shows his true faith, it can NEVER be said that "he was never saved in the first place" because he has shown his true faith. Do you agree?"

 

[dadof10]

I counted 16 occurrences of things humans do in just this one post: “assumeâ€, “lookâ€, “sayâ€, “recognizeâ€, “showâ€, “knowâ€, “sayâ€, “choiceâ€, “concludeâ€, “knowâ€, “insistâ€, “behaviorâ€, “measureâ€, “actsâ€, “stop doing thingsâ€, “doâ€
That’s a lot of human acts involved in discussion of salvation (a gift from God, not of ourselves). The whole point of OSAS is that our salvation rests in God’s hands not ours.


I understand we are specifically discussing the literal/visible acts of people’s salvation (not how they get their salvation to begin with). Fine. But who ever said that how we view anyone else’s behavior is actually what saves them to begin with? Nobody. And certainly not James. If behaviours don't save someone (and they don't, see Galatians and Hebrews), then viewing those behavious, sure doesn't provide any 100% accurate sign of their salvation. Jame's main point is that viewing peoples' behavious is a bad idea, to begin with.

And I’ve made the point and used the Scriptures of James and Peter to show they both believe that looks can be deceiving muultiple times. Yet you and dadof10 keep trying to pry one verse in James 2, into saying it's not a bad idea, but rather that it's "the sign" that God is somehow looking for and we can judge that sign just as well as God. James never says that God is looking for "the sign" and tells us we should either.

It seems to me you’ve clearly not understood James’ major theme in James 2 to begin with.

Humans CANNOT judge a book by its cover with respect to their salvation. They can SHOW behaviours (good or bad) but none of that is what amounts to their salvation to begin with. There just simply indications to us.

James starts and ends Chapter 2 with this observation:

My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, and if you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing [assuming he’s a brother] and say, “You sit here in a good place,†while you say to the poor man, “You stand over there,†or, “Sit down at my feet,†have you not then made distinctions among yourselves [incorrectly he clarifies later] and become judges [we are not their judges to begin with] with evil thoughts? Listen, my beloved brothers, has not God chosen [not us] those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom, which he has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you,[answer is yes] and the ones who drag you into court? (James 2:1-6 ESV) Are they not the ones who blaspheme the honorable name by which you were called?
​

God does not judge a man’s salvation by the clothes he wears, yet we humans fallaciously do that sometimes to our harm! “making distinctions among ourselves = “evil thoughtsâ€.

Yet that’s your and @dadof10 ’s premise (point #2) for using James 2 to “prove†OSAS=no

Ya’ll are tyring to rhetorically "sit people in the good seats†based on the “clothes†they are wearing.

Just notice how similar your statement here is to James’ example above:

We can assume they were believers because we have plain Biblical teaching that says righteous behavior is the sign of salvation.

My brothers, show no partiality [assuming they were believers] as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing [righteous behavior] comes into your assembly, …have you not then made distinctions among yourselves and become judges [the sign] with evil thoughts? (James 2:1-4 ESV)
​

James points out the only thing that really matters to God (i.e. salvation) is:

“Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousnessâ€â€”and he was called a friend of God. (James 2:23 ESV)​

I think you have James' concept of "good deeds" mixed up with James' concept of "partiality". Making distinctions is WAY different than a person allowing the love of God to flow through him in the form of "good deeds".

You agreed with my "Point 1", which is that by "justified" James means "shown to be righteous". How would you define it? Obviously it's POSSIBLE, right? I mean, the way James discusses it, it's actually EXPECTED of ALL OF US.

Now, I suppose if we had a 100% accurate brain scan or something and could hook it up to everyone’s brains and measure their honest beliefs about God/Jesus, then that might be “the sign†that you are trying to make James describe. God can do that type of thing, but we cannot. Nor is James describing such a "sign". We can simply assume they are/were believers. And treat them as if they were, if they say they are. but the plain fact is, only God knows for sure.

Then what does James mean???? What does "shown to be righteous" mean?

 

[dadof10]

How does this mean that the faith that does nothing can save a person?

It doesn’t. I didn’t say that a faith that does nothing saves a person, nor did I say that you have said that.

James says we can identify the faith that saves by what it does, namely if it upholds the requirements of the royal law of scripture.

What Scripture do you exegete here, to hold this doctrine?

"So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead. 18 But some one will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith."

James is saying that he can show other humans his true faith by the works he does.

If the faith that saves is an inward belief in God, how in the world could we identify that without some sort of mind reading machine?

Obviously, James disagrees with you. We can identify a person's "saving faith" by his actions. What else would "shown to be righteous" mean?

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Kinda vague. James is describing real, tangible DEEDS in James 2. I'm sure James would agree with you. I know I do, but this verse doesn't get us any closer to what exact deeds constitute "shown to be righteous". The point is, it's POSSIBLE to show ourselves righteous, IF you interpret "justified" here in that way.

This has been hashed over before.
Let's look at John 6:28-29;
"Then they asked him, what must we do to do the works of God"?
"Jesus answered, the work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent".

I think James is comparing an intellectual, worldly knowledge of God with a heart felt knowledge of God.
If we look at it this way, if a person has a heart felt knowledge of God (renewal of Spirit), then works will follow.

This is why James compares it with the knowledge that demons have in James 2:19.

 

[dadof10]

Kinda vague. James is describing real, tangible DEEDS in James 2. I'm sure James would agree with you. I know I do, but this verse doesn't get us any closer to what exact deeds constitute "shown to be righteous". The point is, it's POSSIBLE to show ourselves righteous, IF you interpret "justified" here in that way.

This has been hashed over before.
Let's look at John 6:28-29;
"Then they asked him, what must we do to do the works of God"?
"Jesus answered, the work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent".

I think James is comparing an intellectual, worldly knowledge of God with a heart felt knowledge of God.
If we look at it this way, if a person has a heart felt knowledge of God (renewal of Spirit), then works will follow.

This is why James compares it with the knowledge that demons have in James 2:19.

Again, I agree with you, but that wasn't your question. You asked what is it I "see" when a person is showing saving faith. By that, I thought you meant what deeds do the showing. Faith is already there. The deeds show the quality of the faith.

 

[smaller]

Justification in the text takes on many aspects.

Some sects try to equate the Perfect Eternal Justification of the believer to something we 'earn' by our actions.

It is important to consider that there are justifications in the temporal imperfect sense as we perceive them here and there is Perfect Justification which can not and does not logically/reasonably originate with us, alone, and can only come from and be of God in Christ.

Examples of the two:

Luke 18:
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

A similar showing of 'temporal justification' here, similar to above in the sense of understanding that for all intents and purposes of comparison, God is true and every man a LIAR:

Romans 3:4
God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

Again the Spiritual matter of honesty is being displayed and deployed in the above holders.

Honesty vindicates that man. Justified him by being honest about his factual condition. Was he still a sinner? Of course. Still a LIAR? Yes! Sinners are by nature also LIARS, especially compared to GOD. IN that sense of fact he was not justified by being a sinner or sinning or a lying liar, but simply being honest about the facts. This would be a form of 'temporal justification.' And it would not be without and apart from the Spirit of Truth in him to so speak and act. But it is NOT entire Perfect Justification as we are promised as an eventual culmination in putting aside our current 'body of death.'

Here, larger pictures of Perfect Justification that can logically stem only from God in Christ:

Romans 3:24
Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

This is a little more complex matter of justification that, in essence, links it to REDEMPTION. In short, the redemption price has been paid by the blood and actions of God in Christ but the finality of PERFECTION or Perfect Justification has not been put upon us, the REDEMPTION of our BODIES into a state of eternal existence. This is a positional understanding of a forthcoming matter remaining on the horizon. This is also the matter of Justification that Luther saw and that most Protestant camps place their 'faith' in when stating it is a faith of justification APART FROM WORKS.

Paul shows that man or flesh can not obtain this 'type' of JUSTIFICATION:

Romans 3:28
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

and again shows the frailties of the first, honest, justified in the temporal sense man in the first setting:

Romans 3:20
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

The lesson? Sinners of and on their own are not able or sufficient to PERFECTLY JUSTIFY themselves.

It seems simple enough to many.

But some sects really blur and abuse the lines on these matters and place unnecessary and unattainable burdens on people.

and with those, also DOUBT. And such should rightfully doubt and remain in doubt if they think they can conjure up Perfect Justifications all on their own.

s

 

[Deborah13]

Once he "shows" saving faith, the excuse "he was never saved to begin with" can't be logically used. He MUST HAVE HAD IT, then lost it.

Did you forget about my friend that anyone would think is a Christian? Because someone acts a certain way that is Not proof that they are saved. So because someone does things "shows" that makes someone else think that they are saved doesn't mean they are. We cannot determine is all I am saying.

 

[chessman]

"Now, once a person shows his true faith, it can NEVER be said that "he was never saved in the first place" because he has shown his true faith. Do you agree?"

Of course I do not agree. People can say the Earth is flat. That doesn't make it true. Now I personally believe in Biblical inerrancy in the original text/language. So if the Bible says someone was once saved then no longer saved, I'd believe that's exactly what happened. But people saying someone was once saved, then unsaved, without the biblical evidence is nothing more than a personal opinion.

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

 

[chessman]

You agreed with my "Point 1", which is that by "justified" James means "shown to be righteous". How would you define it? Obviously it's POSSIBLE, right? I mean, the way James discusses it, it's actually EXPECTED of ALL OF US.

I posted earlier (#15) every occurrence of “justified†in the Bible. It begins in Job with a very clear aspect of “justified†being horizontal (man-to-man)

Job 32:2 Then Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the family of Ram, burned with anger. He burned with anger at Job because he justified himself rather than God.

And ends the same way, in James 2.

James 2:25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?

​

James has a man to man view of “justificationâ€. That’s not even what God’s after in a saving faith with Him in the first place (a la “the thief on the cross).
You say “Obviously it's POSSIBLE, right?†It depends on what you mean by “itâ€.
If you mean “shown to God to be savedâ€, then I think it’s silly to think God needs any external “works†to know if someone believes in Him or not. God’s a know it all, from before time began. James uses the O.T. text (God’s Word) to prove TO US that Abraham was justified to God by his “beliefâ€. There’s no evidence in the O.T. account that God was ever surprised by anything that Abraham did (or even was going to do), else He wouldn’t have changed his name. A la, fathering a child in his old age, father to many nations, etc.

and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousnessâ€â€”and he was called a friend of God. (James 2:23 ESV)
​

If you mean “shown to man to be savedâ€, then I think someone’s actions in accordance with God’s instructions for living our lives is about the best evidence that we have to go on. But James makes clear that “looks can be deceivingâ€.

For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, …(James 2:2 ESV)
​

James also makes clear that words can also be deceiving. People can say they believe all day long, but if they are unwilling and un-convicted to submit to the Lord, then He probably was never their Lord to begin with. A la:

Even the demons believe—and shudder! [yet are not save] (James 2:19 ESV)
​

So all these examples James uses prove his point. And I agree with all of them. AND I agree with OSAS.

Then what does James mean???? What does "shown to be righteous" mean?

I don’t find “shown to be righteous†in the text of James 2. Those are your words, not James’.

I see Abraham’s faith was “counted to him as righteousness†and I see people’s clothes (i.e. their actions) being not that good of an indication of their saving faith. [/FONT

And I see James saying that a “said faith†without works that accompany their lives, is a dead faith.

 

[ezra]

The Meaning Of Justified..declared righteous --not guilty as if we had never sinned . some of the post in here are bit out in left field . nothing wrong with hearty discussion keep it on a level that is simple. i use the K.I.S.S method keep it simple stupid....> pointing to me. while i am not stupid but things like this must be kept to a level a child can understand

 

[farouk]

Romans 5.1 is a reckoning, judicially, that the believer is righteous, because of faith in the work of Christ at the Cross. He sees us as acquitted, not guity.

In Romans 5.1 it's not at all the idea that God helps us to become more righteous (although He does this also to the believer in the Lord Jesus, but this is what is called sanctification).

Blessings.

 

[dadof10]

Once he "shows" saving faith, the excuse "he was never saved to begin with" can't be logically used. He MUST HAVE HAD IT, then lost it.

Did you forget about my friend that anyone would think is a Christian?

Not anyone. You know she's not a Christian.

Because someone acts a certain way that is Not proof that they are saved.

No, but when a Christian, a person who professes that Jesus is God, does righteous works, he is showing that his FAITH IN CHRIST is saving faith. James is not saying that everyone who does good deeds is saved, he is saying that IF you have saving faith, it will be displayed by your deeds. James is talking to and about CHRISTIANS, not just anyone.

So because someone does things "shows" that makes someone else think that they are saved doesn't mean they are. We cannot determine is all I am saying.

James says we can. Otherwise he says our deeds ACTUALLY JUSTIFY us. You have to choose, you can't have it both ways.

 

[dadof10]

"Now, once a person shows his true faith, it can NEVER be said that "he was never saved in the first place" because he has shown his true faith. Do you agree?"

Of course I do not agree. People can say the Earth is flat. That doesn't make it true. Now I personally believe in Biblical inerrancy in the original text/language. So if the Bible says someone was once saved then no longer saved, I'd believe that's exactly what happened. But people saying someone was once saved, then unsaved, without the biblical evidence is nothing more than a personal opinion.

This isn't about what "people say" it's about what's being PROVEN. Here is what you agreed with:

I asked: They are showing that they truly have "saving faith". Do you agree?

You answered: I would answer your question as, Yes. That's exactly James' point. That Abraham and Rahab SHOWED their true faith which was in their case a "saving faith". I stress, as I feel James was stressing, the word "showed" their saving faith in these passages. That's exactly how I view the word "justfied" (see analysis below). How could it be otherwise since James just got through saying:

But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.†Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.
(James 2:18 ESV)

So, you agree that when a Christian does good deeds he is showing that he HAS saving faith. Is this right, or am I misunderstanding you?

Once this person is shown to HAVE a saving faith, then logically it can never be said that "he NEVER HAD saving faith" because he has showed (by his deeds) he does. If he apostacizes, the only option left is that he LOST his saving faith because he has SHOWN he had it.

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.

 

[Deborah13]

James says we can. Otherwise he says our deeds ACTUALLY JUSTIFY us. You have to choose, you can't have it both ways.

James is not saying we can. Some Christians do lots of wonderful things that no one else ever sees. And other Christians do things that people can see.
That is not James' point. He's talking about faith and each person has to decide if they have saving faith. IF a man says....

If James' were saying that we should show others our faith by doing good works, he would be teaching against other scripture that says to do good in secret such as,
Matthew 6:4
That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
Matthew 6:18 That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.

We are told to openly profess and witness the salvation found in, Jesus. But our good works we can keep to ourselves, we do not Have to prove anything to other Christians by showing good works. That is not what James is teaching.

 

[dadof10]

I posted earlier (#15) every occurrence of “justified†in the Bible. It begins in Job with a very clear aspect of “justified†being horizontal (man-to-man)

And ends the same way, in James 2. James has a man to man view of “justificationâ€. That’s not even what God’s after in a saving faith with Him in the first place (a la “the thief on the cross).
You say “Obviously it's POSSIBLE, right?†It depends on what you mean by “itâ€.
If you mean “shown to God to be savedâ€, then I think it’s silly to think God needs any external “works†to know if someone believes in Him or not. God’s a know it all, from before time began. James uses the O.T. text (God’s Word) to prove TO US that Abraham was justified to God by his “beliefâ€. There’s no evidence in the O.T. account that God was ever surprised by anything that Abraham did (or even was going to do), else He wouldn’t have changed his name. A la, fathering a child in his old age, father to many nations, etc.

and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousnessâ€â€”and he was called a friend of God. (James 2:23 ESV)
​

If you mean “shown to man to be savedâ€, then I think someone’s actions in accordance with God’s instructions for living our lives is about the best evidence that we have to go on. But James makes clear that “looks can be deceivingâ€.For if a man wearing a gold ring and fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, …(James 2:2 ESV)

The lesson here isn't "looks can be deceiving", its "My brethren, show no partiality as you hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory". This has nothing to do with whether we can be shown a person HAS "saving faith" or not. This is about partiality, not showing the "kind" of faith one has..

James also makes clear that words can also be deceiving. People can say they believe all day long, but if they are unwilling and un-convicted to submit to the Lord, then He probably was never their Lord to begin with. A la:

Even the demons believe—and shudder! [yet are not save] (James 2:19 ESV)
​

So all these examples James uses prove his point. And I agree with all of them. AND I agree with OSAS.

Yes, and you also believe that "justified" in James 2 means "showing true faith". The problem is, you can't reconcile a person showing that he HAS TRUE FAITH and OSAS. Neither of the verses you posted above deals with this subject.

Then what does James mean???? What does "shown to be righteous" mean?

I don’t find “shown to be righteous†in the text of James 2. Those are your words, not James’

LOL...OK, how about "showing his true faith"? Is that better? This is what you said is an accurate definition of "justified" here. I don't see it in the text of James either. Why are you splitting hairs?

I see Abraham’s faith was “counted to him as righteousness†and I see people’s clothes (i.e. their actions)...

Do you think James is using "clothes" in verse 2 as a metaphor for "actions"?

being not that good of an indication of their saving faith.

If their actions are "not a good indication", then why in the world did you agree that James means by actions people can show "true faith"? I'm getting dizzy...

And I see James saying that a “said faith†without works that accompany their lives, is a dead faith.

And you also said that those deeds show "true faith", something a person HAS. This view CAN'T be reconciled with OSAS, unless it's impossible for a person who has shown this "kind" of faith to apostacize. You can not look at a person who shows his saving faith and say "he has showed he has true faith by his deeds" and if he apostacizes, say "but, he never had true faith in the first place". It's just not logical.

 

[dadof10]

Romans 5.1 is a reckoning, judicially, that the believer is righteous, because of faith in the work of Christ at the Cross. He sees us as acquitted, not guity.

In Romans 5.1 it's not at all the idea that God helps us to become more righteous (although He does this also to the believer in the Lord Jesus, but this is what is called sanctification).

Blessings.

Do you think this is the definition of "justified" in James 2?

 

[farouk]

Romans 5.1 is a reckoning, judicially, that the believer is righteous, because of faith in the work of Christ at the Cross. He sees us as acquitted, not guity.

In Romans 5.1 it's not at all the idea that God helps us to become more righteous (although He does this also to the believer in the Lord Jesus, but this is what is called sanctification).

Blessings.

Do you think this is the definition of "justified" in James 2?

There is no contradiction between the teaching on justification in James and Romans respectively. James says that justification that is not accompanied by evidence, isn't true justification anyway. But it is not the works that bring the justification into being; this is by faith, and it happens because God accepts the work of Christ on the behalf of those who truly believe, in dependence on that finished work.

 

[smaller]

The name of this thread is a mini-example of flawed logic.

Does any believer here or anywhere know the Perfect Meaning of Justified?

No. None of us who are on planet earth have 'experienced' in FULL, such a term.

So what we talk about here on earth are these various terms, such as justified, only in a limited sense of understandings.

A great flaw in simple reasoning transpires within ANY person or sect when they are deluded into thinking they know those terms in their PERFECT sense. And some sects do make such faulty claims. When they do they are merely showing their own faulty reasoning skills and not much more than that.

Does our 'limited sense' of justifications and our limited sense of same via actions justify an eternal reward?

Not if tit is for tat. The 'scale' then that must be proposed is that limited actions are eternally sufficient for justifications if this is where such claimers want to go.

Jesus advised that by providing a cup of water to one of His own would not lose their reward.

The bar seems to be set rather sufficiently low in this regards to make the conversation somewhat of a moot point.

Matthew 10:42
And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward.

If this is 'sufficient' for justifications from the works crowd, then I am with them.

s

 

[dadof10]

James says we can. Otherwise he says our deeds ACTUALLY JUSTIFY us. You have to choose, you can't have it both ways.

James is not saying we can. Some Christians do lots of wonderful things that no one else ever sees. And other Christians do things that people can see.
That is not James' point. He's talking about faith and each person has to decide if they have saving faith. IF a man says....

If James' were saying that we should show others our faith by doing good works, he would be teaching against other scripture that says to do good in secret such as,
Matthew 6:4
That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
Matthew 6:18 That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.

We are told to openly profess and witness the salvation found in, Jesus. But our good works we can keep to ourselves, we do not Have to prove anything to other Christians by showing good works. That is not what James is teaching.

Again, Deb. There are only 2 definitions of "justify" that I know of. Actually "made/declared righteous" or "shown to be righteous". If James means the former, he is saying that our deeds actually MAKE us righteous, if the latter, he is saying we can show our "saving faith" through our actions. If you believe he means the latter, which you seem to, this means it's POSSIBLE to show that we HAVE true, saving faith. Let me stop here and ask if you agree with what I've written so far. If you've already covered this previously, I apologize for bringing it up again. Three different threads and so many people posting, I forget who said what.