The Process Of Justification

[smaller]

Because of what you teach here. You call anyone who thinks they have #4 type soil a lying hypocrite as if it's impossible to attain to that which Jesus spoke about because of the power of evil dwelling in every believer.

and fwiw, you do not "represent" my understandings here. I consider it to be entirely honest to see and say that "I" personally am tempted internally and even "stolen from" internally, by the tempter, exactly as scriptures show, happens where the Word is sown. Mark 4:15.

It does take an honest and good heart to make the conclusion that the tempter is therefore "operational" in MY flesh, and to also conclude therefore there is no justifying or making righteous, the flesh, again as well noted by scripture.

Jesus "requested" me to stop lying to myself, and to others on this matter, by His Word. So I lost my interests in being a lying hypocrite, thinking that "I" am better than other sinners. He showed "me," by His Word, that "I" was being a lying hypocritical phony religious pawn/pharisee of SATAN, by said actions in denying this to be so. Luke 18:11, Romans 3:9, 1 John 1:8, 1 John 3:8

Having evil present, Romans 7:21, a messenger of SATAN in his flesh, 2 Cor. 12:7, being the chief of sinners after salvation, 1 Tim. 1:15, having "temptation" in his flesh, Gal. 4:14 and being a participant in killing christians and making them blaspheme, probably by torture, prior to salvation did not stop Jesus from Saving Paul and it also did not STOP PAUL from being startlingly refreshingly HONEST in like accords.

Paul's kind of honesty is rarely, if ever preached.

 

[dadof10]

-

Not at all.

What i'm saying..... is that if Paul in Galatians says,...."the hearing of Faith".
Then in Romans, he says...."Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God".
Then in Titus he says......"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all people. "
Then in Ephesians he says.... For it is by grace that you have been saved [actually delivered from judgment and given eternal life] through FAITH. And this [salvation] is not of yourselves [not through your own effort], but it is the [undeserved, gracious] gift of God;

What im saying is that all of these scriptures work in HARMONY< as its all the SAME PRINCIPAL, but its being evolved, explained, even tho its all the same exact doctrine of "Grace through faith"..
So, this is...... to "study to show thyself approved", as that is how the Bible teaches....you have to compare scripture with scripture to get the total understanding-comprehension > LIGHT of Revelation.

So, Gen 12 is to Gen 15, <> what apples are to apple sauce.

We aren't talking about "principles", we are talking about whether an historical event happened or not. You are on record as saying that Abraham was justified when he believed in Gen. 12. This event either happened or it didn't. You say it did, then say that justification is a one time event. Logically, Abraham could not have been justified again in Gen. 15:6 because he was already justified. You can attempt to spin and swirl and perform back flips, but in the end, it's just folly, as anyone can see.

 

[Kidron]

We aren't talking about "principles", we are talking about whether an historical event happened or not. You are on record as saying that Abraham was justified when he believed in Gen. 12. This event either happened or it didn't. You say it did, then say that justification is a one time event. Logically, Abraham could not have been justified again in Gen. 15:6 because he was already justified. You can attempt to spin and swirl and perform back flips, but in the end, it's just folly, as anyone can see.

Abraham was justified when he believed.
Im on record as saying that..
So, as i explained,.... we are to understand biblical principals not by using one scripture alone.
For example Paul teaches that we are not justified by WORKS, in Titus 3, but its in Roman 3, that he has expounded on what he stated in Titus.
So, they are linked.
So, if something is stated in Gen 12, then is expounded in Gen 15, we have the usual.
As that is how the bible is to be interpreted...by comparing scripture with scripture.
So, when i read where God is asking Abraham to do something in Gen 12, then i read that God told him something in Gen 15, i see Abraham in both places has been told by God, something, and in both cases Abraham has reacted.
He reacted again when he was told to offer Issaic, but was already justified before he did.
You see the 2nd case as the justification, because you read the word "justified", so to you, this means, "it happened here, because the word justified is used".
I have no issue with that, at all.
So, we are agreed that you see it like that...fine.
I see it differently....for example, in 1 John, 5:11-13, we are told that we can KNOW that we have eternal life.
However, based on "according to his mercy he saved us" in Titus 3:5, i realize THERE, that i have eternal life, even tho this scripture does not have the word "eternal life" in it.
AND, that is why i see Gen 12 & 15 as linked.
In all 3 cases i have listed, you have Abraham, you have God, and you have something happening.
They are all linked.
And now im on record for writing that, as well.

 

[childeye]

To believe that God is good, is justification. When one believes/trusts, in the man named Jesus, as the Love of God on display on the cross, they are justified. For God's nature is either a Person that would sacrifice Himself to save others, or conversely he is a person who would sacrifice others to save himself. The latter is the image of god that was presented in the Garden, by the serpent. Genesis 3:4-5.

 

[dadof10]

I know that you agree that the leaven is figurative of sin.

I absolutely do not believe that the "leaven" here is figurative of sin. It is only figurative of the "one" in verse one. Nothing more. The entire chapter deals with this one subject.

So, obviously, an unleavened lump of dough is one that has no sin in it.

No, an "unleavened lump" has no sinning man who has taken his "father's wife" in it. That's the only context in this chapter.

That would be, in regard to sin, a perfect lump of dough, as I'm sure you would agree.

It would be a Church without this public sinner in it.

And you and I both agree that the lump of dough made up of all of us believers is full of leaven (that's that honesty thing I was talking about), yet Paul said the sacrifice of Jesus has made us perfect....for all time:

"14 For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. " (Hebrews 10:14 NASB bold mine)

The "lump" is the Corinthian Church without this man in it, so this verse from Hebrews doesn't really apply here. Now, I would like to point out a flaw in your reasoning concerning Abraham and whether he was justified in Gen. 12. It's time.

I asked you two or three times on a previous thread what organically within Hebrews 11 and Gen. 12 would keep you from accepting my exegesis. It seems to have all the earmarks of what you would consider "justifying faith". Faithful obedience, trust in God, good deeds that "prove" he is justified. The only reason you gave was "it (Hebrews 11) doesn't say he was (justified)". I countered that it doesn't have to say "he was declared righteous" to be true. We draw true doctrine from implications and inferences within Scripture all the time, in fact, it's an undeniable fact that most of our beliefs come about from inferring one thing from another. Here is the proof...

So, there you have it: A lump of dough that is perfect,

Inferred. Nowhere in 1Cor. 5 does it call the lump "perfect".

but not in actual reality, but legally, on paper,

Inferred. No mention of legality or paper.

such that we are no longer subject to the punishment of imperfect people.

Inferred.

Legally we are not guilty in the Judge's sight, as if we were unleavened.

Inferred. You are tying legality to "leaven", which this chapter doesn't do.

Practically speaking, we're guilty as heck, full of leaven.

Implied. The "leaven" is not "sin" here, it's the "man".

What is changing is the practical, outward righteousness of our behavior, while our legal right standing with God is already 100% completed--one time, for all time, as Paul points out in the above scripture.

Implied. The verse in Hebrews doesn't tie into the "leaven/lump" analogy.

That doesn't need to be accomplished again.

Huge inference.

What is in the process of development is the outward righteousness of our behavior. That's called the process of sanctification, not the process of justification--though it's true that every time we do something righteous we are justifying ourselves as in showing (not making) ourselves to be righteous. The showing of oneself to be righteous is also called 'being justified'. And that not well known fact has caused a lot of confusion in properly understanding this subject.

Your conclusion, based on....inference and implication.

It seems when it bolsters your case, implication and inference are perfectly fine. If it goes against your view, however....not so much.

So, I think I've proved that it's acceptable to infer from Scripture. The thread was closed before you could reply, so now's your chance. I think it's undeniable that Scripture strongly infers that Abraham was justified in Gen. 12. I know your argument is that the nature of justification is such that it doesn't need to be repeated. If that's true (here it comes) why was Abraham justified twice? Does Scripture contradict?

I've got a 9 week training class, so it will be hit and miss for a while. I'll try and respond as soon as I can. Talk to you soon...

 

[dadof10]

Abraham was justified when he believed.
Im on record as saying that..
So, as i explained,.... we are to understand biblical principals not by using one scripture alone.
For example Paul teaches that we are not justified by WORKS, in Titus 3, but its in Roman 3, that he has expounded on what he stated in Titus.
So, they are linked.
So, if something is stated in Gen 12, then is expounded in Gen 15, we have the usual.
As that is how the bible is to be interpreted...by comparing scripture with scripture.
So, when i read where God is asking Abraham to do something in Gen 12, then i read that God told him something in Gen 15, i see Abraham in both places has been told by God, something, and in both cases Abraham has reacted.
He reacted again when he was told to offer Issaic, but was already justified before he did.
You see the 2nd case as the justification, because you read the word "justified", so to you, this means, "it happened here, because the word justified is used".
I have no issue with that, at all.
So, we are agreed that you see it like that...fine.
I see it differently....for example, in 1 John, 5:11-13, we are told that we can KNOW that we have eternal life.
However, based on "according to his mercy he saved us" in Titus 3:5, i realize THERE, that i have eternal life, even tho this scripture does not have the word "eternal life" in it.
AND, that is why i see Gen 12 & 15 as linked.
In all 3 cases i have listed, you have Abraham, you have God, and you have something happening.
They are all linked.
And now im on record for writing that, as well.

When were you "justified", Kidron? If it was a "one time event" in your life, certainly you can point me to a date and probably a time. Suppose this one time event happened on Jan. 1, 2000. You would, I'm sure, say that you "had righteousness imputed to you" on this date. If someone said that you "had righteousness imputed to you" on Feb. 1 2005, would you call that an accurate statement? Would you say that yourself? Would you say that having righteousness imputed 5 years after your "born again" experience was "expounding" on your justification? Please, this is ridiculous...

 

[Kidron]

When were you "justified", Kidron? If it was a "one time event" in your life, certainly you can point me to a date and probably a time. Suppose this one time event happened on Jan. 1, 2000. You would, I'm sure, say that you "had righteousness imputed to you" on this date. If someone said that you "had righteousness imputed to you" on Feb. 1 2005, would you call that an accurate statement? Would you say that yourself? Would you say that having righteousness imputed 5 years after your "born again" experience was "expounding" on your justification? Please, this is ridiculous...

Justification is a part of the Grace of God., and so is sanctification, and so is atonement., so is, adoption...
These are only some of the terminology that relate to and define the Cross., and this is all connected to the Blood of Jesus.
So, its all the same thing....its all SALVATION, its ALL Imputed Righteousness, .... but each of these terms are found in different epistles, usually authored by Paul.
And so, when someone says, what is "GRACE"...
Well, its all i just wrote and more., including eternal life.
So, you cant just park your pov on one scripture and say..."yep, thats it", ....as the bible is not a one trick pony.
Its a rainbow of connected colors, a plethora of links and hidden gems.
Ok?
So, you cant ask me about one scripture in Gen 12 and Gen 15 that are both related to all that i just listed and then say...."ok, then thats it then, right Kidron, its just the one thing",.... and expect me to agree with you, as that is not all there is to it, dadof10.

And to answer your question....I was justified when i believed the Gospel and trusted Christ.
At that instant i was born again.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

It would be a Church without this public sinner in it.

Let's get this straight. You say the sin of the 'public sinner' is not the leaven, right?
But if we take away the public sinner, or remove the sin from this 'public sinner', the lump is once again unleavened. Correct?
But this in no way means the sin is what is making the lump unleavened. Do I understand you correctly?

I absolutely do not believe that the "leaven" here is figurative of sin. It is only figurative of the "one" in verse one. Nothing more. The entire chapter deals with this one subject.

You do not believe the leaven is figurative of sin? How can you believe that when Paul himself makes reference to leaven as sin right in the passage:

8 Therefore let us celebrate the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

So the chapter most certainly has more to do with than just the 'one subject' of a man among them having his father's wife being the leaven that leavens the whole lump.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I asked you two or three times on a previous thread what organically within Hebrews 11 and Gen. 12 would keep you from accepting my exegesis. It seems to have all the earmarks of what you would consider "justifying faith". Faithful obedience, trust in God, good deeds that "prove" he is justified. The only reason you gave was "it (Hebrews 11) doesn't say he was (justified)".

The simple fact that Genesis 12:4 does not say he was justified then is not the only reason I gave.

I commented at length using scripture how it is neither necessary, nor possible to be justified (made righteous) twice. So if Abraham was made righteous in Genesis 12:4 by his faith it is not only unnecessary to be re-justified (Hebrews 10:14), but also impossible to be re-justified, because if he needs to be re-justified that means he lost the justification that he already had, and God won't do that (Hebrews 6:4-6).

You are arguing that since Abraham had obedience prompted by faith in Genesis 12:4 that he was justified at that time. But not all faith that produces obedience justifies. Cornelius still needed to be justified after he obediently and in faith obeyed God in sending for Simon to come speak to his household (Acts 10:1-8 NASB). Since you chose to discredit my own personal testimony of having faith and obedience BEFORE I was justified perhaps you'll heed the example I have provided right from scripture.

 

[dadof10]

To believe that God is good, is justification. When one believes/trusts, in the man named Jesus, as the Love of God on display on the cross, they are justified. For God's nature is either a Person that would sacrifice Himself to save others, or conversely he is a person who would sacrifice others to save himself. The latter is the image of god that was presented in the Garden, by the serpent. Genesis 3:4-5.

Then when Abraham "believed that God is good" and "believes/trusts" in the "love of God" in Gen. 12, was he justified then?

 

[dadof10]

The simple fact that Genesis 12:4 does not say he was justified then is not the only reason I gave.

I commented at length using scripture how it is neither necessary, nor possible to be justified (made righteous) twice. So if Abraham was made righteous in Genesis 12:4 by his faith it is not only unnecessary to be re-justified (Hebrews 10:14), but also impossible to be re-justified, because if he needs to be re-justified that means he lost the justification that he already had, and God won't do that (Hebrews 6:4-6).

You are arguing that since Abraham had obedience prompted by faith in Genesis 12:4 that he was justified at that time. But not all faith that produces obedience justifies. Cornelius still needed to be justified after he obediently and in faith obeyed God in sending for Simon to come speak to his household (Acts 10:1-8 NASB). Since you chose to discredit my own personal testimony of having faith and obedience BEFORE I was justified perhaps you'll heed the example I have provided right from scripture.

You are not even addressing the verses in Heb. 11 or Gen. 12 at all. Look at our last 10 or so posts. We have gone around and around about specific Scripture. I reject your view that the lump\leaven symbolizes the personal sin of the believer's in Corinth. You reject my view that this chapter deals only with this one man. You brought up this verse to prove a point and I have responded directly to that verse with my own exegesis. This is how apologetics works. Isn't it frustrating when you post a verse or two and the recipient just posts an (allegedly) contrary verse and completely ignores the verses that prove your point? I have read enough of your posts to know that this tactic bugs you, as it does me. All I'm asking for is an exegesis of Heb. 11 and why you think the faith mentioned is not "justifying faith".

 

[Jethro Bodine]

All I'm asking for is an exegesis of Heb. 11 and why you think the faith mentioned is not "justifying faith".

I explained it at length, addressing your points directly.
What more can I say except to repeat it all over again?

The bottom line of it all is, you insist that any and all obedience inspired by faith justifies (thus the reason Abraham had to have been justified in Genesis 12:4). I provided several Biblical points that prevent you from coming to that conclusion. If you can't see them I don't know what else to say.

 

[smaller]

The difficulty of this conversation stems primarily from the "freewill" camps because they, for the most part, believe that their "will" operates, devoid of The Will of Christ. I see such postures as devoid of the Spirit of Christ in their equations.

There is certainly the will of the person. There is also the Will of The Spirit. And there is also the "will," mini "w," of the adversary, all three involved in the equations of "W-will."

The Superior W Will is always and has to be the prevailing W Will, by nature of Superiority. It is always "justified" by Nature. It is always "righteous" by Nature. And this Will does operate in believers.

That leaves us to account for the other two wills involved, neither of which are Perfect. And, I don't see anything less than Perfect being justifiable or righteous anyway.

Therefore justification and righteousness is and only can be by Divine Imputation.

Only God is big P Perfect. Why would anything less than big P Perfectly big J Justified and big R righteousness mean anything to God anyway?

We're talking God Measures in these matters, and not the paltry produce of some obscured minor will agencies trying to conjure up things that aren't possible for them, apart from God in Christ.

Job 32:2
Then was kindled the wrath of Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the kindred of Ram: against Job was his wrath kindled, because he justified himself rather than God.

 

[smaller]

Does anyone think that the Spirit of Christ was "not" operating in Abraham?

Genesis 20:
6 And God said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her.
7 Now therefore restore the man his wife; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live: and if thou restore her not, know thou that thou shalt surely die, thou, and all that are thine.

It was not "just and only" Abraham involved here, with Abraham, as the scriptures teach us:

1 Peter 1:
10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

When we "listen" to Abraham, we should be cognizant of what Abraham consisted of. It was [The Spirit of Christ and Abraham.]

John 5:39
Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

 

[childeye]

Then when Abraham "believed that God is good" and "believes/trusts" in the "love of God" in Gen. 12, was he justified then?

I would say Yes.

 

[dadof10]

I explained it at length, addressing your points directly.
What more can I say except to repeat it all over again?

The bottom line of it all is, you insist that any and all obedience inspired by faith justifies (thus the reason Abraham had to have been justified in Genesis 12:4). I provided several Biblical points that prevent you from coming to that conclusion. If you can't see them I don't know what else to say.

How is refusing to address the actual verses that prove my contention "addressing my points directly"? Sheesh...I expected way more. Well then, let's move on to Gen. 17. This is from post #23 in this thread.

"Abraham was also justified in Gen. 17, right before he got circumcised. My friend, Jethro Bodine pointed out to me, on another thread, that Romans 4:18-22 refers to Gen. 17, not Gen. 15, as I had always thought.

"Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb: He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform." (Rom. 4:18-21 KJV)

The three bolded, italics verses above are specific to Gen. 17 and are not mentioned at all in Gen. 15, which is more about "the land" that God would give him as an inheritance. Now verse 22 (KJV)

And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

His trusting faith was "imputed to him as righteousness" (just like in Gen. 15:6) when he again believed in God's promise, even though it seemed impossible due to his age and the "deadness" of Sarah's womb. He then went on to obey, by getting circumcised himself and circumcising everyone else."

What about this, Jethro? Paul specifically says that his "strong faith" and trust lead to God "imputing righteousness" to him. This episode happened in Gen. 17, after he was justified "once for all time" in Gen. 15:6, but before he was circumcised. Paul is obviously saying that he was justified by his faith, even though he was circumcised right after. That it wasn't the "work" of circumcision that justified him, but his faithful obedience in actually doing it that did the justifying. Will you address this, or simply say your point is made by other Scripture?

 

[dadof10]

I would say Yes.

So, Abraham was justified twice. Good. So we agree that justification is a lifelong process?

 

[dadof10]

And to answer your question....I was justified when i believed the Gospel and trusted Christ.
At that instant i was born again.

Like Abraham in Gen. 12, right? Simple yes or no answer will be sufficient.

 

[childeye]

So, Abraham was justified twice. Good. So we agree that justification is a lifelong process?

Did you know that you are essentially asking me if someone who believes God is good, can change their mind and believe God is not good? That is equivocating. I don't believe that, and I don't see how you could either. In my mind, no one would ever actually be justified if that were the case, and therefore Christ died in vain.

Since I don't believe you nor I can change our minds that Christ was full of Love, I think you must mean that our faith does endure trials, tribulations, and persecutions. I view these as a means by which the enemy of God uses to try to dissuade our conviction that God is good. I don't see it as God trying to test us.

For example, look at Job. Satan is convinced Job will curse God, if God brings upon Job the destruction of all his wealth, and also affliction upon his own flesh. I feel that Satan is in fact projecting his own sentiments upon Job. But God is convinced Job will not curse Him, even because Job does not Love Him for the things that God gives him nor does he value his flesh over God. In the end God is proven right, even because it is true what God believes, and not true what Satan believes. Therefore we who believe are justified even because Christ believes we are worth dying for.

This issue is therefore also applicable in how a person discerns the bread and the wine, the body and blood of Christ.

 

[childeye]

Scripture citing for post #199.
Romans 1:17King James Version (KJV)
17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.