The Process Of Justification

[dadof10]

In this thread you've created are you trying to say we are justified by our works?

tob

Is that what the OP says? I'm not "trying to say" anything, I'm saying that Abraham was justified more than once, and the point is, so far, irrefutable because no one has actually even attempted to refute it. Maybe you wanna give it a try?

 

[turnorburn]

Why are you trying to make this a point, how does that effect us?

tob

 

[dadof10]

Why are you trying to make this a point, how does that effect us?

tob

The truth affects everyone, don't you think?

 

[turnorburn]

Depends on a persons idea of truth, there's Gods ways and there's our ways, so how does your point effect us today?

tob

 

[dadof10]

Depends on a persons idea of truth, there's Gods ways and there's our ways, so how does your point effect us today?

tob

Ah, relativism. Either Abraham was justified twice or he wasn't. There is no gray area, you have to make a choice using the evidence presented and draw you own conclusions. This speaks volumes about the way you approach Scripture study. Instead of drawing conclusions FROM Scripture then basing your doctrine on that, you bring your man-made doctrine into your reading, then see if SCRIPTURE AGREES WITH YOU. If it doesn't, you engage in relativism instead of accepting the truth and changing your view. Sorry, in my view, there's no such thing as "a persons idea of truth". There is either Truth or not.

 

[smaller]

Ah, relativism. Either Abraham was justified twice or he wasn't. There is no gray area, you have to make a choice using the evidence presented and draw you own conclusions. This speaks volumes about the way you approach Scripture study. Instead of drawing conclusions FROM Scripture then basing your doctrine on that, you bring your man-made doctrine into your reading, then see if SCRIPTURE AGREES WITH YOU. If it doesn't, you engage in relativism instead of accepting the truth and changing your view. Sorry, in my view, there's no such thing as "a persons idea of truth". There is either Truth or not.

There have been several counters to your supposed sights.

One, that The Spirit of Christ was with(in) Abraham. Abraham obviously wasn't "alone" in heart. There was The Spirit of Christ and Abraham.

So how many times do you think the Spirit of Christ needs to be justified? I'd say, ZERO.

Abraham was a prophet. Gen. 20:7. And the prophets had the Spirit of Christ, within them, to thusly speak and to prophesy the Words of God. 1 Peter 1:10-11

Secondly, the flesh of Abraham was no different than any person's. He had indwelling sin just like everyone does. (All have sin. All are sinners, too many to cite, really, but Gal. 3:22 sticks a fork in this matter.) How many times then was the flesh of Abraham justified? Again, I have to say, ZERO.

Trying to see Abraham "alone" or trying to justify Abraham's flesh when not even Abraham tried to pull that stunt (Gen. 18:27) seems to be a dead end quest at this point.

 

[childeye]

Abraham showed us many deeply spiritual matters. From his own "flesh" loins, he produced, by the Promise of God, a promised son, and this was figurative of Christ. It is also figurative of this:

Philippians 3:21
Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

In Isaac, we can see the Promise of the Son, in a figure. IN Ishmael, we see the son of the flesh, even from Abraham, that would not inherit. These two pictures go hand in hand to this:

Gal. 4:
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

And to this:

Galatians 5:
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

And to this:

1 Cor. 15:
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

These are amazingly beautiful pictures, in my sight.

Was the natural man, Abraham, any different than us as it pertains to our flesh, our natural man? No. Abraham knew what was coming.

Change, from the Promise of God Himself.

Great scriptures. How about this one?
Psalm 51:3-7King James Version (KJV)
3 For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.

4 Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.

5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

6 Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.

7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.

 

[smaller]

Great scriptures. How about this one?
Psalm 51:3-7King James Version (KJV)
3 For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.
4 Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.
5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
6 Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.
7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.

2 Corinthians 4:16
For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.

 

[ezra]

Yes, but justified doesn't mean he was saved, only that his actions were correct given his motivation.

then what does it mean justified== declared righteous ===just as we had never sinned====clean slate

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Allow me to frame the question in this manner. Is this a free choice to believe God is good, and then believe that God is evil, and back again, simply as a persons prerogative?

If not, why does Jesus speak of the person who does that?
"13“Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. " (Luke 8:13 NASB)

Or is there a such thing as a true Love for God that can never be defeated, because it is incorruptible?

Perhaps that is the person Jesus is talking about in the fourth type of soil:
"15 But the seed in the good soil, these are the ones who have heard the word in an honest and good heart, and hold it fast, and bear fruit with perseverance." (Luke 8:15 NASB)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Waiting with baited breath (whatever that actually means).

Let's talk about Cornelius.
He could easily be added to the faithful of Hebrews 11.

"And what of that Cornelius fellow. He heard the voice of God and obeyed. And as a result gained the inheritance."

The point being, he heard the voice of God, obeyed it, yet his faith in God's word expressed in obedience did not justify him. But you are insisting that just the fact that a person has faith that does something they are automatically justified by that faith. But we see right in the Bible that sweeping generalization, which you are applying to Abraham to prove he was justified in Genesis 12, is false.

 

[turnorburn]

Ah, relativism. Either Abraham was justified twice or he wasn't. There is no gray area, you have to make a choice using the evidence presented and draw you own conclusions. This speaks volumes about the way you approach Scripture study. Instead of drawing conclusions FROM Scripture then basing your doctrine on that, you bring your man-made doctrine into your reading, then see if SCRIPTURE AGREES WITH YOU. If it doesn't, you engage in relativism instead of accepting the truth and changing your view. Sorry, in my view, there's no such thing as "a persons idea of truth". There is either Truth or not.

Ah, skirting my question "how does your point effect us today?"

tob

 

[Kidron]

then what does it mean justified== declared righteous ===just as we had never sinned====clean slate

YES !! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Declared by GOD. !!

 

[Kidron]

But you are insisting that just the fact that a person has faith that does something they are automatically justified by that faith. .

If God accepts only our Faith in return for Him Instantly crediting HIS Righteous to us, then who are we to try to prove this isnt the case?
Its God alone who justifies us once and forever, and He requires 3 things.
1.) The blood and death of Jesus the sinless,
2.) The Gospel being delivered
3.) our Faith (upon hearing and believing the Gospel)..
Thats it. > justified....finished.... heaven bound.


Titus 3:5-6

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

Romans 3:21-26

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

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

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

 

[dadof10]

There have been several counters to your supposed sights.

One, that The Spirit of Christ was with(in) Abraham. Abraham obviously wasn't "alone" in heart. There was The Spirit of Christ and Abraham.

So how many times do you think the Spirit of Christ needs to be justified? I'd say, ZERO.

This is not a "counter", this is a farce. Catholic, Orthodox and ALL Protestant denominations hold that Abraham NEEDED to be and WAS justified. You and your ilk are such a tiny minority that it's not even worth arguing the point. Scripture says he was justified. That point isn't even arguable, so I'm not going to. It's a waste of time.

 

[dadof10]

Let's talk about Cornelius.

OK, anybody but Abraham.2

He could easily be added to the faithful of Hebrews 11.

"And what of that Cornelius fellow. He heard the voice of God and obeyed. And as a result gained the inheritance."

The point being, he heard the voice of God, obeyed it, yet his faith in God's word expressed in obedience did not justify him.

Do you really not see any difference between Abraham's situation and Cornelius'? The fact that Abraham was pre-Pentecost and Cornelius was post doesn't matter to you? Does the fact that AFTER Christ came, justification was by faith IN CHRIST? Do you think Scripture teaches that AFTER PENTECOST if a person "believes in God" and does not have faith IN CHRIST (like Cornelius before he met Peter), he is still justified? Abraham talked directly to God, had faithful obedience before Christ and so was justified. Cornelius didn't talk directly to God and had faith IN GOD ONLY (like the Jewish people), not in Christ. It wasn't until he had the opportunity to either accept or reject Christ that he was justified. Abraham didn't have this opportunity, that's the difference, and it's huge.

But you are insisting that just the fact that a person has faith that does something they are automatically justified by that faith.

No...I'm insisting that it's an undeniable fact Scripture teaches that Abraham was justified in Gen. 12, 15 AND 17. You can try to mis-characterize it if you want, but that's what I'm insisting, and that's what you are going to have to argue against eventually.

But we see right in the Bible that sweeping generalization, which you are applying to Abraham to prove he was justified in Genesis 12, is false.

You already said all you wanted to say with regards to Gen. 12, remember? We have moved on to Gen. 17 and Rom. 4:16-22, haven't we? You know, the verses that end with "And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness." (Rom 4:22 KJV) Certainly this means that Abraham was justified in Gen. 17...Right?

If you want to bring someone else into the mix in reference to Gen. 12, how about Rahab? She was actually mentioned in Heb. 11, yet it doesn't "say" she was justified there, kinda like Abraham. She had the "faith" that justified, according to James, but the author of Hebrews doesn't see the need to mention the word "righteous" every time he mentions one of the "cloud of witnesses". It's just assumed, especially since he mentioned Noah and Abel being "righteous". But, that same faith that Abel, Noah and Rahab had was totally different than the faith Abraham had....Right...

Jethro, please take a look at the above exchange. Notice that when confronted with one of your arguments (Cornelius) I responded directly to it, I didn't just say "the nature of justification is such that it couldn't possibly be as you say". Your turn. How about a little exegesis on Rom 4 and Gen. 17?

 

[dadof10]

Ah, skirting my question "how does your point effect us today?"

tob

Or you're "skirting" mine. Care to give it a try? C'mon, TOB. Try to actually engage here instead of your usual drive by posting.

 

[ezra]

ya know believing and faith is same thing Abraham by faith looked toward the cross and the finished works . Cornelius by faith looked back at the finished works of the Christ. granted even today many believe in God/Christ ,the Resurrection but have not believed from the heart .that is the key to many have head knowledge but not from the heart

 

[turnorburn]

You call it drive by i call it life, i opened with a question but you refuse to answer..

"Why are you trying to make this a point, how does that effect us?"

tob

 

[turnorburn]

What's this suppose to mean?

Instead of drawing conclusions FROM Scripture then basing your doctrine on that, you bring your man-made doctrine into your reading,

What man made doctrine i haven't offered any doctrine..

tob