The Process Of Justification

[Jethro Bodine]

You have said that V.18-22 refers to Gen. 17, so your view is that Paul is talking about Gen. 17, then going BACK to Gen. 15 and saying BACK THEN "it was credited to him as righteousness"?

Correct. That is what I'm saying.

Paul is chronicling Abraham's faith, and how it even grew, not wavered, even when he was told the heir of his blessing would come from him and Sarah despite them being beyond normal child bearing age. That's why he was justified back in Genesis 15:6. This is the faith that justifies. Romans 4:22 is a quote from Genesis 15:6 and the justification he already had because of a faith that has continued to show itself as the faith that justified him then, not a pronouncement of a new and additional justification. That would not even be necessary as even you must admit in accordance with your own doctrine, for Paul explains how his faith did not waver, but even grew. But you have explained how re-justification is necessary because of doubt and is, therefore, an evolving process.

 

[ezra]

Any church that would throw this kind of preaching out of the pulpit is crazy.

they are put there

 

[dadof10]

are you even real? what does the Bible say? yes the moment he believed yes he was JUSTIFIED read the Bible.

You keep asking if I'm real. As far as I know....Yep, I just checked, I am. Please read the OP, the first post in this thread. That proves that Abraham had faith in Gen. 12. So, after you read that and let it sink in, you can come back and admit you're wrong, because that's what the Bible says.

 

[ezra]

You keep asking if I'm real. As far as I know....Yep, I just checked, I am. Please read the OP, the first post in this thread. That proves that Abraham had faith in Gen. 12. So, after you read that and let it sink in, you can come back and admit you're wrong, because that's what the Bible says.

why would i deny Abraham had faith this was the beginning of his faith which has to grow. i have yet in all your flip flopping worse than john kerry in his politics .to fully understand you.

 

[dadof10]

why would i deny Abraham had faith this was the beginning of his faith which has to grow. i have yet in all your flip flopping worse than john kerry in his politics .to fully understand you.

John Kerry? Couldn't you find a "flip-flopper" from this decade to compare me to? You said that Abraham was justified when he "had faith". The author of Hebrews says Abraham had faith in Gen. 12 (Heb. 11:8). Do you think this faith he had in Gen. 12 justified him? Yes or no...

 

[dadof10]

Correct. That is what I'm saying.

Paul is chronicling Abraham's faith, and how it even grew, not wavered, even when he was told the heir of his blessing would come from him and Sarah despite them being beyond normal child bearing age. That's why he was justified back in Genesis 15:6. This is the faith that justifies. Romans 4:22 is a quote from Genesis 15:6 and the justification he already had because of a faith that has continued to show itself as the faith that justified him then, not a pronouncement of a new and additional justification. That would not even be necessary as even you must admit in accordance with your own doctrine, for Paul explains how his faith did not waver, but even grew. But you have explained how re-justification is necessary because of doubt and is, therefore, an evolving process.

I'm at work right now and will be busy watching the game later tonight. I'll try and get back to you early tomorrow morning...

 

[Jim Parker]

So, after you read that and let it sink in, you can come back and admit you're wrong, because that's what the Bible says.

good luck with that

iakov the fool

 

[ezra]

w

John Kerry? Couldn't you find a "flip-flopper" from this decade to compare me to? You said that Abraham was justified when he "had faith". The author of Hebrews says Abraham had faith in Gen. 12 (Heb. 11:8). Do you think this faith he had in Gen. 12 justified him? Yes or no...

what does the bible say ??????? do you really need me answer that ? if it will help you with your search YES the bible says he believed {had faith} and it was accounted to him for righteousness. or is there another question?

 

[dadof10]

Correct. That is what I'm saying.

Paul is chronicling Abraham's faith,

I agree, chronicling from when? I've only got a few minutes here, so let me see if I can cut to the chase a little bit.

"For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith." (Rom 4:13 NASB)

When was this "promise" made?

 

[dadof10]

w

what does the bible say ??????? do you really need me answer that ? if it will help you with your search YES the bible says he believed {had faith} and it was accounted to him for righteousness. or is there another question?

Then you agree with me that Justification is a process, proved by Abraham's two justifications. He had faith in Gen. 12 and was justified by that faith. He had faith in Gen. 15 and was justified again by that faith. That makes two times. I will be expecting your mea culpa shortly

 

[dadof10]

good luck with that

iakov the fool

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I agree, chronicling from when? I've only got a few minutes here, so let me see if I can cut to the chase a little bit.

Genesis 15

"For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith." (Rom 4:13 NASB)

When was this "promise" made?

I'll have to check exactly when, and if/when it was understood that Abraham himself would possess the land and not just his descendants.

But we know he believed the promise so as to be justified in Genesis 15:6. And we know it was unnecessary (besides impossible) for him to be re-justified since his faith never wavered as to the promise, and even grew stronger when he found out the heir would come from his own body and Sarah's.

 

[dadof10]

Genesis 15


I'll have to check exactly when, and if/when it was understood that Abraham himself would possess the land and not just his descendants.

Then, it would be in Gen. 12 if "possessing the land" was part of the promise. This is when the land was first mentioned, then it was reiterated in Gen. 15. Unless you believe that God just mentioned "the land" in Gen. 12, then actually made the promise in Gen. 15. But that seems highly unlikely.

But we know he believed the promise so as to be justified in Genesis 15:6.

Well, check the verse again. The promise was "through the righteousness of faith". There was only God and Abraham there. It seems Paul is saying Abraham had a faith that produced righteousness at that time, doesn't it?

And we know it was unnecessary (besides impossible) for him to be re-justified since his faith never wavered as to the promise, and even grew stronger when he found out the heir would come from his own body and Sarah's.

Not so fast, my friend. We're not there yet...and will never get there.

 

[turnorburn]

Then, it would be in Gen. 12 if "possessing the land" was part of the promise. This is when the land was first mentioned, then it was reiterated in Gen. 15. Unless you believe that God just mentioned "the land" in Gen. 12, then actually made the promise in Gen. 15. But that seems highly unlikely.


Well, check the verse again. The promise was "through the righteousness of faith". There was only God and Abraham there. It seems Paul is saying Abraham had a faith that produced righteousness at that time, doesn't it?


Not so fast, my friend. We're not there yet...and will never get there.

We got there 2000 years ago when Jesus said.. "It is finished"

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

tob

 

[dadof10]

We got there 2000 years ago when Jesus said.. "It is finished"

John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

tob

Rat-a-tat-tat...

 

[smaller]

Works based salvation proponents do not ask themselves, just once, "what must I do to be saved?" They never actually get there and live with the same question, continually.

It's a carrot/stick Gospel that never actually get's the carrot. I wouldn't necessarily term such constructs faith in Christ, because faith in Christ is faith IN HIM.

1 John 5:13
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Then, it would be in Gen. 12 if "possessing the land" was part of the promise. This is when the land was first mentioned, then it was reiterated in Gen. 15. Unless you believe that God just mentioned "the land" in Gen. 12, then actually made the promise in Gen. 15. But that seems highly unlikely.

The promise for Abraham himself to possess the land--along with the aforementioned seed--came in Genesis 13:15, right after he and Lot parted ways.

The promise was "through the righteousness of faith". There was only God and Abraham there. It seems Paul is saying Abraham had a faith that produced righteousness at that time, doesn't it?

I'm losing the point of our conversation. What point are you trying to make?

 

[dadof10]

The promise for Abraham himself to possess the land--along with the aforementioned seed--came in Genesis 13:15, right after he and Lot parted ways.

You are the one who mentioned "possessing the land" in answer to my question "when was the promise made?" The verse in question doesn't mention "the land", but that Abraham (or his descendants) would be "heir of the world". That is the promise talked about here:

"For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith." (Rom 4:13 NASB)

This happened in Gen. 12, which also mentions for the first time "the land".

"And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. ... And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him." (Gen 12:2-3, 7 KJV)

I'm losing the point of our conversation. What point are you trying to make?

LOL...you and me both. I've been really busy at work. I'm training for a new job and it's pretty intense. I know I went off on a tangent with that whole Gen. 17 thing. I might have to rethink that. My main point here is that Abraham was justified in Gen. 12. I should have just stuck to the exegesis of that and saved the Gen. 17 stuff for another time so I could study it more before commenting.

Anyway...The point of the above is that Paul says that the promise made in Gen. 12 was "through the righteousness of faith". The promise was given, not through the law, but through....righteousness. The righteousness of faith. Through a faith that was righteous. Isn't this how you would read it?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Anyway...The point of the above is that Paul says that the promise made in Gen. 12 was "through the righteousness of faith". The promise was given, not through the law, but through....righteousness. The righteousness of faith. Through a faith that was righteous. Isn't this how you would read it?

Right. One does not possess the promise of inheritance through the righteousness that is (supposedly) earned by obeying the law, but by the righteousness that comes for free through faith in the promise of God.

My Bible says Abraham received this righteousness that comes through faith in the promise of God when he believed God in Genesis 15:6, when God told him that a son coming from his own body would be the descendant--that is, the heir--that would possess the land being promised.

And we know this is not a moment in a long process of being declared righteous over and over again, because Paul explains how Abraham did not waver in doubt in regard to the promises that it should be necessary for him to be re-justified. Doubt and wavering faith was the reason you gave for why it is necessary that justification be a process of being re-justified and not simply a one-time deal. You have tried to use Abraham as the example to prove how a person is, and has to be, re-justified. But Paul says he never wavered in his faith that re-justification was ever necessary for him.

 

[Kidron]

Any church that would throw this kind of preaching out of the pulpit is crazy.

May I make special note of your mention of how Christ's righteousness is credited to our account (Romans 4:6). When I believed, his perfect righteousness showed up in my righteousness account. It was enough to pay off the huge debt of unrighteousness I had accumulated, the one I realized I could never pay off with works of righteousness. Now when God sees my account he sees my debt marked 'paid in full', dated the day I believed. I'm what you call a 'happy camper'.

PREACH IT.

and you know why the understanding of salvation is such a fog for a lot of believers?
its because the cross is not preached these days......that is to say....."Christ as sin bearer"...."Christ dying for sin".
Its the fact of sin bearing by Christ that reconciles you to God, and when this "sin"<>"cross<>Christ<>reconciliation" preaching is not being being preached from pulpits, then people are not being shown that Salvation is a simple thing.... = your sins are keeping you out of heaven, so CHRIST came to pay for them, so that you can GO"....."God wants you back, so He came to earth as a man to pay for your SINS on a CROSS so that He could get you back"...

These days, preaching is all about getting along, or believing for abundance, or feeling good about yourself.... while the preaching of the CROSS, is um........kinda missing.