The Process Of Justification

[Jethro Bodine]

No, sorry. You haven't answered my questions concerning Rom. 4:13 yet.

For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

I did.
You obviously missed it.

You've admitted that this is in reference to Gen. 12

Not the way you are suggesting.

The object of his faith was the Triune God.

Lot's of people believe in God, and even act like it to some extent (especially in your church). But without some further specifics of faith they remain unjustified.

and it's obvious that the term "righteousness of faith" means justified.

What is obvious in context is that he is referring to the way of faith to be justified vs. the way of keeping the law to be justified (Romans 4:9-17 NIV). The passage says NOTHING about when Abraham's faith resulted in justification. You're just sticking to your old argument that any and all faith justifies and reading the text through the lens of that predetermined theology.

Unless you believe that this verse doesn't refer to Gen. 12

The verse does not refer to Genesis 12 so as to say Abraham's faith justified him then.

or the words "righteousness of faith" don't refer to justification

It means 'righteousness that comes through having faith'. It says nothing about the when and where of that happening. The error you make is saying that any all faith justifies, even believing that God by his command made all things that we can see from nothing, or that the faith to walk through the Red Sea on dry ground is somehow the faith that justifies.

the Bible does "actually" say Abraham was justified in Gen. 12

If you would only post the exact, plain words that say this we could all go home. But as it is, you can only make an inference that the Bible says that, and there's certainly nothing wrong with making inferences, but your's is an inference that violates and contradicts what the rest of the Bible says about justification. So we know your inference is wrong. People do not get born again more than once.

 

[dadof10]

If we were to evaluate justification, according to man's bible commentary, and the different meanings assigned therein, then Abraham was justified [declared righteous] in Genesis 12, and justified [shown to be righteous] in Genesis 15, while standing in the promise land that God called him to.

So if the "first time" a person is justified they are declared to be righteous, then Genesis 12 would have been that "first time"... as it is written ...But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness. Romans 4:5

If the "first time" a person is justified, they are indeed declared righteous, from their position of being ungodly, then Genesis 12 would have been when Abraham was "saved" [declared righteous; ie justified], as a shadow and type of those to come who are saved by faith in Christ Jesus.

Does the scripture support this?

7 Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.”9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. Galatians 3:7-9

This is a reference to Genesis 12, where Abraham was first justified.

His response to this "Gospel", was obedient faith, setting an example for those of us who would later believe, and therefore obey, thereby becoming a friend of God.



JLB

Well put. I read your previous post to Jethro and this makes a lot of sense. I just don't know whether I would say that Abraham's righteousness (justification) in Gen. 12 was simply reestablished in Gen. 15, or he was actually justified again because somewhere between the time he left Haran and "looked at the stars...", he lost his obedience or his faith.

 

[dadof10]

I did.
You obviously missed it.

Simply copy-paste or link.

Not the way you are suggesting.

Elaborate, then.

Lot's of people believe in God, and even act like it to some extent (especially in your church). But without some further specifics of faith they remain unjustified.

There are further specifics in Abraham's case in Gen. 12. They are obedience, for doing what God told him, and trust for doing it and "not knowing" how his obedience was going to play out. Trusting obedience, Jethro. The exact "kind" of faith that you have said "justifies"...until now.

What is obvious in context is that he is referring to the way of faith to be justified vs. the way of keeping the law to be justified (Romans 4:9-17 NIV). The passage says NOTHING about when Abraham's faith resulted in justification. You're just sticking to your old argument that any and all faith justifies and reading the text through the lens of that predetermined theology.

No, not "any and all faith". Any and all trusting, obedient faith with "works attached". This is the kind of faith we are talking about because this is the "kind" of faith Abraham had in Gen. 12. This "any and all faith" mantra is the same straw-man you have been kicking since the beginning. This thread isn't about "any and all" faith or "any and all" men. It is about a specific man who lived in a specific time who had a specific kind of faith. Abraham does not have a "dead faith" here, his faith is "justifying". If you think there is some hybrid "kind of faith", just give Biblical examples or descriptions of your phantom "commendable faith", a faith that has trust, obedience, and works, but does not justify. Sorry, I only see two. Dead and alive.

The verse does not refer to Genesis 12 so as to say Abraham's faith justified him then.

It means 'righteousness that comes through having faith'. It says nothing about the when and where of that happening.

Please...It says right in the text.

"For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world..."

When did this happen, Jethro? There was a promise (singular) made at a single moment in time. This is an historical event.

"...was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith."

"The promise...was...through the righteousness of faith". The promise that Abraham believed in (Gen. 12, Heb. 11) was accepted "through the righteousness of faith". The only reason you can't (won't?) see it is because you don't want to.

The error you make is saying that any all faith justifies,even believing that God by his command made all things that we can see from nothing, or that the faith to walk through the Red Sea on dry ground is somehow the faith that justifies.

Again, believing that God is the Creator has to be included in any justifying faith, that's where the author is going. And the Red Sea??? We are talking about Abraham's faith here, not Moses. You're flailing.

It only seems like an error because it's a straw-man. You have to set up straw-men and distract because you have no Biblical evidence to support your "commendable faith" theory.

If you would only post the exact, plain words that say this we could all go home.

"The promise...was...through the righteousness of faith". This happened in Gen. 12. But please stay. I want to hear how you will create an entirely new "kind of faith" out of whole cloth.

But as it is, you can only make an inference that the Bible says that, and there's certainly nothing wrong with making inferences, but your's is an inference that violates and contradicts what the rest of the Bible says about justification. So we know your inference is wrong. People do not get born again more than once.

I'm getting tired of this fallacy. I really should have dealt with it from the beginning, but I had other fish to fry. This is a clear example of Circular Reasoning, by saying that my argument can't be true because the nature of justification is such that it can't be true. The nature of justification is what we are discussing!!! Please read that again. You are assuming the conclusion, that your concept of justification is accepted by everyone. We are discussing the nature of justification, that it is not a one time event, but a process. That speaks directly to it's nature.

 

[Kidron]

faith without the work of obedience is dead.

JLB

Yes, there are a lot of Christians who are going to heaven because Jesus's blood has made them worthy for God to accept, and yet they do NOTHING that even suggests they are saved, as James is explaining.

But as Paul taught you.... "to him that WORKETH NOT, but BELIEVETH on HIM who *justifies the UN-GOD-LY*....this persons FAITH is COUNTED for Righteousness"..

So, what this means is... "Its not by works of righteousness, but according to God's MERCY that HE saved us".

See, salvation is what God does for you, for free, based on what Christ did for you on a CROSS.

No works by you required for salvation. = its a "free gift".

 

[Jethro Bodine]

"The promise...was...through the righteousness of faith". This happened in Gen. 12.

The mistake you're making is thinking that the moment the promise was made that Abraham was justified, and you are projecting that predetermined thinking onto Romans 4:13. You're automatically equating hearing the promise with being justified by the promise. I know the concept of a salvation experience is probably alien to you because of your denomination's teaching about the subject, but I surely was not justified the moment I heard the promise.

There are further specifics in Abraham's case in Gen. 12. They are obedience, for doing what God told him, and trust for doing it and "not knowing" how his obedience was going to play out. Trusting obedience, Jethro.

The Israelites, in faith, trusted God and crossed over on dry land. Your error is suggesting that since it is faith, and it's in the faith chapter (Hebrews 11), that it is justifying faith, therefore, when Abraham left his homeland by faith he was justified by that faith. If that's true then the Isrealites were justified when they crossed by faith on dry land. That's ludicrous. Once again, we see you can not make it into a chapter of examples of being made righteous by faith. It is a chapter of commendable faith that may or may not have justified these people sooner or later.

Trusting obedience, Jethro. The exact "kind" of faith that you have said "justifies"...until now.

Please stop this evil, unfair twisting of what I say. Shame on you ! You took what I said, 'The faith that obeys is the faith that justifies', and turned it around to say, "any and all faith that obeys justifies'.
Listen carefully (I know you won't, lol), for the justified person, not just any person who obeys in faith, his faith will be an obedient faith. There, now you have no excuse to twist that around to what I did not say. I have the feeling you can't see the difference.

 

[dadof10]

The mistake you're making is thinking that the moment the promise was made that Abraham was justified, and you are projecting that predetermined thinking onto Romans 4:13. You're automatically equating hearing the promise with being justified by the promise. I know the concept of a salvation experience is probably alien to you because of your denomination's teaching about the subject, but I surely was not justified the moment I heard the promise.

No, not the "moment the promise was made", the moment he, by faith, accepted it, trusted it and obediently acted on it. Another straw-man. More flailing.

Are you forgetting what you said "...righteousness of faith" means? You said "It means 'righteousness that comes through having faith'." In Gen. 12 Abraham had "righteousness that comes through having faith" by accepting the promise, which, by anyone's definition, means "justified". Game over, time to go home.

 

[JLB]

Yes, there are a lot of Christians who are going to heaven because Jesus's blood has made them worthy for God to accept, and yet they do NOTHING that even suggests they are saved, as James is explaining.

But as Paul taught you.... "to him that WORKETH NOT, but BELIEVETH on HIM who *justifies the UN-GOD-LY*....this persons FAITH is COUNTED for Righteousness"..

So, what this means is... "Its not by works of righteousness, but according to God's MERCY that HE saved us".

See, salvation is what God does for you, for free, based on what Christ did for you on a CROSS.

No works by you required for salvation. = its a "free gift".

We can not be saved by works of the law.

We can not be saved by righteous works.

We can not be saved by works that earn salvation.

We can only be saved by obeying the Gospel, like the example of Abraham left for us.

Abraham obeyed God when God called him, as he turned from his old life and followed the Lord, leaving for us an example of those who would repent and believe.

As it is wrtten

And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, “In you all the nations shall be blessed.”9 So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. Galatians 3:8-9

And again

The time is fulfilled, andthe kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospeL Mark 1:15


JLB

 

[Jethro Bodine]

This thread isn't about "any and all" faith or "any and all" men. It is about a specific man who lived in a specific time who had a specific kind of faith.

So, then, you are dropping your argument that Hebrews 11 is categorically about being justified? Now Hebrews 11 is just about Abraham being justified by his examples of faith being noted there?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

"The promise...was...through the righteousness of faith". The promise that Abraham believed in (Gen. 12, Heb. 11) was accepted "through the righteousness of faith". The only reason you can't (won't?) see it is because you don't want to.

Oh, that's right, I forgot that I haven't given you any reasons why I don't agree with you and, therefore, I don't agree because I don't want to.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

No, not the "moment the promise was made"

Then when? Genesis 15:6 perhaps?
Why not? That's what the Bible says.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You have to set up straw-men and distract because you have no Biblical evidence to support your "commendable faith" theory.

Did you forget? You blew it off.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The nature of justification is what we are discussing!!! Please read that again. You are assuming the conclusion, that your concept of justification is accepted by everyone. We are discussing the nature of justification, that it is not a one time event, but a process. That speaks directly to it's nature.

You describe the nature of a justification that is simply not supported by the Bible itself.
I told you in the beginning this would not go anywhere because you had a bad definition of 'justified' to begin with. When you understand and accept what the Bible really does say about justification then you will see it is impossible for it to be a process of repeated justifications. Remember, I said this to you way back then. It is not only impossible to be re-justified, it is also unnecessary. And I showed you the scriptures that teach that. But I have to ignore those in order to accept your un-rightly divided doctrine that says it is possible, and necessary.

 

[beloved57]

Those Christ lived and died for are Justified /Made Righteous solely by His obedience of one Rom 5:19!

 

[JLB]

Then when? Genesis 15:6 perhaps?
Why not? That's what the Bible says.

No mention of justification in Genesis 15.

I hear you saying that Genesis 15 is where Abraham was justified, but the scripture doesn't use the word justification.

Is all righteousness by faith an automatic indication of justification? From what I have read of your post's, you don't seem to think so.

So why is it you keep saying, Abraham was justified in Genesis 15?

And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness. Genesis 15:6

OK, so we don't find that Abraham was justified from Genesis 15, but rather that the Lord accounted to him for righteousness.

Is everyone who walks in the righteousness of faith considered justified?

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found?
For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
For what does the Scripture say? “ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.”
Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due.
But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,
Romans 4:1-5 NASB

I think we all agree that the works of the law does not justify a person, which is the works Paul is referring to here.

Paul uses the same language from Genesis 15, to prove his point about the righteousness of faith.

ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.

There is no mention of Abraham being justified [made righteous] here, the phrase is righteousness, specifically "credited to him "as" righteousness.

So again, my question is, are all who walk in the righteousness of faith, considered to be justified, or is there specific criteria or circumstances whereby a person who walks in the righteousness of faith, is "justified" by God.

Verse 2, For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.

Was Abraham justified by works? No

Verse 3, For what does the Scripture say? “ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS.”

No mention of justification in this verse.


Where is it specifically that it says Abraham was justified in Genesis 15, since it is your claim that all righteousness of faith, doesn't necessarily justify, how can we assume that Abraham was justified in Genesis 15?


JLB

 

[MarkT]

Was Abraham justified by obedient, trusting faith in Gen. 15? Doesn't he have the same obedient, trusting faith in Gen. 12? Why would you consider him justified in Gen. 15, but not in Gen. 12?

When you are talking about justification, you are talking about the law and the commandments. Abraham was justified in what he was going to do (kill his son) by his faith in God. Killing is against God's law. It doesn't matter that the law was not yet given; killing has always been against God's law. So you can say Abraham was justified by faith in the first case. In the second case Abraham obeyed the LORD, but this was not a commandment to break the law. So I would not say justification is a process according to your argument, especially since our Lord Jesus Christ took away our sins, so we are justified or excused/forgiven by our faith in him.

Then again I'm not really sure what you mean by process. If you mean live by faith or what? I guess it can be a process since we have to deal with the world and temptation every day.

 

[dadof10]

The Israelites, in faith, trusted God and crossed over on dry land. Your error is suggesting that since it is faith, and it's in the faith chapter (Hebrews 11), that it is justifying faith, therefore, when Abraham left his homeland by faith he was justified by that faith. If that's true then the Isrealites were justified when they crossed by faith on dry land. That's ludicrous.

Why is it ludicrous? A group of people can't have an obedient, trusting faith and be justified at the same time? Tell that to Cornelius and his household. What's ludicrous is thinking the Bible teaches "commendable faith". That it teaches that people can have a faith in the Triune God that obeys, trusts and "has works attached", but doesn't justify.

Once again, we see you can not make it into a chapter of examples of being made righteous by faith. It is a chapter of commendable faith that may or may not have justified these people sooner or later.

Go ahead and just show "us" where the Bible defines "commendable faith" as a faith that trusts, obeys and does good deeds, but does not justify. "We" are waiting...

Please stop this evil, unfair twisting of what I say. Shame on you ! You took what I said, 'The faith that obeys is the faith that justifies', and turned it around to say, "any and all faith that obeys justifies'.

Then simply explain the difference. I have been asking this question from the beginning. Abraham had "the faith that obeys is the faith that justifies" in Gen. 12. It seems logical that if we look at the nature of the faith a person has, we can see what kind of faith it is. If I explained Abraham's faith in Gen. 12 to you without using his name, you would, beyond any doubt, say it had all the earmarks of "a faith that justifies" and was, in fact, a justifying faith.

Listen carefully (I know you won't, lol), for the justified person, not just any person who obeys in faith, his faith will be an obedient faith. There, now you have no excuse to twist that around to what I did not say. I have the feeling you can't see the difference.

OK, so faith has to have obedience, trust and "works attached" to be a justifying faith. What else is needed?

 

[dadof10]

So, then, you are dropping your argument that Hebrews 11 is categorically about being justified? Now Hebrews 11 is just about Abraham being justified by his examples of faith being noted there?

Huh? What are you talking about? You made the straw-man argument that I think "any and all faith justifies". My point is that I don't think "any and all faith justifies", because Abraham (who we have been talking about, in case you missed it) didn't just have "any and all faith". He had an obedient, trusting faith. Are you really not getting this or is this just more distraction?

 

[dadof10]

Then when? Genesis 15:6 perhaps?
Why not? That's what the Bible says.

Wow. If you aren't interested in "engaging" why don't you just "go home"? You posted another straw-man and I called you out again. You made the ridiculous statement "The mistake you're making is thinking that the moment the promise was made that Abraham was justified..." When did I say that, Jethro? I'm not making that mistake, because "the promise was made" by God. I went on to explain (which fell on deaf ears), that when Abraham believed in the promise is when he was justified, not "the moment the promise was made" by God. I would ask you to read it again, but I don't think it's comprehension that's the problem here, it's distraction. You can't prove your "commendable faith" theory, which leaves only "live" faith which justifies or "dead" faith which does not. You have also admitted that Rom. 4:13, which says "The promise...was...through the righteousness of faith" is referring to Gen. 12. Paul is plainly saying that in Gen. 12 Abraham believed in the promise through the righteousness (justification) of faith. All you have left is straw-men and Circular Reasoning.

 

[dadof10]

Did you forget? You blew it off.

Well then, just copy and paste it. Should be pretty simple. Where does Scripture teach that there is such a thing as a faith that trusts, obeys and has good deeds attached, yet does not justify?

 

[dadof10]

You describe the nature of a justification that is simply not supported by the Bible itself.

I'll try this one more time. The Bible does teach that the "nature of justification" is a process. Abraham is a Biblical example of this. Your concept of justification is not supported by the Bible itself. This is the argument, so can't be your conclusion.

Now you are begging the question. That my view of the nature of justification is not Biblical, is your conclusion, so can't be your argument. The "nature of justification" is what we are arguing about. I am using the example of Abraham being justified more than once to prove my point. I hope this is clear enough.