truthlover writes:
In the first half of Romans, he is addressing a Jewish misconception (about justification). He didn't have to address the same misconception about the judgment, which is a very simple concept.
I asked why there is no equivilent, in-depth, teaching on second salvation by works - as opposed to judgement (which doesn't necessarily result in condemnation). The idea that our works will effect our final salvation is extremely complex given how important it is. Nothing this vital can be said to be simple. It is vital that we understand it more than anything else. Surely?
- Every justified person will disobey the overarching principle of "doing unto others" at some point. Where is the cut off point? There is none given. So how can one know if one is even close to a pass mark? If I get drunk once does that make me a drunkard. Or if I lust 10 times does that make me an adulterer?
- Persevere, continue in the faith, strive to enter. There is nothing said about any failure at anytime to achieve this as being acceptable. It is impossible to do this every second of the day however. So the best one can do is to try to persevere, try to continue, try to strive. Except the words 'try' and 'trying' only appear a couple of times in the whole NT and never in connection with salvation.
The concept of justification by the blood of the King is simple, but it is not simple to explain.
Nobody understands justification by faith. We can only believe it. All we know about it is that God decided that that was the way it would be. There is nothing intrinsically understandable about justification to our minds. Witness folk here who repeatedly fail to come to terms with someone else dying on our account. "Unfair" is the cry heard when an attempt is made to explain it. Safe to say that if it cannot be explained easily the simple it is not.
The disciple has two extremes to avoid. One is to turn the grace of God into licentiousness, and the other is to begin to live in "do not touch, do not taste, do not handle," which is of no value against the work of the flesh.
I agree
The one thing everyone agreed on, and that wasn't difficult to explain, was that everyone would stand before the judgment seat of the King, and they would be judged according to their works, whether good or bad.
There will be greater or lesser in the kingdom of heaven. On what basis will the grading be made if not works. What else is there with which to base such a grading. A mans works will be tested by fire and they may be burned up as straw - yet he himself will be saved. He may arrive with empty bags but arrive he can. Not all judgment will result in damnation. Your equating judgement to second salvation by works. Which is not the same thing. Why no established doctrine of salvation by works
Paul does address this, pretty extensively, but not in the long explanations that he devotes to obtaining righteousness through faith, because it wasn't as difficult or controversial.
Again, its second salvation by works not judgement I was wondering about. Say for example a person can be saved purely by faith. They can still be judged by their works and their heavenly reward issued on the basis of it. Salvation can be a citizenship issue that is cleared up without works and works then judged: the citizen of heaven gets levels of reward, the citizen of hell level of punishment
Would this not fit better given the emphasis Paul lays on justification/works? That which is vital gets the rigorous coverage, that which is less vital gets less rigorous coverage.
iano writes:
To clarify: what I hold is what the first half of Romans explains and exposits: the doctrine of justification by faith and the results thereof. This is not pretend justification. It is real. Although righteousness is not the same thing as justification it does go hand in hand with it.
truthlover writes:
Until you are willing to say that the unrighteous are also unjustified, and that they have no inheritance in the kingdom of God, then this is just empty bleating on your part.
??
A person who is justified is also declared righteous, receives the holy spirit, has eternal life, have been (in eternity) /will be (in time) glorifed etc. COnsider it a Christmas stocking: 1 gift containing many packages. Not all packages are the same however. Am I being unclear?
You say this when it suits you, and you back off whenever the rubber meets the road. You believe in a justification, where God calls a person righteous even if they have no noticeable good works or change in their life at all, and that is pure pretense, not justification at all.
Justification as you (kind of) admit, is a past-tense occurance. It has happened. Galatians 3:3 doesn't say anything about justification so supports not the idea of it being a process. I can't think of a case where justification is ever referred to as a process. If a person is declared righteous as a result of being justified then that has happened too. And it is sinners who are justified. No one can have works to show for it.
If justification is past tense and is by faith. If it is nowhere described as a process then what has it to do with works? "Pure pretense" and "rubber meets the road" are strong statements - but is there anything of substance to reinforce them?
If you don't believe it, then say it where it matters. Tell us that all drunks, adulterers, and divisive people are unrighteous and unjustified and will never attain to the kingdom of God unless they repent.
What is a drunk? What is an adulterer? What is a divisive person? At what number of transgressions does a person become one of these things? Once, twice, a thousand times? Have you lusted in the last 10 years. Does that make you an adulterer? For that matter, what does repent mean?
Justification and being declared righteousness has nothing to do with whether you did or do these things. A drunk who repents and is justified may or may not give up drink. Does that mean he will be unjustfied if he fails to stop. I don't see anywhere in scripture that says that jusfication is reveresible. And given Pauls treatment of it if it were the case then he surely would have covered it.
Romans 8:30 "....and whom he called, then he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified"
Just to remind ourselves that it is all of him, our justification. Not us or our faith.
When we started all these discussions, you were saying that justified persons might never change at all in any noticeable way to them or others until maybe even after they die, yet they would be justified, and thus "righteous."
And I hold that that is the case. Justification is not a process. It is a positional thing. Just like citizenship and heirship, justification is a legal, forensic act. A bad citizen, a bad heir are no less citizens and heirs than good ones. Legal/forensic.
The process of 'improved behaviour' will likely arise from a process which is set in train called sanctification. But some grow faster than others, some have further to come from. Some are lazy and resistant, some are Christians-on-vacation some Christians-in-the-trenches. All justified however.
I changed dramatically in view and action since being born again but the world isn't going to notice by and large. If it had my pre-born again twin beside me reacting to things alongside me in the way I would have then, then it would spot the difference. But some car driver not getting his mirror kicked off by a road-raged biker Ian won't notice anything. He has nothing to compare with
You're not very good at applying your own context issues to yourself. Gal 5:5 goes on to say, in v. 6, "...for neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith WORKING through love."
Galatians goes on to say " For
in Jesus Christ neither circumcision..." It is in Christ that this happens, Paul is pointing out. He is telling them that it is not justification/righteousness by works of the law but by being in Christ. Faith through love. And where does this faith come from? From God. God gives the faith. And when he does the works will follow. We are ever-dependant on God for anything that we do.
That is the difference in our view TL. I have no objection to works and that works must follow otherwise faith is dead (or never was). But God is the one who begins the works in use, God provides the faith necessary to do it. It is all of him. Your version of events seems to put the onus on us to do stuff. But it is always "by the Spirit" "through Christ" "By the grace of God". God is the one who makes it possible. If he didn't then nothing would happen: no justification, no declared righteous, no salvation of any kind. Nada.
So. If we are dependant on God for our salvation, how can we be dependent on us?
"I buffet my body and bring it into subjection, lest by any means, after I have preached to others, I myself should be disqualified."
Do you think that "disqualified" means loss of salvation? If so can you show so? This can fit as easily into loss of heavenly reward as it can loss of salvation. I agree obedience is important in that respect for a believer. Not for salvation but for reward. The reward is my pleasure at Gods pleasure in me. Oh to hear "Oh good and faithful servant" What could be better. That is to be sought - even if I don't act like I want it at all times... "Oh wretched man that I am (not anymore)"
There is an ongoing growth, an adding to faith and a being made perfect (2 Pet 1:5 & Gal 3:3), and while I do believe that's part of the justification process, we've got enough to argue about without that. We'll just leave it as using justification only for the past tense event.
I'd prefer to put this to bed. TL It may become important at some stage. I agree there is a process of being made holy and growing in faith etc. I believe it is very important. It is all over the NT. But we cannot tie justification before God to that process without biblical warrant. And I hold there is none
™ Version 4.2
