Eternal Justification?

[brightfame52]

That is a point of nothing.

Not to you, but Im not you. Also the elect had to have union with Christ in order for God to love them. See Gods Love is solely in Christ Jesus Rom 8:39

39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

In the original " the love of God" has the definite article

9 οὔτε ὕψωμα οὔτε βάθος οὔτε τις κτίσις ἑτέρα δυνήσεται ἡμᾶς χωρίσαι ἀπὸ τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν

This is a very specific Love of God and its in Christ Jesus, therefore there is no Salvific Love outside of union with Christ Jesus

Outside of Union with Christ, God Loves nobody and in fact hates them. So if you deny the elect a eternal union with Christ, you deny He eternally Loved them and you deny eternal election. Jeremiah as a type of the Church Jer 31:3
The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying,
Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love:

And if one denys Eternal Election in Christ, frankly, you deny the Gospel !

And finally, any union with Christ forbids condemnation which denotes Justification Rom 8:1

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

The elect never had condemnation upon them since they were in Christ and Christ had agreed to be their Surety from before the foundation.

 

[brightfame52]

You need to show anywhere in Scripture that it says we are justified before we are born

I dont have to find no scripture that says your literal sound bites. Scripture isn't written that way, thats carnalizing, most truths are Spiritual and need to be spiritually discerned by comparing scripture with scripture, here a little there a little

Isa 28 10

For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

You need to show anywhere in Scripture that it says we are justified before we are born

Do us a favor and you need to show anywhere in scripture that says we are not Justified before we are born !

 

[makesends]

I dont have to find no scripture that says your literal sound bites. Scripture isn't written that way, thats carnalizing, most truths are Spiritual and need to be spiritually discerned by comparing scripture with scripture, here a little there a little

Isa 28 10

For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:



Do us a favor and you need to show anywhere in scripture that says we are not Justified before we are born !

Ha! That 'precept upon precept' quote was not about how we SHOULD discern, but how they DO, of whom God does not speak favorably, (to put it nicely), nor to whom he lends bright hope.

Isaiah 27
11 For this is a people without understanding;
so their Maker has no compassion on them,
and their Creator shows them no favor.

Isaiah 28
1 Woe to that wreath, the pride of Ephraim’s drunkards,
to the fading flower, his glorious beauty,
set on the head of a fertile valley—
to that city, the pride of those laid low by wine!

9 “Who is it he is trying to teach?
To whom is he explaining his message?
To children weaned from their milk,
to those just taken from the breast?
10 For it is:
Do this, do that,
a rule for this, a rule for that;
a little here, a little there.”

12 to whom he said,
“This is the resting place, let the weary rest”;
and, “This is the place of repose”—
but they would not listen.
13 So then, the word of the Lord to them will become:
Do this, do that,
a rule for this, a rule for that;
a little here, a little there—
so that as they go they will fall backward;
they will be injured and snared and captured.

 

[John Bauer]

You don’t believe the elect were in union with Christ Jesus before the foundation of the world? Ephesians 1:4, “According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.”

You are taking “chosen in him” as mystical union with Christ but without evidence or argument. You cannot assume the very thing to be proved. Here is an interpretation that doesn’t attempt to break Scripture: being chosen “in him” is covenantal context, not covenantal union. He chose us eternally, indeed, not in ourselves but in Christ (which I suggest refers to the pactum salutis). But covenantal union with Christ is effected historically, not eternally, by the Holy Spirit in the lives of every elect person in due time, each one now justified through the living faith wrought in them.

 

[brightfame52]

Ha! That 'precept upon precept' quote was not about how we SHOULD discern, but how they DO,

To me its a principle of scripture

 

[brightfame52]

You are taking “chosen in him” as mystical union with Christ but without evidence or argument.

It is a mystical union , just as it was a mystical union in Adam. The argument for the Mystical union with Christ is Election Eph 1:4 and I will add 1 Cor 1:30

30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption

 

[makesends]

To me its a principle of scripture

Instead of slinging you up against Scripture any further (I'll let you do that to yourself), I'll admit that we all do that to some degree. It is necessary that we compare scripture with scripture. But to add a piece of this to a little of that, smacks of 'personal interpretation'. I do enough of that myself, already, and certainly don't need to add yours to my repertoire. I'm good at connecting dots without looking at the numbers on them. I have noticed you are, too. Need to be careful about that.

Orthodoxy is a useful rudder to steer by.

 

[brightfame52]

Another reason for eternal justification of Gods elect, which is connected to His Suretyship, and that is the non imputation of sin.
God purposed not to punish sin in His Elect but in His Son, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world Rev 13:8. His counsel to punish sin in His Son, who became sin for us, includes also His will to impute sin to Him. Uniformly, the Father’s purpose not to punish sin in His elect includes His will not to impute it to them, and is their justification from all sin in His sight 2 Cor 5:19

 

[makesends]

Another reason for eternal justification of Gods elect, which is connected to His Suretyship, and that is the non imputation of sin.
God purposed not to punish sin in His Elect but in His Son, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world Rev 13:8. His counsel to punish sin in His Son, who became sin for us, includes also His will to impute sin to Him. Uniformly, the Father’s purpose not to punish sin in His elect includes His will not to impute it to them, and is their justification from all sin in His sight 2 Cor 5:19

So you are saying that he never imputed Adam's sin to the elect????

 

[brightfame52]

So you are saying that he never imputed Adam's sin to the elect????

Yes it was imputed to Christ. 2 Cor 5:21. You dont believe all the sins of the elect were imputed to Christ for Him to die for, including their sin in Adam ?

 

[Arial]

I dont have to find no scripture that says your literal sound bites. Scripture isn't written that way, thats carnalizing, most truths are Spiritual and need to be spiritually discerned by comparing scripture with scripture, here a little there a little

It isn't about you or me. It certainly is not about the red herring above.

We do let scripture interpret scripture but the way you apply that suggests you do not really know what that means. And if you have noticed, the scriptures I usually address are the ones you give---making it you who produce sound bites. You are not comparing scripture with scripture to find an interpretation. You start with an interpretation and cherry pick scriptures regardless of their context and meaning and say "See! Proof."

The hermeneutic is not "compare scripture with scripture". It is that clear passages help to interpret more difficult passages on the same subject. Scripture interpreting scripture is making sure an interpretation of a scripture is nowhere else contradicted by another scripture. You ignore both those rules of sound hermeneutics.

Eternal justification contradicts Rom 5:1; Gal 2:16; John 3:18.

Justificatio follows calling: Rom 8:30.

We are children of wrath before faith Eph 2:1-3.

Forgiveness is tied to covenant participation: Acts 13:38-39.

Faith is required unto righteousness: Rom 4:5.

Scripture explicitly denies justification before faith: Romans 3:25.

There is more of course and those are not given within their full context simply to not consume too much space. Put them into their context (the duty of the one who purports eternal justification) and you will see within the surrounding context they stiill assert what I gave them to assert. IOW I didn't have to pull them out of their context to make them say what I wanted them to say. Not only that, but they stay in agreement with the full counsel of God on the order of salvation (ordo salutis).

For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

That is not about comparing scripture with scripture and comparing scripture with scripture is not the Reformed hermeneutic. It is keeping scripture consistent with scripture. Clear passages govern the interpretation of less clear ones, and no interpretation may contradict the total teaching of Scripture.

Do us a favor and you need to show anywhere in scripture that says we are not Justified before we are born

See above, all my other comments in this thread and the comments of other posters in this thread.

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
So you are saying that he never imputed Adam's sin to the elect????

Yes it was imputed to Christ. 2 Cor 5:21. You dont believe all the sins of the elect were imputed to Christ for Him to die for, including their sin in Adam ?

Of course they were imputed to Christ! That isn't my question, nor is that implied by my question.

But by saying yes, you are agreeing to what I in consternation asked you. You are saying that Adam's sin was never imputed to the elect! That is outrageous. I know you like to be shocking and to post threads to show a different look at things, you are enthralled with your own thoughts, —(aren't we all?)—, but this is beyond the pale.

If it wasn't for the millions of believers who don't know of Adam's sin imputed to us, I'd call this heresy.

 

[JesusFan]

Show the reference.

We are all born as Lost sinners before saved, correct?

 

[JesusFan]

While that is one way to look at our pre-regenerate state, how does that render us not already sheep, when Scripture calls us sheep? Notice not only my post on the matter —John 10:16— but also what @John Bauer said —John 10:26— in post #86? The elect ARE his sheep, even before they are in the flock. That they would be goats, but for his mercy, does not render them not sheep.

We are before being saved lost state, so could not be part of his flock as the under the Shepard until actually changed from dead in sins to now being alive in Christ

 

[makesends]

We are before being saved lost state, so could not be part of his flock as the under the Shepard until actually changed from dead in sins to now being alive in Christ

Agreed. But you didn't say part of his flock, nor even HIS sheep, but not even sheep.

 

[makesends]

JesusFan said:
actually, per me and jesus, the goat became his sheep due to them being the very elect of God

We are all born as Lost sinners before saved, correct?

Reference, please, for the, "per me and jesus, the goat became his sheep due to them being the very elect of God".

Failing any specific reference, demonstrate the whole reasoning, and, if reasonably possible or necessary, with references to demonstrate each point. Yes, "we are all born as Lost sinners before saved". But that of itself doesn't make your case. (Continue, please, but not bit by bit, leading a donkey by the carrot. I don't like the JW method. —sorry, I don't mean to insult you as though you were like them, but that is what it feels like to be led along bit by bit.)

 

[Arial]

Not to you, but Im not you. Also the elect had to have union with Christ in order for God to love them. See Gods Love is solely in Christ Jesus Rom 8:39

Here is what was not the point. Careful reading of posters posts is respectful and helpful. The Bible even more so. If one can't even do the first, how is anyone to expect they do the second? No need for comment on that. Here is what was "the point of nothing".

Okay but dont forget this, Im not you. I believe it regardless of how you fell about it.

 

[Arial]

JesusFan said:
actually, per me and jesus, the goat became his sheep due to them being the very elect of God

Reference, please, for the, "per me and jesus, the goat became his sheep due to them being the very elect of God".

Failing any specific reference, demonstrate the whole reasoning, and, if reasonably possible or necessary, with references to demonstrate each point. Yes, "we are all born as Lost sinners before saved". But that of itself doesn't make your case. (Continue, please, but not bit by bit, leading a donkey by the carrot. I don't like the JW method. —sorry, I don't mean to insult you as though you were like them, but that is what it feels like to be led along bit by bit.)

My two cents. @JesusFan is collapsing categories. The scripture of goats being separated from sheep---final judgment---and "you are not my sheep" which is the reason for unbelief.

Scripture never shows God turning goats into sheep. Logically, a goat cannot be turned into a sheep. The distinction lies in election and the Father's giving men to Jesus. His sheep are lost (another nail in the coffin of eternal justification) until they are "found". At just the right time and in just the right way, their ears are opened and they hear the voice of the Shepherd and follow him.

The non-elect are goats and goats they always remain.

 

[makesends]

Not to you, but Im not you. Also the elect had to have union with Christ in order for God to love them. See Gods Love is solely in Christ Jesus Rom 8:39

39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

In the original " the love of God" has the definite article

9 οὔτε ὕψωμα οὔτε βάθος οὔτε τις κτίσις ἑτέρα δυνήσεται ἡμᾶς χωρίσαι ἀπὸ τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ θεοῦ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν

This is a very specific Love of God and its in Christ Jesus, therefore there is no Salvific Love outside of union with Christ Jesus

Outside of Union with Christ, God Loves nobody and in fact hates them. So if you deny the elect a eternal union with Christ, you deny He eternally Loved them and you deny eternal election. Jeremiah as a type of the Church Jer 31:3
The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying,
Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love:

And if one denys Eternal Election in Christ, frankly, you deny the Gospel !

And finally, any union with Christ forbids condemnation which denotes Justification Rom 8:1

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

The elect never had condemnation upon them since they were in Christ and Christ had agreed to be their Surety from before the foundation.

Not that following or even agreeing with your point here demonstrates it to be relevant to your larger point, but I take exception with your fabrication here.

You said, "...the elect had to have union with Christ in order for God to love them."

You keep doing this kind of thing —taking two facts together to extract a third the Bible does not say. I may as well take you to imply that God did not love us from the foundation of the world, and to be implying that election has nothing to do with his love for us. It's true that this love has everything to do with what also necessarily implies our union with Christ, but the two are dependent on God's decree—not stated to be non-existent if not causally sequenced according to your arrangement.

Scripture does not say that "the elect [first] had to have union with Christ in order for God to [decree their election]". Did God decree their election before loving them? Of course not!

What's strange is that your arrangement discounts your whole favorite thesis, that the elect were justified, (and therefore saved), before they were even born, and never at enmity with God!

 

[brightfame52]

Of course they were imputed to Christ! That isn't my question, nor is that implied by my question.

Thats what it seems to me. I dont see why you would ask that question. Of course Christ died for all the sins of the elect to include Adam.

You are saying that Adam's sin was never imputed to the elect!

Right it was imputed to Christ with the rest of the elects sins.

@makesends

If it wasn't for the millions of believers who don't know of Adam's sin imputed to us, I'd call this heresy.

So when was the elects sin in Adam imputed to Christ ?