• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Justification

Generally speaking, the terms Hebrews, Jews, and Israelites all refer to the same people- the nation which sprang from Abraham through Isaac and Jacob, a nation promised and chosen by God in the Old Testament (Genesis 12:1-3). Each term emphasizes some aspect of this people's origin or background.
Amen. Today the new name the Father named the bride or church, Christian. It is part of the list of same people. It's never about the temporal dying flesh of any nation.

If any man has not the Spirit of Christ the Holy Spirit of God they simply do not belong to Him

Even Jesus said in John 6 of his own dying flesh "it profits for zero" Many disciples that were looking for a fleshly gods walked away faithless

Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

In that way God who is not served by the dying hands of mankind can send a unbeliever to preach the gospel .

Abraham who is not a Jew was used to represent the Father of all nations . His father an Amorite enemy of the Jews and his mother a Hittite another enemy of the Jews .

Abraham like Jacob, there names were changed to represent being born again from above . previously Abraham "the Father of all the nations" was Abram father of one family
 
What are the five views named?
Read the synopsis. Click on the link and open the sample of the book.

This book explores five major approaches to this important biblical topic as they've developed in Protestant circles:​
  • Non-Theonomic Reformed View – the law is the perfection of righteousness in Jesus Christ.
  • Theonomic Reformed View – the goodness of the law is dependent on how it's used and does not offer a way to salvation. Heavily focused on Paul's discussion of the Law.
  • Law as "Gracious Guidance" View – emphasizes the contrasts between the Mosaic law and the Gospel of grace, while still asserting the Law's value.
  • Dispensational View – approaches the Law from a historical perspective to help us understand its presentation, treatment, and recipients.
  • Modified Lutheran View – the Law of Christ as the fulfillment of the Law of Moses.
This book allows each contributor to not only present the case for his view, but also to critique and respond to the critiques of the other contributors, allowing you to compare their beliefs in an open forum setting to see where they overlap and where they differ.​

The Counterpoint series also has books on several other topics/doctrines related to salvation including divine providence, the nature of the atonements, the role of works, sanctification, eternal security, and the nature of hell. The Spectrum Series has one on Justification.

This volume focuses on five views of justification and calls on representative proponents to set forth their case and then respond to each other. The five views are:​
  • Traditional Reformed (Michael S. Horton)
  • Progressive Reformed (Michael F. Bird)
  • New Perspective (James D. G. Dunn)
  • Deification, or Theosis (Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen)
  • Roman Catholic (Gerald OCollins and Oliver Rafferty)
In addition, editors James Beilby, Paul R. Eddy and Steven E. Enderlein provide an extensive introduction to the issues informing this important debate. This distinguished forum of biblical interpreters and theologians offers a lively and informative engagement with the biblical, historical and contemporary understandings of justification. Justification: Five Views is not only a fascinating probe into Paul's meaning, it is also a case book in theological method.​

.
 
There could be some differences. The law of righteousness is the law of faith (newness of life) it opposes the letter of the law (death) in respect the whole book of law as it is written. It represents the power of Christ's faith Gods labor of love that works in those yoked with him.
You're going to run into contradictions and circular arguments when you try to explain that because faith is in the Law and obedience to the Law required faith in its justifying effect. Nearly everything Jesus taught in the gospels can be found in the OT, much of it in the Law of Moses. Sin is defined in diverse ways in the NT, three of which are disobedience to the Law, all unrighteousness, and anything not done in faith. Now put the two together. Note the words related to justification are nowhere found in the Law and most mentions in the prophets are in antithesis (God challenging their ability to stand before Him). If the "law of righteousness" (a term that should be defined) always and wholly opposed the letter of the Law then Jesus is impossible.
 
Amen. Today the new name the Father named the bride or church, Christian. It is part of the list of same people. It's never about the temporal dying flesh of any nation.

If any man has not the Spirit of Christ the Holy Spirit of God they simply do not belong to Him

Even Jesus said in John 6 of his own dying flesh "it profits for zero" Many disciples that were looking for a fleshly gods walked away faithless

Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

In that way God who is not served by the dying hands of mankind can send a unbeliever to preach the gospel .

Abraham who is not a Jew was used to represent the Father of all nations . His father an Amorite enemy of the Jews and his mother a Hittite another enemy of the Jews .

Abraham like Jacob, there names were changed to represent being born again from above . previously Abraham "the Father of all the nations" was Abram father of one family
Galatians 3:27For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
 
You're going to run into contradictions and circular arguments when you try to explain that because faith is in the Law and obedience to the Law required faith in its justifying effect. Nearly everything Jesus taught in the gospels can be found in the OT, much of it in the Law of Moses. Sin is defined in diverse ways in the NT, three of which are disobedience to the Law, all unrighteousness, and anything not done in faith. Now put the two together. Note the words related to justification are nowhere found in the Law and most mentions in the prophets are in antithesis (God challenging their ability to stand before Him). If the "law of righteousness" (a term that should be defined) always and wholly opposed the letter of the Law then Jesus is impossible.

From my experience most to not reckon faith (power) as coming from God .They say he needs no faith, Not understanding what faith is and from who it comes from .

Faith is the unseen power of Christ labor of love that he works in us. His Faith is not of the powerless creature.

We are justified by the just work of Christ's faith. The power of God that works in us to both reveal the will and empower dying mankind by the faith of Christ. . God's labor of love to finish it.

He is both the just one and the justifier Two laws working as "one" The letter of the law death And the unseen power of the faith of Christ the law of faith. two laws make "one" perfect law

Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

We have no power, no faith of our own by which we could rise to new born again life .We have the treasure of His power working in us but never considered of us (no faith) power to please.

Deuteronomy 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.

Remember before we were saved we had no faith of Christ by which we could please him. Not little power (faith ) but none .

2 Corinthians 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

Philippians 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, (letter death ) but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
 
From my experience most to not reckon faith (power) as coming from God .They say he needs no faith, Not understanding what faith is and from who it comes from .

Faith is the unseen power of Christ labor of love that he works in us. His Faith is not of the powerless creature.

We are justified by the just work of Christ's faith. The power of God that works in us to both reveal the will and empower dying mankind by the faith of Christ. . God's labor of love to finish it.

He is both the just one and the justifier Two laws working as "one" The letter of the law death And the unseen power of the faith of Christ the law of faith. two laws make "one" perfect law

Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

We have no power, no faith of our own by which we could rise to new born again life .We have the treasure of His power working in us but never considered of us (no faith) power to please.

Deuteronomy 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.

Remember before we were saved we had no faith of Christ by which we could please him. Not little power (faith ) but none .

2 Corinthians 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

Philippians 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, (letter death ) but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
I find the overuse of highlighting is distracting and interferes with the reading of the post.

What is the subject of the op?
What is the specific point we (you and I) are endeavoring to discuss?
What is the specific point you are trying to make in Post 45?

.
 
The overuse of highlighting is distracting and interferes with the reading of the post.

What is the subject of the op?
What is the specific point we (you and I) are endeavoring to discuss?
What is the specific point you are trying to make in Post 45?
Sorry for highlight .

Justification is the subject. The point Christ is the just and justifier of our new born again faith. The point in 45 not having our own faith as trust as a righteousness but do have the faith of Christ the faith of God. . . the just and justifier

Philippians 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, (letter death ) but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
 
Sorry for highlight .

Justification is the subject. The point Christ is the just and justifier of our new born again faith. The point in 45 not having our own faith as trust as a righteousness but do have the faith of Christ the faith of God. . . the just and justifier

Philippians 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, (letter death) but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
Yes, justification is the subject, and specifically justification by faith not works. Yes, Jesus is the justifier of us, but it is a mistake to say he is the justifier of our faith if "our new born again faith" is thought to be different than any other correct faith in God. It runs the risk of imply there are different kinds of valid faith. I will also argue any suggestion the faith of Christ in us, and our own Spirit birthed, inspired, worked, and empowered faith in Christ is a false dichotomy. In a regenerate believer the two are co-occurring, collaborative, and inextricable. Neither fleshly faith nor intellectual assent are asserted in scripture as veracious. They are therefore not germane to this thread. The faith of Christ necessarily begets a faith in Christ. No one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3).


Do you think Philippians 3:9 should be used as a proof text defining the subject of justification?

Do you think the words "by" and "through" should be considered synonymous and therefore interchangeable?

By and through what other means does scripture state we are justified?
 
Yes, justification is the subject, and specifically justification by faith not works. Yes, Jesus is the justifier of us, but it is a mistake to say he is the justifier of our faith if "our new born again faith" is thought to be different than any other correct faith in God. It runs the risk of imply there are different kinds of valid faith. I will also argue any suggestion the faith of Christ in us, and our own Spirit birthed, inspired, worked, and empowered faith in Christ is a false dichotomy. In a regenerate believer the two are co-occurring, collaborative, and inextricable. Neither fleshly faith nor intellectual assent are asserted in scripture as veracious. They are therefore not germane to this thread. The faith of Christ necessarily begets a faith in Christ. No one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3).


Do you think Philippians 3:9 should be used as a proof text defining the subject of justification?

Do you think the words "by" and "through" should be considered synonymous and therefore interchangeable?

By and through what other means does scripture state we are justified?
Again, I don't hold to what I think @GLee believes in some regards, but to his defense, in the structures of his native language (I'm guessing), prepositions do not mean quite the same thing as what his translation of them produces. Notice how he leaves out the article so often, since (still guessing, here) in his language the verb form includes the gender and number, implying what English uses the article to do.

So: He may not be saying that Christ is the justifier of faith, but that in our faith's claims, Christ is the justifier, or even, to be implying that Christ justifies because of salvific faith.
 
From my experience most to not reckon faith (power) as coming from God .They say he needs no faith, Not understanding what faith is and from who it comes from .

Faith is the unseen power of Christ labor of love that he works in us. His Faith is not of the powerless creature.

We are justified by the just work of Christ's faith. The power of God that works in us to both reveal the will and empower dying mankind by the faith of Christ. . God's labor of love to finish it.

He is both the just one and the justifier Two laws working as "one" The letter of the law death And the unseen power of the faith of Christ the law of faith. two laws make "one" perfect law

Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

We have no power, no faith of our own by which we could rise to new born again life .We have the treasure of His power working in us but never considered of us (no faith) power to please.

Deuteronomy 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.

Remember before we were saved we had no faith of Christ by which we could please him. Not little power (faith ) but none .

2 Corinthians 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

Philippians 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, (letter death ) but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
In the Reformed Faith, a sinner is justified before God solely on the fulfillment and merits of the Last Adam. Who came to fulfill the broken Covenant of Works; which all sinners are under (Galatians 3); Christ became a curse for us to redeem us from the Law. And through Faith Alone we are united to Christ and received his righteousness. And all of this is given freely through the proclamation of the Gospel to all who believe in Christ Alone!​
 
Amen. Today the new name the Father named the bride or church, Christian. It is part of the list of same people. It's never about the temporal dying flesh of any nation.

If any man has not the Spirit of Christ the Holy Spirit of God they simply do not belong to Him

Even Jesus said in John 6 of his own dying flesh "it profits for zero" Many disciples that were looking for a fleshly gods walked away faithless

Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

In that way God who is not served by the dying hands of mankind can send a unbeliever to preach the gospel .

Abraham who is not a Jew was used to represent the Father of all nations . His father an Amorite enemy of the Jews and his mother a Hittite another enemy of the Jews .

Abraham like Jacob, there names were changed to represent being born again from above . previously Abraham "the Father of all the nations" was Abram father of one family

Good reminder to us about his parents: what was he the moment before he believed?
 
In the Reformed Faith, a sinner is justified before God solely on the fulfillment and merits of the Last Adam. Who came to fulfill the broken Covenant of Works; which all sinners are under (Galatians 3); Christ became a curse for us to redeem us from the Law. And through Faith Alone we are united to Christ and received his righteousness. And all of this is given freely through the proclamation of the Gospel to all who believe in Christ Alone!​

Don’t forget that Rom 9 says there never was a covenant of works; it was a mistaken conception of post-exile Judaism, in which Paul was raised. They pursued it “as if” it were by works.
 
Good reminder to us about his parents: what was he the moment before he believed?

If you meant Jesus the Son of man .a moment before he was given faith from the Father needed to believe God. All of mankind must be born again

God is not a man.

Romans 11:30-32 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
 
If you meant Jesus the Son of man .a moment before he was given faith from the Father needed to believe God. All of mankind must be born again

God is not a man.

Romans 11:30-32 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:
Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

My post was about Abraham
 
Don’t forget that Rom 9 says there never was a covenant of works; it was a mistaken conception of post-exile Judaism, in which Paul was raised. They pursued it “as if” it were by works.
So, for the record are you denying there was a Covenant of Works between God and Adam?
 
I don’t know why it would matter after knowing Rom 9-10 and Gal 3.
 
Is that a no?

The indication of Rom 9-10 is that it was a misconception of post-exile ‘zeal for the law’ that was of course false. The indication of Gal 3 is that Judaizers replaced the Promise to the Gentiles (the Gospel’s mission) with the law. This was the original replacement theology problem. It is also post-exile when the concern about re-destruction of the nation for violating Torah was very high.

Those two features of post-exile Judaism produced a completely man-made idea that Israel was in a covenant of works in its history. All this is overthrown by the Gospels declarations about history.

Do history first, then see what’s left of theology.

See my book M. Sanford THE COVENANT REVOLT. 2023. At Amazon. (MCS Regent College Vancouver)
 
The indication of Rom 9-10 is that it was a misconception of post-exile ‘zeal for the law’ that was of course false. The indication of Gal 3 is that Judaizers replaced the Promise to the Gentiles (the Gospel’s mission) with the law. This was the original replacement theology problem. It is also post-exile when the concern about re-destruction of the nation for violating Torah was very high.

Those two features of post-exile Judaism produced a completely man-made idea that Israel was in a covenant of works in its history. All this is overthrown by the Gospels declarations about history.

Do history first, then see what’s left of theology.

See my book M. Sanford THE COVENANT REVOLT. 2023. At Amazon. (MCS Regent College Vancouver)
Well, Mr. Sanford, Scripture is clear that God made a Covenant of Works with Adam and Israel. Read Hosea 6:7, and especially Hebrews. But Covenantal language is throughout Scripture. You must not overlook the entirety of it.

The Greek διαθηκη plays in the teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews. In the teaching of our Lord we meet with the idea only once, in the institution of the Supper. More frequently it occurs with Paul, in Romans (ix. 4; xi. 27), 2 Corinthians (iii. 6, 14), Galatians (iii. 15, 17; iv. 24), Ephesians (ii. 12), altogether nine times in six contexts. In Luke's writings we find it, apart from the institution of the Supper, once in the Gospel (i. 72), and twice in the Acts (iii. 25; vii 8). Once also it is met with in the Revelation of St. John (xi. 19). This makes sixteen instances of its occurrence outside of Hebrews. Over against this stand seventeen occurrences in Hebrews alone. In other words in this single Epistle the conception is more frequent than in all the rest of the New Testament writings put together.
Both these facts require an explanation — the relative quiescence of the idea in the New Testament as a whole, no less than its sudden activity in Hebrews. It seems strange at first that a conception which plays so dominant a role in the Old Testament and so strongly colors the representation of religion there should have found so little employment in the later stage of revelation. The cause is usually sought in this, that other ideas like the Kingdom of God and the Church have forced it into the background and taken its place. But this is rather a fuller statement of the problem, and only in so far of help towards the solution, than the solution itself. For the question persists: Why did other ideas, and precisely these ideas, become so dominant as to relegate the diatheke-idea to semi-oblivion? To this question the answer can only be found in the momentous change to which in the development of redemption and revelation the general character of religion became subject. Through the coming of the Messiah and the accomplishment of His work the people of God received a Messianic organization; their whole constitution and manner of life became determined by their relation to the Christ. Now the Old Testament idea of the berith, had in the long course of its history, scarcely come as yet into fructifying contact with the Messianic hope of Israel. Therefore at the dawn of the new dispensation it was not prepared to take the lead in the great rearrangement of doctrinal values characteristic of this epoch. While inherently not incapable of entering upon an organic union with the Messianic point of view, yet on the surface it did not suggest or invite such an interrelation. It will be remembered that the great prophecy of Jeremiah concerning the new berith which Jehovah will make with Israel in the future is not Messianically oriented. A definite, specific historical situation was required to draw this ancient idea into the service of the new Messianic outlook created by the appearance of Jesus and the accomplishment of His work.​
 
Well, Mr. Sanford, Scripture is clear that God made a Covenant of Works with Adam and Israel. Read Hosea 6:7, and especially Hebrews. But Covenantal language is throughout Scripture. You must not overlook the entirety of it.

The Greek διαθηκη plays in the teaching of the Epistle to the Hebrews. In the teaching of our Lord we meet with the idea only once, in the institution of the Supper. More frequently it occurs with Paul, in Romans (ix. 4; xi. 27), 2 Corinthians (iii. 6, 14), Galatians (iii. 15, 17; iv. 24), Ephesians (ii. 12), altogether nine times in six contexts. In Luke's writings we find it, apart from the institution of the Supper, once in the Gospel (i. 72), and twice in the Acts (iii. 25; vii 8). Once also it is met with in the Revelation of St. John (xi. 19). This makes sixteen instances of its occurrence outside of Hebrews. Over against this stand seventeen occurrences in Hebrews alone. In other words in this single Epistle the conception is more frequent than in all the rest of the New Testament writings put together.
Both these facts require an explanation — the relative quiescence of the idea in the New Testament as a whole, no less than its sudden activity in Hebrews. It seems strange at first that a conception which plays so dominant a role in the Old Testament and so strongly colors the representation of religion there should have found so little employment in the later stage of revelation. The cause is usually sought in this, that other ideas like the Kingdom of God and the Church have forced it into the background and taken its place. But this is rather a fuller statement of the problem, and only in so far of help towards the solution, than the solution itself. For the question persists: Why did other ideas, and precisely these ideas, become so dominant as to relegate the diatheke-idea to semi-oblivion? To this question the answer can only be found in the momentous change to which in the development of redemption and revelation the general character of religion became subject. Through the coming of the Messiah and the accomplishment of His work the people of God received a Messianic organization; their whole constitution and manner of life became determined by their relation to the Christ. Now the Old Testament idea of the berith, had in the long course of its history, scarcely come as yet into fructifying contact with the Messianic hope of Israel. Therefore at the dawn of the new dispensation it was not prepared to take the lead in the great rearrangement of doctrinal values characteristic of this epoch. While inherently not incapable of entering upon an organic union with the Messianic point of view, yet on the surface it did not suggest or invite such an interrelation. It will be remembered that the great prophecy of Jeremiah concerning the new berith which Jehovah will make with Israel in the future is not Messianically oriented. A definite, specific historical situation was required to draw this ancient idea into the service of the new Messianic outlook created by the appearance of Jesus and the accomplishment of His work.​

I suffocate at mile long paragraphs. Please make a list of three one-line points to summarize what you have to say. It must address the end of Rom 9-10’s intro and Gal 3:17.
 
Back
Top