Justification

[Arsenios]

Friend, I confess, I'm entirely lost as to your point.

Oh, the only point is that it is not always easy to be a preacher's kid...
How's that?
I mean, how would you advise him in your Doctrine of Justification?

Roughly around March 23, 1987 - God GAVE me life (9 months before I was born).

It happens to the best and to the worst of us!

AS A RESULT of this gift, in time, my heart began to beat and my lungs began to work and eventually I breathed air.

Got it - Eventually you were born...

Now, it's true, generally speaking (always rare exceptions), one who is alive has a heart that is beating and lungs that are breathing.....

Except for before they are born and after they die - Making this beating-heart and lung-breathing life but an extraordinarily brief flash in the pan of eternal life...

and it can even be argued that if the heart isn't beating at all and the lungs aren't breathing at all, there very likely isn't life.

Foolish men argue many things... But we know the truth! Life preceded breathing air, and continues after it unto eternity...

BUT it cannot be said that it was my heart beating and my lungs breathing that gave me life on March 23, 1987.

Life begets life, no question... Life causes the heart to beat, and breath in the lungs...

Follow?

You tell me -
I mean -
Do I have you aright?

THIS was the Reformation debate......

Really???

is faith/life/justification the result of what Jesus did/does as THE (only and all-suffcient Savior) and what the Holy Spirit does/do as THE Lord and GIVER of life (the ONLY one, and not the Offerer of life but GIVER of life)?

Well, the Orthodox would reply that not only is He the Giver of life, but He is also the Giver of Life!

I think you want to make "faith/life/justification" to be God's Gift of Life, yes?
It is what Christ EARNED for us, yes?
By His "WORK" on the Cross, yes?

And in this we utterly disagree...

But before showing why, I will make sure I am understanding you aright...
So I will not be tilting at windmills and incinerating strawmen in my mis-understanding of you...

Or

Have you ever heard of the fallacy of the false alternative?

is faith/life/justification a synergistic/Pelagian matter of self accompishing a long series of works (perhaps in a certain chronological order) perhaps empowered by the RC Denomination (and maybe God)?

Well, you are still addressing your Mother Church, Which from the Orthodox perspective was 500 years apostatic at the time of Luther, who intended to cure/heal his Mother Church, the Latin Church of the West... The only way in which she may be called a denomination is that She was, in Her Apostacy, denominated after Peter as the Ruler of the Church on earth... The rest of us are "denominated" only along the names of the geographical regions where the Apostolic witness was embraced - So there was the Church in Rome worshipping in the Latin Language, the Church in Antioch, worshipping in Greek, the Church in Thessalonika, worshipping in Greek, the Church in Alexandria, worshipping in Coptic, the Church in Georgia, worshipping in Georgian, the Church in Russia, worshipping in Slavonic, and on and on... ALL ONE Church at the beginning...

Hence the Historic Church is PRE-denominational...
And authoritative without being authoritarian...

A denomination is a Church worshipping in the name of a person who founded it - They follow -isms, normally... Calvinism, Lutheranism, and so forth... Named after the man who founded them... Did I mention Arianism, Pelagianism, etc? From our perspective, Rome became Papalist in the 10th century...

But She is still an Apostolic Church, and we still look to reconciliation...

Notice the faith of Christ is not Jesus-ism...
Nor being conciliar are we Conciliarists...
Nor is it Paulism or Johanism...

So having done that little aside, we come to the Historic Body of Christ, which Lutheranism seeks to correct thinking that the apostatic Church of Rome and the West IS the Church... Luther believed this, as did all the Reformationists, yes? And they thought that the Church had simply gone off-track and botched the Faith of Christ... And that the only corrective was to be from the Book that is known as the Bible... And so they came up with a "Doctrine of Justification" that is found nowhere in the history of Christianity, and tried to correct the (apostatic from the Orthodox pov) Church that birthed them forth as illegitimate Children and then condemned them as heretical as they gave themselves Biblical justification for their newly created Doctrine of Justification which they had inferred from their reading of the Bible texts...

So that because ONLY God CAN give life and justification, then man cannot do anything to gain God's favor, and indeed man can ONLY do evil until God does so justify him, and then even though he continues in sins, it is not so much now, and God only sees the sinner as "covered" by the "work" of Christ on the Cross, as man slowly overcomes sins and becomes Sanctified...

Am I understanding you OK so far?

Now, ... ONCE WITH THE GIFT OF LIFE - ONCE WITH THE GIFT OF FAITH - ONCE WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT - ONCE THUS JUSTIFIED - there is the complex, changing, evolving, synergistic, progressive process of LIVING (one cannot live before they are alive, a dead person can't do much).... and that's not a simply, "straight line" progression. And it's NOT that suddenly - within a microsecond - one THEREFORE is in his life as holy as God is, as morally perfect as God is, as loving as God is, as serving as God is, ALWAYS and PERFECTLY doing all that God wills (never missing the target - the definition of sin). It's rarely even a steady progression - people "back slide". Now - we ARE forgiven, we ARE "covered", we ARE alive - but we continue to fall short of the perfect will of God. Protestants call this "Always Saint and Sinner" - always falling short, but always forgiven. Yes, you are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT - we SHOULD always be making strong, enormous progress - we are called to such! But the truth is: we have erred more than we know, and it is our fault - our own terrible fault - which is why Protestants teach that we live a LIFE of repentance and humility, while Protestants often think of the Publican in Jesus' parable, knowing we need to fall on our knees, pound our chest, and confess that we are THE sinner and that we HAVE sinned against Him (and others). AND - equally - claim the Spirit's power and look to the Spirit's direction for the Life we are called to LIVE - becoming more Christ-like. But Protestants are apt to say it's unlikely any will achieve the absolute holiness, perfection and love of God on Earth (perfectionist Protestants disagree here). So, the CALL to perfection is absolutely proclaimed (IMO, more than in Catholicism) but with the balance that we ALWAYS need God's mercy and the works of Christ, never reaching a point where we can snub our nose at Christ and say, "I personally don't need you no more."

OK - So Justification is God's gift to man of life, faith and the Holy Spirit in the Lutheran/Protestant view...

And HOW is this gift from God attained by man?

BTW, Protestants (except for a few Calvinists) would argue that one with the Divine Gift of Life can wreck that faith - and thus eliminate the Gift of life/faith/justification. I can explain more on that if you like, but I raise it only to note that there too, Protestants and Catholics (and I suspect Orthodox) show agreement on Sanctification. It's Justification that the RCC insists we radically disagree, the gaining of life/faith/justification, NOT the living of that.

How did the early Church address matters of Justification?

And yes, one CAN throw away the Salvation God has Given him or her...


Arsenios

ps - I hope this helps!

 

[Josiah]

Got it - Eventually you were born...

No, lol, you entirely missed it.

At a time, I was GIVEN physical life (Monergistic). THEN I began the life-long process of living (synergistic). My being born is pretty irrelevant to my point. My living didn't cause physical life to be given to me. Perhaps you'll re-read the post?

I indicated that my being GIVEN life is not identical to my LIVING the life given to me. They are different issues. And what is true about one cannot be imposed upon the other.

Except for before they are born and after they die - Making this beating-heart and lung-breathing life but an extraordinarily brief flash in the pan of eternal life...

You ENTIRELY missed my point. And of course, I was using a physical illustration. If you cannot accept what is obviously true about God giving physical life (and then our living it) I wonder how you can accept that God gives spiritual life (and then we are to live it)?

Life preceded breathing air

Think about that..... Then our breathing very likely is not what causes our conception. Now, can you apply that truth to spiritual life? Lutherans believe that the Holy Spirit is the Lord and Giver of Life, which we believe means the Holy Spirit GIVES life, not that the dead give it to self. We do not affirm that the Holy Spirit is the OFFERER of life to any dead one who will grab it from Him.

See post 671.

I think you want to make "faith/life/justification" to be God's Gift of Life, yes?
It is what Christ EARNED for us, yes?
By His "WORK" on the Cross, yes?

And in this we utterly disagree...

As I've suspect.... you keep indicating you agree, "we hold essentially the same position" and that "we utterly disagree."

And I'm NOT here to support what the RCC did in 1054. I desire that you take your "issues" with the RCC to MoreCoffee (sadly, the only active Catholic here at CH), I left that denomination.

So that because ONLY God CAN give life and justification, then man cannot do anything to gain God's favor, and indeed man can ONLY do evil until God does so justify him, and then even though he continues in sins, it is not so much now, and God only sees the sinner as "covered" by the "work" of Christ on the Cross, as man slowly overcomes sins and becomes Sanctified...

I've never conveyed that. What I'm affirming is that in justification (narrow) Jesus is the Savior (not part-Savior - the part that is entirely ineffectual, not one of the RCC's Helpers in this, not the Possibility-Maker but Savior) and that the Holy Spirit is the Lord and Giver of Life (not the Offerer of life to any who will steal it away). That the giving of spiritual life/faith/Holy Spirt is God's doing and gift because of the Incarnation - the Death - the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, THE (one and only, all sufficient Savior).

See post 671. MoreCoffee was unwilling to tell us what in that is apostate heresy, anathema, and deserving of the RCC splitting itself nearly in two over. In fact, he would not indicate ANYTHING in it that is clearly heretical. Perhaps you will from the Orthodox position.

And HOW is this gift from God attained by man?

See post 671.



- Josiah




.

 

[Arsenios]

No, lol, you entirely missed it.

So it seems...

At a time, I was GIVEN physical life (Monergistic).

OK - I get that part, and it happened before your heart was beating and breath filled your lungs...

THEN

After living 9 months in the womb and being born...

I began the life-long process of living (synergistic).

So we each develop differently according to who we are and what we DO after birth...

My being born is pretty irrelevant to my point.

Is your point not about re-birth?

Is rebirth a part of Justification by God?

My living didn't cause physical life to be given to me.

No - Your birth in fallen Adam into fallen creation is purely God's Gift to you -
It is God's Gift of creating you...
And it is this Gift that you say can only do evil?
eg Until Justification by God?

Perhaps you'll re-read the post?

Well, it is good to know that I have not yet incinerated a straw-man...
The silence of the foolish makes them wise? )

I indicated that my being GIVEN life is not identical to my LIVING the life given to me.

IF I should ever deny this, let me be ANATHEMA!!

They are different issues.

Utterly...

And what is true about one cannot be imposed upon the other.

Then why make the point as you did?

You ENTIRELY missed my point.

I fear that I still am...

And of course, I was using a physical illustration.

So not a proof, but a plausible analogy??

If you cannot accept what is obviously true about God giving physical life (and then our living it) I wonder how you can accept that God gives spiritual life (and then we are to live it)?

Did you not just say that they are entirely different issues??

God gives everything that we choose according to His Great Mercy...

Think about that..... Then our breathing very likely is not what causes our conception.

We already see eye to eye on that issue...

Now, can you apply that truth to spiritual life?

Absolutely not, according to you, and I agreed with you...

But now you say the one is the same as the other...

Lutherans believe that the Holy Spirit is the Lord and Giver of Life,

Agreed already!

which we believe means the Holy Spirit GIVES life,

Both to our conception in the womb, and in our re-Birth into Christ...

not that the dead give it to self.

No one has said that - Least of all your Orthodox Brethren...

And we can tell you why...

We do not affirm that the Holy Spirit is the OFFERER of life to any dead one who will grab it from Him.

He gives it to those who ask for it...
Repentance is an ontological request...
Words alone easily lie...

As I've suspect.... you keep indicating you agree, "we hold essentially the same position" and that "we utterly disagree."

That is called understanding the same facts very differently...

And I'm NOT here to support what the RCC did in 1054.

A grasp of Christian history is a good thing...

I desire that you take your "issues" with the RCC to MoreCoffee

You called the RCC a Denomination, not me...
I answer you and you tell me to talk about my issues with the RCC with MC?
I had issues with your use of the term "Denomination"...
MC is not in that loop at all...
Yet you have pushed him forward...
Thereby not responding to the issue of your use of the term "denomination"...

(sadly, the only active Catholic here at CH), I left that denomination.

And here you use it again without answering me...
By sending me to MC...
So what do you mean by denomination?

I've never conveyed that.

OK -
So what good does un-Justified man do?
And...
What good CAN un-Justified man do?

What I'm affirming is that in justification (narrow) Jesus is the Savior (not part-Savior - the part that is entirely ineffectual, not one of the RCC's Helpers in this, not the Possibility-Maker but Savior) and that the Holy Spirit is the Lord and Giver of Life (not the Offerer of life to any who will steal it away). That the giving of spiritual life/faith/Holy Spirt is God's doing and gift because of the Incarnation - the Death - the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, THE (one and only, all sufficient Savior).

How do you understand Christ in this passage?
Mat 11:12
And from the days of John the Baptist until now
the Kingdom of Heaven is suffering violence,
and the violent take it by force.

What is he talking about?

See post 671. MoreCoffee was unwilling to tell us what in that is apostate heresy, anathema, and deserving of the RCC splitting itself nearly in two over. In fact, he would not indicate ANYTHING in it that is clearly heretical. Perhaps you will from the Orthodox position.

You will have to work that one out with MC...

By Orthodox standards, it is true enough...
But it hangs in a cloud, presuming that Justification is the relevant operating term to be theologized, without reference to Historical Christianity and its understanding of the nature of Salvation...
"Narrow Justification" is much akin to historical Salvation, as conceptualized by the Reformation...
The revelation that sits at its base as it was reported in this thread is not from the God that I KNOW...
For it begins with fallen man's total depravity, as Calvin siezed upon...
And his condemnaiton by God...

The beginning of Salvation is the Call of God...
THEN comes Justification BY God...

I have yet to see you address this issue either...

How do you understand the difference between the two?
God's Call and God's Justification?

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

In justification (narrow) Jesus is the Savior

Agreed...

The Holy Spirit is the Lord and Giver of Life

Agreed...

The giving of spiritual life/faith/Holy Spirt is God's doing and gift

OK...

because of the Incarnation - the Death - the Resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Yes, all true enough...

Yet is this a decent dogmatic account of Salvation?

No... It is not even close...
Not by the standards of the Ancient Faith...


Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

Interesting that you say that. Very gratifying it is too. So the gospel, does it start with Jesus preaching "repent and believe the good news for the kingdom of God is at hand"? Or is that not the gospel? I am sure it is the gospel. Perhaps you can tell me why is says "repent and believe" rather than ignoring repentance?

Only the elect, chosen by God, will repent and believe.
What comes first, repent then believe or...God choosing who will repent and believe?
The Bible is so very clear regarding God's Sovereign choice in whom he reconciles. God is always in charge.
Yet, you keep pushing human effort as the means by which a person merits his justification before God. Why do you do such a thing?

 

[Josiah]

Agreed...



Agreed...



OK...



Yes, all true enough...

Yet is this a decent dogmatic account of Salvation?

No... It is not even close...
Not by the standards of the Ancient Faith...

It IS a complete proclamation of Justification (narrow). And in THAT sense, of Salvation - unless you reject that Jesus IS THE Savior and the Holy Spirit IS the GIVER of spiritual life. Now, is that the "END" of EVERYTHING? Of course not, as Protestants STRESS (more so than Catholics, in my experience) anymore than being conceived is the END of everything human and everything between God and man. But if the topic is conception, then yes an account of conception that you agree is correct would be a correct accounting of conception. If you want to change topics to something else, then something else would probably need to be said. IF we were discussing how to become an American citizen, we likely wouldn't be talking about serving on a jury - although American citizens are often called to do that. Follow? Arguing that serving on a jury causes one to become an American citizen is incorrect, although American citizens perhaps serving on a jury IS correct. Again, please note, the RCC itself indicated that's very grave, enormous problem with the Lutheran view concerns JUSTIFICATION (see post 671), NOT Sanctification (what happens as a result of the gift of life/faith/Holy Spirit/justification, on that we (and the vast majority of Western Christians anyway. We're not talking about Sanctification/Discipleship/the Christian Walk and Life because it's not been a significant issue of debate. The HUGE, HUGE issue the RCC made in the 16th Century and after is about Justification (narrow) - THAT is what the split the RCC brought about was over. There were other issues in the Reformation, but THAT was the "deal breaker" the horrible apostasy, the detestable heresy, the issue to be anathematized. See post 671.

The problem I see in popular Catholicism is what is true in Sanctification is imputed to Justification where it's not only not true but destructive of the Gospel. I admit to being entirely confused as to whether you agree or disagree with the generally Protestant position on narrow Justification (you've boldly stated that you agree and that you disagree - although never identifying WHAT you disagree with), but know this: It IS THE issue the RC Denomination chose to make the centerpiece of the debate, the generally Protestant position conveyed declared to be heresy and officially anathematized and split itself over. I don't know if the East stands with the post-Trent RCC on this or not (again, you indicate you agree with Protestants on THIS, but you utterly disagree on THIS- although you've never declared on what) but the RCC does utterly disagree, to the point of regarding what is shared in posts 671 and 780 for example as apostasy, heresy, to be officially anathematized. I realize this is a Catholic/Protestant division but you have chosen to quite engage in this discussion, although I still have no clue as to whether your "the Orthodox agree" or "the Orthodox utterly disagree" applies. I'll ask again: Look at post 671. Perhaps do what MoreCoffee has declined to do: SPECIFICALLY note what is THERE that is apostasy, heresy, mandating an official anathmatization, so horrible that the RCC needed to split the church again over THAT? Identify specifically WHAT is stated there that is so very, very wrong. That might help me, that would advance the discussion here.

It's extremely revealing, too, to note that the RCC did NOT shout, "Lutheranism is right about Justification BUT there is MUCH MORE than should be said about our relationship to God!" It stated, "what Lutherans say (see post 671) about Justification is WRONG, extremely and horribly WRONG, apostasy, heresy, anathema." Maybe you disagree. Maybe you agree. See post 671. Perhaps you'd highlight the horrible apostasy, the terrible heresy, that stuff stated in 671 that must be anathematized, the stuff SO detestable as to mandate splitting Christianity over. That would help us.


See posts 671 and 780.


Josiah


PS If you want to start a thread concerning denominations, you may. But it's not the issue here.




.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It IS a complete proclamation of Justification (narrow). And in THAT sense, of Salvation - unless you reject that Jesus IS THE Savior and the Holy Spirit IS the GIVER of spiritual life. Now, is that the "END" of EVERYTHING? Of course not, as Protestants STRESS (more so than Catholics, in my experience) anymore than being conceived is the END of everything human and everything between God and man. But if the topic is conception

The topic is not "conception" but it is "Justification".

, then yes an account of conception that you agree is correct would be a correct accounting of conception. If you want to change topics to something else, then something else would probably need to be said.


Arsenios

 

[Andrew]

We are justified because we believe, when you believe you dont just go around showcasing your belief by dogmatic ritual, whatever your good works are -are hidden, you can still go to church and participate in traditions as long as you will it you but it won't justify your faith if you already have it. Your works will indeed justify you in Gods eye but not in the vanity of men.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

[MennoSota]

We are justified because we believe, when you believe you dont just go around showcasing your belief by dogmatic ritual, whatever your good works are -are hidden, you can still go to church and participate in traditions as long as you will it you but it won't justify your faith if you already have it. Your works will indeed justify you in Gods eye but not in the vanity of men.

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

I'll go further and state: We are justified because God chooses to justify us and that is the only reason we are justified.
We believe because God chose to adopt us and give us faith.
There is literally nothing that we can observe in ourselves that impresses God. Everything we have is because...God.

 

[Andrew]

I'll go further and state: We are justified because God chooses to justify us and that is the only reason we are justified.
We believe because God chose to adopt us and give us faith.
There is literally nothing that we can observe in ourselves that impresses God. Everything we have is because...God.

Lets just say that God searches the hearts of men and chooses his children to adopt

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

 

[Arsenios]

Only the elect, chosen by God, will repent and believe.

Is there anything I can DO to become one of the elect?

Arsenios

 

[MennoSota]

Lets just say that God searches the hearts of men and chooses his children to adopt

Sent from my LGLS755 using Tapatalk

The heart of every man is wicked. He choice is a mystery of grace. There is no one that impresses God so that he is compelled to choose that person.
Our justification is not found within us. Our justification is found entirely in Christ alone.

 

[MennoSota]

Is there anything I can DO to become one of the elect?

Arsenios

No. You are at the mercy of the Sovereign God who either chooses to extend grace or extend judgment. It is his to decide.
If you hear his voice you will believe. If you don't hear his voice, you will consider the gospel to be foolishness.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Is there anything I can DO to become one of the elect?

Arsenios

Flip a coin?

 

[Arsenios]

See post... 780.
Josiah

See post 781...

Arsenios
The quintessential non-engagementalist!

 

[MoreCoffee]

Flip a coin?

:hiphiphooray:

One hopes that was a flippant remark

 

[Arsenios]

All true enough...
Yet is this a decent dogmatic account of Salvation?
[And the answer is:]
No... It is not even close...
Not by the standards of the Ancient Faith...

It IS a complete proclamation of Justification (narrow).
And in THAT sense, of Salvation -

What is the difference between Salvation and Justification?
And how are they related?

The stages in human terms according to Paul are
1 - God Calls us [to repentance]
2- God Justifies those He has Called
3 - God Glorifies those He has Justified...

And we should add to this that many are Called, and few are Chosen...

And in addition to the above, what is quintessential Salvation?
Is Justification by God a PART of it?
How does God Justify?
How does man KNOW God has Justified him...

You cannot, by Ancient Faith standards, simply ignore Christian history, then POSIT what some narrow sense of Justification is according to your own interpretation of what you read in the Bible, and then go on to argue that the Ancient Faith totally missed out on the Truth of the Faith of Christ...

You have to start out with HOW man is lost, and HOW he finds his Salvation in this being lost, and what Salvation IS for the lost... iow You must begin with a CONTEXT for man's NEED for God to Justify him... And in this, you have to answer Paul's three stages of Salvation...

Justification is stage two...

You have not addressed this - Insisting that "narrow Justification", your own admittedly technical term, which sounds a lot like Orthodox Salvation, is the fundamental term. It is NOT - It is stage two as Paul instructs...

Can you simply address Paul's words?

Rom_8:30
Moreover whom He did Fore-ordain, them He also Called:
and whom He Called, them He also Justified:
and whom He Justified, them He also Glorified.

Would you please engage this text? It should be clear that Justification is second in a string of three, or 3rd of 4, or 4th of 5... One simply CANNOT treat it as fundamental in the Gospel of Christ... Unless Called and Glorified are equally fundamental...

unless you reject that Jesus IS THE Savior and the Holy Spirit IS the GIVER of spiritual life.

Fallacy of the FALSE alternative... I agree that Christ is the Savior and that the Holy Spirit is the Lord and Giver of Life... And I utterly disagree with your theory of Justification as you have so far explained it...

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

Flip a coin?

:hiphiphooray:

One hopes that was a flippant remark

A terrible way to coin a phrase!

I mean, this is a SERIOUS discussion being tossed here!

Not a mere word salad!

Goorsch all Friday!

I say!

Arsenios

 

[Arsenios]

Changing our ways (eg repenting) does not justify anyone

God Justifies -

So why is repenting the first word of the Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Why does John's baptism of repentance precede the ministry of Christ?

What is the before and after relationship of repentance and the siezing of the Kingdom of Heaven?

What does "making straight the road" signify?

Arsenios

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

At times that's how Calvinist doctrine seem to me. A Godly coin-flip. "For God so loved the Elect that..."

oh, wait...