Justification
- Thread starter MoreCoffee
- Start date
- Status
MennoSota
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Messages
- 7,102
- Age
- 55
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Christian
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Marital Status
- Married
Since no one seeks God, not even one (Romans 3), your statement means that Jesus saves no one for no one willfully seeks God.
By the way have you met any orphan who hated being adopted, despite having no say in the adoption?
ImaginaryDay2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 3,982
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2015
- Messages
- 19,311
- Location
- Western Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Catholic
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Marital Status
- Single
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
It read as a melodramatic Luther emulation comment to me. Not a substantial argument about Justification. Only unwillingness to admit a mistake.
MennoSota
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Messages
- 7,102
- Age
- 55
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Christian
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Marital Status
- Married
LOL, you're deep...
MennoSota
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2017
- Messages
- 7,102
- Age
- 55
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Christian
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Marital Status
- Married
Two people that struggle to understand how a person who is spiritually dead in their trespasses and sins can still keep on sinning. I don't see why it is so hard for you to conceive. What I do note is that if you grant what Paul says as truth, you are then faced with the unmistakable reality that God and God alone does the work of making us alive in Christ. There is no synergistic effort from you. You cannot pat yourself on the back and pridefully proclaim the greatness of your choice.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
No. He said "to His disciples," to those alive. The living can live. Generally the dead don't. The living can will, the dead typically not.
So, In terms of Justification (narrow), WHO is the Savior?
IF you answer "Jesus" then Jesus is the Savior. Not you - not a bit, not at all, not now, not ever, not in any way or shape or form or manner. Salvation is entirely, wholly wrapped up in Jesus. It's entirely HIS work. HIS heart. HIS love. HIS mercy. HIS gift. HIS blessing. His life, His death, His resurrection. His Cross, His blood, His sacrifice. His righteousness, His obedience, His holiness. Not you. Not yours. If it has to do with salvation, then Jesus does it. It's a gift, an inheritance. You may have some other role in some other matter, but not this. The "job" of Savior belongs to Jesus. Not you.
IF you answer "me!" then you are the Savior. Not Jesus. Not a bit, not at all. Not now, not ever. Not in any way, shape or form or manner. Salvation is all wrapped up in YOU. YOUR works. YOUR will. YOUR love. YOUR efforts. YOUR merits. YOUR obedience. YOUR righteousness. YOUR holiness. YOUR choices. YOUR accomplishment. YOUR sacrifice. Not Jesus. Not Jesus'. If it has to do with salvation, then you do it. Reward. Payment. Jesus may have some other role in some other matter, just not this one. The Savior is you. (And it is deceptive to refer to Jesus as the Savior if He's not).
Is the Savior the one on the Cross or the one in the mirror? Which is it?
Protestants disagree; we reject that self is the savior of self. We hold that Jesus is the Savior.
Protestants disagree that self is the Lord and Giver of life, we agree with the Ancient Creed that God is.
1. The dead don't deny themselves. They deny God.
2. BELIEVERS are told to take up their cross and follow Jesus; the verse specifically states Jesus told this "to His disciples."
3. If it's "meeting half way" then Jesus is half Savior. And it would be good to be honest about that view, and not deceptive by calling Jesus THE Savior. Protestants don't deny Jesus as the Savior or insists that He's only (at most) HALF Savior. We hold that Jesus is the Savior, which is why we proclaim Jesus as the Savior.
4. The Prodgical Son was alive... but wondered off. Only a tiny percentage of Protestants hold to OSAS (and even they don't deny that a believer can wonder off, only that they will eventually return). The parable is not that the Prodigal Son - before he was conceived in his mother's womb, met his mother "half way" and that together, each contributing half, caused the not-yet-alive prodigal son to be conceived.
Sanctification is the RESPONSE to justification; it is the living thus living; it is those loved now loving ("Just as I have FIRST loved you"); it is the living growing and maturing, becoming more Christ-like. And it's not the topic of this thread.
A blessed Easter season to all...
- Josiah
.
Last edited:
Arsenios
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2018
- Messages
- 3,577
- Location
- Pacific North West
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Eastern Orthodox
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Single
The opening words are: "ei tis thelei": IF ANYone is willing/desiring...
So your argument is with Christ saying "ANYONE"...
And YOU saying "ONLY TO THOSE ALREADY LIVING"
So which of these do YOU choose to follow?
Christ?
Or...
Your own self whom Christ disciples YOU to deny?
As a friend of mine wrote not too many posts back:
"It aint no rocket science!"
Sanctification is the Presence of God, and is not the human response to such Presence...
Roger that...
Arsenios
Arsenios
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2018
- Messages
- 3,577
- Location
- Pacific North West
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Eastern Orthodox
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Single
"Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at HAND!"
Don't you just LOVE the Gospel of Jesus Christ?
Arsenios
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2015
- Messages
- 33,436
- Age
- 58
- Gender
- Female
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
It's important to note that Jesus was speaking to those who already were waiting for the promised Messiah and it's far different for him to talk to them about "will" than someone who has never heard the Gospel message. God had already acted in His people bringing them to faith and we see that some, once meeting Jesus turn away from Him and they were unwilling to believe in Him.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
No. The opening words are, "Jesus said TO HIS DISCIPLES...." And of course, the only ones who can follow are those who are alive... dead people don't follow the God they deny, reject and repudiate. Unbelievers don't deny themselves, they deny Christ. Not until people are alive and with faith and with the Holy Spirit is it even POSSIBLE for someone to deny themselves and follow Christ.
IMO, you need to decide who the Savior is. All will be a blur until it is acknowledged that the dead are dead and the unbelieving who thus deny Christ (and uphold self) are dead and thus unbelieving and deny Christ. The Jewish - Muslim - Hindu - Buddhist "answer" is that self needs saving but that self is the Savior of self (albeit with divine help). The Christian answer is that self needs saving and that Jesus is the Savior. The ancient creed professes that God is the GIVER of life... not the "offerer" or "helper" or "meets us half way so that the dead give themselves HALF of life and God gives them the other half." I think it would help if you decide where we see the Savior, the Giver of Life - on the Cross or in the mirror?
Sanctification is the RESPONSE to justification; it is the living thus living; it is those loved now loving ("Just as I have FIRST loved you"); it is the living growing and maturing, becoming more Christ-like. It's another subject for another day and thread.
- Josiah
.
Last edited:
hedrick
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2015
- Messages
- 683
- Age
- 75
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Single
I think it's worth moderating some of this discussion. Classical Protestant theologies have said that it is necessary to draw near to Christ. (I'd normally call that faith, but I'll accept either wording.) I don't see any reason to deny it. However the Reformed and Lutheran traditions have said that we can do that only when we're freed by God.
At least among Reformed, the usual view is "compatibilism," which says that responsible human choice and God's action are compatible. That is, there are two descriptions, both of which are true. If you look at human activities, we repent and turn to Christ. We are moved to do so by things like preaching. If you could look at things from God's point of view, you'd see that this activity is part of God's plan, and in fact that God has to enable it.
I think some Protestant discussion can leave the impression that God simply changes an entry in the ledger without actually arranging for us to come to Christ. Neither Luther nor Calvin believed that we could be saved without faith.
At least among Reformed, the usual view is "compatibilism," which says that responsible human choice and God's action are compatible. That is, there are two descriptions, both of which are true. If you look at human activities, we repent and turn to Christ. We are moved to do so by things like preaching. If you could look at things from God's point of view, you'd see that this activity is part of God's plan, and in fact that God has to enable it.
I think some Protestant discussion can leave the impression that God simply changes an entry in the ledger without actually arranging for us to come to Christ. Neither Luther nor Calvin believed that we could be saved without faith.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2015
- Messages
- 19,311
- Location
- Western Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Catholic
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Marital Status
- Single
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
You're likely right about what you've written. As I read the thread I come away relieved that I am not a Protestant.
ImaginaryDay2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 3,982
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
Consideration of worldview would go a long way in this thread, I think. obviously, the pov's expressed here are not going to be similar to our own, and to argue ad nauseam will only prevent us from learning and growing in our fellowship with others. It might be worth noting that my Lutheran congregation shares building space with an EO mission. So far, we've not gone to war, but recognize one another as brothers in Christ. If we'd read between the lines of our respective points, I think we'd see we're not that far off.
Imo, it's pointless asking "who is the Savior" and suggesting with it that one who might be "synergistic" (and I'm not sure that EO can be neatly compartmentalized like that) deny it is Christ. Likewise, Monergists in no way reject that we have a part - one here has even suggested that sanctification might be what we do (i.e. it is the "response").
Spiritual terms and truths are not so neatly placed into baskets that they are discernible and easily digested.
Imo, it's pointless asking "who is the Savior" and suggesting with it that one who might be "synergistic" (and I'm not sure that EO can be neatly compartmentalized like that) deny it is Christ. Likewise, Monergists in no way reject that we have a part - one here has even suggested that sanctification might be what we do (i.e. it is the "response").
Spiritual terms and truths are not so neatly placed into baskets that they are discernible and easily digested.
Last edited:
ImaginaryDay2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 3,982
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2015
- Messages
- 19,311
- Location
- Western Australia
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Catholic
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Marital Status
- Single
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
Oh, come on, we have tea!
We have Irish Coffee! :disgonbegood:
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
1. No one here (IMO) has remotely suggested that anyone else is not a Christian or not justified. As I have posted very often, I certainly consider Catholics to be my FULL, UNseparated, and in every way equal and equally blessed brothers and sisters in Christ (no Catholic here has returned that, saying the same of Lutherans for example, but that doesn't change my view). Let's keep that in mind....
2. I have expressed my pov AS A PROTESTANT and have made that very clear. I'm conveying how classic Protestants (that probably means conservative Lutherans and Reformed, as well as many Anglicans) view this. I see an Orthodox perhaps considering sharing the EO view (but hasn't yet) and of course our resident Catholic just disagreeing with any and all Protestants.
3. Of course, we've discussed this topic in COUNTLESS threads here at CH. Dozens of them (although our new friend is new to the topic HERE). I have noted numerous times that the point where we depart is that Protestants address this as TWO inseparable issues - Justification and Sanctification (both in the narrow sense), whereas Catholics address this as one big issue. This, IMO, is the "heart" of the problem. Protestants like to address Law and Gospel as distinctive, Catholics jump them together. This, the "problem" in our communications. I've shared before, too, that I am not at all convinced that the OFFICIAL position of the RCC on this is errant - only that it is framed and conveyed very differently. Where I DO see a distinctive difference is in how POPULAR Catholicism (the kind IMO taught by the laity in Catholic parishes - and in my case, that also was our Deacon - the view me and virtually every Catholic known to me was taught on this) which perhaps is simply MEANT to be "simple" and "bottom line" but ends up being very different. I have often quoted verbatim my Catholic teachers on this, never once told that I was lying or that our Catholic teachers didn't say that... not even disagreeing with what our Catholic teachers taught us. The stuff I (and almost every Catholic known to me) was taught is what I have disagreed with. The OFFICIAL stance MAY be fine - it's just so extremely difficult to determine. In any case, I believe they have the gift of faith - and that we'll be in heaven forever.
4. I have had the joy of having a Greek Orthodox friend for years. We actually met when we were both undergrads in college. While we haven't seen in other in person for some time, and indeed don't "chat" on line now (both busy with new families), we had this discussion at some length. Her insight: Theology, person, is not really "developed" in the same way or extent as is the case in the West, and so discussions of this sort are a bit uncomfortable for the EO's. She commented that Justification in the way Western Protestants speak of it is (to me oddly) - not on their "radar" (so to speak). The focus is not on how one BECOMES a believer only to celebrate that one does - and then to focus on the spiritual life of the believer. From her - and from my Catholic teachers - I've gathered that this issue SO DEFINING of Protestantism (and the issue the RCC chose to split itself over) is one where the RCC itself is vague and likes to speak of this is a combined manner, whereas the Orthodox really don't speak to the issue of justification (in the Protestant sense) much at all. THUS, a Catholic who YET AGAIN brings up this subject at CH gives Protestants an opportunity to speak of what we consider "the Chief Article" and that largely defines us as Protestants. Once again, our Catholic friend hasn't given us the RCC view (official or popular) and so far our EO friends hasn't either. IMO, the RCC has an Official view (I just think it's EXTREMELY hard to know) and several Popular views. But the Protestants were given yet another chance to share what we consider the most important teaching of all.
5. In Protestantism, there are two "takes" on this. Monergism comes from Luther, Calvin and most conservative/traditional Anglicanism - the "first wave" or "conservative" Reformation. A more synergistic view came from the the "second wave" or Radical Protestants, the revolutionaries such as the Anabaptists. They are closer to the Catholic view than are the "first wavers." So not all Protestants define this the same way. Admitted.
6. Actually, I think my point of "who is the savior" gets RIGHT to the issue in Protestantism. And yes, OF COURSE, we have a role - but not in justification, that's in sanctification as you pointed out.
ImaginaryDay2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 3,982
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
nm
Last edited:
ImaginaryDay2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2015
- Messages
- 3,982
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Moderate
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
I wouldn't say this is true at all. Maybe re-read the OP. It differs from traditional Protestant understanding, but states the POV nonetheless and should have some bearing on the conversation here.
from the OP:
[quote="MoreCoffee]Catholic teaching places more emphasis in Justification meaning "made righteous" or "made just" and the idea is that not only is there a legal idea in the word "justification" but there is also a real change in the people who are said to be "justified" and that real change is that they become - progressively - more and more just and righteous when they make good use of the graces that God gives to them in their lives. And because Catholic tradition keeps both the idea of legal and of actual change of status in its use of "justification" it follows that Catholic theology also places emphasis on real change in one's way of life and attitudes and words and doings as the actual meaning of "justification".
http://christianityhaven.com/showthread.php?5265-Justification&p=129192#post129192[/quote]
See here also: http://christianityhaven.com/showthread.php?5265-Justification&p=129221#post129221
I also see the first response was an immediate 'cut-and-paste' that has been used multiple times in multiple threads, rather than a discussion on the OP
Last edited:
Arsenios
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2018
- Messages
- 3,577
- Location
- Pacific North West
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Eastern Orthodox
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Single
So you think that the context of his audience modifies His words?
I mean, if He had said: "If any of YOU are willing..." your case would clearly be made... And I would slink off into oblivion... Where I belong!
But that little word tis - It only means "If anyone" in context - It actually means: "If ANY..." It is a generic indeterminate pronoun... And by it, He signifies the gentiles as He is addressing the Jews... For as God, He knew that He would be rejected by the Jews... And that His words would go out to ANY who hear the Gospel and obey it by converting their life to a life of ever-repenting in love of God and man... And indeed, in love of all creation...
So we get to disagree a bit!
Arsenios
- Status