Featured What is Justification by faith?

You've done it. Some of your own text was coming through as part of a quote.
It's fine now.

 

Its always the other guy.

As I said...quote me denying that the Old Testament Saints were not justified.

You are being dishonest about this, and you can clear it up with a single quote.

Get busy.

When you do so, I will take up discussion with you again, but until then, I am quite content to let you continue to use dishonest debate tactics.


God bless.

 

So where is the quote to justify your charge?

Just one, Biblicist. That's all you need.


God bless.

 

The debate right now is whether you have been honest in your sharge against me.

No appeal for sympathy is going to change that, and no rule is being broken, unless it is false charges which are an attack.

You do not have liberty to raise false charges against another member and then cry foul when you are challenged...to back it up.

That's the debate. There is nothing in the rules that a member has to adopt your teaching simply because you have spoken.

In this thread, and the other, I am going to ask this same question for every post you make until you answer it. You can't answer what you want to answer and ignore that which challenges your teaching and really think...

...that is debate.

So I am full in, my friend, and that fact is you don't set the rules for what is debate and what isn't, particularly when your rules are make false statements about other members and refuse to back it up. I often say things that appear to be attacks but I try to give the reason for the statement/s.

Here is an example: I say your doctrine contradicts itself and can at times be seen to evolve in the process of a discussion. My proof? Well, how about the numerous posts concerning you saying infants have "no personal ability to discern right and wrong" which then, when you are forced to cede the point that we have an example of someone separated from God benefiting from the Grace of God, you start talking about John the Baptist understanding the good news of Christ's birth.

So which is it?

And I will cede the point that John and any infant can benefit from the ministry of the Holy Ghost in that Age, but...that is just another facet of my own doctrine, and comes into no conflict with my view that men were not born again before Pentecost.

And I don't even know why I am wasting my time with this, lol, because you would not address these issues before, so not sure why you would now.

Again, at this time...quote me saying the Old Testament Saints were not justified. You know you can't. I know you can't, because I know what my doctrine is. I don't have to worry that you can find me saying that.


God bless.

 

Yet again we have my supposed positions misrepresented without providing quotes of what I actually said. Anyone who pays attention to how my views are portrayed by the nameless doctrine proponents is naive.

Now let's turn to Biblicists points he is willing to debate.
1) He can certainly choose the positions to which he wants to respond.
2) No one is debating that Paul addresses justification based on faith in Romans.
3) No one is debating that Abraham is used to present how faith in Christ result in justification. But when and where that justification occurs is under debate.
4) No OT saint was justified before Christ died. Romans 3:24
5) No one is debating that "Adamic sin is what made all men sinners by nature and spiritually dead/separated from God and thus they come into the world already condemned, already dead in sins by nature at conception.
6) No one is debating that Scripture is the final authority in presenting Paul's doctrine of justification based on faith.

Thus the only point is #4, So why so much misdirection?

 

I see Martin has chimed in with his own misrepresentations. Good grief
1) No one said, saving faith was based on believing the right historical doctrine.
2) Saving faith is our faith, no matter how flawed, that God, who knows our heart, credits as righteousness.
3) 2 Corinthians 5:21 say we became the righteousness of God in Him. Romans 5:19 says the many (everyone placed in Christ) will be "made" righteous. This is done by the washing of regeneration, the circumcision of Christ.
4) Justification occurs when we are washed by Christ's blood, Romans 3:24.
5) No one is advocating Easy Believism.

 

Darrel C, I said you should speak for yourself. And please tell me which of the Arminian doctrines you disavow? Arminians believe in total spiritual inability. They overwrite it with Prevenient Grace. Your, "must be enlightened" sounds similar. Thus you seem to be more Arminian than me.

 

Yet again Biblicist has misrepresented my view without quoting it. Here is his fabrication.

But my position from Hebrew 11:2 is that all the OT saints gained approval through faith. And Paul uses Abraham (Romans 4:4-5/24) to show that NT saints also have their faith credited as righteousness in the same way.

Abraham had to wait to be made perfect, NT saints do not, because our faith is credited after Christ died.

No one claimed Abraham's approval was based on works, rather than faith. God knows the heart and credited Abraham's faith as righteousness based on that, and not works.

Next we get absurdity, the idea someone asserted that people were not unholy at the point where they were justified. Good Grief, God is the justifier of the unjust.

Justification occurs during regeneration, as born anew new creations we have been justified, made righteous, blameless, perfect, and holy.

 

Please notice that my posts 28, 29 and 31 addressed misrepresentations. Justification based on faith is an extremely important topic. But rather than address it, I must spend an inordinate amount of time addressing the misrepresentations (with no quotes to support) posted by opponents.

If we translate the preposition "ek" as based on, "dia" as through, "ex" as from, and the construction lacking a separate preposition as by, and arrange the phrases to make the meaning more clear,we get these translations of our verses:

Romans 3:28 For we consider a person to be justified by faith apart from the works of the law.
Romans 5:1 Therefore, since we have been justified based on faith through our Lord Jesus Christ, we have peace with God.
Galatians 2:16 Knowing that a person is not justified from the works of the law but through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, even we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified based on the faithfulness of Christ and not from the works of the law, because from the works of the law no one will be justified.
Galatians 3:24 Thus the law has become our escort to Christ, so that we could be justified based on faith.

In summary, we are justified based on our faith in Christ being credited as righteousness by God through the faithfulness of Christ on the cross.

 

Here is the "that. "My position from Hebrew 11:2 is that all the OT saints gained approval through faith. And Paul uses Abraham (Romans 4:4-5/24) to show that NT saints also have their faith credited as righteousness in the same way.

Two very different view. How are we justified? By the blood of Christ. That is what the bible teaches, Romans 5:9. Was Abraham justified or David justified before Christ died? Of course not. Was Abraham's faith credited as righteousness? Yes! His faith, his faith, his faith. Was David justified? Nope. But David does indicate a person receives blessings when his or her faith is credited as righteousness. Where does this go upon death? To Abraham's bosom and not Hades, because their faith was credited to them as righteousness.

Here is the deal, when a person's faith is credited to the person as righteousness, they are not justified. But when a person is subsequently placed in Christ, they are justified by the blood of Christ.

The error being presented by Biblicist is to claim a person is justified when their faith is credited to them as righteousness. However, for OT saints, Christ's sacrifice had not yet occurred, so they had to wait in Abraham's bosom.

 

But here is the biblical view:
Hebrews 10:14
For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. Everyone set apart in Christ, has been, past tense, perfected.

 

I am not going to address your view of Darrel's supposed view.
Everyone is unholy until justified by the blood of Christ. No one was justified before Christ died.
Next, yet another misrepresentation, no one was justified before Christ died.
If Abraham had been justified, he would have not have had to wait in Abraham's bosom until the blood of Christ was spilled.

I am sorry to say Biblicist has ceased to present anything to address. Romans 3:24 proves his view is bogus. And his response is to claim it invalidates my view.

 

Yet again a complete and utterly false statement. No quote, just another wholesale fabrication. Certainly this sort of vicious slander should be against the rules.

 

Last one, our justification is based on our faith toward Christ that has been credited as righteousness by God and through the faithfulness of Christ on the cross, for we are justified by His blood, Romans 5:9.
Scripture is crystal. Read again Romans 3:24.