Justification

1. Why do we feel it is necessary to complicate the sweet and wonderful Doctrine of Justification, without which, there is no gospel.

2. Paul preached a simple doctrine of justification, ""Therefore, my brothers, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses" (Acts 13:38, 39, NIV, emphasis mine).

a. Paul preached that Justification is the forgiveness of sins.

b. Previously, our sins separated us from God. Justification is the releasing of those sins that separated because the propitiation of Christ (Rom 3:23-26).

3. It is that simple.

 

No it's not. That's my whole point. Amy is addressing a text that calls for works, not faith. Therefore the context is not everlasting life. The context is aionios life which is the life that Jesus came to offer. But this aionios life is not based on you being a hearer, but a doer as James puts it. That's works.

If you want life you are going to have to do something. You are going to have to die to self. That's works.

 

1. Amy, I think this is what the Scripture is saying. At the foot of the cross of Christ, there are only two types of people: the unregenerate and the regenerate.

2. I do not see why when Paul makes these dichotomies that it must be Christians he is speaking about and not the unsaved.

3. Yes, his letters are addressed to saints, but along the way he makes reference even to the unsaved. A careful reading of Paul will undoubtedly reveal this.

 

Well, if dying to self is a work, I will be rewarded for it, as a believer standing at the JSOC.

I believe the "natural" man the Paul is referring to here is an unsaved man, because he goes on to say that he cannot understand the things of God because he does not have the Spirit of God.

That's right. The child of God is convicted and understands the things of God because he has the Spirit of God in him. He may disobey, but it's not because he had no understanding of God.

 

Isn't this what I said? I thought so. I agree that sometimes Paul is referring to the unsaved calling him the "natural" man.

I posted that scripture for JJ because he believes that even though a person has received the Holy Spirit, they may have NO change in their lives. He usually brings that up whenever I talk about the Holy Spirit.

I thought this was a good reference to the fact that there is a change.

 

1. I'm not in disagreement with you, for I'm only expressing the same.

2. I find that these matters are simple and not difficult, but they become complicated when we wish to promote "another" view of things.

 

Sorry for the miscommunication.
Yes, you are correct in that these matters of salvation, justification and sanctification are very simple and it's a shame when people try to complicate it.

 

Spiritually yes, but they will die physically and eternally. You are confusing your kinds of death.

 

Exactly, Pastor Larry, but you can't get JJ and HoG to understand that.

 

I'm not the one confusing them.

Either this is talking about a physical perishing in which case we're all going to perish, or it's talking about spiritually, in which case an unsaved person doesn't have a life to lose.

We can't mix-n-match 'em to suit our whims.

 

There are Christians only in the narrow way.
There are lost people only in the broad way. The destruction they suffer is the total loss like those that choose to build upon the sand as in Matthew 7:27. Notice these are the ones that heard but failed to do the teachings of Christ, but the one that heard and did his teachings, building upon the rock, which is Jesus Christ was saved. If He is not what you are building on you are not saved. If you are not in His way, the narrow way, you are not saved.

 

You left out what it is actually talking about and that is eternal perishing.

 

<3 u Larry!:wavey:

 

Sorry but that text does not say that the natural man "does not have the Spirit of God."

Again you are adding to what the text says.

 

You have yet to answer how someone who doesn't have a life can lose it.

Can you lose a $20 bill that you've never seen?

 

2 things are eternal.

The Word of God and God Himself.

And the souls of men.

 

1. Every person born into this world was born with life. That life was meant to be engulfed with the things of God. But because of our sin-nature, unless God does a work in our hearts, we will continue to rebel against him and forfeit our souls.

2. The life that will be lost, is that life which should have been enjoyed in the presence of God for all eternity. Instead, that life will be spent in eternal damnation (2 Thess.1:9).

3. To argue that a person must first possess life to lose it, is correct. But we must clarify ourselves in this world of deconstructionalism: What life are they losing? And what is meant by losing?

4. I submit that the life they are losing is that life which should have been spent with God in eternity but was overcome by sin and continued in sin. And the losing refers to life spent outside of the presence of God in eternal destrution.

a. It would be folly for me to conclude that a life that should have been spent in the sweet presence of God for all eternity but spent in eternal destruction is not considered as losing.

b. Losing one's life in eternal destruction must not lead to annihilationism.

 

It most certainly does say the natural man does not have the Spirit of God. Then "natural" man is ruled by his sinful nature and the things of God are foolishness to him. He cannot understand spiritual things because they are discerned through the Spirit of God. We (the saved) have the mind of Christ. The unsaved do not have the mind of Christ.


1Cr 2:9 but just as it is written, "THINGS WHICH EYE HAS NOT SEEN AND EAR HAS NOT HEARD, AND {which} HAVE NOT ENTERED THE HEART OF MAN, ALL THAT GOD HAS PREPARED FOR THOSE WHO LOVE HIM."
1Cr 2:10 For to us God revealed {them} through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.
1Cr 2:11 For who among men knows the {thoughts} of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the {thoughts} of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.
1Cr 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,
1Cr 2:13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual {thoughts} with spiritual {words.}
1Cr 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
1Cr 2:15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.
1Cr 2:16 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ.

Who is us and we in this passage compared to the natural man?

Paul includes himself in "us" and "we". Was he a "natural" man?