Some view that people who gained approval through faith under the Old Covenant, were fully justified by the "promised" blood of Christ. Their faith "looked forward" to Christ. In order for the [snip] doctrine advocates to force their [doctrine] doctrines into scripture they must resort to redefining words (i.e. draw always means compel rather than attract by lovingkindness.) They [misinterpret] scripture, Matthew 23:13 does not really say that men who were entering the kingdom were blocked. No that cannot be true because it demonstrates their mistaken doctrine [snip]. But the most egregious misuse of scripture is to ignore the given sequence, and claim the opposite sequence occurred. They put the cart before the horse again and again. How? By the use of time travel. Folks can be washed by the blood of Christ before Christ died. As ludicrous as this view is, they put it forth again and again, as if repeating an obvious falsehood somehow makes it less of a falsehood.
Abraham had as James would say, "live faith" rather than dead faith. From his faith flowed works, such as offering up Isaac.
Now the bone of contention is whether we should use the term "justified" when OT saints gain approval through "live faith." Or, the alternate view, should we reserve the term "justified" to only refer to those washed by the shed (past tense) blood of Christ. This alternate view is the one I advocate. I believe where we see translations use the term justified for OT Saints, that the translation should read "acted righteously" or "self proclaimed righteousness" Thus we do not use the term "justified" to mean two very different things, which creates confusion.
Let us look at a few:
Job 40:8
“Will you really nullify My judgment?
Will you condemn Me so that you may be justified?" Here "you may proclaim yourself righteous" better presents the actions of the person the Lord is questioning.
Isa 45:25
“In the LORD all the offspring of Israel
Will be justified and will boast.” Here since the justification is future, justified might seem valid. But some might claim the OT saints were already "in Christ" rather than waiting to be made perfect in Christ. So again, "will be proclaimed righreous and will boast.
We know that everyone enrolled in heaven has been, past tense, made perfect, Hebrews 12:23. And we know no one entered heaven before Christ came from heaven, John 3:13.
Thus the time travel theology of claiming the OT saints were regenerated before Christ was put to death is unbiblical.
Abraham had as James would say, "live faith" rather than dead faith. From his faith flowed works, such as offering up Isaac.
Now the bone of contention is whether we should use the term "justified" when OT saints gain approval through "live faith." Or, the alternate view, should we reserve the term "justified" to only refer to those washed by the shed (past tense) blood of Christ. This alternate view is the one I advocate. I believe where we see translations use the term justified for OT Saints, that the translation should read "acted righteously" or "self proclaimed righteousness" Thus we do not use the term "justified" to mean two very different things, which creates confusion.
Let us look at a few:
Job 40:8
“Will you really nullify My judgment?
Will you condemn Me so that you may be justified?" Here "you may proclaim yourself righteous" better presents the actions of the person the Lord is questioning.
Isa 45:25
“In the LORD all the offspring of Israel
Will be justified and will boast.” Here since the justification is future, justified might seem valid. But some might claim the OT saints were already "in Christ" rather than waiting to be made perfect in Christ. So again, "will be proclaimed righreous and will boast.
We know that everyone enrolled in heaven has been, past tense, made perfect, Hebrews 12:23. And we know no one entered heaven before Christ came from heaven, John 3:13.
Thus the time travel theology of claiming the OT saints were regenerated before Christ was put to death is unbiblical.
Last edited by a moderator:
