Justification?

Ephfourfive said:

And baptism?

Click to expand...

Not sure what you’re asking.

How about Justification by Grace alone ? Rom 3:24

24 being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

bling said:

For today: What is the difference between being righteous and being justified?

Click to expand...

No difference.

Danthemailman said:

Romans 5:1 says justified by faith “apart from additions or modifications.” So it’s faith (rightly understood) in Christ alone.

Click to expand...

Can one be Justified by the blood of Christ if Christ died for them apart from Faith Rom 5:9

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

Ephfourfive said:

Is baptism required for salvation?

Click to expand...

No, although it's commanded. I'm part of the Reformed tradition. We see it as a means of grace, that is, a way in which God reaches us. It represents, and helps us experience, death and resurrection with Christ, a connection made in Rom 6. But that doesn't mean it's impossible for God to save us without baptism.

Clare73 said:

In the NT usage, there is none, justification is righteousness = "not guilty," in right relationship with God through faith and trust in the person and work of Jesus Christ for the remission of one's sin, not based on any good works.

It should also be noted that in the NT sanctification is righteousness--growth in separation from sin (pluck it out, cut it off) and obedience to God, which involves works.

When the word "righteousness" is used, the context, in light of the whole NT, will show which one Paul is using.

Click to expand...

Paul emphasizes the idea you could not stand justified before God with the Old Law. You could be right or righteous before the Lord by doing right before the Lord. To stand justified before the Lord you would not only have to be doing right, but also have all your past wrongs resolved. To get your past wrongs resolved takes more than just having them forgiven by God. You could prostrate yourself before God asking for forgiveness and be forgive and be in a just position before God, your justified position before the Lord is on the floor face down. Paul is talking about us standing before God justified and more then just righteous.

Brightfame52 said:

No difference.

Click to expand...

Paul emphasizes the idea you could not stand justified before God with the Old Law. You could be right or righteous before the Lord by doing right before the Lord. To stand justified before the Lord you would not only have to be doing right, but also have all your past wrongs resolved. To get your past wrongs resolved takes more than just having them forgiven by God. You could prostrate yourself before God asking for forgiveness and be forgive and be in a just position before God, your justified position before the Lord is on the floor face down. Paul is talking about us standing before God justified and more then just righteous.

bling said:

Paul emphasizes the idea you could not stand justified before God with the Old Law. You could be right or righteous before the Lord by doing right before the Lord. To stand justified before the Lord you would not only have to be doing right, but also have all your past wrongs resolved. To get your past wrongs resolved takes more than just having them forgiven by God. You could prostrate yourself before God asking for forgiveness and be forgive and be in a just position before God, your justified position before the Lord is on the floor face down. Paul is talking about us standing before God justified and more then just righteous.

Click to expand...

In Rom 5:9

Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him

The word justified here dikaioō means:

1. to render righteous or such he ought to be
   
   
2. to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered
   
   
3. to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be
   

So they're the same.!

Ephfourfive said:

It is implied
And the covenant requires an outward sign of initiation into the covenant and union with the mediator and communion with God

Click to expand...

When it comes to repentance unto salvation (Acts 3:19; Acts 11:18) belief/faith is implied and when it comes to saving belief/faith repentance is implied because they are two sides to the same coin. Not so with baptism. You can repent and believe the gospel but not yet be water baptized.

The promise (sacred oath or sacrament) of the father acts 2:38-39 with reference to ez 36:25-27

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Click to expand...

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

So the only logical conclusion *when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture* is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

Ez 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Click to expand...

Ezekiel 36:25 says, "I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities" (also see Numbers 19:17-19; Psalm 51:2,7). Physical water represents or signifies spiritual purification, but it does not cause it. In John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing. Also see John 4:10,14. The word "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26)

Hebrews 8:6
But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. Based on Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

A promise is a sacred oath or sacrament!
Baptismal regeneration is the promise of the Father for union in the new covenant!

Click to expand...

Baptismal regeneration is a false doctrine that adds works to the gospel.

The church and the seven sacraments are necessary for salvation

Click to expand...

False and you are obviously Roman Catholic. Been there, done that prior to my conversion several years ago.

Better covenant on better promises

Click to expand...

The new covenant is certainly a better covenant on better promises.

An oath to sacramental life in the new covenant in union with the mediator and communion with God!

Click to expand...

Water baptism is an ordinance, not a sacrament.

Context of Jn 3:5 “born again”

John 1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; (John prepared the way by baptism)

John 2:6 And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. (Old covenant prefiguring of baptism, purification from sin)(His disciples believed because the ever Virgin mother of God interceded Jn 2:11)

John3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (Baptism)

Click to expand...

Have you even considered "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39? Again, in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing. If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

Also "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, divine life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature." (2 Peter 1:4) The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23), but the Holy Spirit is the Agent who accomplishes the miracle of regeneration.
*So to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

John 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. 23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized. (Baptism)

Click to expand...

In regards to water baptism in John 3:22, Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus is over with and He has moved on. John 3:22 - After these things Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea, and there He was spending time with them and baptizing. So water baptism does not fit the context of John 3:5.

John 4:4 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John.

Click to expand...

(though Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples)
In John 4:10, Jesus said, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, 'Give Me a drink,' you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water." In John 4:14, Jesus said, "but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life. *Jesus connects this living water here with everlasting life. *Living water is not water baptism. In 1 Corinthians 12:13, we also read - ..drink into one Spirit. Water baptism is the picture or symbol of the new birth, but not the means of securing it.

Born again means Baptismal regeneration!

Click to expand...

False and heretical doctrine. Born again means "born from above."

Mark 16:16 The requirements for those who are being saved cannot be undone by the requirements for those not being saved! He who believes and is baptized is still required for salvation? Heaven and earth may pass away but my words shall not pass away!

Click to expand...

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely necessary for salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief and not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. *NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned." So what happened to baptism in John 3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26? and no baptism is not implied.

It is Reasonable that if they reject faith why bother mentioning the second requirement?

Click to expand...

There have been many people over the years in various false religions and cults who have a spurious faith yet have gone on to receive water baptism. If someone truly rejects faith and does not even believe in the existence of Christ, then they would not bother getting water baptized. If baptism is a second requirement then why is it not mentioned in so many passages of scripture in connection with obtaining salvation? (John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5-6; 5:1; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8,9; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..). Gonna stick with the "it's assumed" argument? That may be the only desperate attempt to get around the truth here.

Brightfame52 said:

In Rom 5:9

Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him

The word justified here dikaioō means:

1. 
   
   
   • to render righteous or such he ought to be
   • to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous, such as he is and wishes himself to be considered
   • to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous, or such as he ought to be

So they're the same.!

Click to expand...

Did God write that dictionary?

Butterball1 said:

James is using justified in the same way Paul uses justified.

Click to expand...

False. Paul is using the term "justified" to describe the judicial act of God by which He accounts the believer as righteous. (Romans 4:2-3) James however is using the term "justified" to show the genuineness of one's faith by the works that they do. (James 2:21,24)

The difference in what Paul and James is saying is in WHAT TYPE of work justifies and what type of work does NOT justify.

Click to expand...

That is false and results in salvation by works -- saved by "these" works and just not "those" works. Paul does not merely limit works to specific works of the law. In Titus 3:5, Paul said it's not by works of righteousness which we have done, (of works which are done in righteousness) but according to His mercy He saved us.. In 2 Timothy 1:9, Paul states that God saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works.. So it's works in general that do not save us.

James shows the work of being obedient to GOd's will justifies, James 2:21-24 and Paul is saying the flawless, perfect sinless works required by the OT law does not justify.

Click to expand...

That is still saved by "these" works and just not "those" works (sugar coated double talk) which still equates to salvation by works, which is condemned in scripture. John 6:40 - For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. In James 2:15-16, the example of a "work" that James gives is: "If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Depart in peace, be warmed and filled," but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?" To give a brother or sister these things needed for the body would certainly be a "work of faith/good work" yet to neglect such a brother or sister and not give them the things needed for the body is to break the second great commandment "love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:39) as found written in the law of Moses. (Leviticus 19:18)

In Matthew 22:37-40, we read: Jesus said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets. Please tell me which works a Christian could do that are "completely detached" from these two great commandments which are found in the law of Moses? (Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18) You cannot dissect good works in general from the moral aspect of the law.

If Abraham had not obeyed God in Genesis 12 in moving from his house, land, kindred he would never have been justified. Abraham's justification was a process that began in Gen 12 and he met the final test in Genesis 22 when he offered Isaac. Genesis 22:12 "And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me." "Now I know" is not said in Gen 12,15,17 but not until Gen 22. Had Abraham failed this final test he would not have been justified. This is why James cites Gen 22 in James 2:21 as the point of Abraham's final justification.

Click to expand...

Justification is not a process, but is instantaneous. In Genesis 12, we see the call of Abraham to leave his country and go to the land that God will show him. Abraham left, yet it was not until Genesis 15:5-6 when God told Abraham to look up at the sky and count the stars—if indeed you can count them. Then He said to him, "So shall your offspring be." Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness.

Therefore Abraham was not unconditionally, totally justified in Gen 12 or Gen 15 once and for all time regardless of what he did. For had he disobeyed in Gen 22 and not obeyed by offering Isaac he would not have been justified.

Click to expand...

Abraham was totally justified (accounted as righteous) in Genesis 15. When Abraham performed the good work in Genesis 22; he fulfilled the expectations created by the pronouncement of his faith in Genesis 15:6. Abraham was accounted as righteous based on his faith (Genesis 15:6) not his works (Romans 4:2-3) long before he offered up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22.

In James 2:21, notice closely that James does not say that Abraham's work of offering up Isaac resulted in God accounting Abraham as righteous. The accounting of Abraham's faith as righteousness was made in Genesis 15:6, many years before his work of offering up Isaac recorded in Genesis 22. The work of Abraham did not have some kind of intrinsic merit to account him as righteous, but it showed or manifested the genuineness of his faith. That is the "sense" in which Abraham was "justified by works." He was shown to be righteous.

Therefore Paul is NOT saying in Romans 4:3 that Abraham was justified by "faith alone" in Gen 15:6 once and for all time regardless of what Abraham did for again had Abraham not obeyed in Gen 22 he would not have been justified.

Click to expand...

Paul certainly was saying that Abraham was justified by "faith alone" (apart from works) in Romans 4:2-3. Also continue to read on through verse 6. If Abraham would have refused to offer up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22, then he would have demonstrated a lack of faith, but of course, that was not the case.

So Paul's point in Rom 4 is NOT that justification is by "faith alone" but is showing justification does not come by trying to keep the OT law flawlessly and perfectly. Instead justification comes by an obedient faith in doing what God says....as Abraham obeyed God from Gen 12 to Gen 22.

Click to expand...

That is false and results in salvation by faith and works.

Again, the reason Paul cited Genesis 15:6 in Romans 4:3 was to show Abraham was justified by faith and not by works required by the law of Moses. Genesis 15:6 uses the words Paul needed to show Abraham was justified by faith (Paul says "faith" NOT "faith alone"). Simply because Paul picked Genesis 15:6 to make his point does NOT means Abraham wasn't justified before Gen 15. Paul speaks of "righteousness of faith" in Romans 4:13. Abraham had faith back in Genesis 12 when he moved from his home per Hebrews 11:8. Therefore Abrham faith would be seen as righteous by God in Gen 12 BEFORE Gen 15. Genesis 15:6 is just a continuation of the process of Abraham's justification that began in Gen 12 with the final test in Gen 22.

Click to expand...

So show me the words "accounted as righteous" in Genesis 12. Genesis 15:6 - Then He brought him outside and said, “Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them.” And He said to him, “So shall your descendants be.” And he believed in the LORD, and He accounted it (faith, not works) to him for righteousness. This is not a process of salvation by faith and works.

Therefore James is NOT using justified to "show or exhibit" that Abraham had already been justified unconditionally once and for all time by faith alone in Gen 15:6 but to point to the final justification of Abraham in Gen 22 when he OBEYED God in offering Isaac. Had Abraham disobeyed in Gen 22 he would NOT have been justified. Justication was a process with Abraham.

Click to expand...

Absolutely false, as I already explained otherwise.

EDIT James 2:25 "Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?"

Click to expand...

In James 2:25, Rahab believed in the Lord with authentic faith (Joshua 2:9-13), requested "kindness" (2:12), received the promise of kindness (2:14), and hung out the "scarlet line" (2:21), as the demonstration of her authentic faith. She showed that her faith in God was not a dead faith by her works, just as all genuine believers show theirs. (James 2:18)

James does not use "justified" to "show or exhibit" that Rahab had already been unconditionally justified by 'faith alone' at some earlier point in time when she in fact had not been. Instead she was not justified until she did an obedient work..... Hebrews 11:31. Had Rahab done nothing to help the spies, her faith would have been useless, dead, worthless.

Click to expand...

Helping the spies was a demonstration of her faith and not the origin of it, just as Noah's obedience in building the ark was a demonstration of his faith, not the origin of it. Noah had already "found grace" (Genesis 6:8), was "a preacher of righteousness" (2 Peter 2:5), and "walked with God" BEFORE he built the ark. Your gross error leads to salvation by works.

As it has been said many times, James' use of Abraham and Rahab is to show true proof of faith is works from a high patriarch to a lowest prostitute. God's standards are the same for all...obedience is required to be justified. Faith alone is dead without obedient works.

Click to expand...

In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims he has faith but has no evidential works (to validate his claim). That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith. So James does not teach that we are saved "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine. Simple!

James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3) Works bear out the justification that already came by faith.

Brightfame52 said:

Can one be Justified by the blood of Christ if Christ died for them apart from Faith Rom 5:9

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

Click to expand...

Apart from faith (our part) there is no justification by his blood (Christ's part). Romans 3:24 - being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

bling said:

Did God write that dictionary?

Click to expand...

So you dont accept that being made righteous is justification.

Danthemailman said:

Apart from faith (our part) there is no justification by his blood (Christ's part). Romans 3:24 - being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Click to expand...

Thats justification by works, mans act of faith as you say, mans part Thats saying Christ blood alone didnt Justify before God those Christ shed His Blood for. Rom 5:9

Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

See thats what God given Faith sees !

Brightfame52 said:

So you dont accept that being made righteous is justification.

Click to expand...

Right.

Brightfame52 said:

Thats justification by works, mans act of faith as you say, mans part Thats saying Christ blood alone didnt Justify before God those Christ shed His Blood for. Rom 5:9

Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

See thats what God given Faith sees !

Click to expand...

Christ's blood is the all sufficient means of our salvation (Romans 5:9) and faith in Christ for salvation is the instrumental means by which we obtain justification. (Romans 5:1) Christ's finished work of redemption is sufficient and complete to save believers. No supplements needed. (Romans 3:24-28) Choosing to place our faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Jesus Christ alone for salvation does not equate to justification or salvation by works.

Ephfourfive said:

What about Jn 3:5?

What is reformed theology? How can what God has reveled be imperfect or needing of reform?
The church is the spotless bride of Christ and cannot be reformed and doctrine is immutable

Click to expand...

Making baptism an absolute requirement for salvation is way too legalistic for me. Paul spent his whole career fighting the idea that circumcision is necessary for salvation, maintaining that we are justified by faith, not by external actions such as circumcision. He didn’t win that argument just to have baptism replace circumcision as the external act that justifies us.

Did John actually mean baptism in 3:5? Probably. But see also Ezek 36:25-26, which is probably the OT background for this:

“I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.”

The water is ultimately God’s cleansing, of which the sacrament of baptism is a visible sign.

Before the rise of the Internet, I moderated a Christian discussion forum in a different medium (Usenet). In one posting someone described the following situation: A person became a Christian, but he was converted by a group that believed there was no salvation without baptism. Before he could be baptized, he was in an automobile accident, and ended up in intensive care. This group also believed that baptism could only be done by immersion, which of course the intensive care ward would not allow. The person died believing he was going to hell. I think most Christians would say that telling him that was abusive.

That’s why the Catholic Church — which certainly believes in baptismal regeneration — maintains that when physical baptism is impossible, or the person doesn’t realize that it’s necessary, they may have the grace of baptism without the physical act.