"The Ancient Way" discussion of George Boyd's "Justification by Faith" post

Not David said:

Our Church wrote the Scripture, it is not something that drop from Heaven like the Quran

Click to expand...

The apostles, and Luke, and Jude penned the God-breathed Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16). . .the apostles belong to all the born again.

Clare73 said:

Matthew 7:22-23; Luke 8:13.

Genuine faitih does not fall away (Romans 8:29-30).

Click to expand...

That does not speak to genuine faith or falling away.

Clare73 said:

100% the work of the Holy Spirit (John 3:3, John 3:7).

God justifies the wicked (not the righteous) through faith (Romans 4:5).

Click to expand...

Except that justification and regeneration does not occur at the same time in the Protestant mindset.

Clare73 said:

The apostles, and Luke, and Jude penned the God-breathed Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16). . .the apostles belong to all the born again.

Click to expand...

Which are Saints of the Orthodox Church.

HTacianas said:

That does not speak to genuine faith or falling away.

Click to expand...

It does if you understand that only true faith saves (Ephesians 2:8-9), and they were not saved. . . because they did not have true faith.

Not David said:

Except that justification and regeneration does not occur at the same time
in the Protestant mindset.

Click to expand...

Scripture is the only mindset in which I traffic.

Not David said:

Which are Saints of the Orthodox Church.

Click to expand...

And saints of all Christendom.

All the born again are in Christ, are his bride and body, the Church.

Clare73 said:

Matthew 7:22-23; Luke 8:13.

Genuine faitih does not fall away (Romans 8:29-30).

Click to expand...

Good evening.

It’s rather a circular argument, isn’t it, to say that we know one is “saved” by their “faith” but that if they do return to sin that means their faith wasn’t in fact genuine.

It’s a new way of explaining things that wasn’t what what the Apostles were teaching.

It IS possible for a person to fall away, having once been among the faithful. Otherwise it wouldn’t make sense for Scripture to warn of it (Heb 6 for example) and for many admonitions that one must persevere in the faith in order to be saved.


4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

I don’t have a great deal of time at the moment. I might have more later. But Dr. Jeannie Constantineau has taught (along with her husband, Fr. Costa which I might be misspelling) especially about the Greek meaning of the words we translate as “justification”. There have been at least 2 podcasts this year on Search the Scriptures Live (Ancient Faith Radio) on that topic.
Search the Scriptures Live | Ancient Faith Ministries

Word Study: Justification - Search the Scriptures Live | Ancient Faith Ministries

And I have listened several times to the series on Imputed Righteousness and found it very useful. That is Matthew Gallatin’s podcast. Imputed Righteousness | Ancient Faith Ministries

Pavel Mosko said:

Hey everybody! A few days ago I started a discussion in the Soteriology board of Theology on the Facebook post listed below. I enjoyed it and realized you might like it as well so I reposted it here for folks that avoid the rest of the forum.

But the second reason for posting is to solicit any kinds of advice for arguing an Eastern position of Soteriology, the Bible etc. especially in regards to Protestant arguments on "imputed righteousness" etc. There are some folks like @ArmyMatt that don't want to be caught into controversies that are a time wasters, or maybe even negative to one's theosis (Is there a handy term for that?). But anyway if Fr. Matt and others got the time etc. I was going to ask that they lurk and if they think of some useful information, advice etc. maybe drop me an message / email on my forum account.

Thanks and have a blessed day.


Interesting Facebook post on Justification


"The reason I cannot, of a good conscience, agree with the Protestant understanding of “Justification by Faith” is all because of one little word. Strong’s will tell you, with Luther, the Reformers, and countless Protestant websites, that “Justification” is “Dikaiosis” in Greek, and that it means “To be declared righteous.” For many years, this was unquestioned truth to me, and I based my whole understanding of my relationship with God on a legal process of God declaring me righteous.

This worldview was completely destroyed when, one day in 2007, I discovered that this is not what the Greek word meant. It is not a legal term, and it nowhere implies “declaration.”
The Greek root of Dikaiosis means “righteous”, and is used to mean “Saint” and “Holy” throughout the Biblical and Christian Tradition. The suffix “-osis” is the aorist tense and means “a state of”, and together the word means a “state of righteousness” not “to be declared righteous.”

If the Septuagint gives the lexical context for the use of this word in the Ancient Church, the Protestant assignment of the meaning of the Latin word “iustificario” from the Vulgate (which was a legal word and assigned by St. Jerome in the 5th century), is an improper assignment. It was a simple mistake to make, but careful scholars can’t allow it to stand when so much hinges on the meaning of this one little word.

To be “legally declared righteous” results in Luther’s famous “snow-covered dung” analogy. To be truly transformed by God’s grace through faith means that we are made into the likeness of Christ. One is external and involves God pretending, the Holy Trinity conspiring within itself to save mankind through legal loopholes, and Christ hiding us from the wrath of God the Father in an act of holy deception. The other is an actual relationship with God that manifests our original purpose and the harmony of Trinity for our salvation, and Christ fulfilled the will of the Father by the power of the Holy Spirit.

We are indeed “Justified by Faith”, but this means that we are actually made righteous by the power of the Holy Spirit in our lives, not merely declared to be something that we are not."
-Bishop Joseph Boyd

Click to expand...

Pavel Mosko said:

But how do you know even know what scripture is? (Outside the obvious fact that your Bible is all bound together as one book very conveniently for you)
e.g. - Jesus never gave a glossary table of approved divinely inspired texts at such times as the Great Commission etc., nor did saint John the Divine have a vision and provide a list of inspired ones at the end of the Book of Revelation.

Click to expand...

If you're referring to the NT, how could he, it wasn't written until after his ascension.

In regard to the OT, the religious leaders gave a table, it was the Pentateuch, the Prophets and the Psalms (& Wisdom).
Jesus knew exactly what was Scripture and what was not.

And those who are familiar with Scripture can recognize the counterfeit when they encounter it.
Scripture has its own style and expression. . .glorious, I might add.

Why are you approaching Scripture with so much doubt instead of belief?
Doubt works against us.
Actually, the Holy Spirit is the only one who convinces us of the divine origin of Scripture.

Lawrence87 said:

Like many things in Orthodoxy it lies in a kind of mystical balance between the two.

Click to expand...

How does a person know then whether or not he is saved? The Bible says that you can know that you have eternal life. It's only by believing in Jesus Christ, nothing else.

1 John 5:13 "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."

Pavel Mosko said:

Sure why don't you cover what is called the "Words of Institution" from the Gospel texts and any other epistles that cover the subject that you want to use, along with Lexicons words, whatever footnotes etc. and explain your version/interpretation of the Lord' Supper aka Holy Communion and why it represents "the Biblical" position.

Words of Institution - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

I had asked for demonstration of Scripture in which you saw my understanding as incorrect.
But something else is just as good.

I see Jesus as offering his sacrifice in keeping with the regulations of the OT sacrificial system; i.e., according to the Law, which he came to fulfill.

In the OT, the Israelite participated, in fellowship with the priest who offered it, in a sacrificial meal of the sacrifice itself, the Israelite partaking of his portion at home while the priest partook of his portion in the courtyard up at the Temple, wherein the Israelite participated in the benefits of the sacrifice--reconciliation with God and fellowship with the priest who offered it.

Therefore, I see the Lord's Supper as the:

1) NT sacrificial meal on the actual sacrifice itself (slain body and blood of Christ), wherein we participate in (1 Corinthians 10:16-18) the benefits of that sacrifice: fellowship with God in Christ, the Priest who offered it;

2) proclamation to the world of the Lord's death until he comes (1 Corinthians 11:26); and

3) proclamation of our own faith in the atoning work of Jesus Christ on the cross for our sin and right standing with God; "not guilty," righteous, sanctified (set apart).

I don't see the Lord's Supper in the upper room as the New Covenant sacrificial meal, because the New Covenant sacrifice had not been offered, and so there could be no meal on the sacrifice. I see the upper room as the institution of the NT sacrificial meal on his sacrifice that was to come.

Nor do I see the "Words of Institution" as necessary, but they certainly are fitting as part of the administration of the ordinance.

I agree with administration of the ordinance only in the assembly of the body, and not privately, for the sake of the church body partaking of one loaf (1 Corinthians 10:17) and for preserving the purity of the ordinance.

I also think the focus on the "real presence" is contra-Biblical, for two reasons:
1) an offered sacrifice is not living, there is no personal "presence," it's a dead body that was slain/killed. Its death is the atonement.

2) the NT focus is on our faith in the Lord's death for reconciliation and fellowship with God, not some magical "real presence" of a living body, which the sacrifice was not (and which reveals in some cases characteristics of idolatry).

BibleBeliever1611 said:

How does a person know then whether or not he is saved? The Bible says that you can know that you have eternal life. It's only by believing in Jesus Christ, nothing else.

1 John 5:13 "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."

Click to expand...

Well I often think of it in terms of belief entailing certain actions. For instance, if someone goes around saying 'democracy is the best political system known to man' and is constantly declaring their support of it, what would you think if you discovered that they don't vote because they don't see the point of it... The belief in democracy entails certain actions, namely voting. If someone pays lip service to a belief in democracy but they do not act like they believe in it, then one has to question whether they really believe in it.

Similarly belief in Christ entails certain actions. The commandment to love God and one's neighbour for instance. Can one really claim to believe if they don't at least make an effort to do these things? Salvation is not earned by how many examples of loving one's neighbour one can come up with, but it is not entirely unrelated either. Thus the faith and the works go together, one cannot really claim to have the faith if their actions do not align with their professed belief.

~Anastasia~ said:

Good evening.

Click to expand...

And good day, to you!

It’s rather a circular argument, isn’t it, to say that we know one is “saved” by their “faith” but that if they do return to sin that means their faith wasn’t in fact genuine.

Click to expand...

No more circular than professing: I did all the exercises in the manner they were prescribed, which my inability to perform reveals that I did not.

It’s a new way of explaining things that wasn’t what what the Apostles were teaching.

Click to expand...

Actually, it was. . .it's the way reality works, as in:

1 John 2:19 - "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us.
For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us;
but their going out was to show that none of them belonged to us."

Their "going out" was not the apostasy of genuine faith, it was the revelation/discovery of counterfeit faith; i.e., faith which was not genuine.

It IS possible for a person to fall away, having once been among the faithful. Otherwise it wouldn’t make sense for Scripture to warn of it (Heb 6 for example) and for many admonitions that one must persevere in the faith in order to be saved.

Click to expand...

Precisely. . .and those who do not persevere were not really born again of the Holy Spirit, for the born again of the Holy Spirit are guaranteed to persevere by the will of God (Romans 8:29-30; 2 Corinthians 1:22, 2 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 1:14).

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Click to expand...

Hebrews is addressed to Hebrew Christians who were considering a return to Judaism (family pressure, disiheritance, merging with a Jewish sect like the Qumran near the Dead Sea, we don't know why).

If they did depart, they would reveal their faith was not genuine, as well as incur the conseqences of apostasy (condemnation, having rejected the only sacrifice for their sin, they could not be renewed to repentance without it).

Lawrence87 said:

Thus the faith and the works go together, one cannot really claim to have the faith if their actions do not align with their professed belief.

Click to expand...

Other people might question if a person like that has faith, but it's possible that he still has faith. In the Bible it's called death faith, and it's called being backslidden.

Clare73, do you mind taking this to St. Justin Martyr's Corner: Debate an Orthodox Chr as I assume that you are unaware that this thread is in the Eastern Orthodox community forum. As such your posts are in violation of CF rules. You are welcome to post in fellowship here and ask questions, but the Christian Community forums were created to be "safe havens" where we can take time out from debates about the faith.

prodromos said:

Clare73, do you mind taking this to St. Justin Martyr's Corner: Debate an Orthodox Chr as I assume that you are unaware that this thread is in the Eastern Orthodox community forum. As such your posts are in violation of CF rules. You are welcome to post in fellowship here and ask questions, but the Christian Community forums were created to be "safe havens" where we can take time out from debates about the faith.

Click to expand...

My mistake. . .I thought this thread was a continuation of another thread.

I see that it is not.

Would you like me to take down my posts here?

Clare73 said:

My mistake. . .I thought this thread was a continuation of another thread.

I see that it is not.

Would you like me to take down my posts here?

Click to expand...

No, it should be fine. It happens often enough and we understand it isn't deliberate. Thank you for understanding.