Doctrine of Justification explained

Cribstyl · Jun 22, 2010

One day a man was 'texting while driving' and his car ran off the road and it instantly killed 3 school children who were walking home from school. After a year in jail, his case finally came up in court....(to be continued later).

"Justification" is an important doctrines to understand in christianity.

One key explanation of Justification is;" it is a judicial process, whereby God declares a person "not guilty."

The reason for God to rule some people as not guilty, is not because they did not commit sins worthy of death.( all sins are worthy of death. Rom 6:23 )

One of several reasons given, is explained as Grace (God's unmerrited favor).Eph 2:8

Hopefully posters wanting to add their knowlege to this thread will stay on topic as we explore fact and fictions related to the doctrine of justification.

StormyOne · Jun 22, 2010

Do you think that the legal system analogy adequately addresses what happens in a relationship? I think that this particular analogy i.e. justification is a judicial process misses the boat in terms of what God does for us.... If my child breaks one of my rules, I do not declare that they are "not guilty" as much as we talk about why it happened and how we can get back on track...

I understand what you are saying so far Crib, I guess I wonder how meaningful the various "doctrines" are when it comes to helping people deepen their relationship with God....

I'm done... please continue.... and if you would share why this analogy appeals to you... thanks....

Cribstyl · Jun 22, 2010

StormyOne said:
Do you think that the legal system analogy adequately addresses what happens in a relationship?

What does that have to do with this thread?

I think that this particular analogy i.e. justification is a judicial process misses the boat in terms of what God does for us.... If my child breaks one of my rules, I do not declare that they are "not guilty" as much as we talk about why it happened and how we can get back on track...

Why not give a reasonable explanation of justification. Your example did not take into consideration, the 'life or death penalty' that Jesus payed, so that we may be justified in court.

Here is one source I found that agree with me.......

Bible Dictionary

Justification definition

a forensic term, opposed to condemnation. As regards its nature, it is the judicial act of God, by which he pardons all the sins of those who believe in Christ, and accounts, accepts, and treats them as righteous in the eye of the law, i.e., as conformed to all its demands. In addition to the pardon (q.v.) of sin, justification declares that all the claims of the law are satisfied in respect of the justified. It is the act of a judge and not of a sovereign. The law is not relaxed or set aside, but is declared to be fulfilled in the strictest sense; and so the person justified is declared to be entitled to all the advantages and rewards arising from perfect obedience to the law (Rom. 5:1-10). It proceeds on the imputing or crediting to the believer by God himself of the perfect righteousness, active and passive, of his Representative and Surety, Jesus Christ (Rom. 10:3-9). Justification is not the forgiveness of a man without righteousness, but a declaration that he possesses a righteousness which perfectly and for ever satisfies the law, namely, Christ's righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 4:6-8). The sole condition on which this righteousness is imputed or credited to the believer is faith in or on the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith is called a "condition," not because it possesses any merit, but only because it is the instrument, the only instrument by which the soul appropriates or apprehends Christ and his righteousness (Rom. 1:17; 3:25, 26; 4:20, 22; Phil. 3:8-11; Gal. 2:16). The act of faith which thus secures our justification secures also at the same time our sanctification (q.v.); and thus the doctrine of justification by faith does not lead to licentiousness (Rom. 6:2-7). Good works, while not the ground, are the certain consequence of justification (6:14; 7:6). (See GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO.)

Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary
Cite This Source

I understand what you are saying so far Crib, I guess I wonder how meaningful the various "doctrines" are when it comes to helping people deepen their relationship with God....

I'm done... please continue.... and if you would share why this analogy appeals to you... thanks....

Systematic theology comes from Christian Theology, it looks at the bible from a topical viewpoint. It is not an absolute path of how to study the bible, but it does present the a topic for my discussion.

Before I started this thread, I did take into consideration how you're taking issues about threads about "sabbaths" and the 10.com." (which may come up, since justification is by faith apart from the law)

Respectfully
CRIB

StormyOne · Jun 22, 2010

Cribstyl said:
What does that have to do with this thread?

It has everything to do with the thread, I was attempting to pick your brain regarding the terminology before exploring the topic....

Why not give a reasonable explanation of justification. Your example did not take into consideration, the 'life or death penalty' that Jesus payed, so that we may be justified in court.

Sure.... God forgave before we ever asked... we simply acknowledge what he has done....

Here is one source I found that agree with me.......

Bible Dictionary

Justification definition

a forensic term, opposed to condemnation. As regards its nature, it is the judicial act of God, by which he pardons all the sins of those who believe in Christ, and accounts, accepts, and treats them as righteous in the eye of the law, i.e., as conformed to all its demands. In addition to the pardon (q.v.) of sin, justification declares that all the claims of the law are satisfied in respect of the justified. It is the act of a judge and not of a sovereign. The law is not relaxed or set aside, but is declared to be fulfilled in the strictest sense; and so the person justified is declared to be entitled to all the advantages and rewards arising from perfect obedience to the law (Rom. 5:1-10). It proceeds on the imputing or crediting to the believer by God himself of the perfect righteousness, active and passive, of his Representative and Surety, Jesus Christ (Rom. 10:3-9). Justification is not the forgiveness of a man without righteousness, but a declaration that he possesses a righteousness which perfectly and for ever satisfies the law, namely, Christ's righteousness (2 Cor. 5:21; Rom. 4:6-8). The sole condition on which this righteousness is imputed or credited to the believer is faith in or on the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith is called a "condition," not because it possesses any merit, but only because it is the instrument, the only instrument by which the soul appropriates or apprehends Christ and his righteousness (Rom. 1:17; 3:25, 26; 4:20, 22; Phil. 3:8-11; Gal. 2:16). The act of faith which thus secures our justification secures also at the same time our sanctification (q.v.); and thus the doctrine of justification by faith does not lead to licentiousness (Rom. 6:2-7). Good works, while not the ground, are the certain consequence of justification (6:14; 7:6). (See GALATIANS, EPISTLE TO.)

Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary
Cite This Source

I think Paul used the example of law and the legal system because his audience at that time understood that system... it was an example, an illustration.... as such illustrations usually lose their ability to enlighten if taken to its logical conclusion.....

Systematic theology comes from Christian Theology, it looks at the bible from a topical viewpoint. It is not an absolute path of how to study the bible, but it does present the a topic for my discussion.

Cool.... though alot of theology is speculative.... not a problem for me, if its not one for you

Before I started this thread, I did take into consideration how you're taking issues about threads about "sabbaths" and the 10.com." (which may come up, since justification is by faith apart from the law)

Respectfully
CRIB

I do appreciate that.... it is refreshing to discuss something other than... ummm those other things..... thank you....

sentipente · Jun 22, 2010

Why would it be necessary for me to be declared to be not guilty? How does this view account for the fact that God sees us as one rather than as individuals. I am held responsible for Adam's fall even though I was not in Eden; why should I not benefit from Adam's justification as well?

AzA · Jun 22, 2010

The forensic or legal metaphor held sway for such a long time because -- surprise -- most of the early theologians, Paul included, had legal training.

StormyOne · Jun 22, 2010

AzA said:
The forensic or legal metaphor held sway for such a long time because -- surprise -- most of the early theologians, Paul included, had legal training.

understood... of course I think the metaphor breaks down at some point because what God did was not necessarily a legal transaction....

AzA · Jun 22, 2010

StormyOne said:
understood... of course I think the metaphor breaks down at some point because what God did was not necessarily a legal transaction....

Of course, but had they all been shepherds instead of lawyers, we wouldn't be advantaged one jot.
Their metaphors come from their domain but too often we do not study their domain, and we are far removed from them.

StormyOne · Jun 22, 2010

AzA said:
Of course, but had they all been shepherds instead of lawyers, we wouldn't be advantaged one jot.
Their metaphors come from their domain but too often we do not study their domain, and we are far removed from them.

Unfortunately we tend to see that ancient culture through modern christian eyes.... which is a mistake... christians learn about jewish culture not from jews but from christians... what's wrong with that picture....

AzA · Jun 22, 2010

Plenty. But then Christians have enough trouble learning about Christian history from Christians. It's no better in any other community.

We all have our golden age fantasies.

sentipente · Jun 22, 2010

AzA said:
Plenty. But then Christians have enough trouble learning about Christian history from Christians. It's no better in any other community.

We all have our golden age fantasies.

Worse is our ability to cleanse the Old Testament of all the blood that is shed in it.

AzA · Jun 22, 2010

sentipente said:
Worse is our ability to cleanse the Old Testament of all the blood that is shed in it.

Lol!
Divine command theory is better than ShamWow.

That said, the tally's not that much better in the New Testament if the usual story is so.

StormyOne · Jun 23, 2010

sentipente said:
Why would it be necessary for me to be declared to be not guilty? How does this view account for the fact that God sees us as one rather than as individuals. I am held responsible for Adam's fall even though I was not in Eden; why should I not benefit from Adam's justification as well?

I think that is the crux of the matter... we think that God is "saving" humanity one person at a time, when in reality what Paul said in this regard is correct.... Adam (the human family) fell and Adam was restored... end of story....

The other issue is the sin thing.... i.e. people are sin-filled and must be saved from their sin, repent of their sin and no longer sin.... The various theories I think seek to address that issue....

AzA · Jun 23, 2010

Interesting: from an Eastern Orthodox perspective, salvation isn't about cleansing from what you do; it is restoration of what you are.

StormyOne · Jun 23, 2010

AzA said:
Interesting: from an Eastern Orthodox perspective, salvation isn't about cleansing from what you do; it is restoration of what you are.

But AzA isn't that the big picture problem? We are using a Western Culture worldview to interpret Eastern Orthodox perspectives?

AzA · Jun 23, 2010

Eastern perspectives, yes, but not EO. EO is the branch of the Christian church that split from Rome (our branch) in the first AD millennium.

StormyOne · Jun 23, 2010

AzA said:
Eastern perspectives, yes, but not EO. EO is the branch of the Christian church that split from Rome (our branch) in the first AD millennium.

ahh yes... as I have gotten older I realize that the western culture take on things especially those concepts with origins in eastern culture contaminates the message.... something clearly gets lost in translation which then leads to questionable doctrines/beliefs....

Cribstyl · Jun 23, 2010

For crying out loud............
Some posters need to know that "hater's doctrine" is another thread.
I will try to resume on the "doctrine of justification."....

Chicken Little · Jun 23, 2010

sorry I'm in wrong forum!
yes paul was too married.. He understood how dead, deceptive and decaying death is in our members. He makes that very evident in all his writings...
"IF" means he is worried/concerned

blue letter Bible .com w KJ concordance reference. can't put link.

Phl 3:8 Yea 235 doubtless 3304, and 2532 I count 2233 all things 3956 [but] loss 2209 for 1511 1223 the excellency 5242 of the knowledge 1108 of Christ 5547 Jesus 2424 my 3450 Lord 2962: for 1223 whom 3739 I have suffered the loss 2210 of all things 3956, and 2532 do count 2233 them 1511 [but] dung 4657, that 2443 I may win 2770 Christ 5547,

Phl 3:9 And 2532 be found 2147 in 1722 him 846, not 3361 having 2192 mine own 1699 righteousness 1343, which 3588 is of 1537 the law 3551, but 235 that which 3588 is through 1223 the faith 4102 of Christ 5547, the righteousness 1343 which 3588 is of 1537 God 2316 by 1909 faith 4102:

Phl 3:10 That I may know 1097 him 846, and 2532 the power 1411 of his 846 resurrection 386, and 2532 the fellowship 2842 of his 846 sufferings 3804, being made conformable 4833 unto his 846 death 2288;

Phl 3:11 If by any means 1513 I might attain 2658 unto 1519 the resurrection 1815 of the dead 3498.

Phl 3:12 ¶ Not 3756 as though 3754 I had already 2235 attained 2983 , either 2228 were already 2235 perfect 5048 : but 1161 I follow after 1377 , if 1499 that I may apprehend 2638 that for 1909 which 3739 also 2532 I am apprehended 2638 of 5259 Christ 5547 Jesus 2424.

"if by any means" 1513
IT means same as 'wether or not'.
"I might attain" 2658"
1) to come to, arrive
a) to come to a place over against, opposite another
b) metaph. to attain to a thing!

he's worried! he understands how dead dead is, how persistent dead is, because we all surely died that day.
I am in the wrong forum so will be leaving.

StormyOne · Jun 23, 2010

Chicken Little said:
but just "not sinning" isn't enough.
someone can hide their life, the one he gave them with out repentance. yep we all get one. they can bury it in the back yard in a hole and that isn't his life. and no one gets there with out his life at work within our life.
not sinning/not releasing death is the start of the equation that has to end with "Life" has he defines it in us , to work out our salvation with fear and trembling.. if Paul was worried about making the first resurrection maybe we sure should be also!
HIS LIFE IN US IS OUR JUSTIFICATION! death has no power over his life.. Life not as "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" defines "life".
Legally there is nothing in the tree of good and evil but death. That same death is a void that man created where man goes to sin and to gain 'knowledge' with out any god involved .. death can never define his life. though many liberals/lawless etc on this list and most every list I have ever visited sure try to define everything from depths of within their own knowledge of death. death is a void ... Knowledge from within it doesn't even exists in the mind of the Father,
now maybe Jesus came and died to get a clue as to how deep that hole can go and thus be able to Judge/sentence man ..but Death and the knowledge based in death it only exsists in mans mind.
so when "resurrections of the dead " happen it is a short ordeal because they have no valid arguments, their arguments are only valid in their Death.

I don't think Paul was worried, thus I don't think we should be worried.... If God has done what he promised to do, then there is no need to worry... unless we think God has not done what he promised....

Doctrine of Justification explained

Veteran

Senior Veteran

Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Contributor

NF | NT

Senior Veteran

NF | NT

Senior Veteran

NF | NT

Senior Contributor

NF | NT

Senior Veteran

NF | NT

Senior Veteran

NF | NT

Senior Veteran

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency