Question on Justification

[Reformationist]

Thanks Paradox...

I am a bit confused now...you said that justification is not equivalent to salvation in Protestant thought. I was under the impression that they were equivalent...once I am justified by Christ's alien righteousness, I am saved.

Is that not the case?

Thanks again!

Justification and salvation can be distinguished but never separated. So, on the one hand, to be justified in the eyes of God is "equivalent" to being saved because all who are justified will be saved and all who are saved are justified. However, it is important that we don't lump them together in a way that suggests they are different ways of saying the same thing. This is the case with the term "regeneration" as well.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Thanks! Thats what I thought Luther taught...

Now, is this the modern day understanding of Protestants that are not Lutherans?

Come on people, the rest of you can answer me, I'm just asking to understand your beliefs better. I'm not going to spring some trap on you or something...

There is no spiritual time gap between regeneration and justification just as there is not spiritual time gap between regeneration and faith. There is a temporal order to these imputations but not an actual one.

For instance, faith is dependent upon regeneration and so regeneration proceeds faith, in the temporal sense. However, the minute we are regenerated we are given the gift of faith. Likewise, in the temporal sense, justification is dependent upon faith, not faith upon justification. Again, though, they are simultaneously given to the person.

God bless

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

There is no spiritual time gap between regeneration and justification just as there is not spiritual time gap between regeneration and faith. There is a temporal order to these imputations but not an actual one.

For instance, faith is dependent upon regeneration and so regeneration proceeds faith, in the temporal sense. However, the minute we are regenerated we are given the gift of faith. Likewise, in the temporal sense, justification is dependent upon faith, not faith upon justification. Again, though, they are simultaneously given to the person.

God bless

Thanks Ref...and "Hi" by the way, its me your old buddy s0uljah

Anyway, do you think its possible for a person to be pulled to God slowly, and not get the gift of faith/regeneration at one instance?

(I ask because that is what I think happened to me...I felt pulled to God for years, and my interest in God grew slowly, even if I didn't believe totally, until I was finally given a sure faith one day at Mass)

 

[Reformationist]

How does God choose who to save?

He has not revealed that to us. The acrostic T.U.L.I.P. is often misleading on many of it's points but it is kept because if it's fluidity. The letter that refers to the issue you address is the U. The U refers to God's unconditional election. As I said, this can be misleading. It is not unconditional in the sense that there is no condition for being elected. It's just that the condition is not something found in us. That is to say that the condition for our salvation is found in the pleasure and goodwill of God and is a sovereign decree.

If this is all God's doing by giving us this alien righteousness at the instant of justification, and nothing preceding this justification merits it (which is the same as Catholics believe, by the way), why aren't all people saved?

Again, it's not accurate to say that nothing proceeds it. We are justified by the obedience of Christ. This vicarious obedience is credited, or imputed, to us the the God given grace of faith. So our justification is merited. It's just not merited by us.

God bless

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

Defens0rFidei,

Two things. First, to claim that God must save everyone to be all loving is to impose a definition of love upon God rather than to have our notion of love be fashioned by Himself. In other words, the question begins with an autonomous determination of what all loving would look like and then demands that God fit within that conception. Hence, I reject the premise to begin with.

You are free to reject it, but I dont believe I am forming my picture of God from my picture of love, on the contrary, I think I know what love is because of God's example.

Like for instance, I have two little babies. If I love them, I want both of them to have a good life and give both an equal chance in life. I think God feels the same way about everyone of us.

 

[Reformationist]

Thanks Ref...and "Hi" by the way, its me your old buddy s0uljah

:o :o WHAT??!! Please don't take this the wrong way but, um,...I never would have guessed that. God has been good to you. Your conduct as Defens0rFidei, at least what I've been exposed to, is a testement to your faith.

Anyway, do you think its possible for a person to be pulled to God slowly, and not get the gift of faith/regeneration at one instance?

I imagine that God could do it that way. He doesn't. But I would say that He could if He desired to.

(I ask because that is what I think happened to me...I felt pulled to God for years, and my interest in God grew slowly, even if I didn't believe totally, until I was finally given a sure faith one day at Mass)

Well, I certainly do not know your history with God as you do so I don't doubt that's how it felt to you. However, think back to when you were first truly interested in God and share why you were interested. I will acknowledge that people's conversion from death unto life by the sovereign power of God isn't always like a shotgun bang but it's pretty definite. You either believe or you don't. There is no real in between. Even when you question something about God you must acknowledge whether your questions are motivated by mere curiosity at the Christian view, which is not of faith, or a desire to learn about your Creator, the response of faith.

God bless and welcome back (even though you've been here for a while),
Don

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

WHAT??!! Please don't take this the wrong way but, um,...I never would have guessed that. God has been good to you. Your conduct as Defens0rFidei, at least what I've been exposed to, is a testement to your faith.

LOL, its all good...I have had time to settle into my faith now...

 

[II Paradox II]

Like for instance, I have two little babies. If I love them, I want both of them to have a good life and give both an equal chance in life. I think God feels the same way about everyone of us.

What do you think of Catholic theories of predestination that emphasize the principle of predilection (no one is any better than anyone else unless they are more loved by God)?

ken

 

[Jason1646]

Like for instance, I have two little babies. If I love them, I want both of them to have a good life and give both an equal chance in life. I think God feels the same way about everyone of us.

I don't think so.

10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, "The older shall serve the younger." 13 As it is written, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." (Romans 9:10 - 13)

~Jason

 

[Reformationist]

Like for instance, I have two little babies. If I love them, I want both of them to have a good life and give both an equal chance in life. I think God feels the same way about everyone of us.

D0F, this example of babies is often given because babies are the closest example we are able to come up with of someone who is innocent of the wrath of God. Unfortunately, I think that is seeking to understand the righteousness of God from a purely emotional perspective. Believe me, I have three children, and I pray that God has mercy on them. However, from a theological standpoint, I am in no position to question the mercy of God. If His Word says that all have sinned and none are worthy then I have to accept on faith that that is true, even if it means that I have to accept that my children, whom I dearly love, don't deserve the mercy of God. If I can accept that they don't deserve His mercy and instead do deserve His wrath then I am not at liberty to question His wrath against those who transgress against Him, even if it's my child. I truly pray that won't happen but if it does I cannot call the holiness of God into question.

Part of the reason I would disagree with your above analogy is that, despite all humanity's common Creator, we are not born as children of God. We are born as children of our father, the devil. Apart from the regenerating grace of God we walk according to the prince of the power of the air, satan. Many heathens would deny it but their denial doesn't make it untrue. We are made children of God by His grace in rebirthing us in His Son. We are not born as His little children whom He desires to give a good life to. Those who are blessed with His grace and made His child are no more worthy than those who aren't. Any good life we, as Christians, experience is due to the benevolence of our Father.

We don't deserve a good life. We deserve death. Those who get a "good life" get it at the mercy of God. Those who get death are the recipients of justice.

God bless

 

[Greeter]

You are free to reject it, but I dont believe I am forming my picture of God from my picture of love, on the contrary, I think I know what love is because of God's example.

Like for instance, I have two little babies. If I love them, I want both of them to have a good life and give both an equal chance in life. I think God feels the same way about everyone of us.

The catch is you are a finite being limited by time while God is an infinite being unbound by time. When we look at a baby we can only see the child's life up until that point. We are unable to view the life as a whole involving every possibility. When we view a baby we are unable to view all the sins that person will do. We view the child as innocent while God is able to see the entire picture and see what we can't, that none of us are worthy, no matter how "innocent" we may appear.

 

[orthedoxy]

D0F, this example of babies is often given because babies are the closest example we are able to come up with of someone who is innocent of the wrath of God. Unfortunately, I think that is seeking to understand the righteousness of God from a purely emotional perspective. Believe me, I have three children, and I pray that God has mercy on them. However, from a theological standpoint, I am in no position to question the mercy of God. If His Word says that all have sinned and none are worthy then I have to accept on faith that that is true, even if it means that I have to accept that my children, whom I dearly love, don't deserve the mercy of God. If I can accept that they don't deserve His mercy and instead do deserve His wrath then I am not at liberty to question His wrath against those who transgress against Him, even if it's my child. I truly pray that won't happen but if it does I cannot call the holiness of God into question.

Part of the reason I would disagree with your above analogy is that, despite all humanity's common Creator, we are not born as children of God. We are born as children of our father, the devil. Apart from the regenerating grace of God we walk according to the prince of the power of the air, satan. Many heathens would deny it but their denial doesn't make it untrue. We are made children of God by His grace in rebirthing us in His Son. We are not born as His little children whom He desires to give a good life to. Those who are blessed with His grace and made His child are no more worthy than those who aren't. Any good life we, as Christians, experience is due to the benevolence of our Father.

We don't deserve a good life. We deserve death. Those who get a "good life" get it at the mercy of God. Those who get death are the recipients of justice.

God bless

What sins have infants done deserving eternal fire damnation?
What if an infant’s father is a believing Christian (the child of God) why doesn't that infant inherent the faith of his father? Why is he still guilty of the sin of Adam?

 

[Greeter]

What sins have infants done deserving eternal fire damnation?

From our POV, or God's? I have had contact with many people and yet I am rarely aware of what sins they have committed that causes them to be deserving of fire damnation. That even goes for people I have known for years. I don't think any of us could even come close to predicting what sins a newborn will be guilty of, unless we use the parents as guidelines.

What if an infant’s father is a believing Christian (the child of God) why doesn't that infant inherent the faith of his father? Why is he still guilty of the sin of Adam?

I don't know of what scripture relates to it, but someone recently told me that there is something in scripture about paying for the sins of the father, even possibly going back a couple of generations. I haven't gotten around to researching it to see if that is correct but since it has come up maybe someone here at CF knows of it and can point it out for me.

 

[Reformationist]

What sins have infants done deserving eternal fire damnation?

I never said that infants have done anything deserving eternal damnation.

What if an infant?s father is a believing Christian (the child of God) why doesn't that infant inherent the faith of his father?

Well, just for the record, I am a covenantalist Christian. I believe that God has established a covenant with His people. This is not to say that all Christians will have children who are obedient Christians. However, I believe the covenant that God has established includes our descendants. Our responsibility is to raise them as Christians believing they are part of that covenant community. My job as their parent doesn't change based on their response. I am to raise them in godliness regardless of whether they ever believe.

As to your question, I don't have a clue. I am not aware that God has bound Himself to such a law.

Why is he still guilty of the sin of Adam?

All people are born guilty. That's what makes grace so gracious. I'm not sure what your question is. Are you asking why, despite the death of Christ, my child may be guilty of the sin of Adam? Well, first off, I don't know who God's elect are. Hopefully the Lord will continue to bless my house and have included my children in His covenant. Secondly, the idea of all people being freed from the stain of Adam by the death of Christ is unbiblical. So, God forbid, if my children's sins were not atoned for by Christ then they will make their own atonement. I am still learning about what promises were made to God's covenant community though.

God bless

 

[Bulldog]

All people are born guilty. That's what makes grace so gracious. I'm not sure what your question is. Are you asking why, despite the death of Christ, my child may be guilty of the sin of Adam? Well, first off, I don't know who God's elect are. Hopefully the Lord will continue to bless my house and have included my children in His covenant. Secondly, the idea of all people being freed from the stain of Adam by the death of Christ is unbiblical. So, God forbid, if my children's sins were not atoned for by Christ then they will make their own atonement. I am still learning about what promises were made to God's covenant community though.

God bless

I think what orthedoxy was asking is why is: Why is the child born guilty of the sins of Adam if he has not sinned?

 

[Reformationist]

I think what orthedoxy was asking is why is: Why is the child born guilty of the sins of Adam if he has not sinned?

Why is the child born guilty of the sins of Adam if the child has not sinned? Because God created Adam as the progenitor of the human race and as such the representative head. Mankind, being represented by Adam, incurred the penalty for Adam's sin. Adam was the representative of the entire human race. Adam disobeyed God, thus, the entire human race was guilty before God.

God bless

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

The catch is you are a finite being limited by time while God is an infinite being unbound by time. When we look at a baby we can only see the child's life up until that point. We are unable to view the life as a whole involving every possibility. When we view a baby we are unable to view all the sins that person will do. We view the child as innocent while God is able to see the entire picture and see what we can't, that none of us are worthy, no matter how "innocent" we may appear.

Wait...are you saying that what the person does has something to do with their salvation?

 

[orthedoxy]

Why is the child born guilty of the sins of Adam if the child has not sinned? Because God created Adam as the progenitor of the human race and as such the representative head. Mankind, being represented by Adam, incurred the penalty for Adam's sin. Adam was the representative of the entire human race. Adam disobeyed God, thus, the entire human race was guilty before God.

God bless

If babies are guilty of the sin of Adam then doesn't that mean they will go to hell unless they are old enough to believe?
Are infants guilty of something they didn't do?
I was trying to ask if you can inherent Adams guilt, why can't you inherent the righteousness of your father?

 

[Greeter]

Wait...are you saying that what the person does has something to do with their salvation?

Nope, just pointing out that our perception of "innocence" is a limited one.

 

[Reformationist]

If babies are guilty of the sin of Adam then doesn't that mean they will go to hell unless they are old enough to believe?

What does how old they are have to do with anything? We aren't saved because we believe. If we were then that would make salvation the product of merit found in us and make belief a work worthy of redemption.

Are infants guilty of something they didn't do?

The transmission of a sinful nature is not the only thing that was propagated to the progeny of Adam. By Adam's transgression we are all, as a creation, guilty before God. Do the orthodox teach that only a sinful nature was passed on but not the guilt for the transgression?

I was trying to ask if you can inherent Adams guilt, why can't you inherent the righteousness of your father?

Because my father (I'm assuming you mean my earthly father) isn't my representative before God.

God bless