The definition of "Justification"

[ToBeLoved]

Revelation 12 seems to indicate that the prosecutor has been ejected from the courtroom; the defense attorney and the judge have made a plea bargain in which the defense attorney has taken the punishment in place of the defendant; the defendant need only agree.

Love this!

 

[ToBeLoved]

justified by works - reason is HIS people will work to glorify HIS name.

You think that justification by works is people glorifying His name?

Not so much. They think God will send them to hell, so they work to change God's mind.

They are not praising God's name by working. They are showing their faith is lacking in that God does not do what He says He did.

It is not about God, it is about the person. They are working to add to what Christ did. They are not resting in Christ

 

[The Times]

Jesus came by water and blood (1 John 5:6). Since blood is associated with the flesh, and we are flesh and spirit (2 Cor 7:1), water is a symbol of the spirit. To be born of water and Spirit is to be born of the spirit (water) and Spirit. And this is consistent with John 3:6, that is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Water in Biblical symbolism is always associated with purification. The spirit of an individual is washed in the purity of Christ Jesus. That is why Jesus commanded us to be baptised, in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Holy Trinity. This is a purification proclamation, before one can enter into the Holy place, in the presence of God, within a Jewish customary context.

In this regard our spirit through Christ's purity, after we are baptised by water, can enter into the presence of the Holy God, where God now imputes Christ's righteousness onto our behalf, this is justification. This is where God no longer sees us as guilty and unclean thing, where the Water of Jesus prepares us as vessels for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, who then begins a process of purging by Fire, to mould us into the personage of his only begotten Son.

John 3:5, places the Water, that is the purification, before the Spirit, which makes perfect sense, that God will not indwell an individual, unless they have given their lives over to Christ, as his subjects and thereby have purified their robes by the blood of Christ.

These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. (Revelation 7:14)

"Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. (Revelation 22:14)

John 3:5, who also wrote the book of Revelation, used the term Water, within the context of purifying one's self, by the blood of Christ, which emphasises, an imparting of Grace by God, through his only begotten Son, who is the justifying agent, as prophesied in Zechariah 3 (read entire context).

So John 3:5, is the salvation formulae or plan of God, who places his Son as the Justifying Agent and his Holy Spirit as the Sanctifying Agent. This is perfect harmony with scripture because you have the Holy Trinity involved in man's salvation.

Your claim that Water is a symbol of an individual's spirit, is incorrect, because John doesn't use it within that context. In fact if we placed your claim within Revelation 7:14 and Revelation 22:14, it would not make sense, because man's spirit alone could never symbolise purification, within the context of salvation.

If you substituted your claim into the verse it would read like this....

These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have spirit their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. (Revelation 7:14)

"Blessed are those who spirit their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. (Revelation 22:14)

We are rebirthed by the two salvation Agents, who are Son and Holy Spirit, thereby baptise them in the name of the Father, who is the author of salvation and the Son, who Justifies and the Holy Spirit who is the Sanctifier.

When you consider in what context John used the term water, you can quite easily see that water refers to the water or purity that Jesus gives, that he exemplifies as Living Waters.

But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.
(John 4:14)

John 3:5 is salvation message of....

If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water. (John 4:10)

So John 3:5 is the gift of God, which involves all members of the Trinity. You cannot render Water as an individual's spirit, it is out of context and it no longer becomes a gift, but one that an individual's spirit can birth themselves. A spirit on itself, can not birth itself, neither can it truly be a new creation, unless it takes the identity of the Son, where it is no longer us who live, but the Son in us, I will be in you and you in me.

So John 3:5 is the salvation equation of the Son in us who purifies us and the Holy Spirit who purges us by Fire to bring us into the fullness of the Son.

 

[The Times]

Again, while I am all for the zeal of Sanctification and it's necessity in salvation, I think you are taking the term "born again" too far. I presented verses that clearly show that being born again is a one time event. We are told in the OT that we will receive a new heart and a new spirit. The word "converted" suggests a one time event. Also, the testimony of many people who first come to the Lord and their radical change in putting away sinful things and addictions also suggest a spiritual rebirth, as well. This does not mean that the new believer will not be tempted, and stumble in their early walk with God. But as they mature, they will overcome their sin by walking in the Lord (i.e. the Sanctification process). Jesus also illustrated spiritual truth by real world examples many times. If the real world example did not parallel the spiritual example, it destroys the comparison. So let's agree to disagree. I am not really interested at this point in what you have to say on this. I am only responding to let you know what I believe is true. My suggestion is ask the Lord to reveal to you which is true and not what you prefer to be true.

Side Note:

Oh, and if you were to do a study on the circumcision of the heart (Which was a term for born again in the Old Testament), you would discover that this only makes sense in terms of a one time event. The OT Scriptures say that person could not enter the temple if they were uncircumcised in heart. Circumcision is a one time event. Just like being born again is a one time event. But again, see whatever you wish to see; Or pray to God about it and seek the truth. Ask God and see what He has to say (and do not be biased to your viewpoint when you ask Him).


...

Ok

 

[fhansen]

Is the following definition of "Justification" adequate?

In Christian theology, justification is God's act of removing the guilt and penalty of sin while at the same time declaring a sinner righteous through Christ's atoning sacrifice

Justification involves not only the forgiveness and removal of sin but also the power to "Go, and sin no more", as it involves the indwelling of the Trinity within us. But we'll continue to struggle between justice and injustice, righteousness and unrighteousness, all our lives as we display, by our actions, whether or not we even truly want God's life and power within us, whether or not we truly want Him IOW.

 

[hedrick]

While this issue hasn’t come up in the discussion so far, it’s worth noting that at least in Calvin’s theology justification isn’t just a one-time event. It certainly has one-time aspects, since it’s sometimes used by Paul to refer to God putting us right with himself. But as our status of being accepted by God, it underlies all of Christian life.

I actually think this is clearer in Jesus’ teaching than Paul’s. Jesus is clear that God continues to love us even when we sin. We don’t lose our status as his children, although the other aspect of Jesus’ teaching is clear that he holds us accountable for what we do.

I’ve noted before that the Protestant and Catholic traditions use somewhat different definitions of justification. Luther’s major innovation is recognizing justification as separate from sanctification. The Catholic tradition uses justification for the whole process of bringing us in line with God’s will for us, thus including what Protestants call justification and sanctification. When you make allowance for the different in terminology, some of the disagreements between Protestants and Catholic go away. But not all of them.

By distinguishing justification from sanctification, Protestants can deal with the complexities of Jesus’ teaching, in which our status as God’s children continues even when we sin. Catholic theology tries to deal with this by identifying some sins as mortal and some not. Of course the NT refers to mortal sins, but for the NT a mortal sin is something close to apostasy: it’s associated with a permanent abandonment of the faith. Catholic tradition doesn’t do that. I think there’s good reason for that. It would make their scheme lose accountability for the kinds of sins that Christians commitment. But by making mortal sins things that normal Christians do, it causes our justification to come and go, thus failing to do justice to the other half of the picture, the one where God doesn’t abandon us when we sin.

While both doctrinal schemes have their advantages and disadvantages, I prefer one where we recognize that there is both an ongoing status before God that survives sin and accountability for that sin. But the Protestant scheme has its own dangers. For many Protestants, salvation seems to be the same thing as justification. Yes, they say that we are expected to do good, but in the soteriological scheme it looks sort of optional.

To do justice to Jesus and Paul, we have to stress both that God’s love for us and our status as his children doesn’t depend upon works, but that we’re accountable for what we do.

 

[fhansen]

While this issue hasn’t come up in the discussion so far, it’s worth noting that at least in Calvin’s theology justification isn’t just a one-time event. It certainly has one-time aspects, since it’s sometimes used by Paul to refer to God putting us right with himself. But as our status of being accepted by God, it underlies all of Christian life.

I actually think this is clearer in Jesus’ teaching than Paul’s. Jesus is clear that God continues to love us even when we sin. We don’t lose our status as his children, although the other aspect of Jesus’ teaching is clear that he holds us accountable for what we do.

I’ve noted before that the Protestant and Catholic traditions use somewhat different definitions of justification. Luther’s major innovation is recognizing justification as separate from sanctification. The Catholic tradition uses justification for the whole process of bringing us in line with God’s will for us, thus including what Protestants call justification and sanctification. When you make allowance for the different in terminology, some of the disagreements between Protestants and Catholic go away. But not all of them.

By distinguishing justification from sanctification, Protestants can deal with the complexities of Jesus’ teaching, in which our status as God’s children continues even when we sin. Catholic theology tries to deal with this by identifying some sins as mortal and some not. Of course the NT refers to mortal sins, but for the NT a mortal sin is something close to apostasy: it’s associated with a permanent abandonment of the faith. Catholic tradition doesn’t do that. I think there’s good reason for that. It would make their scheme lose accountability for the kinds of sins that Christians commitment. But by making mortal sins things that normal Christians do, it causes our justification to come and go, thus failing to do justice to the other half of the picture, the one where God doesn’t abandon us when we sin.

While both doctrinal schemes have their advantages and disadvantages, I prefer one where we recognize that there is both an ongoing status before God that survives sin and accountability for that sin. But the Protestant scheme has its own dangers. For many Protestants, salvation seems to be the same thing as justification. Yes, they say that we are expected to do good, but in the soteriological scheme it looks sort of optional.

To do justice to Jesus and Paul, we have to stress both that God’s love for us and our status as his children doesn’t depend upon works, but that we’re accountable for what we do.

This was very good overall. But to do justice to Catholic teaching, mortal sin is not about God abandoning man, but about man's freedom to abandon God-and being persistent in this BTW. And the New Testament is replete with warnings and admonitions against the possibility of believers doing this very thing, just as Adam did to begin with.

So the primary NT reference to mortal sin is 1 John 5:16 where he speaks of brothers and sisters who commit sin that "leads to death". In light of God's love and mercy, which John surely knew, I'm not sure why he taught against praying in this case, but he was quite adamant overall about believers not sinning, and the consequences if they do. Anyway, the Catholic position is perhaps better highlighted here:
1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity [love] and the privation of sanctifying grace [God's life in us], that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

In any case, justification and sanctification should never be separated from each other, because that means that justice is divided against itself. Man can continue to be right, as he tends to believe about himself anyway, without change, without actually being right, as God intended for him from the beginning.

In Christian thought, fallen man's state of injustice isn't caused by his acting unjustly first of all; rather that state consists of man's separation from God first of all, initiated by Adam's first unjust act-of disobedience. When man and God are reconciled and restored to union, man's justice is already complete because God, with His righteousness, now abides in man again. But this doesn't mean that we cannot thwart or abandon this relationship. We're engaged in a life-long struggle between sin and remaining in that relationship of faith, hope, and charity-and no one knows with 100% certainty whether or not perseverance will be theirs.

 

[ToBeLoved]

You do know that there are multiple definitions of justification, right?

Theology is all about speaking different languages using the same words with different meanings.

Can you please give verses that show there is more than one definition for justification. Never heard this one before.

 

[hedrick]

Can you please give verses that show there is more than one definition for justification. Never heard this one before.

Compare

Romans 3:28
For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.

James 2:24-25
24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 Likewise, was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by another road?

Of course it's clear from Paul's letters that Paul and James disagreed. But I also think it's pretty likely that Paul and James are using different senses of justification, as I noted in my post above. The Catholic tradition, from Augustine, has used a definition similar to James.

 

[RDKirk]

This was very good overall. But to do justice to Catholic teaching, mortal sin is not about God abandoning man, but about man's freedom to abandon God-and being persistent in this BTW. And the New Testament is replete with warnings and admonitions against the possibility of believers doing this very thing, just as Adam did to begin with.

So the primary NT reference to mortal sin is 1 John 5:16 where he speaks of brothers and sisters who commit sin that "leads to death". In light of God's love and mercy, which John surely knew, I'm not sure why he taught against praying in this case, but he was quite adamant overall about believers not sinning, and the consequences if they do. Anyway, the Catholic position is perhaps better highlighted here:
1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity [love] and the privation of sanctifying grace [God's life in us], that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

In any case, justification and sanctification should never be separated from each other, because that means that justice is divided against itself. Man can continue to be right, as he tends to believe about himself anyway, without change, without actually being right, as God intended for him from the beginning.

In Christian thought, fallen man's state of injustice isn't caused by his acting unjustly first of all; rather that state consists of man's separation from God first of all, initiated by Adam's first unjust act-of disobedience. When man and God are reconciled and restored to union, man's justice is already complete because God, with His righteousness, now abides in man again. But this doesn't mean that we cannot thwart or abandon this relationship. We're engaged in a life-long struggle between sin and remaining in that relationship of faith, hope, and charity-and no one knows with 100% certainty whether or not perseverance will be theirs.

I think there are also categorical definitions involved. A "sinner" can be defined as "one who commits sins," but the NT also seems to use "sinner" categorically as "non-believer," dividing mankind into "sinners" and "saints," essentially believers and non-believers.

The categorical sinner--the nonbeliever--cannot help but sin. Everything he does is sin because his master is not God. If he gives alms to the poor, that is sin. If he leads an ascetic life, that is sin. His actions are in obedience to a different master, so none of them are in obedience to God (although there is CS Lewis' "Emeth Exception" which Lewis--along with Billy Graham and me--argues is not actually an exception).

 

[fhansen]

Compare

Romans 3:28
For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.

James 2:24-25
24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 Likewise, was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by another road?

Of course it's clear from Paul's letters that Paul and James disagreed. But I also think it's pretty likely that Paul and James are using different senses of justification, as I noted in my post above. The Catholic tradition, from Augustine, has used a definition similar to James.

Yes, and in the Catholic position Paul and James's teachings don't disagree because they're united within the virtue of love. Faith must produce love in order for justice to be authentic in man, and love produces works such as James describes, along with Eph 2:10 and Matt 25:31-46. We're justified by- via- faith.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Can you please give verses that show there is more than one definition for justification. Never heard this one before.

Verses that say that there are many definitions of 'justification? As in Bible verses? I would think that you might ask for quotes from various theological dictionaries instead. If you want verses that contain the word 'justification, use a concordance. But a concordance will not tell you what a word means with precision.

 

[bling]

I gave lots of discussion questions and information in post 45 and really no answers.

Paul really emphasis the fact we can be “justified” with Christianity which was not available with the Law and this would have thrown the Jews back a ways, since that was not something they thought they could really have and it was something Isaiah prophesied about coming with the Messiah.

People in the Old Testament and us today can be righteous by doing righteous things so righteousness has to do with the present state, but to stand justified before God means the past has been cleaned up, like you are in a civil court having to clean up your past behavior to be found justified to be in society.

Even though we might think about there being some kind of court (or some court in the final judgement) this is talking about us being justified before God now. We might think about God as being some judge, but Jesus teaches us to think more of God as our Father, so it is more like standing before your earthly father after you have done some great rebellious disobedience. What would it take for you to get back into the situation of being comfortable standing before your earthly father after doing some grave rebellious disobedience directly against Him? Remember your Loving Father has no problem easily forgiving you and you can humbly easily accept His forgiveness, but does that solve the problem in your relationship?

Part of the benefit of a fair/just, Loving disciplining is the fact the crime is put behind you (you do not have to wait for the other shoe to fall). Going throw disciplining can be very painful at the time, but your Father is with you all the way. The relationship between the father and the child is made stronger when done right and accepted correctly. You see the tax collector going through a very painful disciplining while praying for forgiveness. Paul went through a very painful disciplining when he was crucified "with Christ" and we can experience that same disciplining (being crucified with Christ) which the Jews under the Law could not and thus could never stand justified by the Law.

Like I said this is a huge topic.

 

[The Times]

In any case, justification and sanctification should never be separated from each other, because that means that justice is divided against itself.

Very good. Justifcation and sanctification are working simultaneously in an individual, as one complete ongoing process. Whilst Justification was that one day Grace event initiated by God the Father (Zechariah 3), it still has to be continuing, in order for sanctification to accomplish its degree in this lifetime and be confirmed before an individual dies.

A prisoner pardoned on parole, is initially justified by the Judge's mercy, based on the stipulated condition that they continue to be sanctified/rehabilitated to the Judge's satisfaction. The individual can however break with the justification part, whereby the Judge can remove the rehabilitation privileges and the circumstance of the individual reverts to again being at the stage where another plea bargain is made by the individual for justification, at the Judge's discretion.

26For if we sin willingly after we are to receive the knowledge of the truth, no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,27but a certain terrifying expectation of judgment and fury of fire being about to devour the adversaries.28Anyone having set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercies on the basis of two or three witnesses.29How much worse punishment do you think will he deserve, the one having trampled upon the Son of God, and having esteemed ordinary the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and having insulted the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10)

No longer remains sacrifice for sin, means that the justifying works of the Son, within the blood Covenant, may no longer be a coverage for an individual who continues a lifestyle of sin. Much like a prisoner on parole, who continues to break with his parole conditions, who then suffers incarceration again, because pardoning by clemency/grace is removed by the judge, who realises that his grace has been trodden under foot.

35Therefore do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward.36For you have need of endurance, so that, having done the will of God, you may receive the promise.

Endurance of faith, whilst abstaining from sinning and by NOT breaking the bail bond conditions, is essential for grace to continue within the context of Justification, that one MAY and HOPES to receive the promise.

37For “Yet in a very while little, the One coming will come, and will not delay.

38But My righteous one will live by faith;
and if he might shrink back, My soul does not take pleasure in him.”

39But we are not of those drawing back to destruction, but of faith to the preserving of the soul.

An individual once called to Christ and Justified by his blood, can trample the Son, by reverting back to destruction, where Grace within the context of Justification is removed and that individual is back at square one with their salvation process, which means that they can loose their salvation, if they no longer remain as prisoners of Christ.

If the Anti-Church manages to remove the 7 sacrements of the Church, then the daily sacrifice for sins, would have been removed and as a result the justifying grace can be removed and humanity be placed again under the curses of the law.

The mainstream church is heading in this direction and the good shepherds, whether they be Orthodox, Catholic or Protestants are fighting the good fight against the Anti-Church.

Daniel 8:11
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.

There cannot be sanctification without the original justifying works of the Son (Zechariah 3), the universal theological teachings are trying to do away with the main requirement of Grace, by removing the sacraments of Christ and replacing them with the abomination that brings destruction, that is the foreign host.

 

[The Times]

“…you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God….” (1 Cor. 6:11)

John 3:5 = 1 Cor. 6:11 = Jesus + Holy Spirit = Salvation

Justification comes through the redemption by Christ Jesus. (Ro. 3:24)

Yes.

We have been justified by his blood (Ro. 5:9)

Yes.

Acts 13:39 Through him everyone who believes is set free from every sin, a justification you were not able to obtain under the law of Moses. (Paul’s “Pisidian Antioch sermon in the synagogue”)

Yes.

The New Testament talks about being Justified by faith, but people under the law had faith also and could not be justified by the law, so describe this “faith” that justifies?

It is tied to a legally binding action that the Father did by committing all who would kiss the Son, to the Son as his many subjects, that he justifies as our High Priest Joshua, as intermediary between man and God, within the Holy of Holies.

Is. 53:11 “…by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many…” Is this our knowledge of Christ or Christ’s knowledge of the many?

Knowledge means decree, tgatcis tge decrees of the Son, eho ministers in the Hoky of Holies on our behalves.

Isaiah suggests “knowledge” is the route to justification, so where is the “faith” and is it “faith and knowledge” and knowledge of what?

It is Christ's faithfullness and decree before the Father that justifies an individual.

I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God.

Yes, his prayers were accepted by God, not in the sense of his many sins being forgiven. His prayer was heard and was justified by God as being sincere.

If on leaving the temple you asked the tax collector: “do you now feel justified before God or how do you feel”, what would be his answer?

He would feel miserable and distraught.

What is the relationship between being humble and being justified before God?

None!

What “knowledge” was needed by the tax collector to be justified? (Sin, forgiveness, Christ, the huge debt of sin, pain and sorrow over sin)

The knowledge of his wrong doings, by acknowledging his sins in a sincere way. It is his prayers that were considered just, mesning genuine and their were heard by God.

Did the tax collector have to physically do anything to be justified?

Yes, he had to acknowledge his sins by tears and self denigration before God as a terrible person he really was in doing the bad things he had done.

Is Christ trying to show us a sincere, remorseful, repentant sinner, hurt by his sins and in pain? And is

Sincere and genuine heart that acknowledges our sinful ways and is willing to turn back to make reconciliation with God, through Christ.

Are we trying to be “justified” in some super high court ruled by some all-powerful Judge, who really cannot empathize with man?

Yes to the firat question and no to the second. GOD'S JUSTICE AND LOVE GO HAND IN HAND.

Are we trying to be justified before our Loving Father?

No, but we are asking that his Son justify us as our intermediary before God.

What did you go through to be and feel “justified” before your parents (satisfying their justice) or did they think: “it is too late” and disowned you ?

Recognition of wrong doings and turning back from ways that upset them.

What do we need to really “know” about Christ to obtain justification?

That to knock on his door and ask him for his mercy to justify us before God, through intercessory means. Jesus becomes our attorney who defends our case before the Father.

“Do you stand justified before God”?

On my own knowledge, efforts, strength or will no, but on the faithfullness of Jesus to legally justice me yes and yes.

We want to be justified before God, but how do we know we are justified before God?

Jesus will let yoi know....

Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them." (John 14:21)

Do you feel justified before God and what “knowledge” of Christ allows you to feel justified?

Yes. John 14:21

When did you come to the realization of being justified before God?

John 14:21

 

[def]

Water in Biblical symbolism is always associated with purification. The spirit of an individual is washed in the purity of Christ Jesus. That is why Jesus commanded us to be baptised, in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Holy Trinity. This is a purification proclamation, before one can enter into the Holy place, in the presence of God, within a Jewish customary context.

In this regard our spirit through Christ's purity, after we are baptised by water, can enter into the presence of the Holy God, where God now imputes Christ's righteousness onto our behalf, this is justification. This is where God no longer sees us as guilty and unclean thing, where the Water of Jesus prepares us as vessels for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, who then begins a process of purging by Fire, to mould us into the personage of his only begotten Son.

There is only one relevant baptism (Eph 4:5, one Lord, one faith, one baptism).

John’s said his water baptism is nothing (Mt 3:11). Water baptism had a specific purpose. John was a messenger sent ahead of Jesus to prepare the way for God to introduce the messiah to the Pharisees (John 1:23-27). When Jesus was water-baptised, the heavens opened, the Holy Spirit descended upon Him (John 1:32-34), and a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.” (Luke 3:21).

Luke said John’s water baptism does not count (Acts 19:1-5, believers who were water-baptised were baptised “again” by Paul in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

John 3:5, places the Water, that is the purification, before the Spirit, which makes perfect sense, that God will not indwell an individual, unless they have given their lives over to Christ, as his subjects and thereby have purified their robes by the blood of Christ.

Acts 10:47 completely refutes the need for water baptism in order to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Believers were baptised with the Holy Spirit without going through water baptism.

These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. (Revelation 7:14)

"Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. (Revelation 22:14)

John 3:5, who also wrote the book of Revelation, used the term Water, within the context of purifying one's self, by the blood of Christ, which emphasises, an imparting of Grace by God, through his only begotten Son, who is the justifying agent, as prophesied in Zechariah 3 (read entire context).

So John 3:5, is the salvation formulae or plan of God, who places his Son as the Justifying Agent and his Holy Spirit as the Sanctifying Agent. This is perfect harmony with scripture because you have the Holy Trinity involved in man's salvation.

Your claim that Water is a symbol of an individual's spirit, is incorrect, because John doesn't use it within that context. In fact if we placed your claim within Revelation 7:14 and Revelation 22:14, it would not make sense, because man's spirit alone could never symbolise purification, within the context of salvation.

If you substituted your claim into the verse it would read like this....

These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have spirit their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. (Revelation 7:14)

"Blessed are those who spirit their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city. (Revelation 22:14)

Since water is a symbol for the human spirit, washed must be associated with the purification of the spirit. The term used is sanctification, purification of the spirit is sanctification of the spirit. The robe must also be understood. The robe is an outer garment, and in the parable of the wedding garment, one was not wearing it, and was thrown out. An outer garment that a soldier of Christ wears is the breastplate of righteousness. Breastplate is the symbol for faith and love. Therefore to purify the spirit is to make it perfect in faith and love.

So John 3:5 is the gift of God, which involves all members of the Trinity. You cannot render Water as an individual's spirit, it is out of context and it no longer becomes a gift, but one that an individual's spirit can birth themselves. A spirit on itself, can not birth itself, neither can it truly be a new creation, unless it takes the identity of the Son, where it is no longer us who live, but the Son in us, I will be in you and you in me.

You are right, a spirit cannot birth itself, but you miss one aspect of Jesus’ teaching: Jesus told Nicodemus that the Spirit gives life to the spirit.

Conclusion: Different understanding of the term water led to vastly different conclusions. This is a classic butterfly effect, small initial changes have major consequences. This is because the Bible is very sensitive to initial meanings, a phenomena known in chaos theory as “sensitive dependence on initial conditions.”

Unless Christians understanding complexity and recognise that the Bible is a chaos system, we are digging a deeper and deeper hole to bury the gospel.

 

[def]

Compare

Romans 3:28
For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.

James 2:24-25
24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 Likewise, was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by another road?

Of course it's clear from Paul's letters that Paul and James disagreed. But I also think it's pretty likely that Paul and James are using different senses of justification, as I noted in my post above. The Catholic tradition, from Augustine, has used a definition similar to James.

Paul and James have no disagreement.

The key to understanding Romans 3:28 is the word "apart". The "apart" does not apply to justification. Paul is not saying a person is justified by faith apart from being justified by works. "Apart" is applied to works: Paul is saying that apart from the works of the law there are other works. And, this other "works" is confirmed in Ephesians 2:10.

But how can doing works be justified by faith? Paul gives Abraham as an example of God justifying the imputation of righteousness (works) based on faith.

Conclusion: The misapplication of the word apart leads to different understanding. This is the butterfly effect, small changes lead to vastly different outcomes. The right strategy can overcome the butterfly effect.

 

[The Times]

There is only one relevant baptism (Eph 4:5, one Lord, one faith, one baptism).

Yes that is right, one baptism. We are to be bathed in Christ's purity.

John’s said his water baptism is nothing (Mt 3:11). Water baptism had a specific purpose. John was a messenger sent ahead of Jesus to prepare the way for God to introduce the messiah to the Pharisees (John 1:23-27).

Baptism in Jesus is in proclaiming we enter into Christ as his bride. Jewish ritual of water baptism of groom and his bride. Ceremonial to acknowledge marriage. Jesus used the water to wine miracle to symbolise his bride and the maturity of wine harvest that results from the union of groom and bride.

When Jesus was water-baptised, the heavens opened, the Holy Spirit descended upon Him (John 1:32-34), and a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.” (Luke 3:21).

Jesus also commanded us to be water baptised as his bride.

Luke said John’s water baptism does not count (Acts 19:1-5, believers who were water-baptised were baptised “again” by Paul in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

This was a special circumstance where Peter refused the Gentiles to fellowship and so God used this special instance to rebuke Peter and later Peter would say who are we to not baptise them also.

Acts 10:47 completely refutes the need for water baptism in order to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Believers were baptised with the Holy Spirit without going through water baptism.

No it doesn't refute it, it ratifies it because eventually they are baptised also.

Since water is a symbol for the human spirit, washed must be associated with the purification of the spirit. The term used is sanctification, purification of the spirit is sanctification of the spirit. The robe must also be understood. The robe is an outer garment, and in the parable of the wedding garment, one was not wearing it, and was thrown out. An outer garment that a soldier of Christ wears is the breastplate of righteousness. Breastplate is the symbol for faith and love. Therefore to purify the spirit is to make it perfect in faith and love.

Show me through scripture how water is spirit. You are just making it up right?

You are right, a spirit cannot birth itself, but you miss one aspect of Jesus’ teaching: Jesus told Nicodemus that the Spirit gives life to the spirit.

Spirit gives life to spirit through the Living waters eminating from Jesus as the bridegroom. The water baptism proclaims our ceremonial vows in marriage to Christ. All the apostles followed this formulae including the church fathers, so what is the problem?

Conclusion: Different understanding of the term water led to vastly different conclusions. This is a classic butterfly effect, small initial changes have major consequences. This is because the Bible is very sensitive to initial meanings, a phenomena known in chaos theory as “sensitive dependence on initial conditions.”

No chaos theory, if you just follow Jesus instructions to be baptised in him as his bride.

Unless Christians understanding complexity and recognise that the Bible is a chaos system, we are digging a deeper and deeper hole to bury the gospel.

Bible is a chaos system, really? So your implying God is the author of confusion right?

 

[Wordkeeper]

Justification has its basis on the clean VS. unclean idea found in Torah. A person who has not touched a corpse or ate with Gentiles has kept himself clean, though not technically (he may be covered with road dust!), but for purposes of Torah, is so, in the ritual sense.

Unclean people could not enter the camp. So in the following, the believer has been found clean for entry purposes into the group known as the People or Friends of God:

Romans 4:3
For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."

Romans 3:28
For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.

James 2:24-25
24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 Likewise, was not Rahab the prostitute also justified by works when she welcomed the messengers and sent them out by another road?


So justification is the ritual of checking and finding a person compliant. The just person is found to be just.

The accompanying ritual of MAKING a person compliant is also found in Torah, the ritual of CLEANSING. This ritual is called, unsurprisingly, justification. You will find that that IS the use of the word here :

1 Corinthians 6
11Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Romans 8
28And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined (pre planned?) to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;30and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.


Washing, sanctification and justification are reiterations of the efforts God makes to cleanse a person.

In summary, a justified person is a person who has made efforts to be found acceptable. And God justifies, makes efforts to keep a person in an acceptable state through washing with His Word.

The practical application is to find out what is one being cleansed of, either by his own efforts or when God cleanses.

The answer is: the person is being cleaned from living for self.

When Jacob lived in the Canaan, he and his family were living for self. Out of ignorance, it is true.

To reveal this state of affairs, God caused a chain of events to occur that landed Israel in slavery to Egypt. Just as dusting causes fingerprints to jump out, slavery to Egypt caused the state of God's people to jump out: they were living for themselves.

God had designed men to be fulfilled only when they served others. Just as the purpose of a horse is fulfilled only when he is subdued and trained to carry a rider.

Is it right if a man buys a horse and cares for it only to find that it keeps kicking down the fences and breaks out to find ways to satisfy its appetites?

Unjustified man is in that state. He is God's child, yet he does not cry out to be fed, but makes his own way in life. What he finds, especially in Egypt, is a hard task master extracting work and giving back poor returns.

When God took Israel out of Egypt, He expected Israel to depend on Him for everything. They could only live if they obeyed Him without questioning, did not complain when He withheld food and water, told them to risk their lives in battle.

He had put Abraham through the same testing, and Abraham had slowly learned how to follow God.

See the stages:

God puts different people in different situations hoping they will seek him, because He is not far from His children. The seeking is the effort from the person which justifies him.

Those who seek Him He will feed with His revelations/Word so that gradually they learn what He requires. This is God's work of justification.

At the end of the process, the believer finds rest from his own labor, as he arrives in the Promised Land, rests in Christ, sharing in what remains of Christ's work, His body on earth, serving his fellow men.

In summary, justification is the cleansing through self effort by the believer of the dirt of living for self, and the further cleansing by the efforts of God, to fulfill the purpose for which man was created.

 

[PeaceJoyLove]

See the stages:

God puts different people in different situations hoping they will seek him, because He is not far from His children. The seeking is the effort from the person which justifies him.

Those who seek Him He will feed with His revelations/Word so that gradually they learn what He requires. This is God's work of justification.

At the end of the process, the believer finds rest from his own labor, as he arrives in the Promised Land, rests in Christ, sharing in what remains of Christ's work, His body on earth, serving his fellow men.

In summary, justification is the cleansing through self effort by the believer of the dirt of living for self, and the further cleansing by the efforts of God, to fulfill the purpose for which man was created.

The process of our soul...The Father's purpose for which man was created...duality of soul is a battle within until it be utterly revealed, the son that we are but didn't know we knew...has to do with becoming blind (single of eye) that we might see (John 9:39-41) .
And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.
And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

Matthew 6:22-23

We 'see' (perceive/perception) from where we are within the process of coming to the knowledge/revelation of what it truly means to be ONE in Christ...a son, individually and collectively.

On perception - God asked Adam in the garden "Where art thou?" after he ate the feast prepared by the woman God gave him. Our toiling in the field for bread holds the promise of entering His rest/entering The Promised Land, indeed.

The first command, "Thou shalt not eat..." and Isaiah 58 is a picture of finding God's purpose and plan since "before the foundation of the world were laid." ...behold the lamb