ECT Let's Define Terms

Interplanner

Well-known member
Where was it prophesised that God can declare some men righteous who personally are not righteous?


Gen 12's main quote about Abraham: He believed God and it was credited to him.
The quotes of Paul about David from Ps 32.
Dan 9's 'he will be cut off but not for himself.'
Is 53: By his experience, My Righteous One will justify many. Justification is to credit or declare a person to have it in his account no matter what he is like.
 

Danoh

New member
Let's define terms...

There is Mid-Acts.

And then there is the cluelessness of the ever endless Holfordian books based reasoning of men in their Willfull Ignorance.

Hah - even describing your mess, IP - requires more words.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
The mystery of the gospel is that a just God can declare some men righteous who personally are not righteous:

"But now the righteousness of God without the law is made known, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by the faithfulness of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe" (Ro.3:21-22).​

Well, it was a mystery. It isn't a mystery now. Not that there aren't important aspects of the gospel's inner workings that we don't fully understand, but the basics of it are clear and easily understood. God's life, His perfect, pure, sinless, innocent, infinitely valuable life, was willingly exchanged for those who put their faith in Him. It is this exchange that allows God to forgive our sins and remain just. Sin's wage (i.e. death) was paid. Thus the scales of justice are even.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Where was it prophesied that God can declare some men righteous who personally are not righteous?

This question doesn't even make any sense.

Who would God justify if not those who personally are not righteous?

The whole human race minus those who personally are not righteous equals no one.
 

csuguy

Well-known member
Hey Clete,

I can go along with your concept of justice: receiving punishment/reward according to one's actions.

However, your thoughts on love seem to differ from the scriptures a bit. To love, in the biblical sense, is to act for the sake of another. Furthermore, the greater the personal sacrifice involved in such an act, the greater the act of love is.

John 15:13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.

Furthermore, love can and does contradict justice. Not in purpose, mind, but in what one requires versus the other. For love would have us forgive one who repents of their sin. There is no forgiveness, however, with justice. Justice demands you pay your debt, but love instructs us to forget what was owed. While God certainly has expectations of us as Christians, it is impossible for us to earn the reconciliation given to us by the grace of God through Christ.

However, properly understood, justice and forgiveness do serve the same purpose. Both seek to resolve conflict in society and restore peace and order, to reconcile us back to one another. Love & forgiveness are superior to justice, for the in the prior individuals reconcile between themselves, truly. People care for one another, and out of this concern naturally arrive at a peaceful and harmonious solution. In the latter, a form of reconciliation is enforced through courts that attempt to determine a fair punishment for misdeeds. The latter is necessary, for the prior is dependent upon the good will of the parties in question. Nevertheless, hope you find yourself on judged with mercy by God rather than by what you truly deserve:

James 2:12-13 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.​
 
Last edited:

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Who would God justify if not those who personally are not righteous?

It was not revealed in the OT that the believer would be "justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Ro.3:24).

That is "the mystery" spoken of here:

"Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, even the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith"
(Ro.16:25-26).​

Even the Lord Jesus indicated that in theory men could attain eternal life by keeping the commandments so at that time it was not known that the only way that a person could be saved was by grace through faith.

Well, it was a mystery. It isn't a mystery now. Not that there aren't important aspects of the gospel's inner workings that we don't fully understand, but the basics of it are clear and easily understood.

That is correct.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Hey Clete,

I can go along with your concept of justice: receiving punishment/reward according to one's actions.

However, your thoughts on love seem to differ from the scriptures a bit. To love, in the biblical sense, is to act for the sake of another. Furthermore, the greater the personal sacrifice involved in such an act, the greater the act of love is.

John 15:13 Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.
I didn't suggest otherwise.

The point isn't that there is no personal cost, the point is the cost paid is not without reward. Love is not causeless (i.e. arbitrary).

Furthermore, love can and does contradict justice.
It is not your intent but this comment is blasphemy.

Which is God not, love or justice?

You'd, no doubt, say that He is both and yet you suggest that they can contradict eachother. The direct implication being the God can contradict Himself.

This is clearly false.

Not in purpose, mind, but in what one requires versus the other. For love would have us forgive one who repents of their sin. There is no forgiveness, however, with justice.
This is just simply not so. The only reason any forgiveness is possible is because God's death at Calvary paid the just price for the offense. When we forgive our neighbor who repents, we are simply affording him the same grace that God afforded us. We are merely obeying Him who bought us with a price. Vengence belongs to God and He will see justice done, one way or the other. Our forgiveness is merely trusting God to take care of it.

Justice demands you pay your debt, but love instructs us to forget what was owed. While God certainly has expectations of us as Christians, it is impossible for us to earn the reconciliation given to us by the grace of God through Christ.
The only reason it can be justly forgotten is because God paid the debt with His own life's blood. God cannot be arbitrary in the manner you are suggesting. If He could be and remain just, Calvary was an unecessary act of needless barbarism.

However, properly understood, justice and forgiveness do serve the same purpose. Both seek to resolve conflict in society and restore peace and order, to reconcile us back to one another. Love & forgiveness are superior to justice, for the in the prior individuals reconcile between themselves, truly. People care for one another, and out of this concern naturally arrive at a peaceful and harmonious solution. In the latter, a form of reconciliation is enforced through courts that attempt to determine a fair punishment for misdeeds. The latter is necessary, for the prior is dependent upon the good will of the parties in question. Nevertheless, hope you find yourself on judged with mercy by God rather than by what you truly deserve:
The governing official is directed to enact justice without mercy and is not afforded the right to forgive any crime for any reason. Our forgivenss of our repentant neighbor has nothing to do with criminal justice but with our relationship both with that neighbor and with God.

And as for my being judged by God, the only judgment left for me has to do with reqards I'll receive (or the lack thereof). My sin has already been judged, having been imputed to Christ, Who was executed for them on my behalf.

James 2:12-13 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.​
This verse was written to Jews who where both saved and lived under the Law. Your application of it is therefore inappropriate. For those under the Law, grace is imputed to those who both believe God and obey the Law. That is a topic for another thread, however.

Suffice it to say that it is still the same shed blood of Christ that balances the scales of justice, regardless of how or why God's forgiveness is granted.

Resting in Him,
Clete
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
This verse was written to Jews who where both saved and lived under the Law. Your application of it is therefore inappropriate. For those under the Law, grace is imputed to those who both believe God and obey the Law. That is a topic for another thread, however.

No, if it is of grace then it is not of works, as witnessed by Paul's words here:

"Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt" (Ro.4:4).​
 
Last edited:

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Let's define terms...

There is Mid-Acts.

And then there is the cluelessness of the ever endless Holfordian books based reasoning of men in their Willfull Ignorance.

Hah - even describing your mess, IP - requires more words.

You should choose your words better than that.

or in other words, button your lip.

LA
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
No, if it is of grace then it is not of works, as witnessed by Paul's words here:

"Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt" (Ro.4:4).​

Which part of "a topic for another thread" did you not understand?
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Which part of "a topic for another thread" did you not understand?

So you think that you can say anything and not be challenged on that thing if you merely say that it is 'a topic for another thread"?

I would hate for anyone to read your comments which ties "grace" with both "faith" and "works" and actually believe that mistaken idea. Therefore,I wanted to demonstrate that your idea is in error.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
So you think that you can say anything and not be challenged on that thing if you merely say that it is 'a topic for another thread"?

I would hate for anyone to read your comments which ties "grace" with both "faith" and "works" and actually believe that mistaken idea. Therefore,I wanted to demonstrate that your idea is in error.

Yes, I think I can do what I want on the threads I start. You, on the other hand, are not required to participate.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Yes, I think I can do what I want on the threads I start. You, on the other hand, are not required to participate.

So you can say anything, no matter how ridiculous, and as long as you say that it is the subject of another thread then no one can challenge you! Are you really that insecure?
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
So you can say anything, no matter how ridiculous, and as long as you say that it is the subject of another thread then no one can challenge you! Are you really that insecure?

It is not unreasonable to want to keep the topic of the thread limited to something specific. I am not obligated to defend every point made on ancillary topics that happen to come up. I am not obligated to defend anything - ever. I don't answer to you and don't need nor have I asked for your approval.
 

Wick Stick

Well-known member
Hi Clete,

I think you've got justice mis-defined.

You have defined it in terms that I think of as "fairness" - that the consequences of actions fall on those whose actions precipitated them. For everyday use in modern English, that's a fine definition.

The problem is that it isn't the meaning of the word as it appears in any Bible I know.

Justice is given in our Bibles most often for the Hebrew words צְדָקָה (tsadiqah) and מִשְׁפָּט (mishpat). When one went before an Old Testament judge, these two words were the two verdicts handed down. One was given to the plaintiff and one to the defendant.

The man declared tsadiqah was justified and/or exonerated. The man declared mishpat was declared guilty, and had to make restitution, or face penalties decided by the judge.

There are different words in the Greek of the New Testament, but frankly they don't matter much, because they correspond exactly to the Hebrew concept of a trial, as explained above.

Why did I bother to respond? You contend that God is just... yet God doesn't cause all the consequences to be doled out "fairly." Very often, the consequences of one mans mis-deeds fall on another man. The God of the Bible "maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."
 
Top