The Timing of Justification and Imputation

[lionovjudah]

We are not new creatures at the cross, we are new creatures after conversion. Our being born from above pertains to our experience of salvation. We are born dead in sin and then born from above.

Mike: not according to Paul in 2nd Corinthians 5

So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! 18All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation;

And this reconciliation happenned at teh cross. This "in Christ"cannot mean chosen in Christ means justified can it? If this was the case we would be a new creature before being born

[jmgipson]

Paul said he was saved before the world began (II Tim 1:9), when Jesus came into the world (I Tim 1:15), when the Spirit regenerated him (Titus 3:5), when he took heed to himself and the doctrine (I Tim 4:16), and would be saved sometime in the future (Rom 13:11).

We can't limit salvation to just one idea or one event at one time. Paul saw his own salvation occurring in five phases.


Paul clearly taught five phases of salvation.

The ETERNAL PHASE is God's plan and choice from eternity to ordain sin into the world and to save His elect from it. Since He is eternal and sovereign, God planned in eternity all that He does in time. He planned sin, so that He could display His glorious grace in saving His elect from it and displaying His power and wrath on the rest.

The LEGAL PHASE is God's work to satisfy His holy nature and perfect justice for the salvation of His elect. Because every sin must be punished, He sent a Substitute to die for their sins. His perfect holiness and justice cannot overlook sins and acquit wicked men. He must punish their sins in Another, even Jesus Christ. And this He did at the crucifixion of Jesus Christ 2000 years ago.

The VITAL PHASE is God's application of these benefits to us personally and individually. Though He planned to save us from eternity and legally did so with Christ's death on the cross, we still have a depraved and wicked nature at enmity with Him. So He regenerates us into a new life by His Spirit and gives us a new heart that loves Him and righteousness. This is being born again, and it is done entirely by the power of God sometime during our lives.

The PRACTICAL PHASE is our response to His salvation. He sends His Spirit into our hearts, and we cry "Abba, Father." With new hearts from regeneration, we seek the truth and love it when we hear it. We hear the gospel, and we believe it. We want to be baptized to show Him our love. We want to know more of what we can do to please Him, and we gratefully cherish all His promises, which give us comfort and peace now.

The FINAL PHASE is that great day in the future when we shall be declared the sons of God to the whole universe and enter heaven for eternity. Our bodies will be raised from graves and glorified into new spiritual bodies, and we will be thoroughly purged from all sin to be perfectly holy in His presence forever. This great conclusion to the plan of salvation is yet in the future.

Salvation includes everything : Foreknowledge, election, predestination, justification, redemption, adoption, forgiveness, reconcilliation, regeneration, calling, sanctification, conversion, glorification.

John

[Mickey]

Mike: not according to Paul in 2nd Corinthians 5

So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! 18All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation;

And this reconciliation happenned at teh cross. This "in Christ"cannot mean chosen in Christ means justified can it? If this was the case we would be a new creature before being born

In this scripture Paul is referring to our conversion or our experience of salvation. To be a 'new creature' means we were something before. If this is referring to before we were born then it makes no sense at all. We were not 'in Christ' according to Paul’s usage of the term here before conversion. This goes back to what we have discussing; in our experience we are God haters and at enmity with Him all the while His favor is with us as He sees us Justified 'in Christ'. At conversion (regeneration) a change of mind takes place in us; not God.

[Robert R. Higby]

I am personally not convinced of the subjective interpretation of 2 Cor. 5:17, 18. Paul's broad statements regarding the newness of the elect individual are too all-encompassing for it to be primarily experiential. We certainly come to know that we are in Christ when the Holy Spirit regenerates us. However, the "all things are new" and "everything old is passed" can only refer to what has been given to us objectively in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

[lionovjudah]

I am personally not convinced of the subjective interpretation of 2 Cor. 5:17, 18. Paul's broad statements regarding the newness of the elect individual are too all-encompassing for it to be primarily experiential. We certainly come to know that we are in Christ when the Holy Spirit regenerates us. However, the "all things are new" and "everything old is passed" can only refer to what has been given to us objectively in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

Bob, can you explain this more in laymans terms. Let me atttempt to explain how I see this.

verse 17: "Therefore, if any man is in Christ as a new creature: the old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."

At some point in time the old passed away, when was this? What is this old thing?

The old thing has to be our sinfull nature and relationship to God. The imputation of Adams sin to all. Resulting in Gods just verdict against man. Because of this we are enemies of God. ANd need reconciliation. A justified person would not need to be reconciled.

Rom 5:10, "For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."

This is the time the old passed away, at the cross of Crist. God reconciled His sheep at this moment.

Also look at 1 Peter 3;18
18: For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

The word here is unjust. Therefore prior to His death, we are not justified.

adikos = unjust
1) descriptive of one who violates or has violated justice
a) unjust
b) unrighteous, sinful
c) of one who deals fraudulently with others, deceitful

So where do all the benefits take place? The Word says at the cross

[Mickey]

I am personally not convinced of the subjective interpretation of 2 Cor. 5:17, 18. Paul's broad statements regarding the newness of the elect individual are too all-encompassing for it to be primarily experiential. We certainly come to know that we are in Christ when the Holy Spirit regenerates us. However, the "all things are new" and "everything old is passed" can only refer to what has been given to us objectively in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

hmmm...so could Paul be speaking of the Old Covenant and the New?

[GraceAmbassador]

hmmm...so could Paul be speaking of the Old Covenant and the New?

Mike:

I am sure you know that the verse starts with "therefore". Everytime a verse starts with the word "therefore" what do we do? We find out why "therefore" is there for... as the old saying goes...

The context indicates that the "old things" are (is) the flesh by which we have known men before (Paul speaks of Christians). He says that we don't even know Jesus by flesh anymore.

This text is not a proof text against or in favor of "eternal justification" in my view, and has nothing to do with the subject as to whether we became Christ-like in nature, as a new creation, or creature at the Cross.

I maintain that Eternal Justification has to be determined by the aspect of God's timelessness, the way that He executes His plans, and the fact that it is impossible to surmise any type of "timing" apart from God's attributes of omniscience, onmipresence and omnipotence; If one can prove that God elected us before He decided to justify us, even so we cannot prove that our justification is not eternal in His eyes. If one agrees that at the point that God decided to elect us He saw us as justified in Christ (if we believe that Christ was always with God) then, there is no other conclusion possible rather than assent to the fact that He justified us as He elected us, to wit, before the foundation of the world, or, in human terms, eternally, or from eternity.

Let me edit this with this "by the way" comment:

By the way, YES; in the Old Covenant we were known "in the flesh" (see verse 16). That meant known in the things we did in the flesh to please God: circimcision, sacrifices, oblations, etc. Now we are not known on this aspect any longer because we in Christ have been made new creation. His sacrifice was sufficient and once for all to accomplish that.

Note other contrasts in chapter 5, such as the one on verse 7: "we walk by faith and not by sight".

That's my humble take.

Milt

[Mickey]

This text is not a proof text against or in favor of "eternal justification" in my view, and has nothing to do with the subject as to whether we became Christ-like in nature, as a new creation, or creature at the Cross.

I looked at Gills commentary a little while ago and he understands this verse as speaking of the former ways of the Mosaic Law and the new way in Christ. I hadn't thought about the meaning of this verse since the BC (free willy) days.

I maintain that Eternal Justification has to be determined by the aspect of God's timelessness, the way that He executes His plans, and the fact that it is impossible to surmise any type of "timing" apart from God's attributes of omniscience, onmipresence and omnipotence; If one can prove that God elected us before He decided to justify us, even so we cannot prove that our justification is not eternal in His eyes. If one agrees that at the point that God decided to elect us He saw us as justified in Christ (if we believe that Christ was always with God) then, there is no other conclusion possible rather than assent to the fact that He justified us as He elected us, to wit, before the foundation of the world, or, in human terms, eternally, or from eternity.

I agree 100%.

[Saint Nicholas]

Nicholas,
I think Rome's order is more like this: Faith, Justification, regeneration. They believe as Free-willers do that Faith precedes the new birth.

Brandan,
Thanks. What is the name of the thread discussing the faithfulness of Chirst?

John........do your Homework on Romanism. You will see I am correct.


I spell it out for you again.

1. Water Baptism ( Regeneration of the soul. The infusion of enabling Grace. The will thus set free to cooperate with Justifying grace.)

2. Sanctifying Grace. ( The ability to obey the laws of God and the Church through the sacraments and thus attaining to sinless perfection and an increase in justification, through meritorius good works.

3.Venial Sin. ( a sin to a lesser degree that does not let one fall from justifying grace, but so thus would retard the process.

4.Mortal Sin ( A sin of grave proportion and consequences. A fall out of Grace, and thus hellbound.

5.The Sacrament of penence. ( the soul is renewed again and back in justifying grace.

6. Purgatory. ( A place of purification and expiation of sin, till the man is made inherently sinless. SINLESS PERFECTION)

7 The Beatific Vision. ( Heaven. That man stands sinless before God)

So again, according to Rome ........Regeneration..Faith....Justification

I will attempt in future posts Lord Willing, to prove beyond a shadow of doubt, that all those who deny an Eternal Justification, by God's Sovereign Verdict and Decree, and who attempt to place the verdict of justification AFTER Regenerative Faith is so cooporated with by man, is teaching a Hybrid Romanism. (Heresy)

In Christ.......Nicholas

[Mickey]

Nicholas, we have some Catholics that drop in every now and then. Your experience and knowledge of Catholicism will be a great contribution to this website! If you want you can start some threads targeting specific issues in the Catholic cult.

[Robert R. Higby]

Explaining this in 'laymens' terms may be difficult, Lion, but I will try!

The 'old thing' in New Testament terms is always BOTH the hopeless enslavement to sin of the present (unregenerate) age AND the law-covenant of Judaism! The two are related; one is how God ministered wrath to Jews before the coming of Christ (2 Cor. 3) and the other is how God always ministers wrath to the world in general.

The connection between Christ's objective work in his atonement and the subjective work of the Holy Spirit is always viewed as an organic unity by the authors of the New Testament. There is no hermeneutic of doctrinal compartments unrelated to each other! So in viewing certain passages, it is difficult to answer the question: "Is it Christ's finished work in history or the Holy Spirit's work in the believer that is referred to?" The two are ever-present to God and his purposes; one begets the other. While we are 'in the flesh' before glory, perfection is only in Christ! Yet we begin to experience the renewing power of God in the present! So a passage such as 2 Cor. 5:17 relates to both aspects, yet affirms that the full reality of the New order (ending both the Old Covenant and the earthly dominion of sin) is only in Christ.

[Mickey]

So when Paul speaks of us being new creatures he is speaking of us being creatures living in a new order?

[jmgipson]

John........do your Homework on Romanism. You will see I am correct.


I spell it out for you again.

1. Water Baptism ( Regeneration of the soul. The infusion of enabling Grace. The will thus set free to cooperate with Justifying grace.)

2. Sanctifying Grace. ( The ability to obey the laws of God and the Church through the sacraments and thus attaining to sinless perfection and an increase in justification, through meritorius good works.

3.Venial Sin. ( a sin to a lesser degree that does not let one fall from justifying grace, but so thus would retard the process.

4.Mortal Sin ( A sin of grave proportion and consequences. A fall out of Grace, and thus hellbound.

5.The Sacrament of penence. ( the soul is renewed again and back in justifying grace.

6. Purgatory. ( A place of purification and expiation of sin, till the man is made inherently sinless. SINLESS PERFECTION)

7 The Beatific Vision. ( Heaven. That man stands sinless before God)

So again, according to Rome ........Regeneration..Faith....Justification

I will attempt in future posts Lord Willing, to prove beyond a shadow of doubt, that all those who deny an Eternal Justification, by God's Sovereign Verdict and Decree, and who attempt to place the verdict of justification AFTER Regenerative Faith is so cooporated with by man, is teaching a Hybrid Romanism. (Heresy)

In Christ.......Nicholas

When you spell it out like this I can understand it now. Not having a Catholic background all I seen was synergism vs. monorgism. The way you had the order of salvation is the way Calvinism states it:

Regeration - Faith - Justification

Arminian Free-willers belive it thus:

Faith - Regeneration - Justification

Which using the terms with this same meaning would class Rome with it.

My mistake. I didn't understand your terms.

John

[Saint Nicholas]

I believe the trouble comes from looking at the word "eternity" in our linear sense of "time"

I do not believe Eternity is past tense. The Cross of Christ is the pinnacle for everything. Not creation, not the 2nd advent, but the Cross. This is where it all funnels to. So my understanding of eternal justification lies in the view that the Cross happenned historically at a specific linear time and date. This is when the blood was shed for the remission of sins. But in the eternal mind of God, this happenned as the final consumation of all events. There is no other way to explain how future sins are forgiven. Without blood there is no remission, hence His death has no beginning or end in the mind of God.

The confusion comes when looking at eternity in a linear sense. this is a mistake. We are not justified before the foundations of the world, we are justified because the cross of Christ is viewed by God as an eternal sacrafice.

This is Romes error when it comes to future sins. They fail to realize that His death is the one and final sacrafice, why? Because it is eternal, no beginning or no end

If this makes no sense to anyone else, thats ok, it makes sense to me!!!!

What year is it in Heaven?
Before the creation of Angels and men when there was God Alone, Was He perfectly complete in Himself?
Is God a complete and Perfect reality in and of Himself?
Were we, the Elect chosen in HIM before the foundation of the world?
Was Christ in union with the Father, from all eternity?
Were we, the elect in union with the Son from all eternity?
On what legal basis Can the Father thus enjoin in full union with those in His Son?............Here is a hint....Justification!

I love to be outside on the dark, black, and cloudy day. Why? so I can tell people who pass on by, that it's a great beautiful sun shiny day. Ha! they all laugh at me and say.your crazy! the sun ain't shining!
Well you could you see their stupidity? Just because they didn't see the sun on that dark, black, and cloudy day, DID NOT MAKE THE SUN A NON-REALITY. Likewise, because the elect don't see nor beleive in their Justification prior to regeneration......DOES NOT MAKE JUSTIFICATION A NON-REALITY.

He who hath ears..let him hear

Nicholas

[lionovjudah]

What year is it in Heaven?
Before the creation of Angels and men when there was God Alone, Was He perfectly complete in Himself?
Is God a complete and Perfect reality in and of Himself?
Were we, the Elect chosen in HIM before the foundation of the world?
Was Christ in union with the Father, from all eternity?
Were we, the elect in union with the Son from all eternity?
On what legal basis Can the Father thus enjoin in full union with those in His Son?............Here is a hint....Justification!

I love to be outside on the dark, black, and cloudy day. Why? so I can tell people who pass on by, that it's a great beautiful sun shiny day. Ha! they all laugh at me and say.your crazy! the sun ain't shining!
Well you could you see their stupidity? Just because they didn't see the sun on that dark, black, and cloudy day, DID NOT MAKE THE SUN A NON-REALITY. Likewise, because the elect don't see nor beleive in their Justification prior to regeneration......DOES NOT MAKE JUSTIFICATION A NON-REALITY.

He who hath ears..let him hear

Nicholas

St Nick: You lost me on this one. Perhaps some lingering affects of years of rc incense?

[lionovjudah]

I will attempt in future posts Lord Willing, to prove beyond a shadow of doubt, that all those who deny an Eternal Justification, by God's Sovereign Verdict and Decree, and who attempt to place the verdict of justification AFTER Regenerative Faith is so cooporated with by man, is teaching a Hybrid Romanism. (Heresy)

In Christ.......Nicholas

Both miss the point. There is no declared righteoussness in eternity past, not is justification at or after regeneration. IT happened at the cross.

When does the writ say God and sinners were reconciled?

Justification at or after regeneration s also wrong. This belief confesses that God still holds our sins against us, after the debt has been paid. This is terribly wrong!!!!!!!

The elect are eternally justified at the point of His death on the cross!!!!

Like the example I used above with your car loan. Justification here would be like paying the note, but still having the bank refuse to give you title.

[harald]

Harald, I highlighted your words "in Christ." If God's elect were "IN CHRIST" before the foundation of the world, and Christ is Righteous, how could the elect not be righteous IN HIM? How can anyone be IN CHRIST, and yet be unrighteous? (Brandan)

Where does the Scripture say God's elect were un-righteous in eternity (in Christ) ? Neither have I said they were unrighteous (whether intrinsically, or in God's estimation) in eternity in Christ. What I am saying is that the Scripture does not say that Justification before God took place before the foundation of the world. JBG before the foundation of the world presupposes the elect, in eternity, stood in need of being cleared of guilt and sin (a part of JBG), presupposing they were unrighteous in eternity.

Paul teaches in Rom. 9 that God's election (whether to salvation or to damnation), in eternity, took place prior to the objects of election had practised anything beneficial (agathos) or intrinsically wrong (kakos). So, when God elected (before the foundation of the world) He did not elect out of consideration of whether the objects of election were good or bad. If He had elected out of consideration of personal character and/or conduct, and had considered His elect "justified" at the moment of electing then this logically presupposes prior "un-justified" state in their case, in which case they were bad, prior (logically reckoned) to being "justified" (in eternity), from which follows that God was, as it were, reasoning as follows: "These are bad, and I will to elect them, but I cannot elect them because they are bad, so I must justify them, else I cannot elect them, because I cannot elect bad ones". See, "justification in eternity" nullifies un-conditional election. The doctrine of unconditional election teaches that God elected apart from taking into consideration character and/or conduct when electing. The election was conditioned on or dependent on (Gr. preposition being EK) the one summoning, Who happens to be the One who un-conditionally elected in eternity.

Harald

[harald]

1) Does in Christ mean Justified?

2) Does chosen=justified

3) does union =justified (Joe K)

1. "in Christ" does not mean "justified" in my statement to Brandan re. election in eternity "in Christ".

2. "chosen" means "having been chosen", and it does not per se mean "justified"

3. union does not per se mean "justified". There was union involved prior to God justifying His elect at Calvary in Christ. This union was part of the basis of justification


Harald: one does not have to seperate Christs sheep as you do. The writ clearly and easily calls all of the sheep chosen. OT saints are as equally chosen as NT saints. This just complicates matters with a seperation that is not needed nor is it scripturally accurate.

I am not separating Christ's sheep. I am making scripturally legitimate distinctions. I am not denying that OT saints are as equally chosen as NT saints. You say the distinction (which you call "separation") is not scripturally accurate. I say it is. There are three elect households, with three distinct hopes, and three distinct household laws. In 1Cor. 15:23 Paul distinguishes between two households when it comes to their entering their respective hopes. The body of the Christ enters (involving reception of resurrection body) its hope first of all, at the rapture. Israel is not to be raptured, nor is Israel the body at that. Israel enters its hope at Christ's second coming, which is years after the rapture of the body. To not make distinction between the three households is not scriptural. Because the Scriptures make distinction between them. There is no one single "the household of God" set forth in the Greek Testament. The body of the Christ is a different household than Israel. The body as a household has its own household administration law or code (oikonomia), and it is not Israel's household administration law/code, the Mosaic Law. The body's oikonomia is called, in Eph. 3:2, the oikonomia of the grace of God. And is to be found in the Pauline epistles, not in the 5 books of Moses, the Torah. If Israel and the body were one and the same "the household of God" then they would have one household law. But the body and Israel are not the same, and consequently one has one household law and the other has another.


Has anyone given a clear definition of what is meant by justification? Can we at least decide and concur together how we are defining this word? I know it is very pregnant, with distinctions.

pardon?
remission of sins?
adoption?
declared righteouss?
aquited?
eternal life?

The word "justification" is a proper rendering of that Greek word which is found in e.g. Rom. 4:25, dikaiôsis. This noun means the making or rendering or constituting or accounting of someone as righteous. The -sis suffix indicates an act or action, viewed as being in progress. So, it can be defined as "the act of constituting (someone) righteous". Then it is another thing to decide what "justification" involves in Paul's teaching. Among other things it involves

- discharging ("remission") of sins (has to do with "pardon"), involving the blood of Jesus Christ
- acquittal
-accounting (considering) as spotlessly righteous because of the fact that they were so (i.e. righteous) in Christ, by virtue of union with Him partaking of His God-ward faith (cp. "justifying the one of faith of Jesus", Rom. 3:26b) having been imputed to Him as righteousness well-pleasing to God.

So, the elect of God were justified before God through the blood of Jesus Christ in conjunction with the faith-righteousness of Jesus Christ, on the tree of Calvary. Rom. 3:25-26. Not in eternity as one false gospel teaches. Not at the point of Christ-ward faith as another false gospel teaches. Neither through a Law-keeping-righteousness of Christ at Calvary as some may heretically teach.

Technically speaking, at that point when God accounted His elect righteous Justification (before God) was done, finished, accomplished. An automatical and immediate conseqence was that once they had been accounted righteous in His sight He adjudicated them to live, adjudicated them to life, eternal life. And, accordingly, Jesus was raised ON ACCOUNT OF (owing to) the justification of His own. Rom. 4:25, Gr. text.

As for "adoption", then. "adoption" translates the noun "huiothesia". Which literally means "placement as (mature) son(s)", or, "sonship-adoption". As for "adoption" it is sometimes preceeded by the article and sometimes without. Nonetheless, myself is at the present inclined to link "adoption" with glorification ("the redemption of the body") rather than with JBG. I think Paul's language warrants such a conclusion. But I would nonetheless not be dogmatical about this.


Harald

[harald]

I see, now I am making things up. Ironic you could not , nor dealt with the exegesis as to just what "foundation" of something means. "PRO" is presupposed here. Your "blinder theology" exposed as bankrupt. (Ray K)

As to what "foundation" means. In the NT "foundation" in the said verse translates "katabolê", from "kataballô" , "to cast down". So if going by the root meaning katabolê means "a casting down" or "a casting (down) into shape". Here, Rev. 13:8, it is katabolês kosmou, lit. "casting into shape of cosmos" or "(the) cosmic order". Kosmos lit. means "orderly arrangement".
Then, if it had read "before the foundation" etc. it would have presupposed the preposition PRO in the Greek. PRO means "before". But now the preposition is APO, KJV here renders "from". APO means "away from". Here therefore "away from (the) foundation of cosmos", i.e. from the point of the casting into shape of cosmos onwards (in time).


The whole counsel of God testifies to the elect's "Justification from or in eternity" from God's eternal counsel, whom the Lord seen fit to accomplish in His Son , our Saviour Jesus Christ.

God's elect were justified before God (Rom. 3:20, Gr. enôpion autou) in about 29 AD. This justification was immutably decreed in eternity. This is testified to by Paul in his epistles.





Isaiah 28:16
Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.

In context it does not teach justification in eternity.


Matthew 25:34
Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

In context does not support JIE. Mark the preposition APO is used, "from". Not "before" (PRO).


John 17:24
Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world.

No dik- root words involved. Thus hard for you to prove justification is taught here.


Hebrews 9:26
For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Not ever close to touching on this justification in eternity thing.



1 Peter 1:20
Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

No dik- root words involved. Then, "foreordained" is a mistranslation of the Greek verb Peter wrote, proegnôsmenou, "of one having been intimately known beforehand", from proginooskoo which means to know intimately beforehand. Here the verb is used with reference to Jesus Christ.


Seldom have I seen looser use of God's word than yours, Ray. Presumptuous eisegesis and ignoring of context when trying to prove that which cannot be proved.

Harald

[harald]

John Gipson,

I take it post #62, your post, is basically a quote from someone else. Unless I mistake from a website by the name "Let God be true", which has an article with the identical wordings as your post above. Perhaps you should give credit where it is due.

Harald