The Timing of Justification and Imputation

[lionovjudah]

and with Bill Parker's old position (before he converted to "at the cross" without ever telling his congregation about it).

Then Mr. Parker is the only one who is correct.

Justification at regeneration/faith says yes it is finsihed. It is accomplished, it is complete, but for some odd reason, I am witholding the benefits until the Spirit applies it. The debt is paid, but you cannot get the title until I see fit.

[Righteous by Faith]

Tell me why there can be no consciousness of successive duration in God's mind. (especially in light of your supralapsarianism which I assume talks about redemption being the purpose of creation). Does God not know that Richard Nixon is dead now? Did God not know that Nixon was alive when Nixon was alive? Isn't God omniscient?
God learns no new facts. But God knows when Nixon is dead and also knows when Nixon is not dead. Or is it only humans can know a before or after concerning Nixon?

Psalm 90:2 before the mountains were brought forth or ever you had formed the earth, from everlasting to everlasting you are God.

Does this mean that God did not know the difference after God brought forth the mountain? Does it mean that God never brought forth the mountain?

Jeremiah 12:15 and after I have plucked them up, I will again have compassion on them.
Does the immutability of God mean that God cannot have law-enmity against Christ so that Christ dies bearing the sins of the elect?

[Ugly_Gaunt_Cow]

Tell me why there can be no consciousness of successive duration in God's mind.

Seeing how God is ALL KNOWING, the above statement is false.

[Brandan Kraft]

Seeing how God is ALL KNOWING, the above statement is false.

Thank you Scott. That is EXACTLY what RBF is denying. And if that is Scott Price's and Anthony Lawson's position as well, than that is what they are too denying. I will let them speak for themselves though.

[Brandan Kraft]

rbf: I would not presume to speak for Carpenter and Andrew Bain, but I do think we agree on justification. As I do with Anthony lawson and Scott Pprice, and with Bill Parker's old position (before he converted to "at the cross" without ever telling his congregation about it).

Seems to me you have a bone to pick with Mr. Parker!

But I dare not speak for any of these gentleman.

Good, for if Scott Price or Anthony actually believe as you do, I'd have to reconsider my opinion of them.

Since you know about this view, it would be helpful for you to acknowledge it when you are talking about views. There is a difference between disagreeing with Scott Price and not understanding him: you know what his view is--imputation in time before faith.

I agree the benefits of the imputation are not experienced UNTIL faith. But God's view of men does not change. That is what you are advocating. And to be honest with you, that position makes me want to PUKE AND GAG! Barf.

I agree. Imputation has real effects. If one is imputed with righteousness, then one no longer will believe a false gospel.

Here we go with carpenterism again... Sheesh.

But you seem to be saying that you were justified even while you were imputed with that righteousness, so that the righteousness was for a while without effect!

Not so. There are benefits of the cross that are applied to elect men before they are converted to the truth.

Interesting, I say it is not effective until imputed. You say: imputed long before effective.

No. I'm saying it's imputed in eternity. Not "long before" or "long after" as God's thoughts cannot be measured in lengths of time as you would suggest.

To answer again, Justification is before God. God's mind counts, reckons righteousness. God's mind counts, reckons sin. Where there is God's law, God's mind counts sins as sin. Where God credits righteousness, there is no condemnation. Two states. Either or.

But God does not think in time.

I don't see where we disagree about it being God who justifies or who counts or even how God counts. (we both can avoid speculations about things we don't know) The question is: did God ever count Abraham's sins against him? God can and does count. We can agree about that.

If God counted Abraham's sin against him, then Abraham is in hell. So to answer your question... NO! God did not count Abraham's sin against him!

[GraceAmbassador]

"Bush is a liar", I'm going to have to ask you to change your screen name. It's offensive, and while I agree that all men are liars, we will give more respect to the President of the United States on this board than what you have displayed. So please send me a private message with the new username, or I will change it for you to something of my choosing.

Concerning your insistence upon imputation in "time", where exactly does imputation take place? I thought imputation was a charging to one's account righteousness or sin. And where are these "accounts?" Do you believe men are carrying their accounts in their back pockets?

Brandan:

Sometimes I don't know why I love you, but when I come home from work and I see your request to change this screen name, I begin to find some of the reasons...

thank you!

Milt

[Brandan Kraft]

Sometimes I don't know why I love you, but when I come home from work

Ditto, brother!

[lionovjudah]

But God does not think in time.

Be careful here brandan. Remember God is BOTH transcendant and imminent. Dont speak one truth at the expense of another.

The dates of the Holy Writ are true. So when God states things as:

Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Gen 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.


Exd 24:18 And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.


these are literal days.....not some mysterious eternal thought

[Brandan Kraft]

Be careful here brandan. Remember God is BOTH transcendant and imminent. Dont speak one truth at the expense of another.

The dates of the Holy Writ are true. So when God states things as:

Gen 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Gen 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.


Exd 24:18 And Moses went into the midst of the cloud, and gat him up into the mount: and Moses was in the mount forty days and forty nights.


these are literal days.....not some mysterious eternal thought

If God thinks in time, that means His thoughts change. And God cannot be defined in terms of change which is exactly what TIME IS!

[GraceAmbassador]

If God thinks in time, that means His thoughts change. And God cannot be defined in terms of change and that is exactly what TIME IS!

Check and see if you find the revelation about "time" and where "time" is and where "time" is confined:

"there is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event UNDER HEAVEN."

I would suppose that no one here believes:

that there is time in heaven
that UNDER HEAVEN is God's realm

I am giving too many hints... You have to find the revelation for yourself, or perhaps, only the Holy Spirit's illumination on this text.

Milt

[lionovjudah]

If God thinks in time, that means His thoughts change. And God cannot be defined in terms of change which is exactly what TIME IS!

Then this would destroy the countless, thousands of verses that has God speakign about specific days. Again, I would suggest of study of transcendance and imminence.

AS an aside, what do we do with these verses? This is getting way too confusing here BK. take a deep breathe and rethink a little.

Again, if you deny the imminece of God, you deny 80% of the words in the writ. His revelation happenned in time. His tabernacling with man happenned in Time. Not only in His mind.


14And the Word became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth.

the trinity itself is an example of both the transcendance and imminence of God.


Plus this will get very mystical if we believe that God cannot tell time!!!

He knows it is 2-7-06 And He is present here and now.


Just rethink this approach BK. Dont worry so much about protecting the immutibility of God, and stumble over this truth.

[Brandan Kraft]

RbF, you seem very familiar to me. I am guessing you are Mark McCulley. Am I right?

[Brandan Kraft]

Actually, I AM CONVINCED YOU ARE MARK! Welcome to the forum Mark. Why did you hide your real name? Do you know how I know you are Mark? Because I have an old e-mail from you that I traced back to Lancaster, PA. Your current IP address also traces back to Lancaster. It seems you changed your ISP within the last year from dejazzed to verizon. Please do spseak up and reveal your true name as we believe in being open and honest discussion with each other.

Brandan

[Brandan Kraft]

I must admit, your jabs at Bill Parker and Pederson make you a dead giveaway.

[Brandan Kraft]

Brandan,
The supra that I am accustomed to does not have men fallen in God's election. This falls in-line with the thinking of passing over the rest which I understand as infra.

John

If you look at Mr. McCulley's order of decrees, you'll see that he has not advocated it. Read it again. He first has an election to salvation in Christ, and then he has man falling. It is an election to salvation from an unfallen mass of humanity. I think you misread Mark's post. (And yes, I'm calling "rbf" Mark because his debating style as well as physical evidence leads me to believe this is Mark.)

[jmgipson]

rbf said:
1. the election of some sinners to salvation in Christ (and the non-election of the rest of sinners)

When I see elect some sinners to salvation and the non-election of the rest of sinners, it seems the clay is fallen man to me. I might be looking at it wrong, I don't know. I usually think of God creating a people for salvation and creating a people for damnation. I know it is probably a small thing but to some so is saying God permitted the fall which sends chills up my spine.

John

[Brandan Kraft]

I see your point John... I never noticed that... Thanks!

[Robert R. Higby]

But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and justification, and sanctification, and redemption. 1 Cor. 1:30. Why most translators limit the translated Greek to 'righteousness' in this context I have no idea; such a translation waters down what is being said in light of the whole of Paul's theology.

rbf:Tell me why there can be no consciousness of successive duration in God's mind.

The successive duration of all events from the beginning of time to eternity future are ever-present in God's mind at ALL times and transcendent of time. This very moment, the creation of the first atomic matter in the past and the succession of trillions of ages in eternity future are equally present. What we are discussing is not merely the relation of time to eternity in God's mind but the immutability of God in his disposition to save. If God purposes to regard his elect under hell-wrath for a period of time and not merely temporal wrath, then he purposes to deny his own immutability and eternal disposition of grace toward such elect souls.

We all agree with the doctrine of the curse extending to every member of humanity. We disagree that this curse ever equals hell-wrath for the elect. Before conversion, the elect are under the experience of temporal condemnation and wrath but not under God's disposition of eternal condemnation and irreversible damnation. As God's disposition of eternal love and grace is irreversible, even so God's disposition of eternal wrath and condemnation is irreversible! So there is no such thing as God's hell-wrath and condemnation toward the elect in time which he purposed from eternity to also completely reverse at a later time with 'previously withheld but everlasting in the future' grace.

Brandan, I love your last 5 blogs--they were the best! I can't say enough in agreement with them!

Mark--if you are indeed rbf please stick around for a while! --Bob

[Saint Nicholas]

God has the account. Justification is before God, not simply before my conscience. Before the propitiation is imputed by God to God's account, those who rely on the works of the law are under the curse. The elect are not only at enmity with God, but God is at "law enmity" with the elect, until the propitiation/reconciliation is imputed. This is before regeneration, calling and faith.

Or do you maintain that you were never of the works of the law, and never under the curse. See Galatians 3:10.

RBF......Why did you not list the rest of Galatians 3:13,14. " Christ has redeemed us from the curse of law, having become a curse for us (for it is written Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree), that the blessings of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."

Yes RBF I do maintain that I was never under the curse of the law,BECAUSE CHRIST REDEEMED ME FROM THE CURSE OF THE LAW.

When? In eternity (The lamb of God slain before the foundation of the earth) and the outworking of that same and one decree historically at the Cross.

Let's think for a moment....Was Christ's death a potential Justification ? or was it an real and Actual propitiation of sin ? A real Justification ..A real transfer of debt ?

If your answer is a real transfer of debt.. A real declaration of Righteousness, Then it was imputed to us before we were ever born. None of us on this board were alive at the time of the CROSS.

[Saint Nicholas]

Justification is not just a declaration. It is a real accounting of one as righteous,

rbf: We need to define terms, not simply repeat soundbites. What does real mean. Fortner thinks it means impart or infuse. We agree that it does not. There is nothing more "real" than the legal accounting, reckoning, declaring of God, that a person is no longer under the law and no longer under the curse.
Think of marriage. If you say to your girl, the sex is real and what need is there for legal stuff, you are wrong. Real marriage is legal marriage. See Romans 5:19 by the one man's obedience the many will be made righeous.
This means that there has been a legal transfer of Christ's work (finished in His death and resurrection) to the one baptised into that work.

I think we disagree about many things, but this is not one of there. Nothing mere about it. Legal is real. Accounting is real.

Romans 7:5 (after the marriage illustration) For while we were living in the flesh, our works of the law, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are released from the law...

Or are you saying that you were never bearing fruit for death, that despite your experience and knowledge, you were born bearing fruit for God?

and that is in Christ from eternity. If we are talking about declaration of righteousness, then yes, I agree that comes at the time of faith to each and every individual. Concerning Romans 4, that is talking about the experience of the elect.

rbf:that is the thing which you need to prove. As a latecomer, you can refer me to the posts where you have proved it. Or do you have footnotes in your bible which tell us what to read above: as in, works of the law means experience of works of the law, and curse means experience of the curse, but not really....

He experieced justification by faith alone. But that is not at all talking about God's view of Abraham!

rbf: so the seal given to Abraham was not given by God but by Abraham?
And Romans 4:6 about David is not about God counting righteousness to David, but only about David singing about it? And Romans 4:17 is not about God giving life to the dead but only about people who thought they were dead finding out that they were never dead but only thought so....?[/quote]

RBF....Who is Fortner? If Fortner thinks that a Real Righteousness means to Impart or Infuse, Then you tell him that I said he could go to Rome, and I swear the Pope will kiss his feet. Why?... Because that is Exactly what the Council of Trent teaches in their canons pertaining to Justification.....I will have none of it!! That is out and out HERESY.

I used to be a Roman Catholic. I could smell Roman Catholic Soteriology a mile away !!

Nicholas