Forensic Justification - what's your view about it?

[GaryTaylor]

GT,

Chrysostom does a reasonable job of providing understanding here and points out that Job was delivered to Satan as well. I would say that the Faith is dormant and not producing the effects that the gift was provided for…

Faith/Hope/Charity…in my recent studies do not act independently but jointly and according to how God chooses to have them work in us…it is possible that when Faith is weak…Hope gets stronger…and it may be that Hope delivers those that shipwreck back to life…towards Charity or love or by love of God…

newadvent.org/fathers/230605.htm

Good point, well taken. I think your right, earlier I started thinking about addicts and recovery, those who hit bottom, yet are still in denial. Yes, I believe the Faith remains and could be inspired through Hope and effort. This is what I referred to with misplaced faith.

 

[CopticChristian]

Good point, well taken. I think your right, earlier I started thinking about addicts and recovery, those who hit bottom, yet are still in denial. Yes, I believe the Faith remains and could be inspired through Hope and effort. This is what I referred to with misplaced faith.

GT,

The issue of addiction is near and dear to me as a problem to be solved. Hitting bottom, recovery & denial are words extracted from the 12 step paradigm. Character defects based on this premise are “sins”. This paradigm claims diseased forever.

If you look at Catholic Thought…the Catechism…7 deadly sins…sins of excess include Gluttony and the like. A person with the Vice or Habit of addiction is sinning. What is happening here is failure to exercise human virtue through effort. This is heresy to the 12 step paradigm, ie powerless. However in the deposit of Faith, we recognize that on our own we can do nothing…all is possible with grace, a gift, we are called to form our conscience, utilize human effort via virtue that are coupled with the theologic virtues of Faith, Hope and Charity. Virtues like Temperance, Fortitude, etc…this is strictly from the Catechism. This paradigm claims consupiscence.

This thinking parallels the thoughts of Stanton Peele, PhD Life Process. In this secular program…Values are essential. Motivation is essential. These things cause a change in habit and resolution of Habit/addiction. Values are virtues. Motivation is grace and effort. The end result is the same. This paradigm claims mistakes made right.

 

[Erich]

I think that where Erich may be going is that a dead body is still a body. If you visit a morgue and ask what’s in the box, the answer is: a body. Even if it’s dead.

His question may come from Catholic Apologist John Martignoni’s argument regarding Faith vs Works…

Correct.

My second question, “If a man says he has faith, and has no works, can his faith save him?” is taken directly from James 2:14, “What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?” James himself tells us that “faith, by itself, if it has no works, is dead” (James 2:17). Others have already spoken of the “faith = body, works = spirit” analogy in James 2:26 (“For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead”) so I see no need to repeat that whole discussion here.

As for whether an incomplete faith can save us… how can an incomplete faith save anyone? Scripture tells us (in James 2:22) that faith is completed by works: “You see that his faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works.” So, works are necessary in order to have a complete faith. And, if works are necessary in order to have a complete faith, a saving faith, then how can anyone say we are saved by faith alone (Sola Fide)? Either that, or an incomplete faith can somehow save us – a notion which cannot be found in Scripture.

 

[Carlan]

Correct.

My second question, “If a man says he has faith, and has no works, can his faith save him?” is taken directly from James 2:14, “What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him?” James himself tells us that “faith, by itself, if it has no works, is dead” (James 2:17). Others have already spoken of the “faith = body, works = spirit” analogy in James 2:26 (“For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead”) so I see no need to repeat that whole discussion here.

As for whether an incomplete faith can save us… how can an incomplete faith save anyone? Scripture tells us (in James 2:22) that faith is completed by works: “You see that his faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works.” So, works are necessary in order to have a complete faith. And, if works are necessary in order to have a complete faith, a saving faith, then how can anyone say we are saved by faith alone (Sola Fide)? Either that, or an incomplete faith can somehow save us – a notion which cannot be found in Scripture./

 

[Christian_Unity]

Oh I heartely disagree. I think there is plenty of evidence just within the scriptures to refute all of these. Those scriptures may not make a dent, of course, if the person who wishes to cling to Reformed theology cannot admit them into evidence, as is often the case. In order to maintain the “solas”, a great deal of Scripture has to be twisted or ignored.

That’s interesting that two Christians come up with two different viewpoints, both claiming that their view is supported by Scripture. I would say Catholic theology would have to ignore a lot more Scripture to come up with a Catholic understanding on the issue of justification and predestination. Would you like to discuss and debate theses issues within the Scriptures alone to prove that I am wrong? Which of the 5 solas would you personally disagree with?

 

[Christian_Unity]

CU,

I have spent the last several weeks forming my conscience. I have listened to the US Catechism for Adults, 16 discs, about my 4th time through and I am beginning to understand the deposit of Faith so much more.

I have listened to the Confessions of St. Augustine…since as a sinner he is such an example of what can be done when someone turns from sin.

I have listened to Abandonment to Divine Providince as it echoes the truths of Veritatis Splendor. It was written to Nuns in cloister to aid them in their spiritual walk…

I have listened to The Imitation of Christ and find that this is a marvelous and humbling work…

I found a site that lists the greates 100 Catholic movies and I have made some of them favorites on my Netflix que…

In consideration of your OP…and your recent postings…based on all that I have previously said here…I question your intentions in posting…

You came to a CAF and asked for a view…now you want to debate what you believe “Scripture” says…

God calls…you respond…and you respond regularly…and you were called to a Catholic forum…and here you find yourself…what is it you truly want?

P.S. these are all available, with the exception of the Catechism, online free…I am planning on listening to Dark Night of the Soul, watching the Passion of the Christ and other movies to aid my calling…I suggest you start listening to what is being said to you…

I guess that you don’t want to debate our difference through the Scriptures, correct?

 

[KathleenGee]

CopticChristian…

Thanks for answering…No wonder…saying the same thing in different ways. I will reread these posts that have come in today after yours…I can not make any sense about this other concept so hopefully all will help me understand what Christian Unity is saying.

I did not grow up in a fundamentalist background. When I share…I am essentially sharing what I have learned throughout my life as a devout Catholic and I have read many materials. So I deliberately share from the point of faith and participation in the Catholic Church and draw on my education in what I have received from the Church. The context I studied under was correcting lay ministers in professional ministries…so the focus was orthodoxy and ecclesiology with much use of the Catholic Catechism and Vatican II, primarily, Lumen Gentium,

I do not go bible quote by bible quote because I simply do not relate to it that way. My favorite place studying the Word of God is at Mass, and seeing the Word in action through the lives of the saints, that in turn have taught me deeper theology of our faith.

 

[guanophore]

Right, however many of our separated brothers , they who believe in the doctrine of once saved always saved,do more or less believe that.
The difference between us is they do not adhere to all the saving grace of the sacraments given in Baptism as we do.
They simply recognise sin committed, after forensic justification, as wrong and lift it to God for forgiveness and believe that is all that is neccessay.at least that is what I understand concerning sin in their life
Peace, Carlan

I think this is just a minority of our separated brethren. Most of them believe that God has justified them because He intends to sanctify them, and that they have a responsibility to turn away from sin, and bear good fruit.

That’s interesting that two Christians come up with two different viewpoints, both claiming that their view is supported by Scripture. I would say Catholic theology would have to ignore a lot more Scripture to come up with a Catholic understanding on the issue of justification and predestination. Would you like to discuss and debate theses issues within the Scriptures alone to prove that I am wrong? Which of the 5 solas would you personally disagree with?

No, I have no interest at all in using the Scriptures to “prove” anyone “wrong”. We understand the scriptures we do by faith, and we can do no other. I daresay that you understand them according to the faith tradition you have received. I do not find it expedient to attempt to “prove” you are wrong.

Yes, I am willing to discuss the issue either with Scripture alone, or in the light of what the Apostles believed and taught which is evident in the Early Fathers’ writings.

You may not realize that you read and interpret Scripture with a preconceived bias, but your OP is evidence of this fact. You quoted a Catholic Scripture, written by, for, and about Catholics, then said it was a “Protestant interpretation”. When one looks back over the thread, it is easy to see that many people had not idea what you were asserting, and had never heard of “forensic justification”. That is because the concept was invented by Calvin 1500 years after the ful deposit of faith was committed once for all to the Church.

 

[CopticChristian]

I guess that you don’t want to debate our difference through the Scriptures, correct?

CU,

Only if you tell if you have read Moby Dick.

 

[jmcrae]

The strength of Reformed Doctrine is Sacred Scripture. What is written is written.

And the authority of the Sacred Scriptures rests on the Holy Tradition of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, vested in the Pope - Pope Innocent I, who defined and declared the canon of the New Testament in the year 405 AD - without which none of us would have a Bible, nor any Solas to debate.

The only way you can refute the essential Reformed doctrines such as faith alone, forensic justification, predestination, 5 solas of the Protestant reformation is to go outside the Scriptures to make any kind of intelligent debate on the issues.

All of the parties to the discussion are operating from outside of the Scriptures. The difference is, the Catholic viewpoint comes from the Holy Tradition, whereas the Reformed viewpoint comes from rebellion against the authority of the Catholic Church - it must go with whichever interpretation denies the authority of the Church. A plain reading of the Scriptures themselves, when understood in their plainest sense, support the idea that Christ established a Church, and appointed the Apostles and their successors, including St. Paul, to be its leaders. The very existence of the Pauline epistles speak to the point that it was the man who had the authority - not the pen, and not the paper.

 

[pablope]

Sorry brother, until you are willing to discuss Christian doctrine through the Scriptures, your comments are just a dog and pony show too. I think everyone here has read the typical Catholic apologetics 101 responses numerous times. No offense is intended, but the truth is found in the Word of God.

Which is the dog and pony show…your interpretation (which was borne out of the reformation) or the Catholic’s whihc is based on 2000 yrs of apostolic tradition?

And is the Word of God limited to the written word? Where is this written in the Bible?

 

[jmcrae]

That’s interesting that two Christians come up with two different viewpoints, both claiming that their view is supported by Scripture. I would say Catholic theology would have to ignore a lot more Scripture to come up with a Catholic understanding on the issue of justification and predestination. Would you like to discuss and debate theses issues within the Scriptures alone to prove that I am wrong? Which of the 5 solas would you personally disagree with?

“Sola” means “only” and the significance is that one can base one’s spiritual life on that one thing alone, and lack for nothing essential.

The fact that there need to be five of them signifies various deficiencies in all five of them - none of them can stand alone - none of them are actually “sola”.

 

[CopticChristian]

“Sola” means “only” and the significance is that one can base one’s spiritual life on that one thing alone, and lack for nothing essential.

The fact that there need to be five of them signifies various deficiencies in all five of them - none of them can stand alone - none of them are actually “sola”.

JM,

Ya really gotta love this guy CU…look here…in two successive posts #457 & #458

post 457

The strength of Reformed Doctrine is Sacred Scripture. What is written is written. **The only way you can refute the essential Reformed doctrines such as faith alone, forensic justification, predestination, 5 solas of the Protestant reformation is to go outside the Scriptures **to make any kind of intelligent debate on the issues. We can continue if you want to. **However, I’m not interested to debate Apostolic Succession over sola scriptura **because that would reduce the strength of Reformed theology which again is Sacred Scripture. Do you want to debate these issues with the Sacred Scriptures and let the chips fall where they may? The Apostolic Faith in which was once for all delivered in the Saints in found in Sacred Scripture alone.

and in post 458…

monergism.com/directory/l…/Regeneration/


When you go to this link…yeah there is Scripture after Scripture…but then look at the following…

“God effects a change which is radical and all-pervasive, a change which cannot be explained in terms of any combination, permutation or accumulation of human resources, a change which is nothing less than a new creation by Him who calls the things that be not as though they were, who spoke and it was done, whocommanded and it stood fast. This, in a word, is regeneration.” - John Murray

Faith in the living God and his Son Jesus Christ is always the result of the new birth, and can never exist except in the regenerate. Whoever has faith is a saved man.
**Charles Spurgeon **from the sermon “Faith and Regeneration”

If salvation is the implantation of a new, infinite life in the soul, it must be a work of God. Self-caused effects can never rise above the character or qualities of their cause. “Flesh gives birth to flesh but the Spirit gives birth to Spirit,” Jesus told Nicodemus. This saving grace cannot be caused by the creature, it can only come from God. John Hannah from To God be the Glory (pg. 34-5)

The inward offer is a kind of spiritual enlightenment, whereby the promises are presented to the hearts of men, as it were, by an inward word.
William Ames

So lets just discuss Scripture, you cannot invoke any of your learnings from the magesterium or the deposit of Faith…but lets look at what Charles Spurgeon, John Murray, William Ames and John Hannah have to say to support my view…

What do you expect from a guy that has not read Moby Dick?

 

[guanophore]

Ya really gotta love this guy CU…look here…in two successive posts #457 & #458

post 457

and in post 458…

monergism.com/directory/l…/Regeneration/


When you go to this link…yeah there is Scripture after Scripture…but then look at the following…

So lets just discuss Scripture, you cannot invoke any of your learnings from the magesterium or the deposit of Faith…but lets look at what Charles Spurgeon, John Murray, William Ames and John Hannah have to say to support my view…

What do you expect from a guy that has not read Moby Dick?

I think CU is not a “guy” .

I also think that CU is not really here for “Catholic Answers”, but in the hopes that “debating through the Scriptures” the Reformed view will win over whatever Catholics may be here that are among the “elect”.

It may be that CU will never be able to grasp the fact that Reformed Christians read the Scriptures through the lense of these authors you have noted here in your post. However, I do think that some reading the thread may be enlightened on this point. The Reformed community has their own “magesterium”, some members of whom are listed above, and they make themselves their own “pope” in the sense that each one reads the Scriptures and believes what they are convicted in their heart is “right” within them, discounting what the Apostles believed and taught to their successors. This is why you don’t see Reformed Christians quoting from the Ante-Nicean Fathers - they are too Catholic! They confine themselves to picking and choosing passages from Augustine.

 

[CopticChristian]

I think CU is not a “guy” .

I also think that CU is not really here for “Catholic Answers”, but in the hopes that “debating through the Scriptures” the Reformed view will win over whatever Catholics may be here that are among the “elect”.

It may be that CU will never be able to grasp the fact that Reformed Christians read the Scriptures through the lense of these authors you have noted here in your post. However, I do think that some reading the thread may be enlightened on this point. The Reformed community has their own “magesterium”, some members of whom are listed above, and they make themselves their own “pope” in the sense that each one reads the Scriptures and believes what they are convicted in their heart is “right” within them, discounting what the Apostles believed and taught to their successors. This is why you don’t see Reformed Christians quoting from the Ante-Nicean Fathers - they are too Catholic! They confine themselves to picking and choosing passages from Augustine.

G,

This is true. CU is a person. The lens of view would be called filters of the world. With or without those filters, CU appears not to have read Moby Dick.

 

[guanophore]

G,

This is true. CU is a person. The lens of view would be called filters of the world. With or without those filters, CU appears not to have read Moby Dick.

Yes, and I am still waiting on an answer as to what point, prior to baptism, was Cornelius regenerated (forensically justified) by the Holy Spirit.

 

[CopticChristian]

Yes, and I am still waiting on an answer as to what point, prior to baptism, was Cornelius regenerated (forensically justified) by the Holy Spirit.

G,

So, as the learning mode is adopted…may I ask you to elaborate so that I may be more informed on this…I too believe this and would like to hear from you…

Calvin’s ideas about the nature of man, and the nature of sin, represent significant departures from the Apostolic faith. One of those departured being that mankind, even in his unregenerate state, still seeks and longs for God.

You also said Calvin redefined things. I know that Calvin was Catholic, a lawyer and his father was excommunicated from the Catholic Church for embezzlement. He may have been angry as motivation. What did he redefine?

 

[KathleenGee]

I think when the continual focus on such ideas about faith and salvation that are not Catholic…ideas most likely already debated by scholars in the past…it is preventing one from living a more sanctified life and living out the Gospel in every day life.

 

[benjohnson]

“Sola” means “only” and the significance is that one can base one’s spiritual life on that one thing alone, and lack for nothing essential.

The simple description ‘Solas’ show the bombastic side of Dr. Luther - they’re have to be understood in the time-frame they were given when the church seemed to have all sorts of extra requirements to get into heaven without spending a good portion of time in Purgatory.

To prove your point well - there’s no such thing as a proper Lutheran that sits at home on Sunday and contemplates the 5 ‘Solas.’ Instead, we go to church to worship, repent our sins and ask for forgiveness, receive the sacraments, and to become stronger in faith.

 

[Porknpie]

Which is the dog and pony show…your interpretation (which was borne out of the reformation) or the Catholic’s whihc is based on 2000 yrs of apostolic tradition?

And is the Word of God limited to the written word? Where is this written in the Bible?

That is worth repeating…and I’ll wait a long time for an answer. Chapter and verse please. Just one.

And is the Word of God limited to the written word?

Where is this written in the Bible?

That’s interesting that two Christians come up with two different viewpoints, both claiming that their view is supported by Scripture.

Not exactly accurate. One Christian claims their view is supported by Scripture alone, following a man-made tradition. The other follows scripture - a NT and OT bible canonized by the Catholic Church in 405 AD, consistent with Tradition and understood by & interpreted by the Magisterium of the Church to be infallible in teaching on faith and morals as Christ himself promised. I put my faith in Christ and his Catholic Church.