The Qualities of Justification

[CHESTERTONRULES]

I agree with you. God desires all men to be saved. I also don’t believe all men are saved. Jesus said ‘few’ are, and the ‘many’ are not. Once God’s grace acts upon us fully, we exercise faith, and then works that actually please God will follow. If they don’t follow, that person’s faith was dead–never real and alive. But the faith is what brought the power and desire to produce good works.

So we agree.

You share the Catholic position on salvation.

We must cooperate with God’s grace and endure with a living faith.

 

[brkn1]

Fair comment. But if it is a “process method,” would that necessarily make it unbiblical? Doesn’t justification within the Protestant setting come via a process method, too?

The problem with a “process method”, according to (Romans 8:30), is that ‘justified’ is in the past tense as all the action words seem to be. The question by Paul in the next verse, “If God be for us, who can be against us?”, has a presently finished ‘justified’ that would be difficult to stretch into the idea that such justification still has to continue being processed until death.
A verse further down says that “It is God that justifieth.”. This also takes away from the idea that the person justified has a process role in his justification.

Consider the following.

An American Evangelical Protestant invites to church a work colleague whose worldview hovers somewhere between agnosticism and deism and is extremely surprised when the invitation is accepted. At the conclusion of the worship service the pastor announces to the congregation that anybody who does not know Jesus as his or her Lord and Savior should come forward. Surprisingly, the agnostic comes forward. The pastor subsequently invites the agnostic to come and talk about the Christian life and during the conversation inquires as to why the agnostic responded to the invitation to come forward. The agnostic looks nonplussed, announces that it’s the last thing imaginable, and then declares that it must be God at work because there is no other feasible explanation. The pastor nods in agreement.

Question: Bearing in mind that the agnostic is completely clueless as to even the basics of Christian doctrine at what point (if any) during the above sequence would you say that the agnostic was justified and how do you get to your conclusion?

Cordially,
Mick

It is possible that something said during the worship may have been used by the Holy Spirit to convict the agnostic of his need for Salvation. The slightest mustard seed of true faith is sufficient to bring an unsaved person into God’s fold. The thief on the cross may not have had much Christian doctrine, but it was enough to get him straight into Paradise that same day. He asked to be remembered by the Lord, which is the same as asking for mercy that the publican did. Jesus said that the publican went home justified.
Whether that agnostic was justified or not is something none of us could be sure of. We might later see evidence that his faith was likely real by his resulting works, as James pointed out, but we could not be sure. It might even be considerably longer before that seed takes, if God placed it in good soil.

 

[SSTeacher]

Coming forward to talk about the Christian life doesn’t imply justification. It might well imply that God is drawing him to Himself. If that person repents of his sins and wrong thinking about Christ and clings to Him in faith for salvation, about 30 things happen in a New York minute!

Thanks for your comment.

Appreciatively,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

The problem with a “process method”, according to (Romans 8:30), is that ‘justified’ is in the past tense as all the action words seem to be. The question by Paul in the next verse, “If God be for us, who can be against us?”, has a presently finished ‘justified’ that would be difficult to stretch into the idea that such justification still has to continue being processed until death.
A verse further down says that “It is God that justifieth.”. This also takes away from the idea that the person justified has a process role in his justification.

It is possible that something said during the worship may have been used by the Holy Spirit to convict the agnostic of his need for Salvation. The slightest mustard seed of true faith is sufficient to bring an unsaved person into God’s fold. The thief on the cross may not have had much Christian doctrine, but it was enough to get him straight into Paradise that same day. He asked to be remembered by the Lord, which is the same as asking for mercy that the publican did. Jesus said that the publican went home justified.
Whether that agnostic was justified or not is something none of us could be sure of. We might later see evidence that his faith was likely real by his resulting works, as James pointed out, but we could not be sure. It might even be considerably longer before that seed takes, if God placed it in good soil.

Thank you for responding.

Gratefully,
Mick

 

[nbtb1348]

Thank you for responding.

Gratefully,
Mick

Isaiah says **“all of our righteousnesses are as filthy rags”

Titus 3–(Notice it is PAST TENSE) “But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy.”

Hebrews 6:1–"Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of **repentance from dead ****works, and of faith toward God, "

Galatians 2:16–“Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”

A person who is TRULY BORN AGAIN discovers that he has been adopted into a FAMILY where the loving Father has taken care of EVERYTHING. We now serve **“in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter” **(guys, the LETTER of the law says do this or else!!

Forget everything else you want to debate, and pray until God shows you the truth of these verses and others like them!

 

[SSTeacher]

Isaiah says **“all of our righteousnesses are as filthy rags”

Titus 3–(Notice it is PAST TENSE) “But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy.”

Hebrews 6:1–"Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of **repentance from dead ****works, and of faith toward God, "

Galatians 2:16–“Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”

A person who is TRULY BORN AGAIN discovers that he has been adopted into a FAMILY where the loving Father has taken care of EVERYTHING. We now serve **“in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter” **(guys, the LETTER of the law says do this or else!!

Forget everything else you want to debate, and pray until God shows you the truth of these verses and others like them!

Thanks again for your helpful commentary. I see this as a pivotal question and I’ve been devoting a lot of time to it.

Reflectively,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

I distinguish between Justification and Sanctification.
Justification is what is called “being saved”. That is an event - which takes place when you/one becomes a Christian, and solely by this faith (Sola Fide).

Sanctification is a process - the process of growing in imitation of Christ, and in holiness in living for Him. Sanctification is the consequence of Justification, and without Sanctification, there has been no Justification.

Luther was unjustly accused of saying that Christians should no longer do good works. That is not true. The question is WHY we should do good works - in order to BE saved, or because we ARE saved. I believe the latter, as it is what I believe Scripture teaches.

Take your time. I’d like your thoughts on it

Hi LutheranDK,

I’m still thinking my way through this question and if I’m making headway it’s certainly not a great deal. But some of my mental meanderings include the following.

An expatriate Limey living Stateside since 1990, I became an Evangelical Protestant in 2000. If I‘d been asked to define my worldview at the time I entered Protestant Christendom I’d have probably described it as somewhere between deism and agnosticism. Given that I’d developed an intense dislike of American Evangelical Protestantism and its attendant manifestations my conversion was unexpected at the every least.

I do consider that mine was a genuine conversion. I recall feeling extraordinarily elated as I set about getting involved in this new life. I gave up smoking and drinking alcohol (I reckon I’d drunk enough to see me through to the end, anyway) and I began to pray every day. I couldn’t wait for Sunday to arrive because I wanted so much to be in church. I volunteered to be a greeter at church, I started inviting work colleagues to come to church, I joined a small group and I began reading the Bible for myself. It wasn’t long before I was recruited to be a Sunday school teacher by which time I’d started to feel much more comfortable with praying out loud. One of the biggest surprises for me was that my younger son subsequently followed me into Evangelical Protestantism having first become interested when he noticed a big change for the better in my outlook and demeanor. I guess these things are always a little subjective but something certainly happened to me and with your permission I’ll refer to it as my conversion.

Everything went swimmingly for five years but in the middle of 2005 the church board ousted the senior pastor whereupon I became painfully cognizant of the world of church politics – a world of which I’d hitherto been blissfully unaware. I subsequently struggled with the priorities and focus adopted by the new leadership and by the end of 2005 feeling bemused and betrayed I left that church. In 2006, after my first experience of “church shopping,” during which time I first experienced the Divine Liturgy at an Eastern Orthodox Church, I joined a different Protestant denomination. It was during this period that I first began to wonder if the Protestant position was tenable.

My second church was very like my first one. I was made welcome and quickly recruited to the body of Sunday school teachers. All went well until the senior pastor suddenly announced that he was stepping down and taking a sabbatical for a year. The first reason given was that he had been in two minds about it and that his indecision together with the subsequent dithering of a committee had resulted in a less than timely notification to the congregation. However, the rumors soon started and it eventually came to light that the church leadership was being economical with the truth and that the real reason for the senior pastor’s departure was because of “financial irregularities.” So last September I left that church and haven’t yet joined another – hence my unsettled frame of mind at the moment.

So perhaps this backcloth helps to explain why I’m in the position of looking back at my steps so far and considering my future direction.

The way in which you described salvation as having two distinct aspects i.e. justification and sanctification is how it was first explained to me back in 2000. I accepted it at the time and mentally filed it under the category of doctrine. However, I’ve come to realize that what I inferred to be Christian doctrine is perhaps more correctly categorized as Protestant theology. I’m not necessarily suggesting that it’s bad theology, mind you – just that it isn’t doctrine and therefore open to questioning. It is the case that pre–Reformation teaching on this matter is that justification and sanctification are NOT separate events. It is only by separating justification from sanctification that one may logically conclude that one is saved. If they are all one and the same then there can be no “assurance of salvation.” Within that understanding, salvation would indeed be a process. Perhaps you agree with my logic? Feel free to point out a flaw, here, if you see one.

At any rate, if Protestant theology is correct and justification is indeed a separate event, it seems to me that I’m really duty–bound to inquire into exactly what happened in my own case in order to ensure that I’m actually justified. And that’s where I am at the moment. I’m looking back at my conversion and my subsequent spiritual journey and piecing it all together – not excluding from my considerations the possibility that the Catholic Church or the Eastern Orthodox Church might contain the fullness of Christian truth.

That’s why I’ve come to this website.

In Christ,
Mick

 

[nbtb1348]

Thanks again for your helpful commentary. I see this as a pivotal question and I’ve been devoting a lot of time to it.

Reflectively,
Mick

Awesome. We were just discussing this tonight in our Bible study. If you read Romans 6-8 and are honest about it, first you will admit it is not easy to understand. But gradually you will see that incredible, eternal things happened at the cross and in the resurrection that pertain to the NEW CREATURE that you are if you have been saved. The believer literally is a new man whose spirit is fused with God’s Spirit. Read Paul’s prayer in Eph 1–

17I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit[f] of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. 18I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, 19and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is like the working of his mighty strength, 20which he exerted in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every title that can be given, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

 

[SSTeacher]

Awesome. We were just discussing this tonight in our Bible study. If you read Romans 6-8 and are honest about it, first you will admit it is not easy to understand.

Eugene Peterson describes the Book of Romans as “the premier document of Christian theology.” That’s not a bad description in my view. I agree that these verses are not easy to understand but I think the same can be said of much that is in the Bible.

Question: Do you understand what you’ve been reading?
Biblical answer: How can I unless someone explains it to me?

That’s one of the reasons why I’m looking toward the Catholic Church just now.

But gradually you will see that incredible, eternal things happened at the cross and in the resurrection that pertain to the NEW CREATURE that you are if you have been saved. The believer literally is a new man whose spirit is fused with God’s Spirit. Read Paul’s prayer in Eph 1–

I have no argument with that. But you’ll perhaps agree that although Saint Paul writes of salvation as a past event in Romans and Ephesians (Romans 8:24; Ephesians 2:5, 8), Scripture declares that there is an ongoing aspect to salvation, also. For example, consider the following verses:

1 Peter 1: 8–9:
Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

Acts 2:47:
…praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

The idea of salvation as something that is taking place in the present can also be found in the writings of Saint Paul.

1 Corinthians 1:18:
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Philippians 2:12:
Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed – not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence – continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling…

It seems, then, that Scripture also allows for salvation to be understood as an ongoing process.

But I’ll respectfully suggest, too, that according to Scripture salvation has a future aspect as well:

Romans 13:11:
And do this, understanding the present time. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed.

1 Corinthians 3:15:
If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.

1 Corinthians 5:5:
…hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.

This is the Catholic argument, admittedly, but perhaps you’ll agree that it’s a valid one nevertheless. I’d be interested to learn how you subsume this wider concept of salvation into your doctrinal attitude.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Grace and peace,
Mick

 

[brkn1]

At any rate, if Protestant theology is correct and justification is indeed a separate event, it seems to me that I’m really duty–bound to inquire into exactly what happened in my own case in order to ensure that I’m actually justified. And that’s where I am at the moment. I’m looking back at my conversion and my subsequent spiritual journey and piecing it all together – not excluding from my considerations the possibility that the Catholic Church or the Eastern Orthodox Church might contain the fullness of Christian truth.

That’s why I’ve come to this website.

In Christ,
Mick

You are on the right track, when it comes to your search for exactly what happens in justification and the resulting continuing sanctification and final glorification at death. I think your best bet is to keep reading Romans again and again. My suggestion would be that you also read Hebrews over and over too.
Understanding exactly what happened when Jesus died for our sins on the Cross is the key. Roman Catholics do not believe that all of our sins were paid for then, hence the need to also include our own righteous works, as a process, to achieve final justification. They say that Christ’s Merit provides the Grace for us to use our own “graced” merit to do so. It is probably more complicated than that, but I think that is the gist of it.

Your idea of considering the Catholic Church “to ensure that I’m actually justified” is negated by the Catholic Encyclopedia explanation of the qualities of justification in my first post: “Catholic: uncertainty, inequality,amissibility”.

I would not dwell too much on what the external denominations presented to you on “your spiritual journey”. They will likely have disappointed you, since it will be sinful man’s presentation. A person that is justified does not lose the sinful nature, which will stay with him till death. It should be diminished considerably by the power of God for a born again person, but not eliminated until the physical body dies. The “perfect” church does not exist in the outward form. Even the most spiritual church at the beginning had its problems, when you read Scripture.

 

[SSTeacher]

You are on the right track, when it comes to your search for exactly what happens in justification and the resulting continuing sanctification and final glorification at death. I think your best bet is to keep reading Romans again and again. My suggestion would be that you also read Hebrews over and over too.
Understanding exactly what happened when Jesus died for our sins on the Cross is the key. Roman Catholics do not believe that all of our sins were paid for then, hence the need to also include our own righteous works, as a process, to achieve final justification. They say that Christ’s Merit provides the Grace for us to use our own “graced” merit to do so. It is probably more complicated than that, but I think that is the gist of it.

Your idea of considering the Catholic Church “to ensure that I’m actually justified” is negated by the Catholic Encyclopedia explanation of the qualities of justification in my first post: “Catholic: uncertainty, inequality,amissibility”.

I would not dwell too much on what the external denominations presented to you on “your spiritual journey”. They will likely have disappointed you, since it will be sinful man’s presentation. A person that is justified does not lose the sinful nature, which will stay with him till death. It should be diminished considerably by the power of God for a born again person, but not eliminated until the physical body dies. The “perfect” church does not exist in the outward form. Even the most spiritual church at the beginning had its problems, when you read Scripture.

Many thanks.

Appreciatively,
Mick