A. Those whom God effectually calls, also justifies free: Ro. 3:24; 8:30 pm.
B. No infusing justice and righteousness but forgiving their sins, and considering and accepting their persons as righteous: Rom. 4: 5-8; Eph. 1: 7.
C. not for anything in them or done by them, but only for Christ 's sake: 1 Corinthians 1:30, 31; Ro. 5: 17-19.
D. No imputing faith itself, or the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience as justice; but imputing Christ's active obedience to the whole law and his passive obedience in his death for the complete and only justice from them by faith, which they have not themselves; it is the gift of God: Phil.3: 9; Eph. 2: 7, 8; 2 Cor 5: 19-21; Tit. 3: 5, 7; Ro. 3: 22-28; Jer. 23: 6; Acts. 13:38, 39.
Justification can be defined as the legal act by which God declares the sinner righteous on the basis of the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ. It is an act or process of renewal, such as regeneration, conversion and sanctification, and does not affect the condition, but the state of the sinner. Sanctification differs in several aspects: the justification takes place outside the sinner, before the tribunal of God, taking away the guilt of sin, and is a complete fact once and forever; while sanctification takes place in man, removing the filth of sin, and is an ongoing process throughout life. We distinguish two elements in justification, they are:
The conceived forgiveness applies to all sins, past, present and future, and therefore can not be repeated.Psalm 103-12; Isa. 44-22; Rom. 5:21, 8-1, 32-34; Eph. 10: 14. This does not mean we do not need to pray more for forgiveness, because the consciousness of sin is more refined than ever, creating a feeling of separation and rejection of sin, and because of human weakness is necessary to search repeatedly, the comforting assurance forgiveness. Ps. 25: 7; 32: 5; 51: 1; Mat. 6:12; Santo 5:15; The John 1: 9.
In justification God adopts believers as His children, puts them in the position of children and gives them all rights to such, including that of an eternal inheritance. Rom. 8: 17; 1st Ped. 1: 4. This legal adoption of believers should be distinguished from their moral adoption by regeneration and sanctification.
The first aspect is defined in John 1:12, 13, and the second in Romans 8: 15, 16. Gal .. 4: 5, appears the first, both in Gal .. 4: 5, 6, by order correlative.
The word justification is not always used in the same sense, some speak of four aspects of justification.
1. Justification from Eternity.
2. Justification in the resurrection of Christ.
3. Justification by faith.
4. Public Justification in the final judgment.
As explanation for this fourfold aspect of Justification, it can be said that in an ideal sense, the righteousness of Christ is already applied to believers, on the advice of Redemption, and therefore from eternity; but it is not what the Bible means when he speaks of the justification of the sinner. We must distinguish between what was decreed in the eternal counsel of God and what is done in the course of history.
There is also some reason to speak of justification in Christ's resurrection. In a sense it can be said that the resurrection of Christ was the justification, the statement that his work was perfect, and accepted by God, and the whole body of believers was justified. But this is a general and purely objective transaction, which should not be confused by the personal justification of every sinner.
When the Bible speaks of the justification of the sinner, generally it refers to the subjective and personal application, ie the appropriation of justifying grace of God. Generally it said that we are justified by faith.This means that occurs at the time when we accept Christ by faith. Faith has been called the instrument or organ that justification decreed by God appropriates. By faith man appropriates, that is, taking for himself the righteousness of Christ, and on this basis is justified before God. Faith justifies him when he takes possession of Christ. Rom. Four. Five; .. Gal 2:16.
We must guard against the error of Roman Catholic, and the Arminians, who say that a man is justified on the basis of its own inherent righteousness, or for their faith. Neither justice own man, or his own faith can be the basis of their justification. This is so only in the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ. Rom. 3:24;10: 4; 2nd Cor. 5:21 and Phil. 3: 9.
There have been several objections to this doctrine. It is said that if a man is justified on the basis of the merits of Christ, is not saved by grace. But justification with everything included, is a generous work of God. The gift of Christ.
The fact that we apply God's righteousness, and his treatment sinners righteous, under this plan of salvation is all grace from beginning to end. It is also said that he is unworthy of God to declare sinners righteous, but God does not state that the justified are just for themselves, but are clothed with the righteousness of Jesus Christ.
Finally it is argued that this doctrine is the way to make people indifferent as to their moral life. If justified, without regard to their works, why they should be careful in their moral life and piety? But justification lays the foundations for a life of communion with Christ, and is the surest guarantee for a truly holy life. The man who really lives in union with Christ, can not be indifferent to moral duties, Rom. 3: 5-8.
1. Rom. 3:24. "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."
2. 2 Cor. 5:21. "He who knew no sin, became sin for us; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. "
1. Rom. 3:28. "So we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law."
2. Rom. Four. Five. "But to him that worketh not , but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."
3. Gal. 2:16. "Knowing that a man is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ that we might be justified for the faith of Christ and not by works of the law, because by the works of the law no flesh will be justified. "
1. Psalm 32: 1, 2. "Blessed is the man whose iniquities are forgiven and. I erased your sins, blessed one whom the Lord imputes no iniquity , and in whose spirit there is no guile. "
2. Acts 13: 38-39. "We Be it known to you , brethren, that this is announced to you remission of sins; and everything by the law of Moses could not be justified, it is justified in all that believe. "
1. John 1:12. "But to all who received him, he gave power to become children of God, to those who believe in His name."
2. Galatians 4: 4-5. "But come the fullness of time God sent his son born of a woman, made under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."
1. Rom. 3: 21-22. "But now without the law the justice of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe in Him; because there is no difference. "
2. Rom. 5:18. "So the way for a crime came upon all men to condemnation, so by one righteousness grace to all men to justification of life."
1. What fruits of justification mentioned in Romans 5: 1-5?
2. Do you teach Santiago that man is justified by works? Sant 21:25.
3. What objections against the doctrine of justification answers Paul in Rom. 3: 5-28?
HOW AND WHEN WE GET A PROPER LEGAL SITUATION BEFORE GOD?
BIBLICAL EXPLANATION AND BASES
In previous chapters we talk about the call of the gospel (through which God calls us to trust in Christ for salvation), regeneration (by which God imparts new spiritual life), and conversion (by which we respond to the gospel with repentance of sin and faith in Christ for salvation).
But what of the blame for our sinful The Gospel invites us to trust in Christ as the forgiveness of our sins.Regeneration makes it possible to respond to this invitation. Converting we responded, trusting in Christ for forgiveness of sins.
The next step now in the process of application of redemption is that God must respond to our faith and do what he promised, that is, declare that our sins are forgiven. This should be a concerning our relationship with God's laws legal declaration, stating that we are completely forgiven and we are no longer subject to any punishment.
A correct understanding of justification is absolutely essential for the entire Christian faith. Martin Luther once he fully realized the truth of justification by faith alone, he became a Christian and was bursting with newfound joy of the gospel. The primary issue of the Protestant Reformation was the controversy with the Roman Catholic Church on justification.
If we are to safeguard the gospel truth for future generations, we must understand the truth of justification. Even today, a correct understanding of justification is the line that divides the biblical gospel of salvation by faith alone and all the false gospel of salvation based on good works.
When Paul gives an overview of the process by which God applies salvation to us, explicitly mentions the justification: "Those whom he predestined he also called; to which he called he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified "(Rom 8: 30). As explained in the previous chapter, the word called here refers to the effectual call of the gospel, including regeneration and produces from us the response of repentance and faith (or conversion).
After the effectual call and response that starts from us, the next step in the application of redemption is the "justification". Paul mentions here that this is something that God Himself does: "Those whom he called, them he also justified."
In addition, Paul teaches quite clearly that this justification comes after our faith and God's response to our faith. He says that God is "the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus" (Romans 3: 26), and that "all we are justified by faith, not by works that the law requires" (Rom 3:28). He says: << justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ "(Rom 5: 1).
Moreover, "no man is justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ" (Gal 2: 16).
What then is Justification? We can define the Way Next: Justification is a legal act Instant from God by which:
(1) declares that our sins are forgiven and the righteousness of Christ we belong, Y:
(2) declares us righteous in His sight.
In explaining the elements of this definition, we shall first consider the second part of it, the aspect of justification by which God "declares us righteous in his sight." We treat these elements in reverse order because the emphasis of the New Testament use of the word justification and related terms is in the second part of the definition: the legal declaration of God.
But there are also passages that show that this statement is based on the fact that God first declares justice belongs to us. So that both aspects should be considered, even though the New Testament terms denoting justification focus on the legal declaration of God.
The use of the word justification in the Bible indicates that justification is a legal declaration of God. The verb justify in the New Testament (gr. Dikaioo) has a range of meanings, but the most common way is to "declare righteous." For example, we read, "and all the people and the tax collectors, when they heard, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John" (Lk 7: 29, RVR 1960).
Of course, the people and the tax collectors did God righteous would be impossible for any of us could.Rather they declared that God was right.
This is also the meaning of the term in passages where the New Testament talks about that we have been declared righteous by God (Romans 3: 20, 26, 28; 5: 1; 8: 30; 10: 4; Galatians 2:16 ; 3: 24). This sense is particularly evident, for example, in Romans 4: 5: "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness (RVR 1960).
Paul can not be saying that God "makes the wicked are righteous" (to change them inside and make them morally perfect), because then they would own merits or works which depend. Rather, he means that God declares that the wicked are right in his eyes, not on the basis of their good works, but in response to their faith.
The idea that justification is a legal declaration is also quite evident when the justification is contrasted with condemnation. Paul says, "Who will accuse those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Who is he that condemns "(Rom 8: 33-34)?. "Condemn" someone is to declare that person is guilty.
The opposite of condemnation is justification, that in this context, must mean "to declare that someone is not guilty." This is also evident in the fact that the act of God to justify Paul is given to respond to the possibility that someone present accusations or charges against the people of God. Such a statement of guilt can not be sustained by the reality of God's declaration of righteousness.
Some examples in the Old Testament of the word justify (gr. Dikaoo in the Septuagint, when tsadak results (justify) supports this understanding.
For example, we read of judges who decide a case "absolving [justifying] the innocent and condemning the guilty" (Deuteronomy 25: 1). So in this case (justify) must mean "state that is fair or not guilty" just as "condemn" mean "convict".
It would not make sense to say that (justify) here means "make someone internally good" because the judges do, or can do, someone is good within your being. Neither the judge's action condemning the wicked makes that person is bad inside; It is simply stating that that person is guilty with respect to a particular crime that has been filed with the court (Exodus 23: 7; 1st R 8: 32; 2nd Cor 6: 23).
Similarly, Job refuses to say his friends comforted him were right in what they said to him: "I can never admit that you are right" Job 27: 5, using the same terms in Hebrew and Greek which translates (justify) .The same idea is found in Proverbs: "absolve the guilty and condemning the innocent are two things that the Lord hates" (Prov 17: 15).
Here the idea of legal statement is especially strong. Of course it would not be an abomination to the Lord if (justify) meant "make someone good or right in your inner being". In that case, (justifying the ungodly) would be very good in the eyes of the Lord. But if (justify) meant "to declare righteous," it is perfectly clear why that justifies the ungodly << "is an abomination to the Lord.
Similarly, Isaiah condemns "those who justify the wicked for reward" (Is 5: 23); again, (justify) mean "declare that it is just" (used here in the context of a legal statement).
Paul often uses the word in this sense of "declare be fair" or "declare not guilty" when speaking of God justifies us, his declaration that we, although convicted sinners, we are, however, just before his eyes. It is important to emphasize that this legal statement itself does not change at all our inner nature or character.In this sense (justify)
God makes a legal declaration about us. This is the reason why theologians have said that justification is forensic, and this word denotes what "has to do with legal procedures".
John Murray makes an important distinction between regeneration and justification:
Regeneration is something God does in us; Justification is a judgment of God concerning us.That difference is like the difference between What Makes A Surgeon And what a judge does.When the surgeon removes a Cancer We Domestic ago Something within us. That's Not What Judge ago: The Da A Verdict Judicial Judge regarding our position. If we are innocent, so he declares.
The purity of the gospel is linked to the recognition of this difference. If the justification with regeneration or sanctification is confused, the door to the perversion of the gospel in its essence remains open. Justification is still the article on which it stands or falls church.
In the legal declaration by God of justification, specifically states that are righteous before his eyes. This declaration covers two aspects. First, it means that states do not have to pay a penalty for sin, including past, present and future sins. After a long reflection on justification by faith alone (Rom 4: 1-5: 21), and a parenthetical reflection on the permanence of sin in the Christian life, Paul returns to his main argument in the book of Romans and says 10 which is true of those who have been justified by faith:
"Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8: 1). In this sense they are justified no longer have to pay any penalty for sin. This means that we are not subject to any accusation of guilt or condemnation, "Who will accuse those whom God has chosen? It is God who justifies.Who will condemn "(Rom 8: 33-34)?.
The idea of complete forgiveness of sins is prominent when Paul speaks of justification by faith alone in Romans 4. He quotes David when he pronounces a blessing on "the one whom God imputes righteousness apart from works." Then remember when David says, "Blessed are those whose transgressions are forgiven, and whose sins are covered! Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account "(Rom 4: 6-8)!.
Such justification therefore clearly includes the forgiveness of sins. David speaks in the same way in Psalm 103: 12: "So far from us as far he removed our transgressions from the east is from the west" (cf. v. 3).
But if God only declare that we are forgiven of our sins, would not solve all our problems, because that would make us morally neutral just before God. We would be in the state in which Adam was before he had done anything good or evil in the sight of God was not guilty before God, but neither had a history of righteousness before God.
This first aspect of justification, in which God declares that our sins are forgiven, we can represent by where the minus signs represent our own sins have been completely forgiven in justification.
However, this movement is not enough to obtain God's favor. We must move rather from a moral point of neutrality to another point where we have a positive righteousness before God, justice of a life of perfect obedience to him. We can represent our need, therefore, where the plus sign indicates a record of righteousness before God.
THE AWARD OF JUSTICE OF CHRIST TO OUR FAVOR IS THE OTHER PART OF JUSTIFICATION
Therefore, the second aspect of justification is that God must declare that we are not only neutral before his eyes, but we are right in his eyes. In fact, he must declare that we have the merits of perfect justice before him. Sometimes the Old Testament presents God as giving justice to his people that even though this not won for himself: "I delight greatly in the Lord; I rejoice in my God.
For he hath clothed me with garments of salvation and covered me with the robe of righteousness "(Is 61: 10). But Paul speaks specifically about this in the New Testament. As a solution to our need for justice, the apostle tells us that "now, without the mediation of the law, said the justice of God, which testify to the law and the prophets.
This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe "(Romans 3: 21-22).He says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" (Rom 4: 3, citing Gen 15: 6).This happened thanks to the obedience of Christ, because Paul says at the end of this broad reflection on justification by faith "by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous" (Rom 5: 19). Then, the second aspect of God's declaration on justification is that we have the merits of perfect righteousness before him.
But the question arises: How can God declare that we have no punishment to pay for sin, and that we have the merits of perfect justice, if we are actually guilty sinners? How can God declare that we are not guilty but fair when in reality we are unjust? These questions lead us to the next point.
When we say that God imputes the righteousness of Christ we mean that God sees the righteousness of Christ as ours, or believe that it belongs to us.
He credited our account. He says, "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" (Rom 4: 3, citing Genesis 15: 6). Paul explains: "When that does not work, but believes in who justifies the wicked, he considers faith as righteousness. David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works "(Rom 4: 5-6). Thus the righteousness of Christ becomes ours. Paul says we are "those who receive the abundance of grace and gift of righteousness" (Rom 5: 17).
This is the third time to study the doctrines of the scriptures we have encountered with the idea of attributing blame someone or justice.
First, when Adam sinned, his guilt was imputed to us; God the Father saw it as belonging to us and therefore, he did.
Second, when Christ suffered and died for our sins, our sin was imputed to him Christ; God saw him as he belonged, and Jesus paid the punishment.
Now we see in the doctrine of justification something similar for the third time. Christ's righteousness is awarded to us, and therefore believes that God belongs to us. It is not our own righteousness but the righteousness of Christ that accredit us. So Paul can say that God made Christ was made "our wisdom, that is, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption" (1 Cor 1: 30).
And Paul says his goal is to be found in Christ, not wanting their "own righteousness that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith" (Phil 3: 9). The apostle knows that justice is before God is not based on something that he has done; It is the righteousness of God that comes through faith in Christ Jesus (ef Ro. 3: 21-22).
Is fundamental to the essence of the gospel insist that God declares us righteous not based on our actual condition of righteousness or holiness, but rather on the basis of the perfect righteousness of Christ, which he belongs to us. This was the essence of the difference between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism at the time of the Reformation.
Protestantism since the time of Martin Luther insisted that justification does not change us from within and is not a statement in no way based on any goodness we have in us. If justification change us in our inner being and then declared us righteous based on how good we were.
(1) we never could be declared perfectly righteous in this life, because sin is always in our life, and:
(2) There would be no provision for the forgiveness of past sins (which committed before being changed internally), and therefore could never be sure of being in right standing with God. Lose the security that Paul has when he says: "Since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom 5: 1).
If we think that justification is based on what we are inside, we would never have the confidence to say with Paul: "there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8: 1). We would have no assurance of forgiveness with God, nor confidence to approach it "with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith" (Heb 10: 22).
We could not mention the abundant "grace and gift of righteousness" (Rom 5:17), or say that "the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23).
The Roman Catholic traditional interpretation of justification is very different.
The Roman Catholic Church understands justification as something that changes us from within and makes us saints inside. "According to the teaching of the Council of Trent, justification is" sanctification and renewal of the inner man. "" In order that justification begins, one must begin by being baptized and then (as an adult) continue to have faith: "The cause instrumental in the first justification is the sacrament of baptism. "? But" adult justification is not possible without faith.
As for what to do with the content of the faith that justifies, the call fiduciary faith is not enough. What is claimed is a dogmatic or theological (religious faith) faith is the firm acceptance of the divine truths of revelation. '' So baptism is the means through which justification is first obtained, and then faith is necessary if the adult will receive justification or continue in the state of justification.
Ott explains that "the so-called fiduciary faith" is not enough, which means that the faith simply trusts Christ for the forgiveness of sins is not enough. It must be a faith that accepts the content of the teaching of the Catholic Church, "a dogmatic or theological faith."
We can say that according to the Catholic concept of justification is not based on the awarded justice but Infused justice, that is, the righteousness that God actually puts in us and change us in our inner being and in terms of our real moral character . Then it gives us several measures justification according to the measure of justice that he has infused or placed in us.
The result of this Roman Catholic understanding of justification is that people can not be sure whether they are in a "state of grace" where they experience the full acceptance and favor of God. The Catholic Church teaches that people can not be sure that they are in a "state of grace" unless they receive for this purpose a special revelation from God. The Council of Trent declared:
If one considers his own weakness and his faulty Disposal, Well you may be Fearful or Anxious Regarding his state of grace, as nobody knows safely Fe, which does not allow Error, who has reached the grace of God.
Ott says regarding this statement:
This uncertainty from grace A This is, without a special revelation Nobody Can With certainty Fe Saber has complied If all conditions are necessary to achieve justification. The inability of the certainty of faith, however, does not exclude under any circumstances Moral Certainty high Backed by the testimony of consciousness.
In addition, since the Roman Catholic Church sees justification as including something God does in us, it follows that people can experience varying degrees of justification. We read: "The degree of justifying grace is not identical in all the righteous" and "grace can be increased through good works."
Ott explains how this Catholic point of view differs from that of the Protestant reformers, "As reformers mistakenly considered justification as only the external award of the righteousness of Christ, they were also required to hold that justification is identical in all men.
The Council of Trent, however, stated that the measure of the grace of justification received varies the person is justified, according to the measure of the free distribution of God and the willingness and cooperation of the container itself. "
Finally, the logical consequence of this view of justification is that our eternal life with God is not based only on the grace of God, but also partly on our own merits, "For justified eternal life is both a gift of grace promised by God as a reward for his own good works and merits. Beneficial works are, at the same time gifts of God and meritorious deeds of man. "
To support this view of justification with Scripture, Ott combines repeatedly New Testament passages that speak not only of justification, but also many other aspects of Christian life, as regeneration (which God works in us), the sanctification (which is a process in the Christian life and, of course, varies from one individual to another), possession and use of various spiritual gifts in the Christian life (which differs from individual to individual) and eternal reward ( which also varies according to each individual).
Sort all these passages under the category of (justification) only makes blur the issue and at the end makes forgiveness of sins and our legal standing before God a matter of his own merit, not a gift from God.Therefore, this blurring of distinctions in the end destroys the core of the gospel.
This is what Martin Luther saw so clearly and is what gave such great motivation Reformation. When the good news of the gospel became really good news in free and full salvation in Christ Jesus, it spreads like an unstoppable fire throughout the civilized world.
But this was only a recovery of the original gospel, which states: "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord) (Ro 6:23), and insists:" You there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus "(Rom 8: 1).
After Paul explains in Romans 1: 18-3: 20 that no one can ever be right in the sight of God (No one will be declared righteous in his sight by works required by law), Ro 3: 20), the apostle goes on to explain that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, by his grace they are justified freely through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus" (Romans 3: 23-24).
"Grace" of God means "unmerited favor." As definitely can not win God's favor, the only way we can be declared righteous is that God freely provide us with salvation by grace, totally apart from our works. Paul explains: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast "(Eph. 2: 8-9, Titus 3: 7).
Grace is clearly contrasted with the works or merits as the reason that God is willing to justify.
God was under no obligation to impute our sin to Christ or ascribe to us the righteousness of Christ; it was only by his undeserved grace that he did.
Unlike the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that we are justified by God's grace plus some merit our to do suitable to receive the grace of justification and grow us in this state of grace through our good works, Luther and the other reformers insisted that justification comes only by grace, not by grace and some other merit on our part.
A. The faith that receives Christ and trust him and his justice is the only instrument of justification: Ro.1:17; 3: 27-31; Phil. 3: 9; Gal. 3: 5.
B. however, is not alone in the person justified, but is always accompanied by all other saving virtues, and not a dead faith , but works by love: Gal. 5: 6; Stg. 2:17, 22.26.
A. Christ, by his obedience and death, fully discharge the debt of all those that are justified; and by the sacrifice of himself in the blood of his cross, suffering in place of them the punishment they deserved, proper, real and completely to God's justice in favor of them met: Ro. 5: 8-10, 19; 1 Tim. 2: 5, 6; I 10:10, 14; Is . 53: 4-6, 10-12.
B. However, since Christ was given by the Father for them: Ro. 8:32.
C. And his obedience and satisfaction accepted in lieu of them: 2 Corinthians 5:21; Mt. 3:17; Eph. 5: 2.
D. And both freely, not for anything in them, their justification is only of free grace: Rom. 3:24; Eph. 1: 7.
E. To ensure that both the precise justice as the rich grace of God will be glorified in the justification of sinners: Rom. 3:26; Eph. 2: 7.
When we started this chapter we noted that justification comes after saving faith. Paul makes it clear this sequence when he says: "We have put our faith in Christ Jesus, to be justified by faith in him and not by the works of the law; because they no flesh be justified "(Gal 2: 16). Paul tells us here that faith comes first and that is for the purpose of being justified.
It also says that Christ is "through faith" and that God is "the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus" (Romans 3:25, 26). The whole chapter 4 of Romans is a defense the fact that we are justified by faith, not by works, just as they were Abraham and David. Paul says we are <0ustificados through faith "(Rom 5: 1).
The Scriptures never say that we are justified by the inherent goodness of our faith, as if faith had merit before God. They never allow us to think that our faith itself we will win God's favor. Rather, Scripture says that we are justified "through faith" understood faith as the instrument by which we are given justification, but it is not at all an activity that earns us merits or the favor of God, but that we are justified only by the merits of the work of Christ (Rom 5: 17-19).
But we can ask why God chooses faith to be the attitude of the heart by which we obtain justification.Why God has not decided to give justification to all who show love? Or any that show joy? o contentment?o humility? o wisdom? Why God chose faith as the means of receiving justification?
It is apparently because faith is the attitude of the heart that is the exact opposite to depend on ourselves. When we come to Christ in faith, we are essentially saying: "I give up! You will no longer depend on myself or my good works. I know that is not going to make things right with God by myself.
Therefore, Lord Jesus, I trust you and depend entirely on you so you give me a position in front of God. "Thus, faith is exactly the opposite of trust in ourselves, and therefore, is the attitude that leads to salvation it does not depend at all on their own merits but the gift of God's grace. Paul explains it well when he says: "Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that by grace and may be guaranteed to all the descendants of Abraham" (Rom 4: 16).
So all reformers from Martin Luther onwards were so firm in their insistence that no justification comes through faith plus some merit or good works on our part, but only by faith. "For by grace you have been saved through faith; this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God, not by works, so that no one can boast "(EF 2: 8-9).
Paul says repeatedly that "no one will be justified in his sight by observing the law requires" (Romans 3: 20); We find the same idea repeated in Galatians 2: 16; 3: 11; 5: 4.
But does this fit well with the epistle of James? What you can mean Santiago when he says: "You see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith only" (Stg2: 24, RVR 1960).
We must realize that James is here to justify using the word in a different sense than Paul uses it. In the beginning of this chapter we note that the word justification has several meanings, and one of them is "declaring someone is right," but we should also note that the Greek word I dikaioo can also mean "prove or show to be fair."
For example, Jesus said of the Pharisees: "You are those who justify yourselves before men; but God knows your hearts "(Luke 16:15, KJV 1960). What is meant here is not that the Pharisees were out there making statements that they "were not guilty) before God, but rather that they were always trying to show others that were just for their external works. Jesus knew that the truth was different: "But God knows your hearts" (Lk 16: 15).
Similarly, the lawyer who wanted to test Jesus by asking who would inherit eternal life, responded well to the first question of Jesus; but when the Lord told him, "Do this and life), he was not satisfied.
Luke tells us: "But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, And who is my neighbor?" (Lk 10: 28-29). He was not looking forward to a legal statement about himself that he was not guilty in the eyes of God; but he was rather looking forward to show that "he was just" in front of others who were listening.
Other examples justify the word meaning "to show that it is just" may be found in Matthew 11:19; Lk 7:35; Romans 3: 4.
Our interpretation of James 2 depends not only on the fact that "show being fair" is an acceptable sense of the word justified, but also that this sense fits well in the context of Santiago 2. When James says, "Was not justified by our ancestor Abraham when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? "(v. 21, RVR 1960) is referring to something that happened later in the life of Abraham, the story of the sacrifice of Isaac, who succeeded in Genesis 22.
This was long after the time recorded in Genesis 15: 6 where Abraham believed God "and it was counted for righteousness." However, this incident early at the beginning of the Abrahamic covenant relationship with God is what Paul quotes and refers to it repeatedly in Romans 4. Paul is speaking of the time when God justified Abraham once and forever, just consider him as a result of his faith in God.
But James is talking about something that came much later, after Abraham waited many years the birth of Isaac, and even after Isaac had grown enough to carry wood for the sacrifice to the top of the mountain.At that time Abraham "showed that it was just" for his works, and in that sense James says that Abraham "was justified by works when he offered his son Isaac on the altar" (Stg2: 21).
What you most want to Santiago in this section also fits with this understanding. Santiago is interested in showing that only intellectually agree with the gospel is a "faith" that actually is not. He is interested in arguing against those who say they have faith but do not show changes in their lives. He says, "Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show my faith by my works" (James 2: 18). "For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead" (James 2: 26).
Santiago is simply saying here that the "faith" has no results or "works" is not true at all faith is a faith (dead). He is not denying the clear teaching of Paul that justification (in the sense of the declaration of a proper legal status before God) by faith alone apart from works of the law; he is simply stating a different truth: that the (justification) in the sense of an outward sign that one is just only happens when its evidences are in the life of the person.
To paraphrase, James is saying that it is just with his works, and not just for their faith. This is something that certainly Paul agreed (2nd Corinthians 13: 5; Gal 5: 19-24).
The practical implications of the doctrine of justification by faith alone are very important. First this doctrine allows us to offer genuine hope to unbelievers who know they can never make themselves righteous in the sight of God. Yes gift of salvation is received only through faith, everyone who hears the gospel can hope that eternal life is offered free of charge and can be obtained.
Second. This doctrine gives us confidence that God will never do pay for the sins that have been forgiven on the basis of the merits of Christ. Of course, we can continue to suffer the ordinary consequences of sin (as an alcoholic who stop taking may still have physical weakness for the rest of his life, and a thief who is justified may still have to go to prison to pay for his crime ).
Moreover, God can discipline ourselves if we act in ways that are of disobedience to Him (see Heb 12: 5-12), and does so for love and for our good. But God can not and never will, take revenge on us for past sins and make us pay the punishment due for them or punish us because of his anger, and in order to harm us.(Thus, there is now no condemnation for those who are united with Christ Jesus) (Rom 8: 1).
This fact should give us a great sense of joy and confidence before God because He has accepted us and we are in his presence as (not guilty) and (fair) forever.
A. From all eternity, God decreed to justify all the elect: 1 Peter 1: 2, 19,20; Gal. 3: 8; Ro. 8:30 pm.
B. And in the fullness of time, Christ died for their sins, and rose again for their justification: Ro. 4:25; Gal.4: 4; 1 Tim. 2: 6.
C. However, they are not personally justified until, in due time Christ is actually applied to them by the Holy Spirit: Col. 1: 21,22; Tit. 3: 4-7; Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2: 1-3.
A. God continues to forgive the sins of those who are justified: Mt. 6:12; 1 June 1: 7-2:. 2; June 13. 3-11.
B. And although they can never fall from the state of justification. Lc. 22:32; 10:28 June.; I 10:14.
C. However , they may, by their sins, fall into God's fatherly displeasure; and in that condition, often they do not receive the restoration of the light of his countenance, until they humble themselves, confess their sins, beg pardon , and renew their faith and repentance: Psalm 32: 5; 51: 7-12; Mt. 26:75; Lk.1:20.
A. The justification of believers under the Old Testament was, in all these respects, one and the same as the justification of believers under the New Testament: Gal. 3: 9; Ro. 4: 22-24 . Chosen: not appear in some editions of Confession, but in the original.
There are very few doctrines that arouse such controversy or cause much consternation as the doctrine of predestination.
It is a very difficult doctrine that needs to be treated with great care and dedication. However, it is a biblical doctrine and therefore it is necessary to consider it . We dare not ignore.
Virtually all Christian churches have some doctrine of predestination. It is inevitable, because the concept appears clearly in Scripture. These churches however disagree, sometimes strongly disagree about its meaning. The point of view differs from Methodist Lutheran point of view, which differs from the point of view presbyterian.
Although all these views differ, each is trying to understand this difficult topic.
In its simplest form, predestination means that our final destination, heaven or hell, it has been decided by God not only before we get there, but even before he was born. It teaches us that our fate is in God's hands. To express this another way: from eternity past, before existiésemos, God decided to save some members of the human race and let the rest of the human race should perish. God made a choice chose some individuals that they might be saved and enjoy eternal blessing from heaven and chose others to suffer the consequences of their sins to eternal torment in hell.
This definition is common to many churches. But to reach the center of the contest corresponds ask: How does God choose? The view of churches that do not come from the Reformation, held by most Christians is that God makes this choice based on their prior knowledge. God chooses for eternal life to people he knows have to choose to Him.
It is the notion of predestination eying because it rests on the foreknowledge of God on decisions or human acts.
The view of Reformed Churches differs as it considers that the final decision for salvation depends on God and not from us. According to this notion, the choice of God is sovereign. No decisions or rests on the answers provided by God. Considers that these decisions emanating from the sovereign grace of God.
The view held by the Reformed churches is that, left to itself, no one would choose God. Fallen people still have a free will and are able to choose what they want. But the problem is that we have no desire for God and Christ will not make until we are not regenerated. Faith is the gift that comes from the new birth.
Only the chosen ones can respond in faith to the gospel. The chosen are decided by Christ, but only because they were chosen by God first. As in the case of Jacob and Esau, the elect are chosen solely on thebasis of the sovereign will of God and not on the basis of anything they have done or to be done. Paul tells us, and not only this, but when Rebecca also conceived by one, Isaac our father (they had not yet born, neither having done anything good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not by works but by the caller), he said: the elder shall serve the younger. So not of him that wills, nor of himthat runneth, but of God's mercy. (Romans 9: 10 to 12.16)
A controversial regarding predestination problem is that God does not choose or choose save everyone.We reserve the right to have mercy on whom He chooses to have mercy.
Some of fallen humanity receive the grace and mercy of the election. The rest, God overlooked by leaving them in their sin. Those who have not been chosen receive justice. The chosen receive mercy. Nobody receives injustice. There is nothing that compels God to be merciful to some or to all alike. It is your decision to define how merciful want to be. However, it will never be guilty of not being fair to someone (see Romans 9: 14-15).
1. Predestination is a difficult doctrine to be treated delicately.
2. The Bible teaches the doctrine of predestination.
3. Many Christians define predestination according to the foreknowledge of God.
4. The view of the Reformation does not consider knowledge as an explanation of biblical predestination.
5. Predestination is based on God's choice, not the choice of human beings.
6. The unregenerate people have no desire to choose Christ.
7. God does not choose everyone. It reserves the severed have mercy on anyone.
8. God does not treat anyone unfairly.
BIBLICAL PASSAGES FOR REFLECTION
Proverbs 16: 4, John 13:18, Romans 8:30, Ephesians 1: 3-14, 2 Thessalonians 2: 13-15.
Every coin has two sides. There is also another side to the doctrine of election. The choice refers only to one aspect of the broader doctrine of predestination. The other side of the coin is the question of condemnation. God declared that loved Jacob but hated Esau. How should we understand this divine allodium reference?
Predestination is twofold. The only way to avoid the doctrine of double predestination would be the claim that God predestined all to be chosen or not predestined anyone or be chosen or be condemned. As the Bible clearly teaches predestination regarding the election and denies universal salvation, we must conclude that predestination is twofold. It includes both election and condemnation. Double predestination is inevitable if we take Scripture seriously. The crucial point, however, is how should be understood double predestination?
Some have understood the double predestination as a cause and effect, in which God is equally responsible for the evil does not create and create the elect. This position on predestination is known as the positive-positive.
The positive-positive position on predestination teaches that God positively and actively involved in the lives of those chosen to work his grace in their hearts and to bring them to faith. Similarly, in the case of the wicked, evil work in the hearts of the wicked and actively prevents them come to faith. This position has often been called the "hyper-Calvinism" because it goes beyond the positions in this regard had Calvin, Luther and other thinkers of the Reformation.
The position of the Reformed Church on double predestination follows a positive-negative pattern. In the case of the elect, God intervenes positively and actively work grace in their souls and bring them to saving faith. Unilaterally regenerates the elect and assures them their salvation. In the case of the wicked, evil does not work or prevents them come to faith. Instead of doing this, he overlooked, leaving them left to their own sins. According to this position divine action is not symmetrical. God's activity is asymmetric with respect to the elect and the wicked.
There is , however, an equal. The evil that has been overlooked by God, is ultimately convicted, and his curse is as real and certain as the final salvation of the elect.
The problem is linked to the biblical statements as in the case of God hardening Pharaoh's heart. No one disputes that the Bible says that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. But the question remains: How did God harden Pharaoh's heart? Luther argued that it was a hardening passive and not active. In other words, God did not create any new evil in the heart of Pharaoh. There was already enough evil in the heart of Pharaoh so that it is inclined to resist the will of God whenever he could.
All God has to do to harden someone is checking out his grace that person and let left to their own impulses toward evil. This is precisely what God does to those who are damned in hell. He abandons his own wickedness.
What sense "hated" Esau God? There are two explanations proposed for solving this problem. The first explains defining allodium not as a negative passion directed toward Esau but simply as the absence of redeeming love.
God "loved" Jacob simply means that Jacob made the object of his undeserved grace. He gave Jacob a benefit that Jacob did not deserve. Esau did not receive the same benefit and in that sense was hated by God.
This first explanation sounds a bit contrived, it seems to want to avoid that one can say that God can hate someone.
The second explanation gives more strength to the word hate. According to this second explanation God hated Esau effectively. Esau was hateful in the sight of God. There was nothing in Esau that God could love.Esau was one worthy vessel being destroyed and deserving of wrath and holy hatred of God. The reader decide with which explanation is left.
1. Predestination is double; It has two facets.
2. Some teach that God is equally responsible for the choice and doom. This is characteristic of hyper-Calvinism.
3. The position taken by the Reformation is that double predestination reflects a positive-negative schema.
4. God hardened Pharaoh's heart passively, not active.
5. God hated Esau in the sense that it gave the blessing of grace, or in the sense abhor it , considering itan object worthy of being destroyed.