Bible Study Justifying Works

[reba]

sheesh

 

[netchaplain]

The application of such a human (pagan Greek) view of justice has caused the distortion of God's work in the salvation of mankind.

The Greek word rendered justified, just, righteous, etc. is DIKAIOSUNE.

The word DIKAIOSUNE, "justice", is a translation of the Hebraic word “tsedaka.” This word means "the divine energy which accomplishes man's salvation". It is parallel and almost synonymous to the other Hebraic word, “hesed” which means "mercy", "compassion", "love", and to the word, “emeth” which means "fidelity", "truth". This, as you see, gives a completely other dimension to what we usually conceive as justice.5 This is how the Church understood God's justice. This is what the Fathers of the Church taught of it. ("THE RIVER OF FIRE" by ALEXANDRE KALOMIROS, 1980 ORTHODOX CONFERENCE)

By applying the pagan Greek understanding of justice to the scripture which arose from the Hebrews, western Catholic and Protestant theologians have adopted the Roman Catholic teaching of Anselm of Canterbury that man's sin required a "just" and equal punishment. It imposed a legalism into the New Testament by which God demands punishment for every violation of His holy law and sin as a violation of God's holy law.

Scripture says that sin is falling short of the glory of God. (Ro. 3:23) That is a reflection of the fact that we were created in the image and likeness of God with the purpose of being like God. That is God's purpose for all who believe; to be conformed to the image of his Son (Rom 8:29) Sin is not a grievous offense against God; it is a failure to act in perfect love as does Jesus.

The application of a legal definition to the word "DIKAIOSUNE" has given rise to the false notions of a God who is ready to punish every offense against Him with eternal torture in the fires of hell.

That is a gross distortion of the God of scripture who so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

iakov the fool

Not sure what you're primarily trying to share, but the intent of the article is to show that Scripture teaches that only God can render one righteous through imputation only. Many are of the false concept than one can render self righteous by works.

Blessings!

 

[Jim Parker]

Not sure what you're primarily trying to share, but the intent of the article is to show that Scripture teaches that only God can render one righteous through imputation only.

That is an application of the pagan, Greek concept of justice which requires a punishment appropriate for every crime and of that pagan/human concept of justice as professed by Anselm, 12th century Archbishop of Canterbury who professed that God was so offended by Adam's sin that He condemned all of mankind to death until an appropriate sacrifice was made to satisfy the demands of justice (thus subordinating God to the demands of justice) and to assuage His anger.

Righteousness is NOT a legal standing imputed to an individual by decree of the "Court of Divine Justice." That is a western distortion of God's dealings with mankind based on the teachings of Augustine of Hippo, Anselm of Canterbury and the scholastics.

Righteousness is better understood as the grace which God applies in His mercy and love of mankind by which the consequences of sin (which is death) is abolished. The work of the devil was to cause man to die as a result of sin. The work of Christ was to destroy that work of the devil and afford all of mankind with immortality by resurrection from the dead. Some will be raised to eternal life and some to the second death.

John 5:28-29 (NKJV)… the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

iakov the fool

For a better understanding of the atonement, see St. Athanasius' On the Incarnation.

 

[netchaplain]

God was so offended by Adam's sin

How can One who foreknows all wrongs ever be offended? The only way God could be offended is if He didn't know everything, i.e. He wasn't offended by man's first sin because He knew it would occur.

Righteousness is NOT a legal standing imputed to an individual by decree of the "Court of Divine Justice." That is a western distortion of God's dealings with mankind based on the teachings of Augustine of Hippo, Anselm of Canterbury and the scholastics.

"And he (Abraham) received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them (Body of Christ) also" (Rom 4:11).

Righteousness imputed by God "through faith" (Eph 2:8):
Rom 3:22; 4:13; 9:30; 10:6; Gal 5:5 Phl 3:9; Heb 11:72; Pe 1:1

Blessings!

 

[smaller]

The Righteousness of Christ, by faith in Christ, is spoken/shown many times in many ways in the O.T. but it is difficult to see, in those shadows and allegories.

But, for an example, Paul draws out the lives of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Hagar, Ishmael and the law, all as "allegories."

Gal. 4:
21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Many think they understand the TWO Covenants, but as to how these TWO Covenants related to the above parties and the law, they do not see.

Abraham had TWO sons. This is the "produce" of Abraham, himself. One, a son of the flesh, who would not and could not inherit, and one of the promise, who could not be condemned. Both of these progeny came forth from ABRAHAM.

This second son, is the son of faith, as delineated more precisely in the O.T. here:

Genesis 15:4
And, behold, the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

This second son, CHRIST, which Abraham "received" in/as a FIGURE (Heb. 11:19), is a picture of Christ that comes forth from "us" by FAITH IN CHRIST and the PROMISE of FAITH in Him.

We tend not to see the particulars of these matters because we ALSO have a son of the flesh, personally, to "contend" with, as shown by Paul, here. But most simply can not perceive this matter, BECAUSE the son of the flesh obstructs them from seeing this as a "personal" matter:

Galatians 4:
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

This is not about "believers" and "some other guys" doing said persecution. It is our OWN FLESH that is in the adversarial seat, identified above, AGAIN identified by Paul in the next chapter:

Galatians 5:
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

Galatians 4:29 and Galatians 5:17 are IDENTICAL Apostolic teachings/revealings. I could site vast amounts of IDENTICAL showings from the O.T. of this SAME MATTER.

But the flesh can neither see it or perceive it that way BECAUSE the "son of the flesh" is actually under the CONDEMNATION of God in Christ and openly "resists" and "envies" the Son of Promise.

 

[dirtfarmer]

The Righteousness of Christ, by faith in Christ, is spoken/shown many times in many ways in the O.T. but it is difficult to see, in those shadows and allegories.

But, for an example, Paul draws out the lives of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Hagar, Ishmael and the law, all as "allegories."

Gal. 4:
21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

Many think they understand the TWO Covenants, but as to how these TWO Covenants related to the above parties and the law, they do not see.

Abraham had TWO sons. This is the "produce" of Abraham, himself. One, a son of the flesh, who would not and could not inherit, and one of the promise, who could not be condemned. Both of these progeny came forth from ABRAHAM.

This second son, is the son of faith, as delineated more precisely in the O.T. here:

Genesis 15:4
And, behold, the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

This second son, CHRIST, which Abraham "received" in/as a FIGURE (Heb. 11:19), is a picture of Christ that comes forth from "us" by FAITH IN CHRIST and the PROMISE of FAITH in Him.

We tend not to see the particulars of these matters because we ALSO have a son of the flesh, personally, to "contend" with, as shown by Paul, here. But most simply can not perceive this matter, BECAUSE the son of the flesh obstructs them from seeing this as a "personal" matter:

Galatians 4:
29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

This is not about "believers" and "some other guys" doing said persecution. It is our OWN FLESH that is in the adversarial seat, identified above, AGAIN identified by Paul in the next chapter:

Galatians 5:
17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

Galatians 4:29 and Galatians 5:17 are IDENTICAL Apostolic teachings/revealings. I could site vast amounts of IDENTICAL showings from the O.T. of this SAME MATTER.

But the flesh can neither see it or perceive it that way BECAUSE the "son of the flesh" is actually under the CONDEMNATION of God in Christ and openly "resists" and "envies" the Son of Promise.

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

In your analogy of the "two sons" of Abraham, why did God say to Abraham in Genesis 22:2 " And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee."

 

[smaller]

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

In your analogy of the "two sons" of Abraham, why did God say to Abraham in Genesis 22:2 " And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee."

I try to keep in mind that nothing that happened with the prophets was not "just and only" themselves. So where, perhaps, the majority would see only Abraham, I would see, not just Abraham, but the Spirit of Christ in Abraham. 1 Peter 1:10-11. And I believe Abraham saw that for himself as well, accounting himself accurately, here, as an individual, serving and showing the priority of preeminent status of the Spirit over the flesh:

Genesis 18:27
And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:

A more interesting note is that God, in the event you reference above, "tempted Abraham." Gen. 22:1. Yet most believers scurry to James' citing (James 1:13) that God tempts no man and then claim that is the only way it is. Uh, no, it obviously isn't the only way it is.

The lesson with the (didn't happen) "sacrifice" of Isaac, the son of promise, is that Abraham, by faith, accounted that God was able to raise him from the dead. Heb. 11:19. That is a picture of "justification" by faith. Many mistake it for works. The faith Abraham, through the Spirit of Christ in him was exhibited in accounting Gods Power, not man's works.

There are many other interesting notes in the event as well. Abraham responding to Isaac's question about 'where is the sacrifice' and Abraham's statement that God would provide the sacrifice, this being prior to binding Isaac to the altar. Genesis 22:8. Which adds a LOT of flavor to the matters.

 

[dirtfarmer]

I try to keep in mind that nothing that happened with the prophets was not "just and only" themselves. So where, perhaps, the majority would see only Abraham, I would see, not just Abraham, but the Spirit of Christ in Abraham. 1 Peter 1:10-11. And I believe Abraham saw that for himself as well, accounting himself accurately, here, as an individual, serving and showing the priority of preeminent status of the Spirit over the flesh:

Genesis 18:27
And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:

A more interesting note is that God, in the event you reference above, "tempted Abraham." Gen. 22:1. Yet most believers scurry to James' citing (James 1:13) that God tempts no man and then claim that is the only way it is. Uh, no, it obviously isn't the only way it is.

The lesson with the (didn't happen) "sacrifice" of Isaac, the son of promise, is that Abraham, by faith, accounted that God was able to raise him from the dead. Heb. 11:19. That is a picture of "justification" by faith. Many mistake it for works. The faith Abraham, through the Spirit of Christ in him was exhibited in accounting Gods Power, not man's works.

There are many other interesting notes in the event as well. Abraham responding to Isaac's question about 'where is the sacrifice' and Abraham's statement that God would provide the sacrifice, this being prior to binding Isaac to the altar. Genesis 22:8. Which adds a LOT of flavor to the matters.

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

James 1:13 states that God tempts no one with evil, not that God tempts(tests) no one at all.

God had already told Abraham that his seed would be through hid son Isaac, so, Abraham's faith was tested. But the amazing thing that I find in that account of scripture is in verse 8 before they went up the mountain, when Isaac said they had the wood and fire, but where is the lamb for the burnt offering. Abraham's answer was: "God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering. He didn't say God will provide for himself a burnt offering but provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering. What did John say in John 1:29 "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."

 

[smaller]

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

James 1:13 states that God tempts no one with evil, not that God tempts(tests) no one at all.

I'm familiar with that one sided refrain. Which is why I called the other side of scriptural reality into the equations of fact, that being, that God assuredly "tempted" Abraham. Gen. 22:1. One sided equations NEVER work well with scripture.

God had already told Abraham that his seed would be through hid son Isaac, so, Abraham's faith was tested.

You can call it testing. Scripture calls it "temptation." After all, WHO do we pray to to "lead us NOT into temptation" but God? Were this prayer not required, we would not make it. Yes, GOD can and does TEMPT.

There are deeper matters behind this action. Which is why we have these types of "contrasting" statements. They are quite purposefully written and meant to "draw" our attentions.

But the amazing thing that I find in that account of scripture is in verse 8 before they went up the mountain, when Isaac said they had the wood and fire, but where is the lamb for the burnt offering. Abraham's answer was: "God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering. He didn't say God will provide for himself a burnt offering but provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering. What did John say in John 1:29 "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."

True. I cited and noted the same thing. Abraham knew, by faith, before he set his hand up, upon Isaac in sacrifice, that God would provide the sacrifice. But more than this, that from Abrahams own bowels, would come forth a "Son of Promise." That was the Spirit of Christ, in Abraham.

So, it gets more interesting, here:

13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.

Do you know what this speaks to?

Where God speaks, a sacrifice appears in the thicket that is not man. One that IS to be destroyed, by the Promise of Christ:

This working still transpires to this day. The working reality of that matter near the altar, is ALSO directly reflected by Jesus, in Mark 4:15. Though few will make the "connection." A working principle of The Word, is that were The Word speaks, the RESISTOR sacrifice follows after. And that one meant for destruction.

There are many interesting shadows in the O.T.

 

[dirtfarmer]

I'm familiar with that one sided refrain. Which is why I called the other side of scriptural reality into the equations of fact, that being, that God assuredly "tempted" Abraham. Gen. 22:1. One sided equations NEVER work well with scripture.



You can call it testing. Scripture calls it "temptation." After all, WHO do we pray to to "lead us NOT into temptation" but God? Were this prayer not required, we would not make it. Yes, GOD can and does TEMPT.

There are deeper matters behind this action. Which is why we have these types of "contrasting" statements. They are quite purposefully written and meant to "draw" our attentions.



True. I cited and noted the same thing. Abraham knew, by faith, before he set his hand up, upon Isaac in sacrifice, that God would provide the sacrifice. But more than this, that from Abrahams own bowels, would come forth a "Son of Promise." That was the Spirit of Christ, in Abraham.

So, it gets more interesting, here:

13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.

Do you know what this speaks to?

Where God speaks, a sacrifice appears in the thicket that is not man. One that IS to be destroyed, by the Promise of Christ:

This working still transpires to this day. The working reality of that matter near the altar, is ALSO directly reflected by Jesus, in Mark 4:15. Though few will make the "connection." A working principle of The Word, is that were The Word speaks, the RESISTOR sacrifice follows after. And that one meant for destruction.

There are many interesting shadows in the O.T.

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

"Lead us not into temptation" is from "the Lord's Prayer" and, "the Lord's Prayer" is not to the church but it will be the prayer of the Israelites during the 7 tribulation. When believers pray, "Thy kingdom come", what kingdom are we praying for? Colossians1:13 " Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and has translated us into the kingdom of his dear son." If we have been translated into his Son's kingdom already; Ephesians 2:6-7" And hath raised us up together, and made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in the kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." Since we are already in Christ's kingdom, why do we need to pray for the earthly kingdom to come?

 

[Jim Parker]

How can One who foreknows all wrongs ever be offended? The only way God could be offended is if He didn't know everything, i.e. He wasn't offended by man's first sin because He knew it would occur.

Exactly.

that righteousness might be imputed to them (Body of Christ) also" (Rom 4:11).
Righteousness imputed by God "through faith" (Eph 2:8):
Rom 3:22; 4:13; 9:30; 10:6; Gal 5:5 Phl 3:9; Heb 11:72; Pe 1:1

None of those say that righteousness is a legal standing.
A very clear statement that it is not a legal standing, ie; according to law, is
Phl 3:9 "...and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own, based on law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith;..."

iakov the fool

 

[Jesus_Is_His_Name]

1 Corinthians 4:10

We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honourable, but we are despised.

I rather be a fool for Jesus, than to be a fool for the world.

 

[netchaplain]

None of those say that righteousness is a legal standing.

Need more clarification of what you mean here Brother.

 

[Jim Parker]

Need more clarification of what you mean here Brother.

I mean that righteousness is not a legal standing.

 

[netchaplain]

I mean that righteousness is not a legal standing.

Okay, thanks!

 

[smaller]

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

"Lead us not into temptation" is from "the Lord's Prayer" and, "the Lord's Prayer" is not to the church but it will be the prayer of the Israelites during the 7 tribulation.

We obviously disagree. I study Gods Words because they are wonderfully engaging on more levels than I can describe. If others don't think so, what can I say? I have no interests in tossing aside any of Gods Words for any reasons.

When believers pray, "Thy kingdom come", what kingdom are we praying for? Colossians1:13 " Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness and has translated us into the kingdom of his dear son." If we have been translated into his Son's kingdom already; Ephesians 2:6-7" And hath raised us up together, and made to sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in the kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." Since we are already in Christ's kingdom, why do we need to pray for the earthly kingdom to come?

An understanding, a position of faith, yes. But the battles are still currently in force. Romans 7:23-25, Eph. 6:11-12, 1 John 3:8.

The most fascinating portions of the scriptures for me are to understand how God in Christ, (not believers) engages the enemies. And on this count God is very consistent, even to this day, actively so. Though common surface views aren't much good to help see these matters. And particularly less so when Gods Words are tossed aside and ignored. Many think Jesus already won the battle, so there are no more battles. That sight I would disagree with as well.

 

[Tony Hyman]

hello smaller, dirtfarmer here

Can you prove that "punishments" are a reality for Christians? I understand chastisements and tribulations, but it is my understanding that Christ has suffered as my punishment for the nature of sin that I once was subject to. Now I am dead to sin in Christ and am no more subject punishment for that nature.

Galatians 2:8-10 " For by grace are ye saved, through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: (not a gift of God) Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them. Is there a difference between doing good works and walking in them?

Well assuming that Christ and God are one within the meaning of "God" and "Lord" within the context of 1 Pet.2:13-14 then Peter or the person who wrote the Epistle on his behalf (omnisus)clearly uses the Greek word ekidikesis meaning -vindication, retribution, punishment,The section in relation to the Godhead reads as follows "Submit yourself for for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men:whether to the king...14 or to governors, who are sent by him to punish (ekidiesis) those who do wrong and commend those who do right.

Clearly punishment is endorsed through Christ as part of the Godhead within Peter's meaning as I understand this passage.We can be forgiven the sin we have committed; namely the guilt, we but still have to face the consequences of that sin or evil deed against the will of God .Whether directly or indirectly via human authority, as is the case here.

 

[Jim Parker]

Can you prove that "punishments" are a reality for Christians?

Heb 12:5-8
And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons:
“My son, do not despise the chastening of the LORD,
Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;
For whom the LORD loves He chastens,
And scourges every son whom He receives.” (Proverbs 13:11-12)
If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.

 

[dirtfarmer]

Well assuming that Christ and God are one within the meaning of "God" and "Lord" within the context of 1 Pet.2:13-14 then Peter or the person who wrote the Epistle on his behalf (omnisus)clearly uses the Greek word ekidikesis meaning -vindication, retribution, punishment,The section in relation to the Godhead reads as follows "Submit yourself for for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men:whether to the king...14 or to governors, who are sent by him to punish (ekidiesis) those who do wrong and commend those who do right.

Clearly punishment is endorsed through Christ as part of the Godhead within Peter's meaning as I understand this passage.We can be forgiven the sin we have committed; namely the guilt, we but still have to face the consequences of that sin or evil deed against the will of God .Whether directly or indirectly via human authority, as is the case here.

hello Tony Hyman, dirtfarmer here

Who are
the evil doers, the wrong doers? The punishment is for breaking the law of the land, fleshly punishment, incarceration. If Christ has suffered for the sins of the world, paid the ransom, suffered the penalty "for missing the mark", not living by faith, are these those that are incarcerated in prisons, fined by the court of the land, and lost civil judgments?

Yes, we have to face the consequences for breaking the law of the land, but, and it is a big but, we don't have to suffer for our being over taken in a faulty, by eternal separation from God's presence. We do have to suffer loss of fellowship, but not loss of relationship. We are still heirs and joint-heirs with Jesus Christ.

 

[dirtfarmer]

Heb 12:5-8
And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons:
“My son, do not despise the chastening of the LORD,
Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;
For whom the LORD loves He chastens,
And scourges every son whom He receives.” (Proverbs 13:11-12)
If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom a father does not chasten? But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.

hello Jim Parker, dirtfarmer here

Your last statement says it all: But if you be without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons