Saturday, November 1, 2014

Is the justification of Abraham equal to the justification we receive in the New Testament?

On another blog, I'm having an interesting debate with some Protestants.  I thought it was important enough to post here.  Let me know how you would answer that question.  I've erased all the messages that are not to the point.

  1. De Maria said,

    October 31, 2014 at 8:20 pm
    In y’alls opinion, is the justification of Abraham equal to the justification we receive in the New Testament? When he was justified, did Abraham receive new life in Christ?

  2. roberty bob said,

    October 31, 2014 at 8:47 pm
    to #925 . . .
    Our NT justification [as to is basis] is the same as Abraham’s justification. We, like he, believe God, and it is credited to us as righteousness. The Apostle Paul commends Abraham’s justifying faith to all who would be justified; that kind of faith is a necessary.
    Did Abraham receive new life in Christ upon being justified by faith? No. Christ had not yet been revealed to the world. Abraham hoped for what he did not yet have — for all that God had promised, but had not yet delivered.

  3. De Maria said,

    October 31, 2014 at 8:51 pm
    I agree with that rb. Does anyone else?

  4. Jason Loh said,

    October 31, 2014 at 11:35 pm
    “In y’alls opinion, is the justification of Abraham equal to the justification we receive in the New Testament? When he was justified, did Abraham receive new life in Christ?”
    Yes.
    Abraham is the father of all believers. We are descended from him by faith and election. He was believed in the promise of God and was justified.
    Was Abraham aware of justification by faith alone as gospel – as articulated by Paul, the author of Romans 4? No.
    Was Abraham (fully) aware of faith alone as constituting his relationship with God? Probably.
    All that matters is the promise of God and that the promise was applied personally to Abraham. IOW, the Abraham heard the promise (and knew that the promise was meant for him).
    Faith is profoundly unreflective.
    Faith is not looking back and therefore looking inside to ascertain whether or not one has faith. It is not about propositions — where the truthfulness or falsity can be immediately verified. Faith is about the spoken word that performs the deed.
    In the context of OT, the promise of God as it was then tied to the physical situation of the saints, faith was forward looking — it trusts in what the promise of God will do in the future despite contradictory experience.
    The difference, therefore, between the OT and NT is that the OT saints looked to the future whilst the NT saints know that the future is present —it is already here — despite contradictory experience.

  5. Jason Loh said,

    October 31, 2014 at 11:37 pm
    “Did Abraham receive new life in Christ upon being justified by faith?”
    Yes.
    Was Abraham aware that he received new life in Christ? No.
    Does it matter? No.
    Only the promise of God matters.

  6. Jason Loh said,

    October 31, 2014 at 11:47 pm
    Now Abraham committed mortal sin before (lying to Pharoah that he was not married to Sarah or allowing Pharaoh to think that he was not married to Sarah) and after receiving the promise of God (had carnal relationship with Hagar).
    Was the promise of God dependant on Abraham or the way round? A natural reading clearly it is the other way round.
    As an elect of God — the very father of all believers — did Abraham kept himself from mortal sin? No. Was he preserved by God from the consequences of mortal sin? Yes. That is to say, Abraham remain justified in God’s sight.
    So, the Catholic understanding is not compatible the testimony and witness of scripture.

  7. De Maria said,

    October 31, 2014 at 11:57 pm
    Interesting questions and answers, Jason. But the one I’m most interested in, is this one.
    “Did Abraham receive new life in Christ upon being justified by faith?”
    Yes.
    So, I’d have to ask you the same question I asked Eric W. If he received the promise in the OT, then what was the promise that Scripture says he didn’t receive?
    Heb 11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

  8. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 12:18 am
    I think this verse from Scripture makes the point clear:
    Matthew 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
    At the time when Jesus made this statement, the OT Patriarchs had not been Baptized of the Holy Spirit. They were only born of woman. They had not been renewed and regenerated by the Holy Spirit.
    And Jesus said that John the Baptist was the greatest of these. John the Baptist had also not received the Baptism of Jesus Christ.
    But we, who are baptized, are citizens of the Kingdom of heaven.
    Hebrews 12:22King James Version (KJV)
    22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,
    Therefore, justification in the NT is greater than justification in the OT.

  9. roberty bob said,

    November 1, 2014 at 1:46 am
    Yes, De Maria . . . and in John 3 we find the lone [overlooked] gospel account of Jesus baptizing. So many people are coming to Jesus in order to be baptized that it gets the attention of John the Baptist’s disciples, who reflexively think that their master will be jealous of Jesus’ sudden popularity. But they are mistaken. Instead John rejoices in Jesus the Baptizer! He realizes that Jesus is Heaven’s Bridegroom, and that Heaven is giving to Jesus all of baptized to be his Bride. In this magnificent wedding John the Baptist is the Best Man who shares in the joy of Jesus receiving his true Bride.

  10. Jason Loh said,

    November 1, 2014 at 2:35 am
    De Maria,
    Yes. The promise was none other than Jesus Christ Himself. Abraham could only looked to the future for the fulfilment of the promise. But he was justified by that promise.

  11. Jason Loh said,

    November 1, 2014 at 2:39 am
    “Therefore, justification in the NT is greater than justification in the OT.”
    Justification in the OT is the same as justification in NT. The only difference is that in the OT, there were no sacraments but shadows or types. But the promise was there — in the types and shadows, nonetheless.
    The OT saints were justified by faith alone though the Promised One had yet to come but was nonetheless present in the PRE-incarnate form (christophany). This is why the church fathers spoke of the God who revealed Himself (self-disclosure) as referring to the Son …
    The NT saints are justified by alone by, under and in the Promised One Who is here in sacraments.

  12. Jason Loh said,

    November 1, 2014 at 2:47 am
    Justification is not by the law — but apart from the law.
    Galatians 3:
    8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the GOSPEL unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
    11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
    12 And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.
    Abraham was justified apart from the law. Paul was justified apart from the law.

  13. Eric W said,

    November 1, 2014 at 8:56 am

  14. De Maria, you asked:
    So, what was the promise that Scripture says they didn’t receive?
    Response:
    …for He has prepared a city for them. (Heb.11:16) Even this city, or general assembly, is not fully realized and it waits for the consummation. All of us wait for a new heavens and earth of resurrected bodies.

    Jason Loh said,

    November 1, 2014 at 10:12 am
    …. Rome is apostate not by directly renouncing and denouncing the gospel. But by indirectly distorting and perverting the gospel…..

  15. De Maria said,

  16. November 1, 2014 at 9:58 am
    Jason, I assume you intended to respond to my question, “what is the promise that Scripture says Abraham didn’t receive?
    De Maria,
    Yes. The promise was none other than Jesus Christ Himself. Abraham could only looked to the future for the fulfilment of the promise. But he was justified by that promise.
    Therefore, when Scripture says in Gen 15:6 “He believed and it was credited to him as righteousness”, Abraham did not receive at that moment, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit nor a new life in Christ. He was not born again.
    Certainly, after many centuries, he received what we receive the moment we are justified. And of course, the Catholic Church teaches that this happens in the Sacrament of Baptism.
    But that brings us back to “imputation”. And I think I can ask this in a different manner.
    “Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness.”
    Protestants frequently say it this way, “The righteousness of Christ was imputed unto Abraham”.
    Does that Protestant terminology mean the same thing as “being born again in the image of Christ”?
    and does it result in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit?
    Because I don’t see that in Scripture.

  17. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 9:59 am
    I ask those questions as it pertains to Abraham in Gen 15:6

  18. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 10:12 am
    Eric W said,
    November 1, 2014 at 8:56 am
    De Maria, you asked:
    So, what was the promise that Scripture says they didn’t receive?
    Response:
    …for He has prepared a city for them. (Heb.11:16) Even this city, or general assembly, is not fully realized and it waits for the consummation. All of us wait for a new heavens and earth of resurrected bodies.
    Soooo? Are you saying that neither they nor we have received the promise? No one has received the promise?
    But Scripture says:
    Acts 2:37-39King James Version (KJV)
    37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
    Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
    De Maria said,
    November 1, 2014 at 10:26 am
  19. Show me from Scripture, Jason. You claim that the Catholic Church is apostate.  I guarantee, just as I’ve been disproving your understanding of justification from Scripture, I will prove to you that your beliefs are unbiblical and that Catholic Teaching is the basis of the New Testament.
    Anytime you’re ready. I’ve already shown your unbiblical belief that Abraham received new life in Christ in Gen 15:6. What else do you want to compare with Scripture.
    And Reed, since you’re inviting rabbit trails away from “imputation”, I am assuming you will permit this new branch.

  21. Jason Loh said,

    November 1, 2014 at 10:36 am
    De Maria,
    Why complicate things? Scripture is clear, is it not that Abraham was justified apart from the law.
    Did he receive the Holy Spirit? Yes, he did. How? We don’t know.
    Just like David prayed in Psalm 51 that the Holy Spirit will not be taken away from him because of his mortal and grievous and serious and abominable sin of having Uriah killed so that he was free to commit adultery with Bathsheba.
    What did the prophets and even St Stephen the martyr say? Ye always resist the Holy Spirit …
    The Holy Spirit as God has always been present in the OT. This is why the Pharisees can also commit the unpardonable sin. They of course pre-figured the legalism of the Roman hierarchy who approved the Tridentine decrees ….

  22. Jason Loh said,

    November 1, 2014 at 10:46 am
    De Maria,
    How have you disproved the Reformation understanding of justification?
    That justification is apart from the law is clear from scripture.
    That justification is imputed to the believer/ saint is clear from scripture.
    That forgiveness of sins and imputation refer to the act of justification is clear from scripture …
    Quoting from NIV instead of the customary practice from KJV:
    Romans 4:
    5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who JUSTIFIES the UNgodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the SAME thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
    7 “Blessed are those
    whose transgressions are FORGIVEN,
    whose sins are COVERED.
    8
    Blessed is the one
    whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”
    a) Justification of the ungodly makes sense only if justification is imputed and not infused … and by extension, destroys any distinction between uncreated and created grace …
    This is obvious since infusion means that one has to be healed and elevated or made fitting and worthy first before being justified. Justification by infusion means that justification is an EFFECT of infusion.
    Imputation, on the other hand, is the re-creative word of God that re-creates of out nothing. This of course turns Aristotle and Plato on their head.
    b) Forgiveness of sins is the same thing as justification of the ungodly … Our Saviour prayed on the Cross: Father, forgive them for they know not what they DO — that is, in the present tense …

  23. Eric W said,

    November 1, 2014 at 11:08 am
    De Maria, you asked and cited:
    Soooo? Are you saying that neither they nor we have received the promise? No one has received the promise?
    39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
    Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
    Response:
    Yes, no one received the promised of the New H&E or resurrected bodies. Jesus is the first fruits of the resurrection.
    They received the promise of God, namely the Holy Spirit. God makes us first fruits of the Spirit, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. He is also a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession–to the praise of his glory
    If you want to divide things into distinct dispensations (covenant theology is not excluded by this), then the OT saints didn’t receive promises the same way as NT saints. Do we see things as additive or disjunctive ?

  25. roberty bob said,

    November 1, 2014 at 11:27 am
    “. . . even this city, or general assembly, is not fully realized . . . ”
    You are right that this city, the Heavenly Jerusalem, does not come into full flower until the consummation of all things at the re-appearing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. However, the truth is that this city, which Abraham and the OT saints longed for, was founded by Jesus Christ at his first appearing — as Hebrews 12:22 indicates. The faithful are here and now members — yes, citizens! — of that great city: the City of the Living God! This unrealized OT hope has been realized through Christ.
    God’s promise to prepare a city [Hebrews 11:16] has come true; a city has been prepared, and the faithful participate in its worship and life.

  26. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 11:33 am
    Jason Loh said,
    November 1, 2014 at 10:46 am
    De Maria,
    How have you disproved the Reformation understanding of justification?
    I have disproved you. You claim that Abraham received new life in Christ when he was justified (#929). And you said that Jesus Christ is the promise (#934). But the Scripture clearly says that he did not receive the promise (Heb 11:39).
    Therefore, your belief is unbiblical.
    That justification is apart from the law is clear from scripture.
    THAT is Catholic Teaching.
    That justification is imputed to the believer/ saint is clear from scripture.
    That justice is imputed to the believer is Catholic Doctrine.
    That forgiveness of sins and imputation refer to the act of justification is clear from scripture …
    That is also Catholic Doctrine.
    Quoting from NIV instead of the customary practice from KJV:
    Romans 4:
    5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who JUSTIFIES the UNgodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. 6 David says the SAME thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
    7 “Blessed are those
    whose transgressions are FORGIVEN,
    whose sins are COVERED.
    8
    Blessed is the one
    whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”
    All of that is Catholic Doctrine. None of that says that Abraham received the promise of new life in Jesus Christ when he was justified.
    a) Justification of the ungodly makes sense only if justification is imputed and not infused … and by extension, destroys any distinction between uncreated and created grace …
    Justice is credited (i.e. imputed). Grace is infused.
    Gen 15:6 says nothing about new life in Christ being imputed or infused into Abraham.
    This is obvious since infusion means that one has to be healed and elevated or made fitting and worthy first before being justified. Justification by infusion means that justification is an EFFECT of infusion.
    You have no idea what you’re talking about and it is besides the point. The point being that your belief that Abraham received new life in Christ is unbiblical.
    Imputation, on the other hand, is the re-creative word of God that re-creates of out nothing. This of course turns Aristotle and Plato on their head.
    You’ll have to show me a dictionary that says that “imputation” means to create or re-create. Otherwise, you’re simply making something up and throwing it in to distract from your unbiblical belief.
    b) Forgiveness of sins is the same thing as justification of the ungodly … Our Saviour prayed on the Cross: Father, forgive them for they know not what they DO — that is, in the present tense …
    Not to the point. You asked me what I had proved was unbiblical. It was your claim that Abraham received new life in Christ when he was justified. I have shown that you are reading that into Scripture.

  27. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 11:45 am
    Jason Loh said,
    November 1, 2014 at 10:36 am
    De Maria,
    Why complicate things?
    It is you complicating matters because you want to distract from your unbiblical beliefs. But I am not easily distracted.
    Scripture is clear, is it not that Abraham was justified apart from the law.
    That is Catholic Teaching.
    Did he receive the Holy Spirit? Yes, he did. How? We don’t know.
    Show me from Scripture. Otherwise you are reading into Scripture, your unbiblical belief.
    As for me, Scripture says that we are promised the Holy Spirit in Baptism:
    Acts 2:38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
    And Scripture says that Abraham did not receive that promise:
    Hebrews 11:39New International Version (NIV)
    39 These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised,
    Nor could he, since the Holy Spirit was not yet given:
    John 7:39
    New International Version
    By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.
    Just like David prayed in Psalm 51 that the Holy Spirit will not be taken away from him because of his mortal and grievous and serious and abominable sin of having Uriah killed so that he was free to commit adultery with Bathsheba.
    Are you saying that Scripture errs when it says that the Holy Spirit was not yet given until Christ was glorified?
    John 7:39
    New International Version
    By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.
    What did the prophets and even St Stephen the martyr say? Ye always resist the Holy Spirit …
    The Holy Spirit as God has always been present in the OT. This is why the Pharisees can also commit the unpardonable sin. They of course pre-figured the legalism of the Roman hierarchy who approved the Tridentine decrees ….
    Still not to the point. But please continue, as you are contradicting the Word of God more and more. Pray tell, where does Scripture say that the Holy Spirit was indwelling the Jews before Christ was glorified? Show me from Scripture.

  30. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 11:56 am
    Eric W said,
    November 1, 2014 at 11:08 am
    De Maria, you asked and cited:
    Soooo? Are you saying that neither they nor we have received the promise? No one has received the promise?
    39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
    Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
    Response:
    Yes, no one received the promised of the New H&E or resurrected bodies. Jesus is the first fruits of the resurrection.
    They received the promise of God, namely the Holy Spirit.
    Who is “they” which received the Holy Spirit? And since you say, “they” do you exclude yourself?
    God makes us first fruits of the Spirit, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. He is also a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession–to the praise of his glory
    If you want to divide things into distinct dispensations (covenant theology is not excluded by this), then the OT saints didn’t receive promises the same way as NT saints. Do we see things as additive or disjunctive ?
    If I understand you correctly, additive. Jesus deconstructed the Old Testament but maintained the Ten Commandments:
    Matt 5:18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
    But, if I understand you correctly, you seem to be saying that we have not received the Holy Spirit. Do you deny the Scripture?
    Acts 5:32New International Version
    We are witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”

  31. Eric W said,

    November 1, 2014 at 12:12 pm
    De Maria, you asked:
    But, if I understand you correctly, you seem to be saying that we have not received the Holy Spirit. Do you deny the Scripture?
    Response:
    I’m happy to clear it up. Act 2 & 10 are about NT believers receiving this:
    God makes us first fruits of the Spirit, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body. He is also a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession–to the praise of his glory
    I include myself as a NT believer.

  32. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 12:22 pm
    Eric W, 
    Did Abraham receive the Holy Spirit in Gen 15:6 when Scripture says, “Abraham believed the Lord and it was credited to him for righteousness”?


  34. Kevin Failoni said,

    November 1, 2014 at 12:36 pm
    DeMaria, HE was raised for OUR justification. We got the life He lived and He got the one we lived.


  36. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 12:53 pm
    Kevin Failoni said,
    November 1, 2014 at 12:36 pm
    DeMaria, HE was raised for OUR justification. We got the life He lived and He got the one we lived.
    Did Abraham receive the Holy Spirit in Gen 15:6 when Scripture says, “Abraham believed the Lord and it was credited to him for righteousness”?

  39. Eric W said,

    November 1, 2014 at 1:09 pm
    De Maria,
    We have two orders: (a) those who give (b) those who receive. Sometimes these orders can mix together. For example, Jesus received the Spirit and baptizes with the Spirit (gives). I will go out on a limb and say that Abraham belonged (perhaps belongs in a deeper sense) to the order of those who gave the Spirit. The gospel was preached when God said to Abraham, ” All the Nations will be blessed in YOU” Also, the promises were spoken to Abraham AND to his seed.
    So, if I distinguished reciprocal aspects correctly, then it seems that Abraham didn’t receive the Holy Spirit in Gen.15:16. However, it’s not unreasonable to think he received the Spirit as one who gives. God gives the Spirit promised through faith in Christ, while Abraham is still our father in faith.
    I’m open to any criticisms after writing this !


  42. Vincent said,

    November 1, 2014 at 2:11 pm
    Jason you are aware that according to Aquinas and Rome the infusions makes man righteous instantly and that Justification for Aquinas and Rome mean to make righteous? Man is made rightous instantly within seconds of being baptized according to Aquinas/Trent.

  43. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 2:22 pm
    Eric W said,
    November 1, 2014 at 1:09 pm
    De Maria,
    We have two orders: (a) those who give (b) those who receive. Sometimes these orders can mix together. For example, Jesus received the Spirit and baptizes with the Spirit (gives). I will go out on a limb and say that Abraham belonged (perhaps belongs in a deeper sense) to the order of those who gave the Spirit. The gospel was preached when God said to Abraham, ” All the Nations will be blessed in YOU” Also, the promises were spoken to Abraham AND to his seed.
    So, if I distinguished reciprocal aspects correctly, then it seems that Abraham didn’t receive the Holy Spirit in Gen.15:16. However, it’s not unreasonable to think he received the Spirit as one who gives. God gives the Spirit promised through faith in Christ, while Abraham is still our father in faith.
    I’m open to any criticisms after writing this !
    I agree with this:
    So, if I distinguished reciprocal aspects correctly, then it seems that Abraham didn’t receive the Holy Spirit in Gen.15:16.
    There’s a lot of things that don’t seem unreasonable. But if they contradict Scripture, they are unreasonable.
    John 7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
    John 7:38-40King James Version (KJV)
    38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive:
    for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
    40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.

  44. Eric W said,

    November 1, 2014 at 2:39 pm
    De Maria, you cited:
    for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)
    If we follow your lead, then the Holy Spirit contradicted himself. The Holy Ghost was given to Jesus before the Holy Ghost was given and Jesus was glorified.
    Acts 10:38
    And you know that God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power.
    ————————-
    John 7 doesn’t contradict the affirmation that Abraham received the Holy Spirit inGen.15:16

  45. De Maria said,

    November 1, 2014 at 3:16 pm
    Eric W, 
    Jesus is God. By definition, the Holy Spirit is in Him.
    The Father is in the Son. But the Son is not the Father.
    The Holy Spirit is in the Son. But the Son is not the Holy Spirit.
    Romans 8:9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.
    Spirit of God
    Spirit of Christ
    Not two different spirits. But one.
That's it so far.  But what do you guys think?  Is the justification of Abraham equal to the justification we receive in the New Testament?
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thanks for contributing.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)