Justification

[dairygirl4u2c]

so there's james and romans. they talk about abraham's justification.

james 2 says "21 Abraham was justified by works when he offered Isaac 22 - faith was working with his works.
23 - Scripture says, "And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness" 24 - you see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone."

"Indeed, if Abraham was justified on the basis of his works, he has reason to boast; but this was not so in the sight of God. For what does the scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." (Rom. 4:3),


I always just thought that the catholic and the protestant has merit to it. but, now i thik that the protestant theroy of justification at a single poit cannot have merit. this is because, it seems like what's being credited to abraham is his fiath in that situation. not his faith at some point in the past. and, of course, it wouldn't be that you get credits if you don't carry out your faith. so, it seems that in this situation, you get credits for your faith that is carried out in works. as catholics say, sanctification also justifies.
the romans verse even says... "not justified by this way... but rather justified by this way" so, it again it cannot be a one time event in the past.

now, if they were to say you get credit for your faith in that situation, that's a decent argument. they could try to separate that they did works in getting that credit, but i don't see how that's a wise distinction since they are necessary. God gives the grace to them for their faith that reslts in works. not that he gives it for faith irregarldes of the works that only incidentally have to occur. it's like stretching the situtaion. and really are saying the same thing anyway. i don't hink catholics say "since you did the works with faith i give you credit... but rather since you believed and the works occured i give credit"

Edited April 21, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

this is a pretty significant realization for me. cause i'm a fence sitter. yet here, my position is hardening against the protestant at-one-point in time theory pretty strongly.
any protestants care to respond?

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1506078' date='Apr 21 2008, 07:41 PM']this is a pretty significant realization for me. cause i'm a fence sitter. yet here, my position is hardening against the protestant at-one-point in time theory pretty strongly.
any protestants care to respond?[/quote]

Coming from the person who likes Eugenics. . .

Picking and choosing sperm that fertilizes an egg to produce superior offspring is evil.

So choose which ever fence you want to sit on.

[Deb]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1506081' date='Apr 21 2008, 08:44 PM']Coming from the person who likes Eugenics. . .

Picking and choosing sperm that fertilizes an egg to produce superior offspring is evil.

So choose which ever fence you want to sit on.[/quote]


Is there anyone you don't want to offend?

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1506078' date='Apr 21 2008, 09:41 PM']this is a pretty significant realization for me. cause i'm a fence sitter. yet here, my position is hardening against the protestant at-one-point in time theory pretty strongly.
any protestants care to respond?[/quote]

I would answer as a former Protestant, but I never believed in the "at-one-point in time" theory. Granted, Lutherans aren't much for "gettin' yer soul saved down at tha' tent meetin'", but even my Protestant friends who could rattle off the exactly day, time, location, clothes they were wearing, what they ate beforehand, and the names of everybody sitting around them at the moment they "got saved", most of the them can admit there's also a process at work.

In fact, the funny thing about every one of those testimonies is that it begins at an earlier point than the "got saved" moment.... no story begins at the climax.

Edited April 22, 2008 by LouisvilleFan

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]Coming from the person who likes Eugenics. . .

Picking and choosing sperm that fertilizes an egg to produce superior offspring is evil.

So choose which ever fence you want to sit on.[/quote]

you have a way of avoiding argumentation and closing your mind. it's not very humble and not very christian. your piety from one side of your mouth, and stubbornness out of the other is amusing. complete hypocrisy and a stereotypical caricature of that's wrong with main stream christianity, your actions are reinforcing all that. maybe you're just new to christianity and i should not be so tough.

this is a legitimate point i bring up. they are saying "not justified this way... but rather justifeid by faith when you do what God says" even by the romans verse.

you're also the one who avoided the "forgive us our trespasses" thread, instead of answering how one can ask for forgiven, when they are alreayd forgiven according to the prot theory.

also, i said i'm tending not to sit on the fence on this one anymore, and think the mainstreat christiainty argument of the united states is wrong, or at least not fully right.

Edited April 22, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1506954' date='Apr 22 2008, 05:56 PM']you have a way of avoiding argumentation and closing your mind. it's not very humble and not very christian. your piety from one side of your mouth, and stubbornness out of the other is amusing. complete hypocrisy and a stereotypical caricature of that's wrong with main stream christianity, your actions are reinforcing all that. maybe you're just new to christianity and i should not be so tough.

this is a legitimate point i bring up. they are saying "not justified this way... but rather justifeid by faith when you do what God says" even by the romans verse.

you're also the one who avoided the "forgive us our trespasses" thread, instead of answering how one can ask for forgiven, when they are alreayd forgiven according to the prot theory.

also, i said i'm tending not to sit on the fence on this one anymore, and think the mainstreat christiainty argument of the united states is wrong, or at least not fully right.[/quote]

Sorry for not being a fruit cake Christian. If I know someone entertains evil in their mind, it would be far better for you to repent, than to think about this, that, and the other thing. These are just vain imaginations, and you need to ask God if he thinks we should start messing around with his creation through Eugenics!

Edited April 22, 2008 by JesusIsMySuperHero

[dairygirl4u2c]

i have a lot of hostility to mainstream US christianity, i apologize if i take too much of it out on you.

[JesusIsMySuperHero]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1506976' date='Apr 22 2008, 06:30 PM']i have a lot of hostility to mainstream US christianity, i apologize if i take too much of it out on you.[/quote]

I get angry at a lot of mainstream US christianity too, so I accept your apology.

I am not angry because mainstream Christianity tells me you are wrong. I am angry mostly at your ideas - not you personally, because of what those ideas represents. I don't think human beings have the right to alter life in any shape or form, because we are not God. It is playing God, and taking a step forward to man making himself God, which is what Revelation was warning us when it says the mark of the beast is 666, man making himself God!

BTW, around 60 per cent of the children who have illnesses like Asthma and others, most of those illnesses are happening because of the dangerous chemicals in our environments. Make tougher laws, preventing industry from pumping hundreds of thousands of tonnes of toxin waste in our oceans, and much more in the atmosphere (excluding carbon dioxide), and we would find that such illnesses would almost be eradicated off the planet. Wowwy, we can do something other than manipulating genes, and only allowing certain sperm fertilize certain eggs to improve on human health. . .

Of course, men will not because the lust for money is the root of all evil. The politicians who get campaign contributions from egregious companies who are practicing those things will not make the laws, and the companies who do it will not repent either, because they are getting too much money.

I am reminded by the movie Erin Brockovich, based on a true story, where a company printed up flyers that told its employees the chemicals - which caused severe cancer - were absolutely harmless. Why is it, if one man decides to destroy men, women, and children can be called a serial killer, and be executed, and the executive boards of companies who do the very same things get off with only paying the survivors of the ones they killed, and we don't consider them serial killers who have no moral decency?

They are just as bad, and I think the leaders of companies who are doing such things, endangering our health, should be considered a bunch of serial killers!

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1506556' date='Apr 22 2008, 08:43 AM']I would answer as a former Protestant, but I never believed in the "at-one-point in time" theory. Granted, Lutherans aren't much for "gettin' yer soul saved down at tha' tent meetin'", but even my Protestant friends who could rattle off the exactly day, time, location, clothes they were wearing, what they ate beforehand, and the names of everybody sitting around them at the moment they "got saved", most of the them can admit there's also a process at work.

In fact, the funny thing about every one of those testimonies is that it begins at an earlier point than the "got saved" moment.... no story begins at the climax.[/quote]

just ot be clear. i always have conceded that they believe in santification and that it's a process. but, even the romans verse which is more prot sounding says "not justified this way, but justified in this way" and that way is what he did right there beliving in god.
so iit' seither his faith right there, or his faith carried ot in works righ tthere that justified. not some event in the past. i don't know how you could distinguish his faith right there with his works right there, cause if he believed, he'd do it. or if it believe and didn't do it,,, do prots really think they're gonna get justified?
that's actually a novel question,,, cause almost all prots thing it's a one time justification. i have no idea where to go on that, or to expect. i'd expect they'd insist on the one time event, but i'm not sure how. tht's why this thread is here.

Edited April 23, 2008 by dairygirl4u2c

[Deb]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1506990' date='Apr 22 2008, 07:44 PM']I get angry at a lot of mainstream US christianity too, so I accept your apology.

I am not angry because mainstream Christianity tells me you are wrong. I am angry mostly at your ideas - not you personally, because of what those ideas represents. I don't think human beings have the right to alter life in any shape or form, because we are not God. It is playing God, and taking a step forward to man making himself God, which is what Revelation was warning us when it says the mark of the beast is 666, man making himself God!

BTW, around 60 per cent of the children who have illnesses like Asthma and others, most of those illnesses are happening because of the dangerous chemicals in our environments. Make tougher laws, preventing industry from pumping hundreds of thousands of tonnes of toxin waste in our oceans, and much more in the atmosphere (excluding carbon dioxide), and we would find that such illnesses would almost be eradicated off the planet. Wowwy, we can do something other than manipulating genes, and only allowing certain sperm fertilize certain eggs to improve on human health. . .

[size=4]Of course, men will not because the lust for money is the root of all evil.[/size] The politicians who get campaign contributions from egregious companies who are practicing those things will not make the laws, and the companies who do it will not repent either, because they are getting too much money.

I am reminded by the movie Erin Brockovich, based on a true story, where a company printed up flyers that told its employees the chemicals - which caused severe cancer - were absolutely harmless. Why is it, if one man decides to destroy men, women, and children can be called a serial killer, and be executed, and the executive boards of companies who do the very same things get off with only paying the survivors of the ones they killed, and we don't consider them serial killers who have no moral decency?

They are just as bad, and I think the leaders of companies who are doing such things, endangering our health, should be considered a bunch of serial killers![/quote]

Those men sound like greedy selfish pigs to me. I could be wrong though. I am sure they aren't Americans.

Edited April 23, 2008 by Deb

[dairygirl4u2c]

i mean, they could always point to galatians i blieve "by grace are ye saved, not of works, lest any man should boast"

but, giving what Jesus says about works, and all the stuff in this thread etc, i don't see how you could insist on the prot theory on that one verse. it's equally plausible that he was talking about works without the grace of God, human machinations of movement etc.

[Apotheoun]

As an Eastern Christian I don't really use the legal terminology of [i]justification[/i] in connection with salvation, but speak of [i]theosis[/i] (i.e., divinization) instead.

[CatherineM]

Even if you believe in justification, Jesus' life story is so full of service, how could you not follow that example.

[CatholicMax]

[quote name='JesusIsMySuperHero' post='1506973' date='Apr 22 2008, 06:24 PM']Sorry for not being a fruit cake Christian. If I know someone entertains evil in their mind, it would be far better for you to repent, than to think about this, that, and the other thing. These are just vain imaginations, and you need to ask God if he thinks we should start messing around with his creation through Eugenics![/quote]
Your not a Christian. Christian means that you affirm Christ and all his teaching and all he left including the church. your a pagan dressed in fancy cloths. and yes Eugenics is evil, to "design" a baby is evil.