Onias

Well, yes I know it is. . . probably because they want to continue to sin but still go to heaven. The very idea of 'justification by faith alone' sounds ridiculous to me. It's your behavior that counts, not what you believe.

This is why I prefer Judaism to Xianity (if I were to get religious). In the OT, God judges people by their actions and not by their beliefs. That's why I think Gen 15:6 is inconsistent with the rest of the OT wherein God loves those who are obedient to his word in actions rather than in mere thoughts.

Sheshbazzar

If you actually observed and kept and DID all of The Commandments, Statutes, and Ordinances as given in the Torah, you might have somewhat to boast of your justification through your obedience to all the words of The Law.

outhouse

I ment reading up on this topic for a while before I posted. Not your most recent post.

It only took a few seconds to realize this is one personal view.



Fact is, it can be interpreted many ways due to the complex nature of Genesis and its compilations and redactions.

As I stated its more of a "when" term first. Even then you have Judaism view and Christianities views as well to complicate matters.


At best I would be focusing on how Paul [if it even matters] used this term which is semi evident.


While it is said to be a important focal point in the whole bible as part of the foundation of righteousness, I still find this a futile exercises.

spin

I thought I gave the distinction between recognizing and judging. They have different implications. The religionist doesn't judge god. They can recognize his greatness/majesty/glory/righteousness/spleen/goodness as much as they like, preferably more.

The ambiguity is notable regarding the referent subject of the verb. It is poorly written as I read it, but then I find myself guilty of doing similar things frequently enough. I usually have to reread what I write several times to get what I wanted to say.

Net2004

I have a question for pagans like sotto voce

when abraham was about to sacrifice his son where in the attempt to sacrfice his son did he have a vision that yhwh in the future would wear flesh and then have it sacrificed?


the christian god had to do an action to appease himself so i guess even the christian god in flesh aknowledged that action was greater than beliefs

sotto voce

That's the Catholic idea, where, come Saturday, you go and confess to the priest the naughty things you did during the week, go to Mass Sunday, and everything's hunky dory, until next Saturday, when you do it all again; and Catholics actually anathematise the teaching of justification by faith. It's also something like the Jewish idea, but who knows what a Jew thinks? It's 'pick and mix' territory.

The Christian idea, by way of stark contrast, is that a fully forgiven person is so grateful to the one who obtained complete forgiveness that life is lived for that one, and sin is forgone on his account. Why would we bother to be good otherwise? If we believe that we are going to hell, because we have already done wicked things, we say that "I might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb," the lamb not representing innocence in this case, of course. And we carry on doing wrong things. But if someone comes and wipes the slate clean, we may, perhaps should, think differently. The slate-wiper is called 'christ', in the biblical context.

So Christians aim to get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice, being kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave them (Eph 4:31-32). Those who do not justify themselves before the church (as insisted on by James) are rejected by the church. That does not mean that Christians never do wrong, but it does mean that they do not continue doing wrong after it has become plain to them that they are doing it.

Historians know better than anyone that justification by confession and Mass just doesn't work, those who actually dispense the confessions and Masses being some of the worst people in history, without a trace of shame. And Christians are aware of this, too, so do not accept anyone as one of themselves who does not reject the Vatican cult as antichrist in teaching and in practical example.

It is ridiculous, a Catholic phrase. The added, superfluous word 'alone' betrays ignorance or disingenuity, misrepresenting the teaching. It's the object of belief that matters, not belief per se. If a Christian asks an educated Catholic what he believes in, he will get an embarrassed silence; the reason being that a Catholic does not actually have a coherent faith, a christ, and he knows it. The Christian view is that faith must be in the perfect righteousness of Christ, because any faith in one's deeds and words, one's own corrupted conscience, is utterly doomed to failure. In the biblical view, nobody can with good conscience tell another, "I have lived a perfect life." So faith must be alone, in terms of justification before deity. One cannot say to Jesus, I believe in your righteousness, but I thought it prudent to top it up with a bit of my own." That is blasphemy, is it not, and it is precisely what Catholics utter at Mass; though of course all of their 'good works' tend to be going to Mass on Sundays. The week-day behaviour of the typical Catholic is no different from that of the guy next door. Indeed, the reputation of middle class Catholics of the USA is rather less than that.

Then the preferred interpretation of Gen 15:6 is the one where deity justifies Abram, not vice versa. It's also the one that makes natural sense of both the text, and the context.

sotto voce

Abraham believed that deity would raise his son to life, as he had been given the promise that he would have many descendants through Isaac.

The main point here is that it was at this point that Abraham realised, by his action, that he was justified before deity. Before that, it was only deity who realised that Abraham was justified. The principle is that deity knows the heart, people see the actions.

And don't misattribute, poster.

outhouse

You do know Abraham was a literary creation, do you not.?

sotto voce

One knows the game is over when the goalposts are moved.

Onias

You're correct. 'Recognizing' is a more appropriate term than 'judging'.