Keep sharing good news without ads.
An age ole debate on the role of faith in relation to our justification!
Go to the original at The Gospel Truth!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhraVs-O_io&t=1s
All right. Thank you for joining me in this episode of the gospel truth. I'm your host marla wilson, man. It's been a while man. I think this is the first show within the last week. Um, I haven't had one in quite some time, but i'm glad to be in front of you today.
Um today, thank you for joining me on the gospel truth. We're engaging the culture because true. That's what we do on the gospel truth. And we do the engaging by debates interviews and bible lessons and we have another debate for you today.
Should should we hold to sole fide? I have matt saley and uh, jeremiah nortier and we're gonna be debating that but before I bring my audience in I do want To go ahead my not my audience, but my interlocutor should I say?
Um, I do want to go ahead encourage you to go ahead like and follow the gospel truth. Make sure you're subscribing make sure you do what you have to do to stay in the loop with the gospel truth. That's going on.
That's the truth is also on facebook and youtube. It's on youtube as you know. You're on youtube right now, but it's on facebook instagram and twitter. So if you didn't know now, you know. Make sure you go over there head over there to make sure you like subscribe.
Do what you have to do to stay in the loop over there as well. As always also all this content is on podcast as well. So make sure you're flowing over to itunes google play stitcher and spotify to make sure you're staying in the loop with the podcast as well.
Um that said I have a whole bunch of shows coming up here on the gospel truth soon. So let me go over a couple little shows and before we bring uh, matt and jeremiah in. All right coming up wednesday january 22nd I have is purgatory biblical that's coming up john o 'rourke versus matthew broderick.
That's gonna be january 22nd at 4 p .m. pacific standard time. 7 p .m. Eastern standard time. After that, I have a lesson coming up on the 25th of this month. What is pelagianism? So make sure you are jumping on that because this is going to be great.
I've been diving to a lot of things concerning pelagianism. Um, and I look forward to doing this lesson. So hope you can join me on that one. After that, I have that's a book of mark teach that jesus is the one true god.
I had dr Del tuggy, uh unitarian reverend anthony rogers trinitarian one of the better Apologists for the trinitarian position anthony rogers and that's coming up. January 30th at 1 p .m Pacific standard time that's 4 p .m. Eastern standard time.
So make sure you stay in the loop what the gospel truth has going on there. And lastly, I have an interview coming up john to sheffield. That's going to be february 2nd answering objections to the canon of the new testament that's coming up 5 p .m Pacific standard time.
That's just the next several shows coming up here on the gospel truth. So make sure you're staying with the gospel truth that's going on. Make sure you're liking make sure you're subscribing make sure you're hitting that's a notification bell.
Make sure you're sharing this content so we can uh, i'll be happy together and sharing this gospel truth stuff together, right? So I thank you guys for joining me. Let me bring my my interlocutors in jeremiah.
Nortina has been on before I I cannot remember who he debated, but he did a great job. I do remember that. If I remember one thing, I remember he did a great great job. He was able to communicate. I think he debated, uh.
Mormon dude, I think he played a mormon cat. I can't remember his name, but he did a great job. I really appreciate jeremiah. So I reached out to him to see if he'd come back on and tackle. Uh tackle, mr Matt saly, uh, matt saly been on the show a couple times actually he did a two on two debate and he did a solo Debate, so this is going to be a great debate man.
Once again, the topic is solely should we hold the solely feeding? So I expect these guys to really perform. So let me bring these guys in so they can introduce themselves. What's up guys what's going on?
What y 'all y 'all doing? Hey.
Hey doing good.
Good. How things over there jeremiah. What you got going over there, man.
It's cold. It's too cold down here in the south.
In the south man. The south man, you said human weather. Down there man, that's what's up. What's going on matt? What's up with you on your side, man?
Oh, man, you know things are definitely cold up here, you know, I think the only warm thing is uh, the love, you know just um. Did a recent shout out to just uh being married, uh, which is a wonderful um, you know and just happy new year to everybody, uh.
Yeah, other than that, oh and also, um, I recently gotten um, I really knew an amazing job um, just working with internationals and foreigners and um, You know, the the money is so great that for the first time ever Uh, i'm gonna be a homeowner.
You know, you have to just kind of save up that much and it's just a it's a blessing and um, and it's timely so. Excellent excellent. No, it's good.
Amen. Amen. Good stuff, man. I appreciate you guys for joining us on this episode of gospel truth. That said I always like to give introductions man. So i'm gonna allow you guys to give you guys a chance to introduce yourself to the audience as always.
Make sure you're sharing blogs. Make sure you're sharing your if you got a youtube page. Make sure you let them know what you got going on where all your content is so they can come follow you or Or read some of your content man.
So that said jeremiah if you don't mean if you don't mind. Go give a quick introduction yourself, man.
Yeah.
Yeah, thank you everybody for tuning in this evening. My name is jeremiah nortier. Um, I attend a church here in jonesborough arkansas called 12 -5 church. So I just want to encourage you to please go to our website at 12 -5 church .com.
That's the word 12 the number 5 church .com.
So.
I've been married a little bit over five years now. My wife ally nortier is definitely in my better half and I love her with all my heart. She is definitely my rock and I just I love studying god's word.
Jesus christ is my lord and savior and we are called to share the gospel. So that is my main objective today is just to share the gospel in clear terms, especially how the scripture defines what the gospel is.
So, um, thank you all once again for tuning in. I'm really looking forward to this discussion with matt. Like he said, um, i'm anticipating good vibes. Um, I know we're gonna have a really good conversation this evening.
All right. All right. Thank you. Jeremiah. All right, matt. Give a quick introduction yourself, man.
Hey, what's going on? Everybody? Um, i'm matthew. Sully aka so real is my poet name Um just from the pittsburgh area. Uh sometime around this time last year. I had launched a ministry called the father's well Um, and so far there have been people just from all over Um all over the country who just tune in every sunday.
And also wednesdays, um just for some open bible lessons I'm trying to add some new things in there like an hour before we start that we will go ahead and go through some prayer. Um, you know, we also contact each other just throughout the week.
It's more than just a bible study. It's a bible journey. Um, also there have been uh, just some good testimonies that have been on. My recent um, or not my recent but uh, my other youtube channel so real.
And you know, we basically had a a testimony about how everything's been Um, and also opened up the father's well youtube channel Um, and I just released a lot of things that we have went over Um just throughout the past year.
Um, not everything though, but if you want to know more about it, then just email me at ssoreal at gmail .com. Other than that, um, you know, I I am recently married. Um, autumn scott is my rock Um, she is you know, the the woman Of of my life my journey my dreams my destiny Um, where would I be without her?
I can say so much more things. Um, but yeah other than that in terms of church I'm definitely looking for Uh a church home. So that's something a little new to me, you know I'm always rock solid and i'm just basically staying with you know a church for 18 years and whatnot but you know just going through some new chapters and um, i'm really looking forward to.
Just seeing where you know, the lord just wants to plan us next but other than that Um, i'm just ready to have a a beautiful uh discussion, uh, just on the topic of my boy jeremiah, so.
Uh, thank you. Thank you mark. So we're gonna jump into this real quick and then we'll jump into this debate. So once again, the topic of this debate is should we hold just solely solar fee day? All right.
So that says it'll be 10 minute opening statements five minute rebuttals. We're gonna follow that with a 15 minute cross-examination first 30 minutes to be 15 minutes each to ask questions. Uh, the final 20 minutes it will be 10 minutes each to ask questions.
Then we'll follow that with five minute closings and then q a from the audience and that q a each. Participant will get one minute each to respond to the question. Um, so that's it. Uh, mr Jeremiah, no tear you're arguing the affirmative in this debate.
So you are up first for your opening statement. Let me know when you're ready and then I will start your time.
All right. I'm good to go.
All right, jeremiah. You got it, man.
Justification by faith alone is the article on which the church stands or falls and this famously said by martin luther. Uh, the question we are discussing today is should we hold to sola fide? And my answer is firmly.
Yes, because historically the doctrine of sola fide which is latin and translated into english as faith alone. This teaches us that man is justified before god by faith apart from works. So by way of analogy imagine that you have a table and on the table.
You have an apple and you have an orange take the orange off the table and the apple is left standing alone. So on the table of justification you have two things you have faith. And works take faith off the table and it's faith alone that justifies us before god.
I believe the scriptures clearly teach us this doctrine. My primary passage of scripture is going to be romans chapter 4 verses 2 through 6 and then I want to present to you three major points so our passage says.
For if abraham was justified by works he has something to boast about but not before god. For what does the scripture say? Abraham believed god and it was accounted to him as righteousness. Now to the one who works his wages are not counted as a gift.
But as his due and to the one who does not work. But believe him who justifies the ungodly his faith is counted as righteousness. Just as david also speaks of the blessing of the one whom god counts righteousness.
Apart from works. So my first major point is understanding the word faith. The greek word for faith is pistis, which means conviction of the truth and it's coupled with trust. We must understand that faith internal and of the heart faith is not.
Faith is not able to be seen by the human eye. It's immaterial and so it cannot be weighed or measured. That is why god ultimately sees the heart of man. Faith is also firm trust according to hebrews 11 verse 1 and this cannot be understood to mean as mere intellectual ascent.
Firm trust is so much more than understanding facts. But it's firm trust and firm trust will compel the will to do Love and to do good works and to love one's neighbor and ultimately have a loving relationship with god.
And so my second major point is understanding the word works. Paul uses two different greek words that can be translated into english as works. Back in romans 4 verse 2. Once again, we read paul. For if abraham was justified by works, then he has something to boast about but not before god.
Here is the greek word ergon which means any general action or conduct of man. And so it would seem that paul's use of the word ergon. He's being abundantly clear and he's condemning any idea of human working.
To help justify us before god. But it's as though he's anticipating an objection where someone could say well. General works don't justify us before god, but it must be our specific works that have a particular goal in view.
That will contribute to our justification. And so paul refutes that idea when he says May ergod my in the greek when he says may this is one of the strongest uses of negation possible. And then he says ergod's in mind.
This means um to work to earn by commitment of exercise. Performance trade or labor. Listen to what he says again in romans 4 verse 5. And to the one who does not work May ergod's of mine but believes in him who justifies the ungodly his faith.
Pistis his firm trust is counted as righteousness. So paul is completely obliterating any system that is dependent on human works to obtain a right standing with god. Rather it is inward faith that trust in the savior and his finished work alone.
That is how we are justified. This would directly refute second temple judaism's interpretation of the hebrew scriptures that righteousness can be obtained by works of law. Paul's teaching on justification would strongly rebuke the eastern orthodox and roman catholicism's teaching that in order for a person to obtain Justification You must perform an action of faith by the sacrament of holy water baptism.
This is to conflate faith in works blurring the lines and not understanding the distinctions. Romans chapter 4 clearly teaches us that pistis inward trusting faith inevitably will produce works as an effect.
But works are no way the instrumentation of receiving righteousness and declaring us right before god. This was never the case even with abraham who is before the law. Not with david under the law and not with christians after the law's fulfillment.
It has always been on the basis of faith in the promise of the god who cannot lie. So my third and final major point is understanding the word Justification. This greek word is defined as an act of god declaring men free from guilt.
This is a legal forensic courtroom term in relation to crime. One way to demonstrate this is by utilizing the greek septuagint to justify. Is often used in the court of law dealing with legal ramifications of lawsuits and instructions of justice.
And paul uses the same terminology in romans 4 verse 5. Listen to this carefully again. And to the one who does not work but believe Believes in him who justifies the ungodly his faith is counted as righteousness.
The way that paul uses the word counted here is really crucial to our conversation. He's using this in a way of legal transaction. Listen to the immediate context. He uses words like justify works wages and the use of his due.
The greek word for counted means to pass to one's account to impute and so that's huge. He's talking about imputation. Imputation is a legal forensic declaration that establishes a new legal status. A good example of this is when a minister Declares to a couple husband and wife.
They are now legally married. They were not married when they walked in but the moment after the minister declared them. And so very similarly in romans chapter 4 paul is painting a courtroom picture.
Where god the father is judge and jesus christ pays our debt and then he intercedes for us. He pleads for us like a defense attorney on our behalf. The judge literally declares us not guilty because of jesus's righteousness.
Credited to our account by faith apart from works. And so paul without question brings this back to the courtroom setting in romans chapter 8. Listen to the legal terminology that he uses. And those whom he predestined He also called.
And those whom he called he Justified. And those whom he justified he also glorified who shall bring a charge against god's elect. Who is to condemn christ? Jesus is the one who died and more than that who was raised who is at the right hand of god who indeed is interceding For us.
So please listen carefully to me here if paul is using legal forensic terminology. Then that means we receive jesus's righteousness by imputation. It is impossible to understand that paul in the book of romans is saying that our right standing before god rests on our own achievement.
And in the mo and one of the most amazing passages in the bible comes from isaiah chapter 53. That prophesies about jesus christ suffering and dying on our behalf. The text says he was pierced for our transgressions.
He was crushed for our iniquities and by his wounds. We are healed. Hopefully you hear the substitution language that the prophet is using. The servant is suffering not for his own sin since he was sinless, but as a substitute for sinners.
Now isaiah Concludes the chapter by saying this. And I want you to hear the legal terminology that he uses. The righteous one my servant will Justify the many for he will bear their wrongdoings because he poured out his life unto death and was counted imputed with wrongdoers.
Yet he himself bore the sin of many and Interceded you hear that that interceding again like a defense attorney for wrongdoers. It is so important for us to understand how the scripture uses this type of legal terminology.
Even in jesus's final moments on the cross. He said it is finished. This phrase is translated from the greek to telestai. This is an accounting term, which means paid for.
In full.
Jesus paid in full the consequence of our sin debt to the father therefore negating any possibility of anybody else coming and adding Their works to the already finished work of jesus purchasing our salvation.
So in closing here I just want to end with. The scripture declares that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of god. And that sin debt earns for us eternal death. And this is the gospel truth that when you look to jesus In faith apart from trusting in yourself or your works or anything else in this world.
But by trusting in him alone the just judge of all the earth Imputes jesus's perfect obedience to the law and his atonement for sin to your account. The judge can look to you and legally declare you can go free my son because someone else has paid your debt In full.
Thank you marlon.
All right. Thank you. Jeremiah for that open statement. All right, matt. You're up for your 10-minute opening.
Cool all right. Just a moment. Let me go ahead and share my screen. Here you show your screen.
Show your screen. I will start uh the timeline to show your screen and start.
All right, okay. All right. All right. Can you guys see this? Yes, we can. Just a second. Okay, so.
Um.
That that that was a blessing. Um, that was a blessing here. Um, so this is basically what I have. Two things that I really want to to talk about is identifying faith and salvation. And are there three parts Of salvation.
Are the three parts of salvation separate or are they interdependently all together? If justification sanctification and glorification are separate and independent from each other. And if faith is separate and independent from works then sola fide is true.
But if the bible repaid repeatedly repetitively preaches and teaches otherwise then faith alone is false. Faith is a belief that you live by. Faith alone is a belief. Is a belief that you adopt, you know, that's true.
You adopt it. But is there more to that than faith alone? Is there more to faith alone. For if there is more than to faith alone then faith alone is false. Everything i'm about to share with you can be summed up in this little parable.
I made up.
Literally.
Two men saw a magical loaf of bread. One man said let's eat it. The other man said okay. I'll slice it up. But it's magic bread the other man said. The other man sliced away carefully as he could. But the bread simply came back together.
How about we just eat the bread now? Are you done? The other man said. Not only am I done, but i'm starving. While eating the other man asked why the bread could not be sliced. The other man replied I suppose whoever made this bread didn't make it to be eaten alone.
And i'm just gonna let that linger. Faith and good works are both just as important and required for salvation. That is my position. Some traditional protestants believe this but disagree on how it's expressed.
Why? Because they separate justification sanctification and glorification. It's called deification for roman catholics theosis for eastern orthodox. That's me. But does the bible do this?
No.
And i'll prove it shortly or at least in my rebuttal. But first things first I want to go ahead and read a quote From john piper who talks about faith alone. And in all caps is basically my response to what i'm understanding.
He's from desiring god that faith alone doesn't mean the same thing when applied to justification. Sanctification and final salvation. It's very interesting. Paul would affirm all of this because he said in galatians 5 6 in christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything.
But only faith working through love. The only kind of faith that counts for justification Is the kind that produces love according to him. So the only kind of faith that counts for justification according to john piper Is faith with works or faith that works because it's it's the only kind of faith That produces love or produces anything.
He continues the kind that bears the fruit of love that the faith which alone justifies is never alone. But always is bearing transforming fruit. So faith alone justifies you. But the faith you have is not without works and later fruit.
Which are the very things, you know that you need your faith. To have in order for it to be the kind of faith that justifies or produces fruit. So if these works and fruit are things that are required of you In order to have this right kind of faith, then you are not justified by faith alone.
Unless i'm misunderstanding. Something that did he say? So when james says quote that these controversial words quote, um. A person is justified by works and not by faith alone. James 2 24. I take him to mean not by faith.
Which is alone? But faith which shows itself. He says paul calls this effect or fruit of evidence of faith. The work of faith he quotes all these scriptures to say what it is. Um, but i'm here to tell you that when you actually look at those passages paul doesn't even have this in the context or concern.
If you don't believe me, we just walk through together. Just ask me during a q a or whatever i'll show you Another one and the obedience of faith same thing these works of faith. And the obedience of faith these fruits of the spirit that come by faith are necessary for our final salvation.
Oh, I see. So faith alone isn't what finally saves someone. He finally says no holiness. No heaven. Right hebrews 12 14, you know without holiness. No one will see god in other words if you downplay your sanctification process.
Then.
No heaven for you, basically. And finally he ends up saying so. We should not speak of getting to heaven by faith alone. In the same way that we are justified by faith alone. Do you see the issue? The issue is is that a lot of times and I could be wrong about this.
But a lot of times when you have to constantly split things up so much to make your doctrine consistent. That lets me know that there's something not very consistent about it. Because I thought that if you're justified by faith alone, you're good you're fit for heaven.
That's it. But if that kind of faith doesn't get you to heaven and something else does then that lets me know that faith alone. I guess according to them faith alone saves you but faith alone doesn't get you to heaven.
So there's more stuff that you have to do. And that you know kind of gets into you know, my little category here. So i'm hearing a lot of what protestants are saying and I know that john piper does not speak for everyone.
I know that. Um, but I thought he would be the most consistent if he's not. Then please give you know, show me some things where all these things weave together. But I decided to do. I decided to look at all the verses starting with jesus where it seems like he's talking about faith alone.
But then after that you look and he said some other things because I only have you know, so many minutes. Obviously, I can't go so i'm gonna go ahead down to. The one I think can stand out the most. This is john 15 Versus one through six and it says I am the true vine and my father is the gardener.
Okay, that's cool. He takes away every branch that does not bear fruit in me. Right branch that's usually us right where the branch is, you know, and of course we're in christ, right? That's a phrase that we find everywhere.
Mainly because of jesus when he says stuff like this in me. So here's people that are in christ. They're a branch. But the father is doing something to these individuals who are in christ who are branches.
But they're not bearing fruit and the father takes him away. And wherever he takes him, I don't think it's heaven. He says he prunes every branch that bears fruit so that it will bear more fruit, you know prunings when you take away any excess kind of Leftover branches so that way the fruit can grow in his place more fruit grow in his place, right?
And so finally he says you are clean already because of the word that I have spoken to you. Remain in me now. Now. This is the part where jesus is talking, right? Remain in me. This is his part and I will remain in you.
So that's something that we we have to do, right? Just as a branch cannot bear fruit by itself unless it remains in the vine in me. You can't bear fruit apart from me.
Right.
So neither can you unless you remain in me? I am the vine and you're on the branches. The one who remains in me and I in him bears much fruit. Because apart from me you can accomplish nothing if anyone does not remain in me.
Notice that the the key verse the key word is remain, you know, if you choose not to stay. Two minutes left if you choose not to stay right you choose not to bear fruit. You choose to just go ahead and be apart from him.
This says he is thrown out like a branch and dries up. And such branches are gathered up. That's not a gathering you want to be a part of. And thrown into the fire. And they are burnt up. So you can see the father doing some things and he's a bit more direct.
And the son is giving some warnings about what happens and so when you put it together, you know, you do see. That there is a fruit bearing process. Right a give back to god that he's looking for right.
And also it's not just these external good works. No, but these good works bear fruits that actually change you or in other words sanctify you you go through this process. Where as in romans where it says you're conformed to the image of the sun.
That's a real thing that you have to go through. That's what it's talking about in bearing fruit. It's just not. Loving your neighbor looking out for the poor. You know, it's also internal as well, you know, um, and so tons of other things.
That jesus talks about. I can't read all these because I don't have time. But if you look on the right, he does talk about the eucharist and he says if you go ahead and do this. You'll live forever. Now notice that grace is now being imparted in this act.
You know, I thought that faith was supposed to be the thing that saves but jesus just like all the apostles and everyone else I could show later end up talking about these things and.
Oh, okay. Yep. All right. That's time right there. All right. So now we're going to go ahead transition to our rebuttal round of this debate. Uh, once again, it's five minute rebuttals. Start with jeremiah, man.
You're up for your five minute rebuttal. Let me know when you're ready and then i'll start your time. All right, i'm ready. All right, you got it man.
Man, I just want to thank you two for talking with me here. Um, you had a lot of really good points. I'm, not going to be able to cover them all so i'll try to cover what I can remember and I was able to jot down.
Now I think you're right. Something that I on my side of things I see distinctions between justification. Sanctification and glorification. I don't see it all being lumped into one, you know thing and it's mainly because.
Uh, the scripture sees these as different categories now. They're all really important and at the moment of salvation and the rebirth being born again. I think there's a lot of things going on. Um as an instantaneous miracle, we'll probably get more into that.
But I think there's a deeper rooted issue. Um, not just recognizing those three categories, but is paul in the book of romans using forensic Terminology is he making a legal declaration about our right standing before god or is it an ongoing process?
I think that's going to be the deeper issue. Uh that we talked about so one place that I want to point out to you man. And you're asking maybe maybe you're wrong on some things. Maybe you can get clarifications romans 8 and the golden chain of redemption um at least shows us the difference between justification and glorification.
And I think uh sanctification is also in the context so starting in romans 8 verse 29 to 30 says. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his son. So there's going to be a sanctifying process that happens in the lives of god's children.
But then the golden chain goes on to say of those whom he predestined. He also called those who he called he also justified. And then he goes on to say. That they will also be glorified so the apostle paul utilizes different terminology there, so we'll get more into that.
Um, since we're limited on time you touched on galatians 5 verse 6 faith working love. I love this scripture because true living faith pistis. Always is going to have external results. It's all works is always going to flow from a heart that loves the savior.
So the thing you got to keep in mind is that we are justified declared righteous by faith. Apart from anything else that we could do in this world. That's what we mean by faith alone not by bringing in our works not by partaking in sacramental works.
We got to understand that jesus did all the works necessary on the cross to purchase our redemption. So maybe we could talk more into um the effects of of faith which is loving works absolutely with the fruit of the spirit.
He said faith alone saves you but doesn't get you into heaven. So when we say salvation salvation can be used in multiple contexts and I would say salvation Could be understood in those three categories that you talked about but we're talking about the initial point of justification.
What must we do to be justified before god we must put our internal trust. Faith in the savior into him alone. So that's what we're saying and then god does a wonderful work of regeneration that changes our heart that compels us to desire to be obedient.
Hopefully we can get into that. That's what john piper was talking about. And so we got just a little under two minutes you brought up john chapter 15. I love this parable this imagery that jesus uses.
So when he says every branch in me that does not bear fruit he takes away. So absolutely there are a lot of people that are in the church building that appear like they Are a a christian and so you can be in the vine and and um, interestingly enough It was john piper that told me is there a way to be in the vine?
And not actually be a true regenerate born again christian. We see him at church every single day. We show we can't see him, but god knows the heart. So he's using imagery here and we know That jesus is not going to contradict himself using this parable earlier.
He said in john chapter 6 um, I believe it's verse 37 where he says All that the father gives to me will come to me and whoever comes to comes to me. I will never cast out Jesus is using clear didactic Uh language there and in john 15 he's using imagery to show that professing christians that don't have internal faith in the savior.
Eventually, they're not going to produce the works and they will be condemned on not having their sins forgiven. So martin, I think that's all the time I have.
All right. Thank you. Jeremiah for that rebuttal. All right, matt. You're up for your five minute rebuttal.
Okay. All right, so, um. Let's see. There were a few things that you said but i'm trying to find the first thing to to go through um, I think one thing that I will say is is that when people talk about salvation in terms of like a courtroom scene, um,.
The problem is is that you really find one so far. I would love to find a courtroom scene. Someone could show it to me. That'd be great. Um, it is true that you know, you have justification paradigms that are definitely used by scripture.
But the problem is you don't really see like a courtroom scene really um, there are other like Scenes that are more of a personal relationship. And so you see certain scenes between god and man are not like courtroom, but more like friendship with romans 5 9 or james 2 23.
Or you kind of see things like with marriage and widowhood with romans 7 verses 1 through 4, right? That's how Uh paul end up viewing people who are coming into faith and all of a sudden they let go of the law.
And they also and also they they marry jesus. That was a paradigm. He showed with the jews. There's a bomb woman free woman type of paradigm, right? There's a relational way. Um where it talks about that in galatians 4 21 through 31, right?
Court of course, there's a legitimate son and the Unlegitimate son type of paradigm with hebrews 12 8. You also have like a a jew and gentile type of paradigm where he makes the two one and all those kind of things.
And you have that in galatians 2 Versus 11 through 21. I think that's ephesians. That's one of them. And of course you had the this is what the biggest one of all which is sort of um Sanctification, but it's more of glorification when you read romans 8 and that's the adoption paradigm.
Romans 8 15 all the way through verse 23. Right when we're being adopted as sons, so you see all these example paradigms.
Of how.
You know jesus and the apostles are expressing Uh how what one looks like and what things are going through? Uh in the spirit realm when one is saved. And everything I named was in scripture but no courtroom saved you know, and so that's the reason why we can't just take a Definition of a term like justify and all of a sudden we read it in phares and say oh well.
This term was used for legal this and this and that but the problem is how the how do they use the term? I use this example all the time. During our our q a we can look at the word religion. With james.
If you pull up a there's it'll tell you exactly what it means. But then when you ask james, he'll say this is true religion to keep yourself pure. And to look after you know, the fatherless and the widow, you know to keep yourself separating pure from the world.
That's not what the lexicon said. So it's how they use words like justification. You know that are found in the text and there's a text yielding something that is, you know legal or relational. And if it's more relational than legal.
Then it's like you got to kind of reconsider like hmm like wow, there's a lot of relational stuff. You know, but not so much legal stuff, you know um now i've been asking for um, he also said that uh I believe he spoke about um.
How works are basically condemned and you look at I believe it was romans chapter four. And so the issue is is that when you look at how paul talks about works? He never condemns good works themselves.
He never just condemns works. He'll condemn works of the law. He'll condemn works that you try to boast about. Right, right like in romans 4. He'll condemn works that you try to go ahead and put somebody in debt for.
Right, he'll condemn those types of works, but to go ahead and condemn good works themselves. Um, he never did that so, of course if you go ahead and use Works and of course in this context in romans 4 he's talking about works of the law.
That's all throughout romans 3. So he's continuing that. If you're gonna go ahead and try to use works to say hey you owe me. Then that is not the way that that goes ahead and justifies you. Plus if you try to say well, you know what?
I still don't believe you then it can it can basically contradicts romans chapter two. You know, this is one of my scriptures. I wanted to pull up where he says that you know where people seek salvation by good works and and um, they seek uh immortality and and good on um, you know, uh eternal salvation through good works.
And and those types of things why would he say that and that was romans chapter two, I believe.
Verses.
5 through 11 and and we could read that, you know, we could take a look at it and and compare it. You know, is paul contradicting himself or is he being contextual with the word works here the type and nature of works?
Um now another thing that you said this is another big one about Imputed righteousness imputation to reckon. This is a whole nother separate debate.
All right, matt that that's that's time right there. All right, guys. So now we're going to transition to our to our cross-examination the most the favorite part of every debate the cross-examination.
All right, so let's make this a real good one. Let's make sure we're interacting back and forth. Let's try to make our responses too long-winded because i'm sure your interlocutor Appreciates time to ask this question.
So let's make sure the responses are short as possible. So with that said jeremiah, you're up first for your 15-minute cross-examination and matt saley.
Matt, I I love your attitude man. And so i'm really looking forward to just going back and forth and hopefully we can sharpen each other through this process. I want to start by saying one thing the protestant position is we've seen two themes in scripture.
We see that there's a legal aspect before god and we see that participatory. Relational aspect as well. So our position is that there are both.
Now.
Here's here's an illustration. I want to get your thoughts on.
You have a a couple that's unmarried And then they get married legally. And they can do New things as a result of their marriage. So that's how we see the christian walk when we are before god. We bring our filthy rags our works before us even when we try to do good things god sees it as detestable.
So we need that we need a perfect righteousness. That's not our own and that's where we get imputation and I think this is a huge part of this conversation because If there is forensic language Then it has to be imputation and that's the initial point justification and sanctification.
So my first question that I want to set up is Um, would it be problematic for your position if we could if you were convinced that paul was using legal terminology.
Hmm.
That's a good question. Would it be problematic? I don't think so. Um, I I think I think it could be problematic in the sense that um, I do know that Protestants because of the west. It is really heavy on status.
You know and that's like a theological inheritance roam a little bit there. But but they're not so heavy on status anymore. But. You know when you look at a word it's more on process. Um, and there are plenty of scriptures.
I like to go through for that. So I would definitely say that if it was expressed legally Without all the examples in scripture that we could walk through right now. Then I wouldn't even be having this debate.
What I would be doing is going through all the scriptures that show this this constant ongoing legal. That goes beyond just look at what this word in the lexicon means. Go to scripture to show their examples, you know what I mean?
And that's the point where.
Okay.
And I want to agree with you that I think the west Has over emphasized legal status over the relational status and i'm over here saying we need to get back to the scripture that affirms both. So there's a little bit of agreement that we have there.
So I just want to affirm that the relational aspect absolutely found all throughout scripture. But one question is on the table of is there still that legal status because all of my reading of eastern orthodoxy?
Denies legal transactions legal forensic terminology. So you asked for a few examples. So I thought this would be a good part of our discussion. So you're familiar with the greek septuagint, correct?
Yes.
Now I want to agree with you. We can't just isolate words Out of their context and then just look at the syntactical domain and cherry pick one and say that's. That's what paul is using.
But I think if we look at the greek septuagint we understand church history the early church i'm talking about the the church of acts. They mainly had a greek septuagint a greek translation of the old testament.
So here's legal terminology. I think you will agree with me. And if you want to turn there turn to exodus chapter 23 verse 7. This has a particular context that deals with instructions of lawsuits. General exhortations of justice and honesty.
But it's it's legal. And verse 7 says this keep your distance from a false charge. Do not kill the innocent the righteous for I do not justify the wicked. And you can stay on that one, but deuteronomy 25 verse 1 It's literally in a courtroom setting and that one says if there's any dispute between men They go to the court and the judge will decide their case and they will or they justify The righteous and condemn the wicked and there's other examples of that.
So but if you look in the greek septuagint Paul uses the same greek terms that's used in the greek septuagint. So that provides a slight foundation in scripture for legal status carrying over into the new testament, but that's not it.
So this is I want where I want to get some of your thoughts if you look at romans chapter 8 Paul uses the same word Justified in the past tense. This is the same root word in the golden chain, right? For those whom he he called he he justified and those who be justified.
And then I think to me this is the most inescapable language and I want to get your thoughts on this. What then shall we say to these things? Um, if god is for us who can be against us and verse 33 says who shall bring any charge.
Against god's elect. It is god who justifies.
Do you think that that could be alluding to a courtroom setting? He's talking about a charge and it's talking about god who justifies. What's your response?
Um, I definitely would say that yeah, you could look at that word charge and say hey, you know. What that right there is a courtroom term a courtroom term and you know, it's a legal term right there. And so hey, look there it is.
You got your courtroom scene. The problem is is that He's not even saying where he is or he's not even saying That this is a place in a courtroom scene like I can use a a word charge. And I don't have to be in a courtroom scene.
The other thing is is that I think it's interesting that you know, just a few verses above, you know. We we go to same same chapter, right? Few verses earlier. Um, he's talking about you know us being Adopted as sons, you know, once again, there's that personal kind of language thing, you know and so he's using all of these terms and so far, you know, once again, there there was no You know legal courtroom when he said, you know where we were adopted, you know, um, and and of course if he's talking about being saved.
You don't have to be in a courtroom to be saved, you know, so you you see like you see basically, um, he's not I don't see a courtroom setting let me ask you and most I can see like courtroom language, right?
He's saying charge exactly but in the context of what where where are they if they're out in the desert somewhere.
Yeah, you know what i'm saying, okay, let me real quick yeah. So let me just so you understand.
But I forgot I forgot what it was so sure yeah.
Now you gotta think we're not saying you have to be in a courtroom setting but if god is expressing our justification in legal terms Then that means that by his declaration We can be declared right and no longer guilty.
So that's why this is an important conversation and I get that that's not convincing to you that paul is using a greek septuagint term that is Definitely used in the court of law and paul is using identical language in this setting.
But I get what you're saying. It doesn't say courtroom. I'm just saying all he has to do is use legal terminology. So hopefully you better understand where we're coming from. But now I want to kind of switch gears where I want to talk about works.
Is it your understanding that you talk about work? Okay, go ahead.
Yeah before we talk about words one little tiny quick thing. Um. Maybe later on we we can look at the.
Area.
Where paul uses that word justified right but instead he uses it in a baptism setting where he says you were washed. You were sanctified.
You I cannot wait for you to ask me about that. I I can't. Okay. All right. No, because that's that's a good I think a good counter, but we'll definitely get into that. So when you go to Uh romans chapter four in my opening statement paul uses two different words for works.
Now I get what you're saying. Anybody can just grab a word from a lexicon, but i'm saying look at the context. So this is I want to get your understanding of the word or gods in mind this from the there's greek is a specific Work so you can obtain something in return.
What is the beginning point of deification. What and if you could make this really short? I'm, not sure how much time I have left, but what's the initial point of deification on your view?
I mean basically like I said I remember when I was hearing about how. Uh, I forget his name. Yeah, john wesley. How in the world I forget his name. He started looking at the church fathers and he came up with this term total sanctification.
Earlier before that it was just called deification. And before that it was just called theosis. And so today it's called glorification. Basically What it means is is that you become like by grace? What god is by nature?
You know, and so it means that you become immortal like god. It means that you know, you become Basically incorruptible like god, you know also it means that You you become of course, you know, holy like god and so that's what it's not just specific question.
Sorry, there's a slight lag. I don't want to cut you off but.
Is it you?
Can you um, do you have to be water baptized in order to step into that relationship like you said?
No, you do not have to be water baptized.
In order to I guess, you know be saved or Um step into that relationship with god, you know always end up saying that a lot of things are valid. But they're just not normative. You know, so you can find people who have professed christ and things like that but maybe for certain circumstances, they just Never got baptized.
Like the thief on the cross or something like that. Okay, but the thing is is that that was never taken as an example by the apostles or anyone? And shipped around as an example, but when you look at baptism and how jesus and the apostles talk about it.
They talk about it in ways that you know, I don't think protestants would. You know, why would jesus say? He that believes and is baptized will be saved. Like what or you have paul or peter saying, you know Baptism now does save you or you know, and that gets into basically the means of grace.
Um, but I know we ain't got time you you have questions. Oh look talk about that.
Yeah, that's okay. Yeah. Yeah, and I appreciate your response to that. So your position is you don't necessarily have to be water baptized in order to be made right with god. You're saying maybe you can have stepped into that relationship.
And for whatever reason you may not be baptized yet, but you are saved in the sight of god. Am I understanding you correctly?
Most definitely, you know, but again when you look in the scriptures, you know baptism is Encouraged and you know, you know according to peter and all that. That's our position. Yeah, so right and that's all I I think.
The difference is is that You know when we talk about what baptism does. Then all of a sudden there's a divine plan, you know, because when you look at scriptures. Let me.
Oh, all right. Let me ask you this real quick. What's what's the in your mind? What's the major differences between faith and works?
If you're talking about faith, um in this I mean man like.
Okay, let me let me offer something.
There is no right so there is no difference right at least to my eyes. It seems like there really is no difference between Um faith and works to me. They seem that intertwined. Now if you say faith in the sense of belief right, um creed confession.
I can understand faith in that sense, but I think the real question is how is faith expressed in the scriptures, you know? And is it just alone or is it always like connected to? Other stuff, you know.
But yeah, so I thought about this earlier. Um, you have people for whatever tragic, um. Situations where they are in a state where they cannot respond with their body. But they can respond by blinking their eyes and they are they are awake and they can hear you.
Um, but they can't do any works. Can that person hear the gospel and believe it in their heart and be declared right before god. Are they going to have to do some type of external works? Like what you're.
So what it seems like what you're saying is there's no distinction. I'm saying maybe we can agree faith is internal and works are external. And I agree with you true living faith That's internal will always produce external works.
So what do you do for the person that can't do works for whatever tragic reason?
Yeah, I mean when it comes to them I don't think that they'll go ahead and and be judged by any works that they they can't do. I mean think about it you you have even the same issue with infant baptism.
You know.
Because you have like babies that are there or if you have like retards that are there. And they're not able to like confess anything. You know i'm saying, you know, they're not able to do that. But the priest will go ahead and you know baptize.
You know that individual, you know, and they won't have to be required to go ahead and say okay. Well, you know. This is what I believe and things like that. You know, it's that you know, if they go ahead and are baptized then it objectively does something.
But I would definitely say if someone's not.
All right, that's time right there. Yeah, that's time right there. Yeah. All right, matt. You're up for your 15 minute cross-domination of jeremiah.
Got it, uh before I even say that I did want to say one other thing, too. It's interesting that baptism, you know based on the corner paul's writings is linked with circumcision which happened on the eighth day and The baby didn't really get a choice to you know do that, you know.
But he's saying those who are baptized in christ had put on christ I that's an extreme position for baptism. Like wow, so baptism does do something. So my question is um. And I have this here I'm gonna pull this up I'm not gonna share the screen because I know that we don't have a lot of time.
This this is my whole thing. If I Am, you know believing in jesus, right? Let's just say I I hear the gospel faith comes by hearing. And hearing by the word of god. And I hear the gospel and my heart is moved like there God's grace is working in me.
I'm feeling a preview of love that i've never felt before in my life. God's grace is working and it is waiting for me to say yes. And so finally I I say yes, I end up saying I believe. You know and and people do this in his prayer.
That's not found in scripture, but that's okay. And you know, they're like, you know what man? I I feel totally different and then all of a sudden, um. Let's just say hypothetically speaking. I I know this is highly unlikely but If the person never does any works.
If the person never prays If they never fast if they never choose to undergo any kind of uh Suffering and things like that like they try to avoid it, you know, i'm talking about matthew 5. But hey, you know when you're ridiculed for righteousness sake and things like that like they choose not to like they don't do anything else except I believe but That's about it.
They just live their life like a regular life. Will that person like go to heaven when they die.
So, uh, you kind of lost me in your question. Do you kind of be care to ask again? Just maybe real short.
Sure.
If there's someone that's um, they hear the gospel and all of a sudden they like confess and and they get saved like they confess. And they're good. But once again They never get baptized. They never oh worship they never pray they never they never fast.
They never do any they never do good works. They never go out of their way for somebody. They just kind of live their lives just regular, you know when that person dies. Will they go to heaven or You know somewhere else they don't want to go like how.
They yeah, okay. Gotcha. They will go to hell because they would have died in their sin and based on what you described. Their whole life is giving evidence that they never trusted in jesus. They may have said it with their mouth like james 2 14 says but their heart was far from god.
It wasn't transformed and did not have a relationship. Works are a good testing To see what the heart looks like. But only god can truly know the heart. Just because someone says to me Yeah, i'm a christian.
I prayed that prayer a long time ago. I'm thinking I have no idea what their relationship before god is like you must. On my understanding of the apostle paul it is faith that declares this righteous before god and faith Is not merely knowing facts or saying words.
Faith is an internal Trust. So to answer your question again, they would go to hell based on what you told.
Me.
Right. So so let's just pause right there, you know that faith is an internal trust and let's just say.
That.
They really Did like internally like trust that you know in jesus like they believe jesus and messiah. Just like the demons. Demons do you know what I mean? Like they they believe all that, you know, and they're trusting that in their belief.
They're not trusting anything else and and to the point where. They don't do anything else.
Yeah, okay. Okay now now you mentioned trust in him like the demons do. Did I hear you correctly? Yes, okay. So that I actually think that's a problematic question. I don't think the demons trust in jesus.
I think they have head knowledge, but they don't trust in the savior. If someone trusts in jesus Then the works will follow necessarily. That that would be the the reformed protestant view.
Okay. Thank you. Okay, so you did it right there, right? So we looked at belief and we looked at trust and both of us were like demons trusting no demons believing. Yeah, okay. That's why you know, so once again, you know.
You have faith and that you're trusting and you're saying that if this is this is the issue I have. This is you know if You know, they truly do have trust they will produce these things that y 'all say it's good works and and Fruits and all these things and so again.
Now it's like and this was in my opening statement a little bit that when it comes to faith alone That justifies you won't really know If you really are justified Until you begin to do and see some works Produce in you through you and you know, just and I mean so.
That's that's why i'm saying like no. There it is. Yeah. Yeah good. Yep.
Yeah, so I believe to have assurance of one salvation. I think I think a mature christian can look back on their life and see all the work that god has done in their life. I think that's one way Of knowing that you're saved the way that first john 5 13 says that we can know that we have eternal life.
And I do think it's problematic if you think you can lose your justification, but that's kind of another topic. But I will say this you can know for yourself if you are saved if you love christ. That cannot be of anything else that is human.
There's a lot of other people that make a profession that they love christ, but I can't know their heart. I can know in my heart if I love christ because that could only be Granted to me by god so you can have an assurance that you are saved and you don't have to analyze the works.
They will necessarily necessarily follow according to scripture. But it's it's faith that gives us that assurance if we love christ, that's nothing human of this world. Does that kind of help in our discussion?
It does it does but I wanted to ask this question in this perspective too because it seems that we have a different understanding About works a lot of times and and this is my background before I ask my question.
A lot of times people will look at roman catholics and eastern orthodox. And by the way, um, i'm eastern orthodox by Theology, I still am one day hopefully going to get catechized into the church. I just did want to say that I should have said at the beginning.
It's in my mind. I forgot apologize.
The issue is is that There's this idea that we are basically trusting in our works to go ahead and and be saved and the problem is is that There's nowhere in scripture Where it says that you know what works in and of themselves produce grace works in and of themselves guarantee Your salvation.
Why. Because this gets into another thing the judgment passages. Matthew 25. Matthew 12 book of revelation. You're going to be judged by your works. If i'm going to be judged by my works I can't guarantee that just because I do these works i'm going to be saved.
Therefore I hope in my salvation. You know what I mean. Like doesn't that make sense like if someone's going to judge whether or not. That your works truly were right before god just like matthew 10. There are people who believe for a while, but all of a sudden something happened.
They have proof but they weren't ripe. You know if if if our work is going to be judged, how can people say?
You are trusting in your works. To be saved. When we say that, you know faith without works is dead. Or faith and works. Is what god is looking for in justification? Or be saved. So I.
I think I mean this with all due respect. I think this is the problem on your side when you don't see a clear distinction between faith and works. There's a relationship there. But we will be judged for our works and I don't want to be judged for my works one day.
Because I will I will be judged for those and I will receive hell fire. However, if I have a perfect righteousness to the law that jesus christ did both passively and actively. Accredited to my account and if god sees me on that basis He can let me in and my whole life can be.
Walking in relationship growing in holiness becoming more and more like him. Well, yeah, those works are after the fact of justification. And there is a bema seat. There's a judgment seat of christ. We'll be Judged for our obedience, but our condemnation was settled.
According to the book of romans because we are under the headship of jesus and no longer under the headship of adam. So I think it's important to see that we cannot bring our works to the table before god.
We have to respond with something that humbles us right shows humility, which is internal trust we gotta be trusting.
So basically like I said, I hear all that and what I do honestly is that I compare it to man Matthew 25 right just one of many where you do see, you know where he says look When I was hungry You didn't feed me When I was thirsty you never gave me drink and we we read all this stuff and he says like lord, when do we not Do that, you know and this is what you didn't do it when you didn't do at least me.
And this is the stuff that he says right before he says, you know what you didn't do this. So this is where you go, but to the righteous he says When I was hungry you did these things like so they're being judged by Their works and things that they've done and so that's why i'm wondering people can trust you know in christ, but at the end of the day if If you're being judged by your what you do with your faith, then how is it you you still emphasize like hey I believe in i'm good.
Okay, jesus in that same gospel. He says out of the the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks Right good tree will bear good fruit. So yeah in one sense. Jesus can look at the works and say righteous.
Right, um enter into eternal life. That's been prepared before you and he can look to the wicked and say look at all of your works, you know. Go to everlasting fire because that stems from a changed heart but we can't confuse that our good works are what Gains us into heaven.
Because I was studying eastern orthodoxy. A lot of my research says you had to be water baptized as the first sacrament to be read water Regenerated through water baptism by the holy spirit. And i'm saying then you're gaining justification.
And that would seem to me to contradict when paul says now to the one who works His wages are not counted as a gift grace no longer grace, but as his due. But to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly his faith is counted as Righteousness.
I'm saying I don't understand anybody that says well you in some way have to bring your good works to the table. I'm saying not if paul is speaking legally and forensically and the scripture talks about walking in relationship.
Both can be true, but the very moment must be when god Forensically and legally declares us righteous now from a human perspective. We can see people acting in a good moral way. I think james chapter two is talking from the human to human perspective because he says you have faith.
Show me go ahead.
Okay, so, you know, I I think like. We should look at john 3 right now and we should look at romans 4 like right now. Uh, but before before I do that, I did want to say that. Um, I think that's another issue.
When you look in the scripture people could read the definitional term about. You know justification declare righteous. They can do that all day. But when you read what the scripture says and what god is doing.
Um, it's a whole different ballgame. You know, there's all kind of scriptures countless ones where he says that you are made righteous or that god justifies the ungodly not declare the. Uh ungodly just because then that would be like declaring something.
Isn't it is. But you know maybe and that's in romans 5 when you have you know by one man's sin. Many were made sinners. They weren't just declared sinners.
They were they were made that there were sinners through and through and it's the same thing when he said through christ, you know. Many will be Made righteous and so I that that's the reason why that's a whole separate debate.
It's basically You know impartation versus imputation. And there's plenty of from our research for my scriptural research. There's plenty of impartation. Um, but not so much imputation. And so the issue is it's like when you look at the word impute Logizomai and you see how it's used it literally just means to to mentally assess something that.
Actually you're seeing I got a question. That's what it means.
Okay, but I don't understand.
Okay, just real quick this gets into your romans 4 where it says that you know, uh, abraham believed and his faith was counted as Righteousness in other words. God looked at his faith and said, oh that's righteous.
There was a righteous quality. About his faith, you know, and that's the reason why it was counted. Is that it didn't mean like credit card. Transfer your account.
All right.
That's time right there. All right, jeremiah. You have 10 minutes to cross this out on that.
Okay, yeah, let's just let's keep kind of going in this train of thought so. Now it's funny.
You know if you're gonna continue to go on a train of thought. And can I finish out what I was saying if we're going to continue to train the thought actually?
You'll you'll have a chance to come back in because I got a lot of things that I want to say because you you Brought up the word. Yeah, it's all good. So the thing is I I haven't heard a reason why I should go with your definition of what gods am I versus the way that paul is utilizing.
These greek septuagint terms that have been found in legal courtroom terminology. So I guess to kind of get back to. Um, I had a few questions. Okay, I do want to talk. I do want to shift gears actually now.
So, um. At what point can a person lose their justification.
Well, that's the thing like You're talking about what when can a person no longer be saved? Um, they can no longer be saved when they walk away From christ when they take off the ring. You know what? I mean that they married him or hey, they can be in his hand like john 6 Where no one can snatch him out but They they can leave or they can depart okay from the faith, you know, or they they can choose.
As this john says they could choose choose not to remain In him like that's not anything that jesus is doing that that's something that they're doing and they're gonna be judged by that. And so it's like yeah, if you choose to do that, then yeah, it's it's not that you know Your your justification was lost which is really not really found in the scriptures.
The emphasis is you walked away.
Like you forsaken, you know, I mean like but you would agree that you lost your justification.
If you walk away, I would agree. Well, no, no, I would I no no, I would agree in the secondary sense. In the primary sense according to like just what the scripture constantly says you can say well No, that person walked away.
They they just they choose they chose to go ahead and Apostatize, you know apostasy they just walk away now you could say because they chose to do that. In effect, it costs them to lose their salvation.
Like you could say that part but that little part right there we agree. But it's not anything found to be emphasized in scripture. You know, I mean, here's the problem.
Let me let me make let me make this let me make this point and I got a follow-up question. This is the problem with the paradigm that I see with eastern orthodoxy and roman catholicism. Is when you smuggle in works then you Are going to get as a result of your works and your faith you're going to get justification.
As you're due i'm saying I don't see grace resting on that. And so I this is this is the pointed question to you.
So romans 5 verse 1 says therefore since we have been justified Erised past tense here by faith. We have peace with god through our lord and savior jesus christ. So Justification is past tense here. And do you once again?
Do you understand justification? To be a past action or an ongoing process.
Now if you're gonna say Strictly justification in the way that you're saying it Then of course, it's a past action. If you're gonna say justification in the same way that you would look at Sanctification glorification things like that, you know the whole shebang especially like sanctification.
Then it's an ongoing process because once again, you know, they were never separated. It was always like together separated. You could definitely look at it. That way. It's easy to see once separated but when you put it all together it even begs the question of Okay.
Well this person is Justified that's great. But this justification is is just a part of an ongoing process of being saved. Well, what do you mean now you're getting a sanctification? So there's something I wanted to go through real quick.
I wanted to go to romans 4 to show you.
I want to I want to ask you this question real quick matt. Okay, and you can ask me and I don't mean this. Because I there's something hold on let me ask. Let me ask you a question real quick so it's it's back still on romans 5 verse 1 so.
One thing we see in the scripture is justification is past tense and it's actually tethered to peace. So since you can lose justification. And you can ultimately lose peace with god. Um, my my question is how can you say you have an ultimate peace with god.
True shalom. When in fact the war between man and god could re-erupt at any moment. Is that truly peace?
Well, I think you're you're reading a whole here's the thing a lot of times when I when I hear people say things The first thing i'm thinking in my mind is okay. Where did jesus paul peter james ever say anything like that in scripture?
Where did they reference that where did they look at faith or justification like that? And the problem is you said, you know, how can you call it true? Ultimate Peace if it could be lost. Yeah notice that they never said you could have true Ultimate peace in the sense that you're saying that once you're saved, you know, that's it and it cannot be lost.
They're not saying that not only that but when they do end up saying hey, you know what? There's some that fell away or there's some that turned away, you know, they don't even say oh and they lost peace with god.
But we all know obviously speaking that you know, it's like duh. Of course, they lost peace with god if that doesn't have nothing that they had to write because that's not what they were theologically emphasizing.
Yeah, and the second part is is that you said well, you know. How can they truly have peace if this war between god and man can re-erupt any time? And once again that kind of makes me think about stuff like well roman 7 Where you could be like paul where you're saved and it's like, you know.
The things I don't want to do I do and the things I should do I don't do that. Oh who's gonna save me from this body of death and or and there are people who still With sin while they're saved but it doesn't mean like oh i'm at war with god, you know I'm at war with my flesh and myself and trying to deny myself.
I see that picture, you know.
But to say.
I'm, i'm, sorry. Good. I'm, sorry.
All right, you're fine. And I just want to make a brief response but then a question so I get how we can be at war with our flesh. But I was talking about the peace there in romans 5 is a peace with god no longer at war with him.
But we can bring that up later. Um romans 2 verse 13, this kind of is in a similar context of what you brought up about how Um, he will render according to each one. Um, According to his works those who by patience and well-doing seek glory honor and mortality.
And he'll give eternal life. I'm not denying that the regenerate those who god has done a mighty work and change their heart will live differently And will receive everlasting life but in verse 13 We read.
For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before god But the doers of the law who will be justified. So my question is does the doers of the law who will be justified? Does that mean by works of law a human being can be justified before god?
Okay, so before I answer that question I want to answer some little things that you you said there. Um, one thing that you said was is that listen, you know, once people are justified they will now. If i'm misquoted you please let me know.
You know once people are truly justified they will go ahead and produce these fruits or they will go ahead and do Something and so once again the issue with that is is that if that's the case then there should be no warning passages.
Like we see in galatians where you have people that are saved, you know. And paul's like look i'm telling you if you do these works of the flesh if you continue to do this stuff Then like you're not going to see the kingdom of god.
Like but the thing is if you if this faith this true faith that you have Like just starts true to like automatically producing stuff. Then there shouldn't even be a warning. Yeah, you know, it seems like there's still a choice on their part to do this.
So I just want to say that right now. Oh, i'm, sorry good.
No, no.
I was saying real quick that that I disagree that there doesn't have to be warning passages, but I agree that um, There will be people that respond to the word of god and they will make a genuine choice whether they want to or not.
But that will give evidence of something that is internal and within so like I said, um, Romans 2 13. So I just want to repeat the question. Um,.
Yeah, so basically so here's the thing a lot of times, um when i'm talking to a lot of hebrews. Um, they'll go ahead and use this about the law. But what you have to understand is is that of course the roman church was written to jewish and gentile christians in the faith.
And of course, we know the story about the jewish christians. They were still a little tight to the law. You know, they didn't let it go quite easily and and paul saw that he was very sensitive to it and so when paul is saying like, you know The doers of the law shall be justified.
He's only talking to the jews. And you read the very next verse. And he sends he ends up saying something about the gentiles. So now suddenly saying something about the gentiles for the gentiles who don't have the law.
Due by nature to things that are contained in the law, you know, so that's what he's saying. So it's really not even about the doers of the law be justified because one, you know. If paul really meant that then it would contradict himself saying well, you can be you know.
You can't be justified by the law. And so all right, he was really saying it.
Okay, that's time right there. All right, matt. You're up for your 10-minute cross-emination jeremiah.
Okay, got it. Um so I want to go back to romans 4 because um, there's something I just wanted to say. And I want to hear what you have to say.
There's this whole emphasis on like works and you know works that are due and you looked up the ergozomai. And how he's using that which makes me want to look up the greek word for good works in romans, too.
I'm curious to see what type he uses for that one. Anyway.
This is what it really is. He's condemning works That you try to go in and hold up a debt to to god and works that you go ahead and try to boast about. Those are the works that are condemned. He never condemned all Good works period.
No, that would contradict what he said in romans 2. And so to show that even more I just want to go ahead and read this here. People don't like to read the other parts of romans chapter 4. Look at what it says.
This is starting from verse 18 About abraham, right? Who did more than have faith check this out hoping against hope? Abraham, you know trusted, you know epistetsuism. That he would become the father of many nations.
He did not weaken in faithfulness When he considered his own body which is already as good as dead Being about a hundred years old and the deadness of sarah's womb. He did not hesitate with a lack of faith in god's promise, but strengthen his faithfulness by Giving glory to god Being fully convinced of what god had promised.
He was able to do. He would go and do and therefore it was reckoned to him as righteousness his faith that he had was reckoned Counted right called righteous by god, you know, and again That's just like what you know imputation means, you know Logizomite it means to call something for what it is when you're mentally saying if I got 10 pennies I'm gonna say oh that's 10 cents.
If you give me a dime questions, let's make sure we're asking questions. Uh to stay at the format.
Okay, I apologize. I apologize. Um, so so basically my my question is this. Um, you even you even read verses 23 and 24 and it talks about the same thing. So my question is this. Yep.
If.
Was paul's.
Belief.
Totally void.
Of.
Obeying god. About this son that he was going to have and doing all the stuff that god told him to do was his faith. Totally void of that. Or was it full of those things?
So there's a lot of things you said a lot there. So I want to respond in light of everything. What is wonderful is that genesis 15 6? We are told by paul that it was his faith that was logizomite. Counted to him as righteousness.
So I actually believe that paul had a faith earlier back in genesis chapter 12. Okay, but then he did do a lot of works and he responded in obedience. But just so we don't get it confused. It was not his works.
Even leading up to chapter 15 that contributed to his justification, but it was still his faith. Right, and so that's really important to the book of romans because before the law came Abraham was already justified.
That's why that's why the book of james tells us that it was fulfilled. We see it from a human vantage point by his works. So the problem i'm seeing with your position Is that you muddy you blur the lines between faith and works.
I'm saying paul tells us that is the basis of our Justification now that justified faith that is alone will always produce works. But we have something to boast about if we have anything to bring before god in terms of our works.
So yeah, absolutely abraham worked, but that didn't Justify him before god. That's what he says early in the chapter.
20 he says that works didn't justify him before god, you know, he says. He says that early in the chapter. Chapter of what?
Right, so verse two says for if abraham was Justified by works. He has something to boast about but not before god and then he uses the word er gods am I. I mean, so this is the whole point. If you say that his faith and works earned his justification I'm saying that totally flips paul's argument on its head.
Okay, I see. So one thing I did want to say is Is that. And this is the deeper part. Even though his belief is being emphasized and this goes right back to what i've been saying from the beginning. If it was written in genesis that abraham Never ended up obeying god.
He did the exact opposite. Um, it just whacks worse and worse. Would the writer even have written. And abraham believed god and it was reckoning. Would he even write that. About that as a conclusion. Would he even write that if abraham never?
Sure. Yeah. Yeah.
Hypothetically. No if abraham was, you know an unregenerate man and when nothing to do with the god. It would not have been written. But what is so wonderful is that paul gives us divine? Interpretation of genesis 15 verse 6.
So we know that it was on the basis of faith. That he was justified and not by ergadzima. Not by a works that's looking to receive something in return. The view that says your faith and works together.
Is what justifies us before god? Well, you're getting justification as a result of something that you do and paul is saying all men stand condemned by our works. But it's those who have faith. And I believe that there's nothing good in man that could conjure up enough faith.
In order to be made right with god god would have to do a supernatural work within us. And change our heart change our minds change our desires to look to the savior jesus. And that is a gospel of grace.
That is a gospel. That's the antithesis Of works, so I think you probably agree with a lot of that then.
Okay, and so again. That's the part where I keep on hammering it and i'm just going to hammer it just one more time now that we're here again. Again, look at verse two. It says. For if abraham was justified by.
Works.
He has something to boast about but not before god and yet in james it says That abraham was justified by works. You know and he also says just justified by works but not. Yeah, just a moment and so. If you don't want any contradiction you have to once again Look at what paul means when he says the types of works.
He's talking about works of the law. Which was throughout chapter three. He's also talking about works that you actually boast about. He's talking about works that you go ahead and hold it to god as due as a debt.
These are things that that that paul not paul. These are things that abraham never did with his works. The only works that are consistent are the ones in romans chapter two. If you say that, you know that it is what you're saying that once again, you're going to contradict romans chapter two.
Where he says that hey, you know people seek, you know Immortality by good works and and honoring and things like that and also going to contradict Um james chapter two and so that's like the issue that I always end up seeing, you know, okay.
So I just want to know so.
Two major points for one Romans is talking about a justification before god. He says in Romans 3 verse 20 for by the works of law. No human being will be justified in his sight. Romans 4 verse 2 says for if abraham.
For if abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about but not before god now in james chapter 2 He's talking about a vindication before men. That's why you see this person-to-person dialogue in verse 18.
He says show me your faith. We we are justified by works before men, but our works never justify us before god. So that's that's the first thing I want to talk about and let's let's hypothetically grant that abraham did works that.
That weren't boast worthy. Okay, is he going to gain justification as a result of that? Your view would say yes, and i'm saying there's no way you can do any types of works That's worthy of boasting or not.
But if you get something as it's due then it contradicts paul. We can see is being used in terms of transaction. So we need a pure righteousness that's not our own to cover us on our account. That's what jesus was ultimately getting at by dying on the cross, so.
Uh, okay, does that make sense the point about doesn't really matter in terms of our works.
Yeah, it does one thing. I did want to lay emphasis on was two things. One when you talk about um, you know before men and before god and the key question is Who is doing the justifying? You know is it men that you're getting all your praise and justification from.
Or is it god? And that was the emphasis when he ended up saying that abraham was justified now. Obviously if abraham was justified by works as james 2 says There's only one person that can do that. That's romans 3.
He is just and the justifier of those who go ahead and believe. Of course faith without works is dead, you know, and that was a harmony that i'm always saying scriptures with that. I know there's an emphasis on belief and i'm not i'm not denying it at all.
But to take belief. And go ahead and push it to the exclusion of what you see in romans 2 or james 2. And try to weasel it in and say well, it's just talking about before men and not before god, but then who's the justifier?
I'm, weaseling it in that was.
You know, no not weaseling. I'm, sorry, I didn't mean to say I know I'm just kidding. No, no, no, I was.
Yeah, do something. All right guys, that's uh, that's time right there. That concludes the cross-examination portion of this debate. So now we're going to transition to closing statements and after that we have some q and a from audience or audience.
Get those questions in and so you guys will be able to tackle them. That said jeremiah you're up for your five minute closing.
All right. Thank you. Barlan. So i'm just reflecting on our dialogue that we just had and It really it hurts my heart to see that it's so easy to try to blur the lines between faith and works. When you listen to Paul in romans chapter 4 listen to him again for if abraham was justified by works.
Then he has something to boast about so works. Immediately you could say i'm glad I made the right decision. I'm glad I put my faith in the right thing. Anything that you do would warrant boasting. But not before god for what does the scripture say?
Abraham believed god and it was la god's of mine counted to him as righteousness. Now to the one who works his wages are not counted as a gift. As is due the problem here is works are being used in a way to get something.
As a result of that Matt's position is that yeah, you have to have faith and your works and i'm saying the problem is already apparent. That you're going to receive justification as a result of something that you do.
But paul says to the one who works his wages are not counted as a gift. So it's no longer of grace. Romans 11 verse 6.
Says.
For if if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works. Otherwise grace would no longer be grace. If we are saved by grace then works play no part in our justification. Paul goes on to say and to the one who does not work.
It has nothing to do about boasting. But if you're doing something externally to get something in exchange. Then you've earned that. But to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly.
It's his faith that's counted to him as righteousness. So when I was talking with matt something that he seemed to conflate Is belief which could be understood as just mere intellectualism knowing facts.
That's not what paul's talking about here. It's pistis. It's firm trust. That's what justifies us before god. James chapter 2 verse 14 says if someone says they have faith. Um, can their can their faith save them?
Well, if you just merely say you have faith, but you deny the faith with how you live. Well, of course that doesn't save you. Even human beings to the tangible eye can see that that is a dead faith. That's actually no faith at all.
So in my closing minutes here, I just want to say the wonderful thing about romans chapter 4. Is that we read that abraham who was before the law was justified on the basis of faith. And then it's wonderful because paul goes into quoting david's 32nd psalm.
Um david was under the law and he said blessed are those who lawless deeds are forgiven. Whose sins are covered blessed is the man against the lord will not count his sin. So clearly this is the legal terminology again, and I know that matt doesn't accept the legal courtroom and Talk of paul, but he's he's quoting from the greek septuagint.
It's clearly understood that these are legal forensic terms meaning that god declares one to be righteous on the basis of their faith apart from works and the neat thing is is that's Always been the method of salvation even with abraham that was before the law.
This is even the case with david who was under the law and this is the case for christians as well and so Matt was just about to read the passage earlier and I was like man. I can't wait to really emphasize this later.
Listen to how paul concludes romans chapter 4. That is why abraham's faith was counted to him as righteousness. But the words it was counted to him was not written for his sake alone. But it was for ours also for christians those of us that Live after the law's fulfillment.
It will be counted to us who believe in him who is raised. Raised the from the dead jesus our lord who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification. And I love how the apostle paul begins romans chapter 5 upon that basis of our justification.
We can have peace with god. Therefore since we have been past tense justified by faith. Then we have peace with god through our lord. Jesus christ so we can have true peace We can have everlasting life and we can know that and if we could lose eternal life.
Then it would not be eternal life. So praise god that we can be saved and have assurance of that salvation based on the finished work of jesus. Thank you.
All right, thank you. Jeremiah, all right. Matt you're up for your five minute closing.
If we could lose eternal life It would not be eternal life. I'm gonna Give him the benefit of the doubt that what he said was. You know, maybe that's not what he was trying to emphasize or truly say. Because that would mean that you know any kind of eternal life or things like that is based on us.
It's based on whether we receive it or not. No eternal life is objective. It's there. Whether we cross into it or not does not determine whether it's eternal or not. It's going to be eternal with or without.
I'm going to go in and read something here because. This basically got into what this what actually happened was what I thought would happen. That we would get into imputed righteousness, which is a whole separate debate, but it's kind of related.
I want to read this from robert dabney's systematic theology chapter 23. This is what it says. Sometimes it is evident that the thing imputed Is that which is actually done or personally belongs to the person to whom it is reckoned or set over.
This is what turnton calls imputation loosely. So-called sometimes the thing imputed to or was done by another as philemon's 1 8 or romans 4 6. This is the imputation which takes place in the sinner's justification it may be said without affecting excessive subtly of definition that by imputation of christ's righteousness We only mean that christ's righteousness is so accounted to the sinner.
As that he receives thereupon the legal consequences to which it entitles. In accordance with second corinthians 5 21 as well as with the dictates of sound reason. We regard it as the exact counterpart of the imputation of our sins to christ.
When we attempt to prove this imputation We are met with this assertion by armenians. And theologians of the new england school that there is no instance in the whole bible of anything imputed. Except that which the man personally does or possesses himself.
So that there is no scriptural warrant for this idea of transference of righteousness as to its legal consequences. We point in reply to flamen 1 8. And romans 4 6. Now, why did I read that? Because this guy is acknowledging that there were other people around in his day saying We hear what you believe about this imputed righteousness transfer and this and that but we look in the scriptures and that ain't nowhere.
Now, of course, he did go to the old testament to use a statuagent to try to find all the legal areas. But once again, the problem is is that it is what this thing means if it means that it's kind of a legal thing.
Then it should not have examples that don't have anything to do with legality again. It literally just means you have a mental image of what you're perceiving. That's what reckon is. It's no different than counting money.
Two three four you're not counting something that isn't there. That's why god saw abraham's faith. And counted it as righteous. In other words, he said oh look, oh that's righteous. That's like me looking at 10 pennies and saying oh, that's 10 cent.
Or is it 10 pennies? Well, it's both. I just still call it 10. It's still 10 cent. Well, it's not a dime. Right, but it's equivalent to a dime. It is 10 cent. I'm seeing i'm calling it as it is as we say today and that's all he did, you know.
Um, there is no transference. He read that in the scripture there's nowhere you find that. And so another thing that I also wanted to read here.
Is.
Where was it? I made an emphasis in the beginning.
Sanctification justification things like that were not separate, but they were very fluid. When you read romans chapter 6 verse 7 There's no way around this. In the kjv it says for he that is dead is freed from sin.
But you look at you know earlier english translations like duet reams and it says for he that is dead is justified from sin. If you read roman chapter 6 He's talking about baptism. He's talking about people who are already in christ, but he's using the word justify in a sanctificational way.
That's the biggest no-no. Of it all if there really are separate things. You know, and so when I say that well if it's all together then faith alone is false then yes. Then that does mean that faith alone is false because by the end of the day.
Just like I read in matthew 25 and the other judgment passages that I didn't get to read, you know revelation 22 Matthew 12 and all the rest of the judgment passages that say look. You're going to be judged by your works by the deeds that you've done in your body on the earth.
That's where i'm going to judge you by and then after that. It'll be deciding whether you go to heaven or hell. I can't put all that together and say oh, it's just faith alone. It's almost like this. This is something I thought about a while back.
It'd be like me saying i'm gonna give you a ticket to kennywood. Kennywood is like a theme park where we have here in pittsburgh I'm gonna give you a ticket to kennywood and the moment I give you this ticket you're gonna have fun.
Two people get the ticket. One person says hey you said that I would have fun.
That's time right there. All right, guys, uh, we are now going to transition to the q a of this debate. So we're going to jump into these questions real quick. We have a whole bunch of them. I got some super chats to get to as well.
All right, it should be popping up here at the bottom of the screen. And there it is, all right, this is. Thank you for the super chat jen and I appreciate you. This question for you jeremiah. Why say faith alone if works.
Qualify faith as true or false faith if works. If works enter at all even to qualify then faith isn't alone.
Well, I just want to respond with.
Faith and works are related to one another but faith produce works. There's a logical progression when you have a conviction. When your will is moved and you love something something's going to happen as a result of that.
I mean we could go into the depths of what james 2 is is really talking about there and then paul makes the point. Don't get it confused if you ever bring your works into the table. It's your due. And it's no longer on the basis of grace.
So paul is just saying look it's the internal faith that justifies us. And that justified faith will produce works. That's why we got to see the legal aspect and the relational aspect. But understanding that our justification was never by something that we did by our works because those are filthy rags the scriptures tell us.
All right, matt. What are your thoughts?
Romans 11 6 but if grace but if by grace. It is no longer by works or otherwise. Grace wouldn't even be grace. What does that mean? That means when god chooses to go ahead and save somebody. It's because it's the grace that actually does the saving period.
That's why I said before that yes, we can do good works. I mean, that's great, but they don't produce grace in and of themselves. No grace comes from God now who he gives it to well, you know that all depends that you know god chooses to give his grace to those who what who believe.
And also go ahead and do the works that come with that faith. That's what he chooses to do, you know. And so when I look at that that lets me know. That it is not works that save. It's grace that saves and that's all he was trying to get the jews to realize because they were so Caught up on their works.
They thought the works in and of themselves like oh god you owe me this and no like that's that's Not how it works. Yeah, you do good works, but no christian is over here saying oh i've done these good works and I'm, all good, even though god is gonna judge my works.
To see if you know, it's it's fit for him, which is the reason why I don't trust in my works. I hope. You know, I believe you know. Not in my works, you know, i'm hoping that god will be pleased, you know, yeah, i'm not hoping in my works.
You see that so that that's what he's really saying, you know, but the jews just didn't get that. It just didn't get it. And that's the reason why he spoke the way he spoke.
All right. All right. Just a reminder for both of you. How long do we both? Both of you get one minute each to respond to the question. Uh, so just remember that. All right. Okay, i'm sorry my next question another super chat here.
Thank you luther. I appreciate the super chat and the question is If we are saved by faith alone How do you understand the warning passages parables and god judging our works on judgment day in scripture?
I believe this is for you jeremiah.
And let me start. So the warning passages are wonderful because the regenerate People of god will look at that and fear will strike our hearts. And we will desire to do good works that god has begun in us.
And we look at the wonderful paradox in scripture where Yes, we are making decisions from our viewpoint. But philippians 2 tells us that it is god who is willing and working in us. So when we see that we are working out our sanctification We understand with looking at all the scripture.
This isn't the initial point of justification. But this is that point of sanctification and it's scripture that utilizes different words for us to understand the different Aspects of salvation. So we can't just look at salvation as an umbrella term.
All the time paul talks about justification. And glorification in romans 8 he says is after we die. So that would be my response mom.
All right, matt. Any thoughts?
I I really don't have much thoughts about his his question. Um, just just being honest.
Okay, fair enough. All right. I have another super chat here. Thank you. Jed and I appreciate you once again for the super chat. This is for you jeremiah. Can you exegete romans chapter 6 verse 3 to 7?
Verse 7 where water baptism is linked to Yucca. Cow, I believe that's how you pronounce it. I messed up my greek man justification and. That's.
Said again Dikaio.
Dikaio there it is man. My greek is jacked up. Uh in the greek as well as the instrumental meaning of being united in christ.
All right. Uh, yeah, I didn't see water in the passage.
I know he he assumes that into the text. But what paul when he's talking about do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into christ? Jesus were baptized into his death. Of course, this is a spiritual baptism the moment that we were united with christ.
I would challenge matt and whoever else show me in the context where there's water baptism here. Let's go to the clear passages that tell us that water is there and I would say yes, that is a water baptism.
But what paul is doing is he's giving us the doctrine behind water baptism. So what he's talking about is being united with christ. It doesn't say water baptism plays a part in being united together with christ.
What unites us together with christ legally is our faith? And then absolutely we should in obedience respond to that faith with water baptism. That's what christians ought to do.
All right, uh. Matt. Any thoughts.
There is something Behind that water. And you know what i'm going to say. It's the spirit. You know he that is you know, uh, what is it? He is believes that that has to be saved. You got john 3 where it says that you know.
He that is born of the water and the spirit. Will go ahead and enter and see the kingdom of god, you know, of course born again. Hail agencia regeneration. That's the reason why when paul wrote to titus he said well per se about a washing in the water.
Regeneration. And so the reason why is because it's not that baptism in and of itself. That we're depending on. No it is because it's the means of grace that god uses and god decides to say hey I want you to do this ritual because it speaks a lot about me and i'm going to put my grace in it.
Then that says a lot about me as god because this is what you mean to me you're a born again child. So I want you to go in water and up the water and there's something that's going to happen to you not because of the water.
But because of my grace, but this is the way I am salivatingly expressing myself to you as god between me and my child. Like that's the reason why people they miss that, you know. But back in the first century like none of this stuff was an issue until the 16th century.
You know, I could be wrong but that's just the way I see it through ancient eyes.
All right. Another super chat coming at me. All right. Thank you. Jedidiah for another one. This is for you. Jeremiah. Uh first timothy 316 paul uses decacal for jesus resurrecting. Uh, such was not a mere declaration, but he was made such.
Does this not show. Paul use it in a transformative sense.
So I didn't get to first timothy 316 my my initial thought is Absolutely. Jesus. So how did he say it. Paul used it in a transformative sense? I believe that jesus completely submitted himself to the father's will he consecrated himself.
He said in john chapter 17. And this is this is what this whole conversation misses. Is that jesus accomplished what we could not accomplish. So um, yes, you see jesus is sanctifying work of being obedient to the law and dying a Substitutionary death on the cross.
I wish we could have gotten more into that how isaiah 53 uses that that terminology. About how we can receive that on our behalf. But yes, I want jesus's perfection Accredited to my account account and that will transform my life beginning with the initial point of regeneration.
Um, yeah before I even say any thoughts, yeah, I did want to say that yeah, I was gone because The dinner that I smelled from my wife smelled so good. I had to go and get up and kiss her twice. I'm, sorry, you know, you probably got the same effect man, you know, you're five years in um.
Yeah, absolutely. Basically. So you have decayo for Jesus's resurrection, um, was it a declaration, you know, and The whole thing is this. My whole response is Are we declared righteous by god? Or are we made righteous by god?
If you say you know what we're declared righteous, but maybe later on somewhere in sanctification were made righteous. Then that lets me know the purpose of being declared righteous.
If we're just saying we're made righteous And yet we see all this declare declare declare stuff. Then that lets me know that the bigger emphasis is always the latter. Which is what to be made righteous.
God is not just going to go ahead and declare someone righteous and all of a sudden They're they're not they're not righteous, you know, that would pretty much kind of contradict, you know a whole reckon thing.
Um, so that lets me know that god wants to actually make you righteous too. Is that that's my whole response to it? I think there's one thing that's being emphasized and and another that's not but the bible's over emphasizing it.
It's like.
Hey.
Why are you why do you keep laughing at me?
I don't know man. I'm, sorry.
All right, all right, so we go just Transition. We've got another question for you and jeremiah. I'm getting super chats and they're all for you. So.
Don't. Oh my god I get no love.
Now this is from gabely he just gave a super chat so I want to honor this super chat by posting this question. Uh, so this for you. Jeremiah, uh was christ's human will predestined to obey the father or was his human will exempt?
From the predestination apply to the human race.
How does that apply to our debate? No, i'm just kidding. Yeah, right.
It's a super chat. It's a super chat. I got a hook. I know.
That is okay.
Great question and I want to say I don't understand the inner workings of god's omniscience. Um omnipotence and all and omnipresence. But i'm reformed so I have in my mind the highest view of god's sovereignty.
I believe that god has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass that would include Jesus's humanity his every step Everywhere that he was going to go and what he was going to do. So In one sense, I believe that it's all determined beforehand.
I believe that god Had perfect knowledge of what every single molecule in this universe was going to be. And he chose that particular world and it's going to happen exactly how god Knew it before the foundation of the world.
So yeah, even christ's humanity would have been Fully known by the triune god, which me and matt would be both trinitarian.
All right matt. Any thoughts. Yeah, i'll just cut to the the core of it.
When it comes to there's nowhere in scripture where it says that god decrees. Everything that comes to pass the closest that you get is I think it's somewhere in ephesians where it says that God, basically, um, he works all things according to the count.
Um to the counsel of his will. You look at that. Okay, so he has to work all things to the counsel of his will. Well, I guess if he has to do that, then let's just know that if he just lets his hands free.
What ain't getting to the council of his will. No, he has to work. Things the council of his will that let's know that those people are got some independence going on. So god's got to do things. Second thing is the counsel of his will.
We all know that in kings there was you know council before god. Hey, hey, this guy is is a little sinful. What should we do. One angel said this? And another angel said that like there was this council going on so what is the council of god's will.
It's not the decree of god's will or the no, it's a council of his will which really sounds like something that judges do. You know, um, so when I look at that, I can't see God decrees all things come back like the the language ain't there like it's just not there.
They just read it and it sounds right. But when you slow it down and break it down, it's like wait a minute.
That's.
That's not saying that you know, but that's just why I said.
All right, and I have another super chat here from jenna die. Again. Appreciate you man for the super chat. Jeremiah. Why say baptism is a work when titus 3 -5 says the bath of regeneration? That is baptism is not a work which merits salvation as a wage.
I'm so glad. Thank you. Jedidah for bringing up titus 3 -5.
I want to talk about the context that um. That the washing here Is not talking about baptism. I wish somebody would show me in the context that it's talking about water or it's talking about baptism. The verse says god our savior appeared.
He saved us not because of works done by us in righteousness. But according to his own mercy by the washing and regeneration renewal of the holy spirit the holy spirit Transforms our heart and cleanses us.
That is a work that he does not by anything that we do. This is not talking about baptism and I can prove that from the immediate context. And the canonical context impossible. Paul is clear. It's not that works that we do because that would allow us to boast but it's by faith.
That is what Justifies us before god. So that washing there is a spiritual cleansing done by the holy spirit. That's what titus 3 -5 is talking about.
Yep.
Once again, do you notice something interesting? Now paul heightens it he says We're saved but don't get it wrong. It's not by our works That are done in Righteousness now dang like now it's like it's not even like, you know.
Oh, it's these works that you're gonna boast about. No, no. It's the works where everyone gives a thumbs up on and paul still says don't get it twisted. That's not what saves us and that's the same thing that everyone else in the early church has been saying.
I keep saying it works in and of themselves. Don't save. They don't even produce grace. You know what I mean you you do them in righteousness and you do it unto god or unto christ. Just like in matthew 25 you do these things unto me you do it to them like it's out of service.
It's out of righteousness, but that's not what saves you, you know, but of course god is gonna go ahead and save those who believe. Save those who serve him and he says that the judgment passes. But yeah, when it talks about uh baptismal regeneration there it's playing the passage the same word the greek word is always used for water baptism.
I don't know what else to say. You know, I think that's playing and plus a link regeneration with it, which is consistent with john 3 if you're born.
Of the water.
And the spirit. You could see the kingdom of god. Like I. I look at all that cheddar. I can't think of myself like no, that's not what it really means. It's hard for me to. Maybe i'm blind. You know, you continue to laugh if you want to.
Maybe i'm blind. Help me, you know, I like that. I like.
I like the the cheddar the cheddar on that cheddar.
You want bro? You know.
Good stuff guys. All right, so matt. This is gonna make you happy. I got no super chat, but this time it's for you, man. So, uh, thank you for the super chat. Appreciate it. Thank you josh for the super chat.
Question for matt. If regenerate man can fall away and lose their salvation. How do you explain romans chapter 4 verse 8 when paul says blesses the man to whom the lord would not impute sin?
Well.
Who is a man that he's not gonna go to impute sin to? Obviously, those are people who are saved and who are repentant and you know. He's giving them mercy to like unless i'm reading it wrong. Like I would think that that's the only kind of people that god would choose to be like, uh, you know what?
This person's repentant, you know, i'm not gonna impute that sin to them. Yeah, they they did sin, but you know what? You're like i'm gonna treat them differently because they're repenting, you know, psalm 51 which is basically, you know.
Where paul's repentance thing comes from? I mean, uh, uh, david's repentance thing comes from. I'll know about david. Uh, david basheba. So that that's what I would say, you know, um in terms of regenerate man.
Falling away. You don't even find those terms in the new testament. Generate man like that like just see how to describe his believers falling away. Like that's what paul says they fell away. And what does that mean?
That means that they apostatize a donkey most they decided to just walk away. That's what they decided to do, you know. Um, so yeah. You can say that they lost their salvation. Yeah, technically it did but the thing that bible emphasizes is that they walked away from christ, you know.
And so yeah, um, that's the way I see both those.
Issues.
All right, jeremiah. What are your thoughts?
Well, I just want to first say that this josh gibson fellow sounds like a very intelligent man and I would love to meet him one day. Um, but I agree with his point that he's getting he's talking about the regenerate man.
The regenerate man has a new heart and new desires and Look what the apostle paul quoted from psalm 32. God is not going to impute his sin to his account. I say impute because he uses the same term logizima, so.
Um, you notice though the unregenerate man he is in his sin. So when we start talking about him being unregenerate we're talking about his innermost being does not love the things of god and so that's why the scripture tells us that um, We we do not seek god on our own.
We we are not righteous. There's none good. No, not one. And by the way, I know josh gibson. He's a really good friend of mine. So thanks buddy for for reaching out.
Yeah, his name sounds familiar.
All right guys, uh another question here. It's from robert. Hey robert, oh man, yes, it's for jeremiah this one's for me. A legal declaration is based on a reality example given blood guiltness and leviticus 17 1 through 4.
How would to support the reformed concept of imputation?
Yeah, so when when we quote from leviticus 17, and by the way, thank you robert. Um, I remember him from our last debate and we've been able to connect a little bit and we have we have a good friendship.
So how i'd respond to you robert is when you look at leviticus 17 The bigger emphasis here and I hope this isn't bypassing your question. But I think this is relevant to your question, but life is in the blood.
That's the whole point of that passage. It's building up saying that in order for us to have life or our life comes from the blood. And i'm reminded of the imagery in genesis chapter three where god Sacrifices an animal to cover Adam and eve so we see the first type of substitution.
And we should have died. We would have died all in adam in the garden. But um by god's mercy, he provided a substitute. Something as innocent as an animal was sacrificed on our account. So I think these legal decorations can happen when there's a substitute that is made.
Thank you robert.
All right, any thoughts matt?
Not familiar with leviticus 17 1 through 4. Just going to be honest, but just to kind of tackle this question I guess like like I said, I I read the reform. Well parts of the reform concept of imputation and a big emphasis is on you know transfers.
And.
Again. Every time I look I don't see transference. I like someone to point me somewhere. I always see Counting. You know. This is what I see. I'm gonna call it this this is what I see here. I'm gonna call it that i'm gonna count this count that one two three four like like you're saying what something is.
Based on what you're saying count like that's what it's saying. So yeah, you have you know blood gilding says. You know if you say it's a legal decoration There's actual blood then god is acknowledging.
Can I make another comment marley? Sure.
Sure, go for it jeremiah.
And this is more back to robert. I would just look to the whole levitical system. Remember, they they would send a goat out into the wilderness, right? This was typology about jesus taking away the sins of the world.
So I and I appreciate matt and you know him articulating his position. But transfer is all throughout the scripture. We see blood atonement being made on our behalf and jesus is the culmination of all that.
All right. Another super chat coming at you. Thank you. Jedidiah once again for our super chat jeremiah. This is for you. John 15 says in christ not in the church since reformed theology says only the elect can truly be.
Quote unquote. In christ. How does that square?
Yeah, so that's a great question. But the first thing I would point anybody point out in john 15 is the fact that he's using imagery. He's using parabolic language. So we got to look for the common property and he is saying someone who doesn't produce fruit.
Is evidence that they are not really in him now in the parable. He's using a tree so a tree is going to have bad branches and good branches. The bad branches don't produce food fruit. They're cut off and they're thrown into the fire.
He's not saying you're losing your justification or salvation. But since it's a parable, we got to look to more clear didactic texts and and staying within the context of john's gospel. Jesus says clearly earlier in john 6.
Uh verse 30 verse 37, he says all that the father gives to me will come to me. That's going to happen. And then he says I will by no mean cast them out. So is he going to cast somebody out or is he not john's not going to contradict himself?
All right matt. Any thoughts.
Yeah, um too many thoughts. I'll try to be brief. So for one he's right, you know the way that he's using the way he's asking about in christ. Was the same ancient first century way that they looked at, you know in christ.
Um in terms of just the jews, you know, they were in the the old covenant. They were in The nation and in romans 11. Yeah, they were in there. But yet some didn't believe they were broken off. You know gentiles are grafted in because they believed and guess what if they did not continue in goodness.
Once again that that's that's more like a Work something you do and live by then you were you were cut off and broken off, you know. When you look at john 15 look the only way that you are Truly not in the faith and things like that and you know that you're out is because well, just look at a passage.
You're not producing fruit. Father sees you're not producing fruit. And so he just breaks it. He breaks you off. And then jesus just says look if you don't remain in me. Then this is what's going to happen to you.
So there's nowhere in the passage where it says, you know, man, if you're really in the faith, you know. You're really gonna go and if you're like, you don't find those if clauses it's no like no like they're acknowledging.
You're in me. But you got to do this if you don't.
Know.
This is gonna happen, you know, that's what you find versus What you whatever it is you've been taught in reform theology. When I look at that stuff I'm, like yo like one of these things got to give. You know and that's that's just me being honest.
And plus, you know christ is the church because he's ahead of the church. So he's he's you know, that's the bride. I just can't see how you separate, you know christian church like that, you know.
All right, all right. All right. This questions, uh, no super chat and jeremiah. It's for you again, man. All right, that's for luther. Thank you luther for the super chat. Appreciate you man. If righteousness is merely imputed.
If righteousness is merely imputed is god lying when he calls a man righteous. Also was enoch righteous his or one his or one of imputation.
Okay, can you hear me. Okay, can you hear me?
So i'll start my timer. I just want to start by saying I believe in what's called triple Imputation. Now what that means is that we all died in adam. We've we've by imputation. God has declared the whole human race.
As.
Sinners and the thing is we desire sin. We inherited that sin nature. So we desire that but we can receive the imputation by christ when we put our faith in him. So that's that double amputation with him.
I know I said triple imputation. But I at least affirm double imputation, right? I guess that that's that original starting point, but to go back to the question. Um, god was not lying. He can legally declare us righteous if our sin gets put on the cross of calvary.
And jesus's righteousness covers us. We can be Legally be declared righteous. Okay, it's a legal term. It's like when a married couple. When a couple becomes married, that's a legal status. So we can legally be declared righteous on the basis of faith.
And then once somebody is married, then they go on in relationship in that marriage. Very similar we can be legally declared righteous before god. Now we can walk in that relationship with christ in sanctification.
These terms are huge and real quick. Enoch's righteousness. He would have been saved the same way that abraham was before the law.
Or.
David was under law or christians after the law's fulfillment. So He would have had a legal He would have had a righteousness that's not his own. Does it say that in the old testament. No. But we know that that is the case because of paul's clear didactic teachings.
He is the one that applies genesis 15 -6 in such a way where it can't be misunderstood. Legatum is being used and I like what matt said in terms of a transaction or counting. We can be counted and declared righteous righteous because of a perfect righteousness.
That's not our own. It's like if you have a bank account. And it's it's on empty somebody else comes and puts money into that account. Um into our account. For us, that's the whole point of jesus dying on the cross his perfect righteousness.
He did everything he was perfectly Obedient at every point. We are we're sinful. And so that's why he said to tell us die. It's paid for in full. So that's another thing that I don't really understand why.
You think you can bring your works to the table when jesus did everything that was necessary? I'm, sorry, that was longer than one minute.
All right, uh. Matt. Any thoughts on that?
Sin actually makes you a sinner when you sin. Christ actually makes you righteous and you're saved. Again.
This.
Transference of Christ righteousness to to to mine. He's trading this off like nah, you don't find transference. You find transformation. That's the whole thing that the bible is emphasizing.
God.
Changes not somebody's status. He changes their their their being like it says that we are a new creation in ephesians chapter 2. If we're made sinners Not declared sinners in romans 5 then that something happened and you agree like something happened to our nature or whatever it is corrupted.
Then that means in christ. We were made righteous like Inherently like imparted not imputed not declared like martin luther said. Hey, we're silks and dung covered with snow like no like from within. You know, we're changing the inside out, you know, and and it produces Fruits, right?
You know the good tree from the good root not the the bad one that got good stuff covered. No, no like so that's I keep on saying like when you just just do the study man I might even just show a video after this or something, but look at what it means imputation to count.
Something that you're seeing and you're making a mental evaluation of it. That's what it means you're counting stuff. There's even places where like easel mine and plenty of scriptures over 40 passages where it's used where people are miscounting stuff.
So, what do you do with that like that's all the new testament. You know this stuff is I I really didn't get to get into. But it's because it's a debate not a discussion. But i'm telling you if you look up that word, you're not gonna find this thing about oh I'm gonna transfer and transfer and transfer.
No, you don't find like no i'ma call it as it is. That's just the way it's always been.
Can I ask him a question? Sure. And matt I respect you so much man, I really appreciated our interaction. But is this a fair representation? Yeah, is this a fair representation of what you're saying? If I Love jesus and have faith in him.
And I do Some good works good works not ones like granting your position worth of boasting. But if I do some good works Do I then get? Justification sanctification and glorification as a result of my Faith working in love externally for what I do.
Is that a correct representation?
Not only is it a correct representation it gets into other things that I would love to talk to you about. One of them is a word that's all throughout the new testament, which is Synergy where god and man are like working together.
Another thing is is that you even say you see where jesus says look. If you go ahead and give alms to the poor then, you know, you you are clean like wait a minute. So that's what it means like these good works.
Is what god chooses to funnel his transformative sanctification through. He wants you to go ahead and do something. You know that will be you know deemed worthy of him and that would show a light to the world.
And when you do that, he's going to go ahead and give you his grace that gets you just A little more closer to be like him. A little bit more closer. That's the whole point. You know, we don't do these things these things to be more.
All right. We have a couple more super chats then we're gonna close this thing out. So I want to make sure I get these guys in. Um, this is for you. Jeremiah. Jedidiah is back at you again. Thank you for the super chat.
Jeremiah Jedidiah, I appreciate you. If I have a coin plated in gold and have it legally declared a gold coin. That is a lie and legal fiction. It may actually be gold plated. But the coin is not gold not a gold gold coin.
How is it different with imputed righteousness?
Yeah, the difference is Legatum is a forensic legal term. I think it's strange how matt has Not really even acknowledged that it can be turned if I'm misquoting you here, correct me but I think even matt would agree that To impute could be a legal forensic term.
So that's on the table. And I simply disagree with matt that romans 8 brings in that courtroom terminology who can bring a charge Against god's elect. Nobody can because they're of god and he has declared them.
Just he's the the just and the justifier. So it's not legal fiction. If it's actually a legal judiciary term and you can demonstrate that in the greek septuagint and Exodus chapter 23 Deuteronomy 25 and in the proverbs to count to impute now, he's he's kind of looking he's he's saying it's to Legitimately acknowledge.
Oh, he's he's righteous. Look at all the good works. He's doing Paul is saying you can't Legatum or you can't do Works with a goal in mind in order to be declared righteous. That's why it really It's hard for me to listen to matt say yeah, I represented his position correctly when I said, okay I'm gonna do my faith and my good works.
And i'm gonna get justification as a result. Well, then I earned it. It's my due. It's no longer of grace according to the apostle paul. That's why he said that it must be of faith um, otherwise it's of works he makes that comparison faith and grace go together and Works and it's due go together.
That's why Romans 11 6 talks about how if you bring works into the equation, it's no longer of grace. So going back to the question It's not legal fiction if it's actually a legal term the question that we're talking about is what is the context?
Does the context not only allow for legal terminology, but do we get clues that it's terminology? Yes, it was used in the greek sattuagent look at the context clues that paul is using he's talking about wages.
He's talking about works or gods of mine and he's talking about his due. These are all legal terms.
Yeah, um plenty of them. I'll try to keep them brief brief. That's a that's a perfect example the gold plated coin. We all know martin luther used his dung analogy on snow but you know notice that. From my experience.
I have not heard a lot of reformed people.
Use.
Analogies that are consistent like that, you know because it's like.
What?
I'm, really not changed. I'm, really not different. You know, so they won't use examples like that not even to go on coin not even done. I haven't heard any examples. They'll use a lot of transference.
Well, you know, you know transferring christ's righteousness you and this and that but they won't say like you really haven't.
Gone through.
Even though regeneration is something that You know, it's a real interchange. You're born again. It's a regenerate. You're an interchange like real interchange.
But yet.
I always thought that that was an instrument Of justification that says no. No, you're still the same. You're just legally so and I look at that and it's like no. That's a contradiction. The second thing is is that yeah, it's true that father george Florovsky said that yeah Imputed righteousness is you know a a doctrine of a legal fiction that we should expunge from our thinking.
Um, so it sounds like that's what he's saying. But when I look at the imputed righteousness.
Again.
You can't go to the old testament. And skip out all the other passages that don't even talk about anything legal when they're just talking about. What something is? Or what something is not they're reckoning something that is or reckoning something is not it's not just you know.
Legal passages and again the charge thing in romans 8 again. Is that in a courtroom? Yeah, you could use that charge terminology. But in what context are they using it. Because I could charge somebody.
I don't mean i'm being legal with them. You know, that means i'm being actual with them. I'm just using the word charge. I charge you or basically i'm telling you that this is what you did. The whole emphasis is that but they're making an emphasis on this this legal stuff.
That when you just read the scripture, that's that's not like the narrative of the story of what he's driving to say. You know, I could use elements of anything I want but what do I mean when I tell them.
My narrative like that's what I want you to focus on not. Oh, he uses legal term. Therefore. It's legal. It's like no, no, no, no, no but again, like that's what happens when you continue to go ahead and make an emphasis on things that I really don't see in scripture, you know, especially with abraham.
Can I make a quick comment? And he counted it as righteousness. There was no transference of you know, unrighteousness righteousness. That wasn't there.
So that's why i'm like still a lot of words unless it's something that i'm missing.
Can I say something real quick marlin? Yeah, go ahead. Matt. You'll appreciate this. I don't really like the the The dung analogy that martin luther used either. But I want you to notice this. Even your side would acknowledge that when we're in christ, we're still going to have dung in our lives.
We're still going to sin and yet there is a transformation. You and I have the transformation at a different place in time. I'm saying that the unregenerate man does not seek god. There's none good. There's none righteous.
No one seeks after god, but god changes us. Regenerates us now. We have new desires. Okay, so when he works faith into us and we look to jesus in saving faith and we love him.
We receive his righteousness imputed to us. I know you reject that but i'm just saying Even your side would acknowledge that there is still dung right? There is still sin that we need Sanctification for and I don't think you really believe that we are glorified now.
I wanted to sneak that in there.
Yes, all right. This is our last question of the night. A super chat. And thank you. Once again, josh for the super chat this for you matt. Uh, can you explain? How first john. 219 In its context does not contradict his view.
Okay. Well, let me go ahead and look it up first. John 2.
219.
It says here. Is this what I think it is? They went out from us.
But.
They were not of us. For if they had been of us They would have remained with us. But they went out. What in order to what in order that it might be shown? That all of them are not of us. Now, what does he mean in this passage?
Obviously if you look at all of john's talking about who these people are. You will come to the inevitable conclusion that he's talking about the gnostics. The gnostics were real actual people who believed in some interesting stuff.
And you know from john's experience just like with paul with judaizers, right? They came in spy out the liberty and things like that. Okay. Well john. He has same problem these gnostics he says look if you don't believe that jesus came in the flesh.
You're antichrist. So those are the people that came into the church. Apparently tried to corrupt it. The church said no, we're not having that. And from there they left. That's the crowd that he's talking about.
That's real different from removing that crowd context. And after that i'm gonna place in there like people that Claim that they were saved but all of a sudden they're atheists now no longer saved. I'm gonna place all them people into that context and that's what i'm gonna read it as.
And man, does that verse make sense? What until what you decide to you know, actually entertain or or actually Ask the thought of who is john talking about because if he ain't talking about my group that i'm preaching I can't say that no more.
And I read the crowd and i'm like, wait a minute. He didn't believe christ in the flesh like wait these people once did believe that. These jokers here they never believed it and they were in the church.
They were trying to go and corrupt it and do all these other things. Church said no, but that's what you see you even read some of the early church fathers. They'll talk to you about this this stuff how these people ended up trying to come into church.
That's the context. But if you don't know that then hey. It's it's any man's game to say what john means. And so that that's I think that just that's just plain, you know.
All right, uh, jeremy.
So I just want to say josh gibson my boy right there. And let me say something else matt. You're right. The gnostics did possess the spirit of antichrist. But antichrist presents a true dichotomy. You either had the spirit of christ or you had the spirit of antichrist.
Of course Gnosticism possesses the spirit of antichrist. Guess what? So does all false ideologies and worldviews that deny christ. Jesus said you are either with me or you are against me. This is a true dichotomy and so um first john presents the the true dichotomy as well all throughout first john and I just want to simply point out in 519 of first john he says and we know that we are From god and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
You got those who are of god the children of god, but you have unbelievers the spirit of antichrist. They are of the devil which are the antithesis of who christ is. So yeah, you have a particular group of people the gnostics that are antichrist.
So are the atheists they are antichrist in their own way. But that is the whole world that lies in the lap of the the evil one. So I think this this scripture presents a problem for the worldview that says truly Regenerate born again christians can lose their salvation because john is saying no they will manifest themselves that they are not truly of us.
Why. Because God's children christians those who are born of the spirit. They will persevere to the end.
All right, I actually have one more super chat here. Um. And this would be the last one this come jedediah. And he's uh mad. He's gonna show you some love man. He said what is your what is your take on romans chapter 10 verses 9 through 10?
Oh, man, I grew up on that one, uh sunday school that thou shalt confess in thy mouth the lord jesus. And believe in thine heart that christ has risen him from the dead thou shalt be saved always in my latter.
You know part of my life always notice some interesting things one, uh confess right. Um, that's something that you do, you know, and of course you believe what in your heart that a lot of people try to put all these passages and say Man, your heart is evil and corrupt who can know it blah blah.
Well now all of a sudden well. He's saying look you need to go ahead and believe in your heart just like jesus says in matthew 11 or 10. I think you need to forgive with your heart. So obviously, you know, the heart ain't that bad, you know, um.
Contextually speaking, you know what I mean? You have to look at like what they mean by this. It's not so one-dimensional flatline and from there. Um, you know, it says in believing heart that christ wrote has risen from the dead then thou shalt be saved.
That's definitely true. This is another thing. I wanted to emphasize in the in the debate dialogue. Why is it? That when I find passages about justification it talks about You were saved. But then when I find passages about sanctification.
It'll talk about your what? being saved first corinthians 15 and all these other ones that I Can't pull up right now. I turn my phone off a little bit and then you know glorification will be saved. Right adoption we will be adopted if faith alone is true.
They should not be talking about sanctification and glorification like that at all. Especially sanctification basically like you shouldn't be talking like that that leave all the saved language in a justification category.
Like but instead they're like no like this this saves you. You know like that so that always has been an issue with me and I can go to all passages like that. Especially when you have the ritual passages baptism or the eucharist, you know.
If you do this, you will live forever. If you don't do this, you have no life in you like Jesus, what do you mean? Like you just said that if we believe in you we'll live forever, you know. But now he's saying some other stuff, you know, so i'm like, oh so there's the means of grace that goes through things that jesus is talking about, you know, so it gets into a whole bunch of other stuff, but That is my issue when I look at faith alone, um, if that makes sense.
All right, uh jeremiah any thoughts.
Yeah, so I just want to say this so it's really clear for the audience sake when you go back to the the golden chain Of redemption go back to romans chapter 8 those whom god justified. Past tense that means from god's perspective.
It's a done deal. Those who are justified are also glorified. It is a guarantee. He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion.
Us people that believe in faith alone that justifies us. Of course, we will be glorified one day because god is doing the work. So that was initially to matt there. And I want to go to the question um for one Great passage just like matt said learn this on sunday school.
And I started thinking about something that is prevalent on the protestant side of things is the sinner's prayer. I believe the sinner's prayer is a work. And a lot of people that really push the sinner's prayer will go to this passage and i'm saying Look what it's actually saying because it's not pushing towards a sinner's prayer.
But if you confess with your mouth that jesus is lord and believe in your heart that god raised him from the dead. You will be saved. Well, what does confessing mean? When you look into the word and the context and all of scripture confessing is much more than saying words.
It's a whole heart transformation. So when you confess something that is a byproduct of what your heart is like. And so confessing is not merely just saying a you know, a set of words, but it's a it's a heart condition.
I know that that's right because of the next verse verse 10 for with the heart One believes that's crucial to my point this whole time because faith is internal and of the heart it's not external works.
But with the heart one believes and is justified. That's the protestant position. I mean, I really do think that is what we are contending for here. And with the mouth one confesses and is saved. It gives evidence of a changed heart and yeah, and we can understand the full range of salvation, which is Justification sanctification and glorification.
It's a guarantee to happen.
All right, um marlon, can can you grace me just yeah, I got it because he responded to me. I just wanted to get one into like Yeah real quick. I always point this out if you look at romans 8. It says and those whom he foreknew.
He also predestined to what be saved. No to be conformed to the image of the sun. He predestined those whom he foreknew to undergo something that. You know is a kind of sanctification. But problem is is that god only does that to people who are you know already saved like, you know.
The faithful ones they already say like they're already in so whatever predestining is going on is Really going on to the people who jump in like i'm gonna predestine you to become more like christ conformed to eminence.
Sanctification this is what's gonna happen to you. I'm predestining you for that. That's what i'm gonna do now. I'm gonna predestine to save you like no like he's predestining christians to go through a beautiful process.
Like that's a gift he has plus when it talks about those whom he foreknew. Contextually speaking. This is paul doing like a backdrop story. He's talking about the faithful jews 11 to romans 11 to god has not cast away his people those who before knew he's telling them he's talking about them.
That's why we're so encouraged. Look at what he did to them. Those whom he predestined he also called those he also called he also justified as he also justified. He also glorified like look at you know, what god did for them.
That's why they're so encouraged, you know further downwards is man. We may be led to buy the sheep to the slaughter, but you know what it is all good. And so that's basically what he's he's talking about that's the reason why this is right before romans 9 which talks about you know, the unfaithful jews and.
It just lines up.
Um, can I get a little bit of that grace?
Hell of a lot of grace man, go ahead jeremiah. Go ahead jeremiah, man.
I'll try to be brief. I will just point out the text does not say Of those of what god foresaw and then all this take place. It's of those whom he foreknew jesus said right when he jesus said Depart from me for I never Knew you this is taught.
You'll appreciate this point. This is talking about a relational Aspect and I think you agree. He completely knows everything before the world began. And this just shows us there there was an intimate relationship for those who are going to be in christ who he knows In an intimate way so for no there doesn't mean just knowledge.
It's almost like for loving of this intimate relationship and i'm saying you can't tether that from all of who god is In his omniscience and his all you know his being everywhere and him being all powerful.
So I didn't want to press too much on that. But I mean, I think that's a crucial point to be made.
Right, right. Those who he foreknew those who he was already in relationship with. You know what I mean, so. Yeah, that's all i'm yeah.
All right, guys good stuff. Appreciate you both very very warming conversation. I appreciate you guys for camaraderie for the uh, the the proper dialogue. I've had some some rough ones in the past week man.
Have some have a couple rough ones, but you guys definitely uh lighten the load there. I appreciate you guys and um,.
Uh matt.
I don't think you got your gift yet. I need an address where I can get that gift to the gift that I sent you got booted back to me. So we'll talk about that after the show and jeremiah. I think you got your gift, right?
I think you got yours, right?
Yeah, where can I order a got the gospel t-shirt. The gospel t-shirt? Oh shirts. I don't know. I ain't got about yet, man.
I gotta gotta work on that production dog.
Good stuff guys. I appreciate you guys. Advertisement.
All right, man. Hopefully we can work something out there. It works out about there, man. But I thank you guys for coming on the gospel truth. I really enjoyed this debate man, and I look forward to doing it again in some time.
Thank you so much marlin. It's been wonderful. It's been wonderful, man. I hope we can continue to reach out to one another and I love you brother and I love talking about god's word.
I will. Same here you. You are my brother from afar. I mean that with all my heart you have an amazing heart and love for christ. I was seeing it and feeling it through everything you were saying presenting.
I'm serious. God bless you and your wife, man.
All right. Thank you. You too. God bless y 'all.
All right. Take care guys. God bless. All right. Another great debate. I appreciate these type of debates. These debates are great, right. Where people communicate and they can actually hear each other.
They can actually deal with the arguments, you know, those are the great debates man. Um, and that's why I like doing this. This this adds to the likability the enjoyment.
Hosting these debates because I get to see two guys come on and Know how to properly deal with the arguments man and know how to attack the arguments instead of attacking a person. You know and that that makes for a great great debate.
I'm, sorry everyone I didn't I wasn't able to get to all the questions. I know we had a lot of questions, but the super chats are coming in and i'm not complaining that's for sure. But the super chats do get priority and um, and so I thank you guys for participating in this debate.
And uh, I just can't close this debate or close the show out without sharing the gospel truth. We talked a lot about imputation and uh how christ if you tell his righteousness was imputed. On those who he called out of sin.
Um, and that righteousness is important, right? I mean that imputation of christ we can't do it on our own, right? We can't work our way to salvation. This is a working that god does alone. Right, and he imputes his righteousness on us.
He bears our sin. All right our he he he takes that sin away from us that we that we are guilty of and and he Imputes his righteousness on us and we can't and that's and that's the gospel. That's the gospel truth.
You know what? I mean? That's the core aspects of the gospel that that's why as believers. We need to be thankful For what christ has done. Um him choosing us electing us and calling us out our sin when he didn't have to we're all enemies of god.
Um, we are all hostile towards god and it's by his grace and his grace alone. That he chose to save some of his enemies and bring them out of their sin. All right. So I I just want to emphasize the importance of the gospel.
And I pray that if you're listening to this this this debate and perhaps god can use this debate as a means to bring you to his salvation. And um, I pray that this was a helpful debate and it was a blessing to you and um.
And that's it. That's all I wanted to say about the gospel man. So just believe on christ. I pray that god does an amazing work in your heart and that god will transform your heart and that you will come to christ and um.
You know as always man, you know, I just want to encourage you to like and follow please. Like and follow the gospel truth. Subscribe. Please subscribe support the ministry at the very least by hitting that subscribe button.
Um, if you don't plan on doing any other form of support just support the ministry by hitting that subscribe button. That said I do want to get out of here. Go ahead and enjoy the rest of the evening with my family.
I thank you for joining me on this episode of gospel truth. May god bless you. May god keep you.