Search results

Please clarify.

What I've been saying is that it is God's righteousness that justifies--the first justification, the ongoing justification, and the final justification--and yet it is not something that does not involve activity on our part, and it is wrong to say "I was justified by God's righteousness, not my...

For which assertion?

Yep, because there is no goodness in our flesh (Ro 7), we can't fulfill the good Law (Ro 7) if we're in the flesh, or walking after the flesh, but those in the spirit (Ro 8:9) fulfill the Law when they walk after the spirit (Ro 8:4), because God is full of the goodness which His Law requires...

I have meant that, in Romans, we can't be justified by "a righteousness of our own", but by "grace"/"God's righteousness', and, yet, final justification is still only for doers of good (2:6-16), and daily justification still apparently hinges on doing good (1:17, 4:12, 14:5, 23), therefore doing...

No problem

I'm saying it's wrong to say how we live after being saved cannot/does not affect our justification.

I'm saying in Romans grace and faith connote God's righteousness, and man walking in God's righteousness, and works connotes man's righteousness (eg Ro 8:3 the Law relies on flesh)--to say that Christians must walk in faith to be justified is not a violation of "saved by grace".

What we do as Christians is done by grace through faith, and falls under the category of "God's righteousness", (eg Paul says "I was abundant in labors above them all yet not I but the grace with me")... therefore, they are not "a righteousness of my own", they are grace, not works. When...

For now, I stand by everything I've said--the word "works" has been misunderstood, because "works" pertains to "a righteousness of my own", not to "God's righteousness" which is "from faith to faith", thus the idea that "we are not saved by works" does not encompass how we walk after we are...

You are welcome to attack any of the arguments I've made proving works has been misunderstood.

Christ says He will lose none, etc. From God's perspective, you were once a sinner, and He sent Christ, and gave you faith, and now you are a saint. He "forgot" your sins (Jer 31:34). Which of those perspectives of God is true?

Yes, this thread is about reconciling all those Scriptures together with all the other Scriptures that seem to say we cannot be lost. I literally just admitted that, yes, from one perspective, they were "truly" saved (not a false salvation), but, from another, they never were.

From one point of view, yes, they were saved; from another perspective, no, they were never saved. Not at all. I don't believe in that.

I am "Oddly OSAS"

Hmm Jesus says "disciple the nations teaching them to observe all I have commanded you", so it applies to us. Lol Matthew is in the NT. Paul agrees with Jesus, and they both teach God forgets righteousness. You have no answers, just empty assertions. No thanks.

Matthew 18 (parable of the unforgiving steward) debunks that nonsensical misunderstanding. It proves God forgets that you had Him as your righteousness (Jer 23:6) if you fall away.

God forgets righteousness.

The context does indicate that--sin can harden the heart, and cause people to "fall away" due to the hardening to unbelief. People in the world don't "fall away" from the living God. God's people fall away from Him. And yes that's exactly what the statement means, in context, as explained, but...