For Dallas Willard, Abraham was not “re-justified” in a legal sense, but his justification was progressive and cumulative. Abraham’s faith in Genesis 15 was perfected by his actions in Genesis 22, proving that true faith is always an acting, trusting relationship.
I want to explore the above and the relationship between Justification and Sanctification
Those who agree with Willard or are Catholic or Orthodox please help me to fill in the missing blanks I will have below.
According to Dallas Willard, Abraham’s faith in Genesis 15—credited to him as righteousness—was not a one-time intellectual assent but a profound, growing, and relational confidence in God that matured through active engagement and obedience. Willard viewed justification as a process that connects with sanctification, where faith transforms from simple trust into a life of apprenticeship to God.
Here is how Dallas Willard explains the progressive and cumulative nature of Abraham’s faith:
1. Faith as Active “Trust-in-Action” (Not Just Belief)
Genesis 15 Context: Willard highlights that “Abram believed the Lord, and [He] considered his response of faith as proof of genuine loyalty”.
Active Confidence: This faith is not passive opinion, but reliance on God’s character in the face of impossible circumstances. It was a decision to trust God’s promise over his own current, barren reality.
2. A Progressive, Cumulative Journey (Not Instant Perfection)
The Journey Approach: Willard teaches that Abraham’s faith grew stronger over time. It was not that Abraham was perfect in Genesis 15, but that his faith journey was accumulating.
Justification Conjoined with Transformation: Willardian theology reconnects justification and sanctification, viewing the “reckoning of righteousness” as an ongoing process where the convert is progressively adapted through discipleship to God’s kingdom.
Stages of Growth: Willard outlined stages of the soul’s journey: confidence in God matures into love, followed by obedience and inner transformation. Abraham’s faith grew from hearing to active following (Gen 12) and then to deep covenant trust (Gen 15).
3. The “Indirection” of Spiritual Growth
Discipleship and Formation: Willard emphasized that true faith—like Abraham’s—is developed through training, not trying, and through “indirection”.
Weaving Faith and Action: Abraham’s faith was proven through his actions—a “weaving together of faith and actions” that resulted in his being called a friend of God.
Ontological Change: The “righteousness” counted to Abraham in Genesis 15:6 was a change in his actual, functional relationship with God, which then allowed his life to be progressively transformed into the likeness of God. [
In summary, for Willard, Abraham’s faith in Genesis 15 was the pivotal point in a cumulative journey where trust in God’s promise led to obedience, which in turn deepened his capacity to trust and follow God further (culminating later in the offering of Isaac).
So I think I got it…
What one might see as justification by mere belief
Abraham was already in an interactive relationship with God before He was declared righteous, hence He believed God.
I could be wrong, but if I’m right then that may be why He does not see justification apart from sanctification
This is a really interesting way of looking at it.
I’ve always understood it a bit more simply, that Abraham was counted as righteous because of his faith in Genesis 15, and then Genesis 22 shows that same faith being lived out and confirmed over time.
So not necessarily that he was “justified again,” but that his faith became more visible and real through what he did.
To me, that helps connect justification and sanctification without making them the same thing. One is about being made right with God, and the other is about how that plays out in a person’s life over time.
Howard Thurman’s theology tends to bypass traditional, rigid forensic definitions of justification and sanctification, focusing instead on the practical, mystical experience of inner transformation and alignment with the “Will of God.” For Thurman, salvation is not merely a legal verdict, but the realization of wholeness and personal dignity through an intimate relationship with God, enabling one to live “unconquerable from within”.
Key aspects of Thurman’s view include:
Sanctification as “Getting Used to” God’s Grace: While not always using this specific terminology, Thurman’s emphasis aligns with the idea that sanctification is the process of living into the reality of God’s unconditional love.
Justification through Personal Purpose: Thurman emphasized that personal fulfillment and self-realization are key to salvation, prioritizing individual purpose over external titles or legalistic standing.
The Inward Journey to Wholeness: Thurman viewed the spiritual life as a journey inward that produces outward, ethical change. This aligns with sanctification as a process where a “new being” is called forth by grace, moving beyond old patterns of behavior.
Social Justice as Sanctification: For Thurman, being set apart (sanctified) means resisting evil and dehumanization. He argued that a “sin against another is a sin against God,” linking personal holiness directly to social, racial, and political justice.
Forgiveness as Power: Thurman viewed Jesus’ nonviolent example of love and forgiveness as the ultimate expression of divine grace, which justifies the individual and enables them to forgive others.
In essence, Thurman merges the theological concepts of justification and sanctification into a lived experience of “mystical activism,” where the believer is made whole by God (justified) and empowered to work for a, more just world (sanctified).
Yes, otherwise we just get Heaven after sins are forgiven…and then what about the rest of our lives here on earth…salvation continues in this life, by being delivered from present circumstances, finding our security or our life with God now.
So it was interesting to me too..still trying to put it together with the actual scriptures to be able to explain it.
Well let me restate..it seems we just get heaven..and wonder if the way many have evangelize that one was truly born again..Thank God He knows the heart.
Interesting enough, Dallas Willard says the same thing Thurman does but with different wording or environment attached but same concept.
I just got Thurman’s book from the Library and either the Spirit showed the same to each or someone was taught by Thurmans words.
Is Justification a Process?
Justification is not a process like progressive sanctification. Rather, when one comes to faith in Christ, it is a complete and finished act of God’s grace alone. It is a legal or forensic declaration. When a person comes to faith in Christ, God pardons the believer of all his sins (past, present, and future) and accepts the now believing sinner as righteous in his sight. God makes this legal declaration the moment a sinner puts his trust in Christ (Rom 3:21-26; 5:16; 2 Cor 5:21). As such, justification happens in a moment of time and is a one-time, finished act of God alone.
While good works are evidence of genuine justification, a person is not saved by these ongoing works. God justifies the believer solely on the basis of the passive and active obedience of his Son alone<. This includes Christ’s perfect obedience and sacrifice for sin; that is, Christ’s lifelong passive obedience (his penalty-bearing work) and his lifelong active obedience (his will of God-obeying work) culminate in Calvary. Christ’s perfect and complete righteousness is the only ground on which God declares a sinner righteous (Rom 5:18-19; Gal 3:13; Eph 1:7; Phil 2:8). Thus a person is not justified by their own works. They are justified only on the basis of Christ’s perfect work on their behalf. This righteousness is imputed (moment of time), not infused (a process) to the believer.
Think of this as a justification accounting ledger that contains debits and credits. There is an exchange when (1) God takes all the sinner’s debits (sin/unrighteousness) and places them on Christ’s ledger (2 Cor 5:21). And (2) God takes all Christ’s credits (righteousness) and places them on the believer’s account (1 Cor 1:30).
So, a Great Exchange takes place (Heb 2:3)! Believers are justified through faith. However, faith adds nothing to what Christ has done for a sinner in justification. Faith is merely an empty hand receiving the righteousness of Christ offered in the gospel (Rom 4:4-5; Phil 3:9).
Faith is chosen by God to be the receiver of salvation, because it does not pretend to create salvation, nor to help in it, but it is content humbly to receive it. Faith is the tongue that begs pardon, the hand which receives it, and the eye which sees it; but it is not the price which buys it. Faith never makes herself her own plea, she rests all her argument upon the blood of Christ. She becomes a good servant to bring the riches of the Lord Jesus to the soul, because she acknowledges whence she drew them, and owns that grace alone entrusted her with them. (C.H. Spurgeon, “All of Grace”)
On the other hand, progressive sanctification is a grace that comes after justification in the order of salvation, or ordo salutis (see “What is the Ordo Salutis” below), and sanctification is distinct from justification. Progressive sanctification is an ongoing work in all saints’ lives, not a one-time finished work of God. While justification is the work of God alone (monergistic), a saint cooperates with God in sanctification (synergistic). The Holy Spirit is the continuous agent of sanctification (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7; 17:17, etc.). He works within the saint to subdue sinful impulses and produce fruits of righteousness (Rom 8:13; 2 Cor 3:17-18; Gal 5:22). As such, sanctification is God’s continual renewing and transforming of a saint’s whole being. It is important to note, while the two graces of justification and sanctification are related, they must be distinguished from one another.
J.
Post 3
In a theological article in The Spirit of the Reformation Study Bible, Richard Pratt writes this regarding “Justification and Merit: Why Does God Count Me as Righteous?”
One of the distinctive slogans of the Reformation was “Justification by Faith Alone,” meaning that God counts believers as righteous (i.e., he justifies them) by means of their faith, not by means of their works.
This idea should be clearly distinguished from the error that God counts believers as righteous on the basis of their faith (i.e., because they have faith). Believers do not earn righteousness by doing good works or by having faith; they are counted as if they were righteous on the basis of Christ’s righteousness reckoned to them through the vehicle of faith.
The New Testament states time and again that believers are saved on the basis of Christ’s work on their behalf, not on the basis of their own merit (Rom 3:22-24; 5:10-11, 15-21; 8:1-4; 1 Cor 1:30; Gal 2:20-21; 3:27-29; 1 Pet 3:18). Paul said, “I consider everything a loss . . . that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ-the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith” (Phil 3:8-9). Paul also clearly explained that justification is entirely of grace received through faith (Rom 3:25-30; 4:1-5:2; Gal 2:16; 3:8-14, 24), referring to the example of Abraham, whom God counted as righteous by means of his faith (Gen 15:6; Rom 4:1-25; Gal 3:8-14). Paul also appealed to David’s voice in Psalm 32:1-2 (Rom 4:6-8) as further Old Testament proof that God has always considered his people righteous by means of their faith, not by means of their works.
The idea that good works are not required to earn righteousness has not gone unchallenged.
For example, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that God counts believers as righteous at least partly on the basis of the good works they perform after they come to faith. Some forms of Arminianism likewise insist that even those who are forgiven on the basis of Christ’s atoning death may yet go to hell if they do not continue in faith and good works, in cooperation with the grace of God.
This subject becomes confusing for many believers because traditions like Roman Catholicism and Arminianism appeal to Scriptures that seem to contradict Paul’s teaching. Whereas Paul wrote, “A man is justified by faith apart from observing the law” (Rom 3:28), James said, “A person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone” (Jas 2:24). Moreover, James also appealed to Abraham’s example.
This apparent discrepancy is easily harmonized, however, by noting that “justify” (Greek, dikaioo) may mean either “count as righteous” (see Rom 4:5) or “prove right” (see Luke 7:35). Paul consistently referred to Abraham’s faith as exercised in Genesis 15:1-6, a passage that recounts the time when God first promised Abraham a son-long before his son Isaac was born. In the Genesis 15 account, “justify” means “count as righteous”: “Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness” (Gen. 15:6). James, however, recalled an episode (recorded in Genesis 22) that took place after Isaac had been born and had grown into young adulthood (Jas 2:21). In the Genesis 22 account, “justify” means “proved right,” as indicated by the fact that God was testing Abraham (Gen. 22:1) and that Abraham’s justification consisted in his passing the test: “Now I know that you fear God” (Gen 22:12). James agreed with Paul that Abraham was initially counted as righteous when he believed God’s promise (Jas 2:22-23), but he added that Abraham’s later obedience proved the earnestness of his earlier faith.
What came from the Council of Trent is a document of man. But we should remember what Peter and the apostles said: “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).
Dr. Joseph R. Nally, Jr.
J.
It’s already been addressed.
The Faith that saves has works
That’s may be why Justification he says is not seperated from sanctification. It’s like: a fire is hot.
Fire and hot go together
Here’s my question though at brother Johann
In Ephesian 2 We know if one merely believes in Jesus as the son of the living God , the atonement, resurrection are they saved?..For the 
Debil I’m sure believes. I do believe the belief has to be with the intention to act.
So here we see even internally, intention is an act.
So the passage Hypothetically if I know it correctly could read like this: You also after listening to the message of truth having also trusted…were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise…(etc so and so)
So one thing is true or 2 things can be true at the same time
It is nothing we do, or nothing we do to earn salvation.
Regardless we all know God is the initiator- He lightens every man’s heart that comes into the world. He created life, He created all things.
And what seems to me, what gives us life- is to be caught up in His work. (His character seems to always be a verb.
Hopefully I am not being combative to you and you can share openly
That’s great! It’s already been addressed, and since I’m passionate about the doctrine of justification, I’ll leave the posts here in the hope that others may be edified.
You still believe we are justified multiple times?
J.
…
Dallas Willard explains the relationship between justification and sanctification by challenging the notion that they are strictly separated, using the life of Abraham to show that justification is a living, progressive process of engaging with God rather than a one-time “legal fiction”. Willard suggests that Abraham’s justification was not a single, isolated event, but a, faith-based interactive relationship that matured over time.
Here is how Willard interprets this through the narrative of Abraham:
1. Initial Justification: Faith in Promise (Genesis 15)
In Genesis 15:6, Abraham believes God’s promise, and “it was counted to him as righteousness.” Willard interprets this as the “conversion” moment—the beginning of a relationship of trust. At this point, Abraham is justified based on his confidence in God, not on his actions.
2. Ongoing Justification & Sanctification: Testing and Obedience (Genesis 22)
Willard highlights the later event in Genesis 22, where Abraham offers Isaac. This act is not simply a “work” that adds to his original justification; rather, it is the outworking of his faith, where his justification is solidified and demonstrated through obedience.
Sanctification as Process: Willard argues that sanctification is the process of being made holy, which in Abraham’s case, happens through the trials and obedience that resulted from his faith.
The “Second” Justification: Willard views this later stage as Abraham becoming the person who is righteous, having been justified and sanctified by a living, active faith over a lifetime.
3. Key Willardian Principles in this View
Conjoining Justification and Sanctification: Willard argues that evangelicalism often wrongly separates these, making justification a legal act and sanctification a purely human effort. Instead, he sees them as a conjoined, continuous process of “life in the Kingdom of God”.
Faith is Interactive: Abraham’s faith wasn’t just mental assent; it was an active interaction with God, seen in his obedience, which is the core of discipleship.
The “Obedience of Faith”: Abraham’s “works” in offering Isaac did not invalidate grace; they proved that faith was genuine and that Abraham had truly become a man of God.
In summary, Willard uses Abraham to explain that justification is not just being forgiven for the past, but the beginning of a life of obedience (sanctification) that continually engages with God and transforms the person, thus demonstrating God’s righteousness in them.
Willard highlights the later event in Genesis 22, where Abraham offers Isaac. This act is not simply a “work” that adds to his original justification; rather, it is the outworking of his faith, where his justification is solidified and demonstrated through obedience.
It is explained right here @Johann
There are 2 more things I want to look at in hopes they can bring more clarity.
Thats the old testament sacrafices
And 1 Peter 3
The Catholic Church teaches that individuals are justified by faith plus good works. They teach that justification is “infused” or a process which can be divided into three stages: (1) an initial justification at conversion; (2) progressive justification (justification plus sanctification); and (3) a final justification at the last day.
However, the Bible teaches that justification is “imputed” (in a moment of time) as opposed to being infused (a process). It is not based upon man’s work, but on Christ’s, and only his. Individuals are justified by faith apart from works (Rom 3:20-28; 4:1-5; 9:30-32; Gal 2:16; 3:1-14). Once one believes with true faith, they necessarily do good works as a result (Eph 2:8-10; Jas 2:14, 17). In other words, good works follow true justification.
The Roman Catholic Council of Trent and its decree on justification anathematized (condemned) this biblical view.
Let’s look very briefly at four issues: (1) Is justification by works? (2) Is justification a process? (3) Justification at Trent, and (4) What is prevenient grace?
Is Justification by Works?
The Bible teaches that man is aboslutely not justified by faith plus works. Martin Luther himself struggled with this truth. The particular passage that gave him problems was Romans 1:17: “For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, ‘The righteous shall live by faith.’” What the Holy Spirit taught Luther here enabled him to move from viewing righteousness as active, or as something he had to achieve, to viewing it as passive, or something Christ already achieved on his behalf. Thus, on the truth of sola fide (faith alone) the Reformation was born.
Luther was right, we are justified by faith alone. The apostle Paul taught, “For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law” (Rom 3:28). And he goes further: “And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness” (Rom 5:4). This is the gospel once delivered to the saints (Jude 1:3).
The Catholic Church objected to Luther’s faith. Quoting James 2:24,“You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone,” they thought it disagreed with justification by faith alone. But is James really disagreeing with Paul? Certainly not! All James is saying is that if a person says he has faith but has no evidence of the same through righteous works, then his faith is not genuine and it will not justify him. Paul agrees when he writes that we are saved unto a faith that works(Eph 2:10), not by it. Genuine salvation is entirely of God (Eph 2:8; John 3:1-8), but it ultimately results in a life of good works; a justified person is given an active faith (Gal 5:6). As Charles Spurgeon once said, “We have been clear upon the fact that good works are not the cause of salvation; let us be equally clear upon the truth that they are the necessary fruit of it” (All Round Ministry, Banner of Truth).
James gives us a couple of examples of active faith: Abraham (Jas 2:21-24) and Rahab (Jas 2:25):
(1) The Example of Abraham
Abraham was not justified by his being willing to sacrifice Isaac (Gen 22:1-19). Hebrews 11:8-10 states:
By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going. By faith he made his home in the promised land like a stranger in a foreign country; he lived in tents, as did Isaac and Jacob, who were heirs with him of the same promise. For he was looking forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God.
By faith Abraham left his homeland and went to the Promised Land, and he was already justified prior to this. Abraham even had the gospel preached to him and he believed (cf. Gal 3:8) prior to those famous words in Genesis 15:6, saying, “And he believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness.” This is evidenced by:
The Hebrew verbal form (waw perfect) of “believed” in Genesis 15:6. This strongly asserts that Abraham’s had an on going belief in the Lord; he kept on believing. This is further confirmed by the use of the aorist tense (a single past tense action) in the LXX.
His life showing a continual pattern of faith: (a) he left his homeland (Gen 12:1; Acts 7:2), (b) built an altar (Gen 12:8), (c) God’s promise (Gen 13:14-18), (d) defeat of the four kings (Gen 14:1-16), and (e) blessed by Melchizedek (Gen 14:17-24).
Hebrews reveals that Abraham already had saving faith in Hebrews 11:8-10; "By faith . . . By faith . . . "
(2) The Example of Rahab
Rahab was a redeemed prostitute (Josh. 2, 7). She hid the Hebrew spies (Heb 11:31). However she hid the spies, because of her previous faith (Josh 2:9-11).
In these examples faith, not works, is the prerequisite to acceptance by God (Gal 3:6-14). The entire chapter of Hebrews 11 demonstrates what previous faith did: (1) “By faith, Abel offered a better sacrifice . . .” (Heb 11:4), (2) “By faith Noah . . . constructed an ark . . .” (Heb 11:7), (3) “By faith Moses . . . chose to be mistreated with the people of God . . .” (Heb 11:24-25), (4) “By faith the people crossed the Red Sea . . .” (Heb 11:29), and (5) “By faith the walls of Jericho fell down . . .” (Heb 11:30), etc. Resting in the Savior’s finished work (Heb 4:9-10; 12:1-2; Gen 2:1-3; 3:15; cf. Psa. 95) enabled the Hall of Heroes to demonstrate an active faith!
Like Paul, James believed in an active faith. However, they both also believed in being justified by faith alone (Eph 2:8; Jas 1:18). Though James 2 emphasizes the ongoing evidence of salvation by works, James 1:18 agrees with the other authors of Scripture that salvation is by grace through faith alone (1 Pet 1:23; cf. John 1:13; 6:44, 65; Eph 2:8-10; 1 Pet 1:3, etc.).
J.
Dallas Willard sees justification and sanctification as conjoined because he defines biblical salvation not merely as a legal declaration of forgiveness (justification), but as a holistic, ongoing “different form of life” and union with God (sanctification). Based on his interpretation of Scripture, he argues that the two are inseparably linked as a single divine process of entering and living in the Kingdom of God, rather than being separate, sequential events.
Willard’s perspective, detailed in works like The Divine Conspiracy and Renovation of the Heart, is built on the following scriptural and theological grounds:
1. Reconceptualizing Salvation as “Life,” Not Just “Forgiveness”
Willard argues against the view that salvation is simply a “ticket to heaven” or a one-time transaction.
Scripture Reference: In The Spirit of the Disciplines, he points to the New Testament’s description of salvation as “new birth” or “eternal life,” which he interprets as a process of continuous transformation, not a singular point in time.
The Conjunction: He connects this to John 17:3 (“And this is eternal life, that they may know you…”), defining “knowledge” as an interactive relationship that merges being forgiven (justification) with being transformed (sanctification).
2. “At-One-Ment” as Union, Not Just Substitution
Willard sees atonement as “at-one-ment,” focusing on restoring union with God, which requires the believer’s inner life to be changed, not merely their legal status.
Scripture Reference: Romans 5:1-5 is crucial to his view, where justification leads to peace with God and active “participation” in grace.
The Conjunction: Justification is the legal door, but it is intended to immediately lead to the “process of making one more righteous” (sanctification).
3. Discipleship as the Essential Link
Willard strongly argues that true faith in Jesus automatically involves entering into an apprenticeship (discipleship) with Him.
Scripture Reference: Ephesians 2:10 and Philippians 2:13 are used to emphasize that regeneration leads to good works and internal transformation.
The Conjunction: He connects this to the “crucicentrism” of the gospels, which is not just believing in the cross, but “picking up one’s own cross” and dying to the ‘old self’ (sanctification) to truly live in the new status (justification).
4. Renovation of the Heart
For Willard, the goal of salvation is the complete “renovation” of the inner person to be like Christ.
Scripture Reference: 2 Peter 1 and Romans 6 are used to argue for “giving all diligence” to do the things Jesus said (sanctification) as a direct result of being in grace (justification).
The Conjunction: He contends that separating them leads to an “undisciplined life”.
In summary, Willard’s “conjoined” view holds that salvation is a “gift of life in constant, interactive relationship with a living Lord, Savior, and Teacher,” where one cannot experience the fullness of being “right with God” (justification) without being empowered to live in the “process of becoming holy” (sanctification).
Again we have fire and fire is not without heat.
Is fire heat? They can’t be seperated.
While one says Justification’s legal status is alone, indicating faith alone saved, there is a dilemma.
Many have evangelize others to believe that mere belief, mental assent gets you into heaven. (That’s why many have left the faith)
However I will try this on instead, sense the debil believes yet has acted against God was He saved, or kicked out?
Hence what I see is this belief is with intent to follow.
So if one begins with this notion then 
at some point You might see Justification inwardly…but sense the goal is to save the body, soul, and Spirit.
Then the outward action confirms the inner renewal..Hence a person intentions(inward) were verified.
Who were His intentions (inward)verified before, by and for?
The one that does right is righteous.NOting: the Roman Road - gives this same ideal…one believes in the heart and confesses with the mouth…the outward verifying the inward
So sense scripture shows Abraham was justified more than once and it had already been made clear that the 1st was inward and the others outward, that they were all parts, inadvertently or unrecognizable to many of us, of the same whole then it verifies Justification not as merely legal but as a process. For even we have a body soul and Spirit that can be one in unity.
If merely the heart without the body wasn’t transforming at regeneration then do we have a problem? Or is God our justification, sanctification and Glorification?
Or does the order of these words need to be thought about- (regeneration conversion justification sanctification)
And what are we missing for a complete unadulterated understanding
And Yes I’d say the heart is transformed at rebirth
Now let’s find some scriptures: Note: I am open to correction. These are my thoughts above I am open anyone with wisdom, of the scriptures, for correction.
…
According to Dallas Willard, regeneration is the “entrance of God’s nature and life into our real existence,” fundamentally transforming the heart (spirit/will) to enable sanctification. Willard emphasizes that this transformation is a gift of grace, not human effort, which “brings every element in our being… into harmony with the will of God”.
Key scriptures Willard utilizes to verify this heart transformation include:
Ezekiel 36:26-27 (A New Heart): The promise to replace a “heart of stone” with a “heart of flesh” is central to his theology of spiritual formation.
2 Corinthians 5:17 (New Creation): Emphasizing that in regeneration, the inner being is made new by God’s nature.
John 3:3-5 (Born from Above): Willard translates “born again” as “born from above” or “born from the Spirit,” representing a new, supernatural life-source entering the human personality.
Ephesians 4:22-24 (Put on the New Self): He cites this to show that the new nature, created in God’s image, is put on to replace the old self.
Romans 12:1-2 (Renewal of the Mind): He highlights this as the process of transformation where the heart/mind is transformed to understand God’s will.
Willard emphasizes that while regeneration is immediate, it begins a process of “renovation” where the whole personality is reorganized around God.
…
So seems like we sealing the deal on this topic..For it seems to me that the very entrance of God’s life into our own gives a transformation and is of a transforming nature. Hence He is at the same time our Justification, sanctification and Glorification all in one.
When I see God’s nature, It’s alway active…what do you see?
Scripture clearly affirms the doctrine of justification by faith, what then is the precise relationship of faith to justification? The answer lies in what is entailed in the preposition “by”. “Few things are more necessary for a correct understanding of the New Testament,” wrote J. Gresham Machen, “than a precise acquaintance with the common prepositions.”
6 The New Testament writers commonly employ three expressions: piste, ek pisteos, and dia pisteos. The Christian is justified “by faith” (pistei or ek pisteous) or “through faith” (dia pisteos).
For example, pistei (the dative case of the noun pistis) is used in Romans 3:28: “Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.”
Ek pisteos is used in Romans 5**“Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”** Dia pisteos is used in Ephesians 2:8 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God” (emphasis added).
Each of these three usages has its own special emphasis or significance. The use of the simple dative (pistei) calls attention to the necessity and importance of faith. The use of the preposition dia (“through” or “by means of”) describes faith as the instrument of justification, i.e., the means by which the righteousness of Christ is received and appropriated by the sinner unto justification. The use of the preposition ek (“from,” “out of,” or “by”) describes faith as the occasion of justification, though never as the efficient or ultimate cause of justification. 7
It is critical to note that in none of these cases, nor anywhere else in Scripture, is faith (or any other grace) represented as constituting some ground of merit for justification.
And this is all the more remarkable when one considers that dia with the accusative would mean “on the ground of” or “on account of.” Thus, dia ten pistin would convey the notion of “on the ground of or on account of faith,” thereby making faith the meritorious reason for the believer’s acceptance with God.
Yet such is the precision of the Spirit’s oversight of the New Testament scriptures that nowhere does any writer ever slip into using this prepositional phrase. On every occasion faith is presented as the means of justification.
Justification by faith alone is never justification on account of faith (propter fidem), but always justification on account of Christ (propter Christum), i.e. on account of the blood-satisfaction of the Lamb of God being graciously imputed to and received by an undeserving sinner (Galatians 3:6; James 2:23). Ultimately, the ground of justification is Christ and His righteousness alone. 8
In the Reformed tradition, various theological terms of expressions have been used to capture this biblical relationship of faith to justification.
For example, the Belgic Confession of Faith (1561, Article 22) and the Westminster Confession of Faith (1647, Chapter 11.2) denominate faith as “only an instrument” and “the alone instrument of justification.”
9 Faith is not an agent (i.e. an efficient cause), but an instrument (i.e. a means) of justification. It is the believer’s sole means by which he receives justification this means is not mechanical as the word “instrument” unfortunately implies; rather, this means is itself the saving work of the Holy Spirit through the Word whereby a sinner is brought into a living, personal relationship with the triune God.
The Heidelberg Catechism (1563, Question 61) states that there is "no other way (nicht anders) than faith by which Christ’s righteousness becomes ours. God did not ordain faith to be the instrument of justification because of some peculiar virtue in faith, but because faith is self-emptying and has no merit in itself: “Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace” (Romans 4:16).
John Calvin compares faith to an empty vessel: “We compare faith to a kind of vessel; for unless we come empty and with the mouth of our souls open to seek Christ’s grace, we are not capable of receiving Christ.” 10 The vessel cannot be compared in value to the treasure it contains (2 Corinthians 4:7).
The Puritan Thomas Goodwin uses strong and active language: “Faith is eyes, and hands, and feet, yea, and mouth, and stomach, and all.” 11 And the nineteenth-century Bishop J. C. Ryle writes: “Saving faith is the hand…the eye…the mouth…and the foot of the would.”
12 Yet faith lives by the Living Bread alone, not by the mouth that fees on the bread (John 6:35-58).
The sinner is justified by Christ’s sacrifice alone, not by his act of feasting upon or believing in that sacrifice by faith.
Second, is it accurate to call faith “a condition of justification,” as has frequently been done?
Given the meaning of “by faith” in the original Greek, it is more accurate to speak of faith as an instrument rather than a condition of justification and salvation, for a condition generally denotes a meritorious quality for the sake of which a benefit is conferred.
We are justified not merely by faith, but by faith in Christ; not because of what faith is, but because of what faith lays hold of and receives. We are not saved for believing but by believing.
In the application of justification, faith is not a builder but a beholder; it has nothing to give or achieve, but has all to receive. Faith is neither the ground nor substance of our justification, but the hand, the instrument, the vessel which receives the divine gift proffered to us in the gospel.
“As little as a beggar, who puts forth his hand to receive a piece of brad, can say that he has earned the gift granted him,” Herman Kuiper wrote, “so little can believers claim that they have merited justification, just because they have embraced the righteousness of Christ, graciously offered them in the Gospel.”
J.
The distinction between these two views is not merely semantic, it is fatal to regard faith as a prerequisite which a sinner can fulfill by an act of his own will in order to be saved. In such a case, man really becomes his own savior.
Worse yet, everything then depends on the purity and strength or perfection of the sinner’s faith. Rather, Scripture teaches that at stake is the very character of faith: Is faith a work of man or the gift of God? The question is answered decisively by the Apostle Paul: “For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him, but also to suffer for His sake” (Philippians 1:29; see also Ephesians 2:8; emphasis added). Justification is received in the form of faith since it pleases God to justify a sinner by giving him faith. 14
Though faith is the means through which God works salvation, faith is not and cannot be a human condition—that is, if “condition” implicates more than the necessary order or way of salvation. If faith were the conditional (i.e. meritorious) ground of justification, salvation by human merit would be introduced, dishonoring divine grace and subverting the gospel by reducing it to simply one more version of justification by works (Galatians 4:21-5:12).
Moreover, since we cannot be accepted by God with less than a perfect righteousness, our faith would have to be perfect. No one’s faith, however, is perfect. All our faith is impaired by sin.
Nothing in us, including our faith, could possibly succeed as a condition. Faith knows no human merit, and needs no human merit (Ephesians 2:8), for the very nature of faith is to rely wholly on the merit and righteousness of Christ as “more than sufficient to acquit us of our sin” (Belgic Confession, article 22). We are not justified by our ever-imperfect faith, but by the ever-perfect righteousness of Christ.
All the conditions of salvation must be and have been fulfilled by Jesus through His obedience, both active and passive, in the state of His humiliation (Romans 5:19). There can be no conditions for salvation laid upon man, simply because salvation is entirely of God and never dependent on anything of man. “So then it; [salvation] is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy” (Romans 9:16). A. A. Hodge notes succinctly:
Justifying faith terminates on or in Christ, in His blood and sacrifice, and in the promises of God; in its very essence, therefore, it involves trust, and, denying its own justifying value, affirms the sole merit of that on which it trusts (Rom 3:15-26; 4:20, 22 Gal 3:26; Eph 1:12-13, 1 Jn 5:10). 15
Some Reformed divines, however, have called faith a “condition” in a non-meritorious sense. Robert Shaw comments wisely on this:
Some worthy divines have called faith a condition, who were far from being of the opinion that it is a condition properly so called, on the performance of which men should, according to the gracious covenant of God, have a right to justification as their reward. They merely intended, that without faith we cannot be justified—that faith must precede justification in the order of time or of nature. But as the term “con-di-tion” is very ambiguous, and calculated to mislead the ignorant, it should be avoided. 16
Robert Traill is even stronger, “Faith in Jesus Christ…in the office of justification, is neither condition nor qualification…but in its very act a renouncing of all such pretences.” 17 The very act of faith by which we receive Christ is an act of utter renunciation of all our own works and righteousness as a condition or ground of salvation. As Horatius Bonar profoundly remarks: “Faith is not work, nor merit, nor effort; but the cessation from all these, and the acceptance in place of them of what another has done—done completely, and forever.”
18 And John Girardeau notes, “Faith is emptiness filled with Christ’s fulness; impotency lying down upon Christ’s strength.” 19
But the objection may then be raised: if faith is essential as it alone unites a sinner to Christ, but faith is not conditional in any meritorious sense, is it proper to regard faith as the “hand” that receives Christ? Isn’t the natural man being attributed some ability by this metaphor? since faith is always both God’s gift (Ephesians 2:8) and God’s work (“This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath seen” [John 6:29]), how can faith be designated as a “hand”?
The natural man indeed has no ability to reach out to accept the salvation of God in Christ. The natural man is dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1). He will never “accept Christ” of his own free will (Matthew 23:37; John 5:40).
Scripture teaches that a sinner does not first move toward God, but God first moves toward a sinner to unite him with Christ by faith, for a sinner would never of his own will or desire turn to Christ in faith (Romans 9:16). Even when tormented with the terrors of divine judgment, the natural man cannot be persuaded to flee to God by saving faith for salvation ((Proverbs 1:24-27).
But in regeneration the Holy Spirit grants the gift of a living, empty hand that can turn nowhere else than to Jesus. “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:12-13; cf. Psalm 110:3).
J.
My over all conclusions still doesn’t mean I can explain it.
But it maybe as simple as saying the faith that saves is a faith that acts. Acts as the product or fruit of one’s belief.
Sense many have seen Salvation as a one time declaration and not as everyday life we receive from God, then what has hindered Spiritual growth, or even new birth is the knowledge that has been evangelize wrongly.
So if no one read how Abraham was Justified more than once and the meaning to which it lends itself, then growth is limited to one’s knowledge.
We all know that it is God who Justifies, He lends no reason for any of us to judge without looking at ourselves, in which we all are sinners and have fallen short of the Glory of God.
So this meaneth: Justification conjoined with sanctification.
If we receive the Spirit of God as the seed, new like DNA, Then that dna is active for transformation, and meant for transformation.
For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.
So my thought from here when we receive the life of Christ by the word …we receive an active force too..Hence Justification/Sanctification at the flip side like a coin..is it ours? or what is imparted, not just imputed.
…
…
I like number 3 because being born again automatically would change the attitude.
Hence an inner workings by the Spirit received…wew! 
(sanctification..the flip side of justification)
…
Dallas Willard taught that while imputed righteousness (justification) provides the legal standing of forgiveness, it is incomplete without imparted righteousness (sanctification). He emphasized that salvation is a transformed life in the Kingdom of God, where Christ’s righteousness is not merely credited to the believer, but actively cultivated within them through apprenticeship and the Holy Spirit, transforming their character to be like Jesus.
Key Aspects of Willard’s View
Imputed Righteousness (Justification): Willard acknowledged this as the legal, forensic declaration where Christ’s righteousness is credited to a believer, ensuring forgiveness and acceptance before God.
Imparted Righteousness (Transformation): This is the crucial, often neglected, “inward” righteousness where God works through the Holy Spirit to change
I proven my case to myself. Now I need a break so it can all sink in..
…