When we consider the approach to law known as the so-called third way, it becomes clear that a different kind of justification might be necessary—one in which we are required to obey regulations even without certainty that God's interactions with us align perfectly with Christ's standards of obedience. The desire to live rightly naturally goes hand in hand with our ability to justify our actions. The privilege of receiving benefits that go beyond our own merits comes from the fact that our reasoning is not simply based on imagination or wishful thinking; rather, genuine justification cannot exist without a formal legal explanation and a clear defense of our conduct. If God did not accept Christ’s sacrificial work on our behalf, then His dealings with us would not be founded on Christ’s acceptance and righteousness. This introduces two distinct legal standards: for God to establish a relationship with us, He must uphold all His laws perfectly. Any standard less than complete righteousness would render God unworthy of His divine status. Therefore, all attempts at salvation become meaningless if our justification does not conform to the legal standard fulfilled entirely by Christ. For us to perceive our actions as truly genuine, we must be convinced both of our moral obligation to act and of the righteousness of that obligation. Living according to the rules set by others often seems preferable to risking errors that might jeopardize our pursuit of personal approval. Since our justification for our actions hinges on the absence of inherent justification within ourselves, we remain ultimately subject to human laws and standards. When we describe the Christian experience as a paradox, we acknowledge that its mystery resists complete explanation. Notably, John Calvin addresses this concept briefly; he refers to only two lines and does not explicitly frame it as a paradox in his writings. Furthermore, when we see justification and sanctification as separate processes, it suggests that sanctification can be evaluated along a spectrum. However, this idea is dangerous. The core question remains: how can I determine whether my spontaneous actions are genuinely approved by God? There must be a definitive standard to measure all actions against. The notion of a fluctuating scale of sanctification is as problematic as the contradictions often found in liberal ideologies that we critique. Such a viewpoint fosters an indifferent attitude where societal norms are dictated externally, undermining authentic spiritual accountability. Every divine commandment inherently carries a meaning or consequence. Humanity often invents its own laws but ultimately denies God's existence. Nevertheless, God's judgment is already underway; His presence will become evident to everyone as the effects of this judgment are realized. I would also like to share a personal reflection: teaching sanctification solely through superficial recitations of Psalms without cultivating a disciplined prayer life misses the deeper truth. The fundamental principle we must remember is that every action we take is justified in some manner. God's law is universal, and Christ’s example obligates us to defend both our conduct and our identity. We are called to act solely with justified intentions.