IS GOD STILL SOVEREIGN?

[Fastfredy0]

Thus by one man's act of disobedience is imputed to the entire human race sin and death.

This is compared to another act of obedience that results in life and righteousness. This is the Adam vs Christ analogy of imputation. Adam imputes disobedience. Christ imputes obedience. See Rom 5:15-18.

Phew, I thought I was in the twilight zone. Thanks for your input. Total agreement. Doesn't mean we are right, but nice to not be alone.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Jesus Himself speaks about this very plainly in John 6:63, 65 & 37. He said, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all" (v 63). And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father" (v 65); "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out" (v37).

Oz

Hallelujah, thank you, thank you. I don't expect one who looks like they have done much studying to change their theology ... but at least it looks like you can understand my perspective; maybe even think it is a remote possibility.

 

[GodsGrace]

This does not agree with other things you have said, I am not sure I am understanding right.
Romans tells us that we all know God exists because the natural world makes His existence known. The Bible tells us that no one can be completely obedient to God. Complete obedience, holiness, is required for salvation. Believing that God exists is not the criteria for salvation. Having faith in Jesus is. He said He was the only way. The awareness of God's existence that we get from nature will never tell us about Jesus nor will it tell us what we are to obey. What do you mean by natural law?

Did you just say that we have to have complete obedience and holiness for salvation?
Who can do this?

What do you think holiness is?

The Natural Law is the law God puts into the conscience of men....
even those that do not believe. The law that every civilized person believes.

 

[GodsGrace]

Phew, I thought I was in the twilight zone. Thanks for your input. Total agreement. Doesn't mean we are right, but nice to not be alone.

Just happened upon this.

IMPUTATION OF disobedience is DIFFERENT from imputation of SIN.

Will be checking your interaction with OzSpen

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering,

Let's start with a discussion of these two verses:

27 Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you. 28 This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins (Matt 26:27-28 NIV).​

These are the words of Jesus who said his blood - the blood of the covenant - was poured out FOR MANY. He didn't say FOR ALL.

How would you respond to this verse that is used in support of particular redemption?

Oz

Matthew 26:27-28

Jesus' blood is shed for the whole world.
Paul says that Jesus' blood is shed for the whole world.
Jesus says for many.

Paul is referring to the atonement of Jesus,,,that is is for everyone in the world.
Everyone who is saved is saved through the blood of Christ, as God planned from the beginning.

The many that Jesus is referring to is in reference to those that will take advantage of this atonement and propitiation on their behalf.

Not everyone will.

Jesus' statement must be reconciled with Paul's or we have a conflict with sotereology...and not a small one.

 

[Avigdor]

Did you just say that we have to have complete obedience and holiness for salvation?
Who can do this?

What do you think holiness is?

The Natural Law is the law God puts into the conscience of men....
even those that do not believe. The law that every civilized person believes.

W
I actually thought you would know what I meant. Especially since I also said no one could do it. The topic we were discussing was whether or not people could be saved through the knowledge of God's existence provided by nature, and by being obedient to His natural law. The topic was not how Jesus's holiness is imputed to those who believe, thus meeting all the requirements of holiness and complete obedience. I did not think that I needed to rabbit trail to that to make my point, (considering all the other conversations we have had.)
And you did not address what I said about the topic at hand in your post to me. You only addressed something you felt you could disagree with. Lets stick to what is exactly being addressed in a post please.

 

[Avigdor]

Ah, thanks for clarification. Easy to misinterpret using this (or any) form of communication.

You've made 1 or 2 mistakes in your lifetime? I thought you were better than that. 22

One or two isn't so bad is it? Considering how long I've been in this world?

 

[Fastfredy0]

Here’s a question —


There’s a person who lives in a remote part of the world, and is a morally upright person, who has never heard of Jesus.


Then there is a born again Christian living in a big city who goes to church quite often, but has a problem with fornication and lying.


Which one is right with God?

Oh, this is a "fun" question. Aside: you didn't answer my question about whether or not you believe a dead person who never heard the gospel can go to heaven ...hopefully that is coming....

There’s a person who lives in a remote part of the world, and is a morally upright person, who has never heard of Jesus.
Assumption 1: "Morally upright" means 'morally upright by the low standards of man. If "Morally upright" means by the standards of God, I reject the possibility of such an occurrence.
Premise 1: This person cannot please because he does not have faith God. Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him...
Premise 2: Faith cometh by hearing
Conclusion: Since this man has not heard the gospel, he cannot please God in any sense. The wrath of God remains.
Aside: His lot in hell will be better than most.

Then there is a born again Christian living in a big city who goes to church quite often, but has a problem with fornication and lying.
Premise 1: This person can please God as he has faith. Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him...
Premise 2: To be 'in Christ' is to please God. This person has the righteousness of Christ imputed to him and his sins imputed to Christ
Premise 3: This person is 'in Christ' for he has been born again
Conclusion: From a salvific point of view, this man is "right with God". (Aside: Although he has Union with Christ, he apparently has limited communion with Christ (1 John 1:1-2:2).

Aside: He is a carnal Christian (to some degree we all are) and to the degree he sins, he is not right with God and this is modified, to some degree, by confession of his sins. (this comment is 'small print' ... getting into the weeds.)

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering,

While the language of imputation is not used explicitly in Romans 5, the concept or reality is certainly present (cf. Psalm 32:2; Romans 4:8; 5:13 and 2 Cor 5:19). Imputation introduces the idea that sinners are constituted guilty independent of and prior to their own personal sin.

In Rom 5:12-20, we have the historical view of the imputation of sin.

Note Rom 5:12 (NASB), 'Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned'.

• In vv. 15-19 we have the one trespass of the one man and that is parallel to the language of v. 12, 'all sinned', i.e. through the one man's sin, all people sinned or became sinners. Sin was imputed to every human being.

• Verses 13–14 form a parenthesis in the argument.

• The 'just as' / 'and so' in Rom 5:12a and 5:12b begin an unfinished sentence whose syntax is not completed until 5:19a and 19b, 'For as through the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous' (NASB). The syntax of 'just as' / 'even so' in 5:19a and 19b connect with 5:12.
  

Thus by one man's act of disobedience is imputed to the entire human race sin and death.

This is compared to another act of obedience that results in life and righteousness. This is the Adam vs Christ analogy of imputation. Adam imputes disobedience. Christ imputes obedience. See Rom 5:15-18.

Oz

Oz,,,,
Sin and Death have affected all of humanity by the sin of Adam.

But we are NOT IMPUTED with his sin.
HE sinned that one sin of disobedience,,,NOT EACH ONE OF US.

We are each responsible for our own sins...not the sins of others.

Being made sinner through one act of sin...
And being IMPUTED for that sin are two totally different ideas.

Please respond again.
I think your wording will be misunderstood by the others.

 

[JLB]

Aside: you didn't answer my question about whether or not you believe a dead person who never heard the gospel can go to heaven ...hopefully that is coming....

That would be up to God, who knows the heart.


If a person who has heard the Gospel and rejected it, and died in that condition, then it’s my belief they go to hell.



JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering,

These are some of the verses Calvinists use to support regeneration prior to faith:

Jesus Himself speaks about this very plainly in John 6:63, 65 & 37. He said, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all" (v 63). And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father" (v 65); "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out" (v37).

Oz

Yes,,,I know what verses calvinists use to show that regeneration comes before belief.
This does not make it correct.

There is a reply for each of the verses you posted.

Also, some will take your comment to mean that you agree that regenration comes before belief.

Do you agree with this doctrine?

 

[JLB]

Oh, this is a "fun" question. Aside: you didn't answer my question about whether or not you believe a dead person who never heard the gospel can go to heaven ...hopefully that is coming....

There’s a person who lives in a remote part of the world, and is a morally upright person, who has never heard of Jesus.
Assumption 1: "Morally upright" means 'morally upright by the low standards of man. If "Morally upright" means by the standards of God, I reject the possibility of such an occurrence.
Premise 1: This person cannot please because he does not have faith God. Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him...
Premise 2: Faith cometh by hearing
Conclusion: Since this man has not heard the gospel, he cannot please God in any sense. The wrath of God remains.
Aside: His lot in hell will be better than most.

Then there is a born again Christian living in a big city who goes to church quite often, but has a problem with fornication and lying.
Premise 1: This person can please God as he has faith. Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him...
Premise 2: To be 'in Christ' is to please God. This person has the righteousness of Christ imputed to him and his sins imputed to Christ
Premise 3: This person is 'in Christ' for he has been born again
Conclusion: From a salvific point of view, this man is "right with God". (Aside: Although he has Union with Christ, he apparently has limited communion with Christ (1 John 1:1-2:2).

Aside: He is a carnal Christian (to some degree we all are) and to the degree he sins, he is not right with God and this is modified, to some degree, by confession of his sins. (this comment is 'small print' ... getting into the weeds.)

So it’s seems by this post, your conclusion is —

If a person has faith because they heard the Gospel, they please God, because they are in Christ.


Do I understand you correctly?



JLB

 

[JLB]

... clarification requested.
I do not keep God's commandment "you shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. "
.... your statement indicates that I am going to hell

Is it your claim the anyone that doesn't "love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. " goes to hell? Is so, have you kept that commandment?

... clarification requested.

Loving God = Keeping His commandments.


“If you love Me, keep My commandments. John 14:15


If you murder your brother you are not keeping the command to,
not murder.

By murdering your brother, you are not loving him, nor God, and are therefore hating him.

Murderers do not have eternal life.


Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. 1 John 3:15


Same with lying, sexual immorality, idolatry and the like...


But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death. Revelation 21:8



JLB

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

View attachment 9756

Are you saying good night to me?

 

[Avigdor]

Oz,,,,
Sin and Death have affected all of humanity by the sin of Adam.

But we are NOT IMPUTED with his sin.
HE sinned that one sin of disobedience,,,NOT EACH ONE OF US.

We are imputed by (because of) Adam's sin. I think that is what Oz is saying. Forgive me OzSpen if I am wrong. We are not held accountable for all of Adam's personal sins. They are not imputed to us. We have become sinners from birth because of what Adam did. That is what is meant by God's designating Adam as mankinds federal head. But we will sin and we are accountable for those sins.

 

[Avigdor]

While the language of imputation is not used explicitly in Romans 5, the concept or reality is certainly present (cf. Psalm 32:2; Romans 4:8; 5:13 and 2 Cor 5:19). Imputation introduces the idea that sinners are constituted guilty independent of and prior to their own personal sin.

Agreed.

 

[jasonc]

Here’s a question —


There’s a person who lives in a remote part of the world, and is a morally upright person, who has never heard of Jesus.


Then there is a born again Christian living in a big city who goes to church quite often, but has a problem with fornication and lying.


Which one is right with God?

If a person is morally up right then he would have to perfectly line up with what God says,

Sorry the 613 doesn't get you,there .

 

[WIP]

Oh, this is a "fun" question. Aside: you didn't answer my question about whether or not you believe a dead person who never heard the gospel can go to heaven ...hopefully that is coming....

There’s a person who lives in a remote part of the world, and is a morally upright person, who has never heard of Jesus.
Assumption 1: "Morally upright" means 'morally upright by the low standards of man. If "Morally upright" means by the standards of God, I reject the possibility of such an occurrence.
Premise 1: This person cannot please because he does not have faith God. Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him...
Premise 2: Faith cometh by hearing
Conclusion: Since this man has not heard the gospel, he cannot please God in any sense. The wrath of God remains.
Aside: His lot in hell will be better than most.

Then there is a born again Christian living in a big city who goes to church quite often, but has a problem with fornication and lying.
Premise 1: This person can please God as he has faith. Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him...
Premise 2: To be 'in Christ' is to please God. This person has the righteousness of Christ imputed to him and his sins imputed to Christ
Premise 3: This person is 'in Christ' for he has been born again
Conclusion: From a salvific point of view, this man is "right with God". (Aside: Although he has Union with Christ, he apparently has limited communion with Christ (1 John 1:1-2:2).

Aside: He is a carnal Christian (to some degree we all are) and to the degree he sins, he is not right with God and this is modified, to some degree, by confession of his sins. (this comment is 'small print' ... getting into the weeds.)

I have a couple questions for you.

1. Am I understanding you correctly that you assert unless a person can hear the gospel from another person, said person has no hope of salvation?

2. Assuming you answer in agreement with my above understanding, how do we reconcile this understanding with Romans 1:18-20?

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
NKJV

 

[GodsGrace]

Are you saying good night to me?

If you were around,,,,then yes.
But you weren't around, so I'm not sure.
Oh. Ok. I said good night to you too.
So now you have to post something serious.
:yes

 

[GodsGrace]

If a person is morally up right then he would have to perfectly line up with what God says,

Sorry the 613 doesn't get you,there .

Jason,,,
The 613 laws were given to the Israelites.
The whole world does not consist of Israelites.

But God is God of the whole world.