Christian Forums

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Christian Forum aspires to be an online community where Christians can come together in fellowship with the purpose to encourage, inspire and build up our faith in Christ Jesus. John 13:34-35
  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses

Paul, James and Sotereology

for_his_glory

Light in darkness
Staff member
Administrator
From
South Carolina
Gender
Female
Christian
Yes
Messages
18,784
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
I disagree with your accusation that I am making God out to be evil.

(2 Cor. 5:21) says God "hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin;" You ask me how? He imputed sin to Christ. Just because it is horrible that this takes place, it isn't evil. It is what God must do if you and I are to be saved. I am surprised at your statement that Christ did not take our sin upon Himself.

This was what Christ shrank back from. (Matt. 26:39) "O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me:" Why did he use the word 'cup'? Because cup speaks to communion. (1 Cor. 10:16) Communion speaks to common union. Christ dreaded the communion he would have on the Cross. Communion with what? Sin, and the evil behind it. No one knows the horror that Christ went through. But it wasn't just the physical pain. It was He who knew no sin being made sin for us.

This is why Christ spoke of the cross being identified with Moses serpent on the pole. (Num. 21:9) (John 3:14) The very thing that was killing the people, the serpent, was on the pole. The same is true with the Cross. This is the cup that Christ recoiled from.

You speak of my 'preconceived' ideas and yet add your words into the Scripture. It is not just 'spiritual' death. It is death.

Quantrill
2Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Paul's point is that Jesus, who is sinless, was made our sin offering like that of the blood of unblemished lamb's sacrificed in the Temple. How does a lamb/Lamb (Jesus) become sinful that knows no sin.

By taking sin upon Himself could He finally defeat sin, death and Satan. In a sense it was like Jesus going into battle for all with sin being the enemy and defeating it as He paid the price for our sin and gave us His righteousness.
 

for_his_glory

Light in darkness
Staff member
Administrator
From
South Carolina
Gender
Female
Christian
Yes
Messages
18,784
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
(Rom. 5:12-14) is not talking about 'spiritual death'.

And, your attempt to make it spiritual death is counter productive. If you're saying man is born spiritually dead, then he is equally physically going to die. Adam may not have died physically at the moment he sinned, but death was now working in him and he was going to die.

Does (Deut. 24:16) mean you must pay for your own sins?

You're the one making some argument about comparison of 'imputation' with 'similitude'. I haven't.

Quantrill
Again, please show me where it says we are imputed with Adam's sin in Romans 5:14.

Yes, we must pay for our own sin like the similitude of Adam. Deu 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Spiritual death is separation from God as we have no fellowship with Him because of walking in disobedience to His commands and when we physically die, as it is appointed to everyone, because of sin entering into the world by that of Adam's sin, now God's judgement comes to all.
 

for_his_glory

Light in darkness
Staff member
Administrator
From
South Carolina
Gender
Female
Christian
Yes
Messages
18,784
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Those after Adam were not under law. They did not sin as Adam sinned.
If this is true could you explain Cain's sin of disobedience, which was similar as Adam's sin was also that of disobedience to God's commands and every generation after him. If there was no law in the days of Adam then Adam didn't sin? I'm not talking about the Mosaic 613 laws. Apparently you have never heard of the Noahic laws before the flood. It's a good study.
 

for_his_glory

Light in darkness
Staff member
Administrator
From
South Carolina
Gender
Female
Christian
Yes
Messages
18,784
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
I already have posted verses.

By the way, no one seems to want to address my question concerning (Heb. 7:4-10), and how that too is imputation. So, did Levi pay tithes to Melchisedec or not? Where is the word 'imputation' in there?

Quantrill
Hebrews 7:4-10 has no relevance to imputed sin. It's about paying tithes so I do not see the relevance.
 

for_his_glory

Light in darkness
Staff member
Administrator
From
South Carolina
Gender
Female
Christian
Yes
Messages
18,784
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
You said a lot in order to contradict the Scripture. (Rom.5:13) "sin is not imputed when there is no law". You're playing a dangerous game with the Scripture. From Adam to Moses there was no law.

Quantrill
What you are not seeing is that God gave a law to Adam, "Don't eat of that particular tree or you will surely die" and he chose to ignore it. By Adam's disobedience sin now entered into the world by one man so death (Spiritual and physical) passed unto all men. Laws are God's commandments and His judgement is righteous.

Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Did not God forgive us without us having to pay for His forgiveness, no, as Christ paid the price for our sin that we can be reconciled back to God who forgives us and remembers our sins no more after we have repented of them. We are to forgive others their trespasses against us whether there is any reconciliation on their part or not. We do not make them pay a price for us to forgive them. I never heard of such a thing.

Mat 18:21 Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times?
Mat 18:22 Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven.

Mark 11:25 And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.
Mark 11:26 But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.

You have totally distorted what I said. Of course we do not make one pay a price when we forgive. But God does not forgive without the price being paid.

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Is not a contradiction, when you realize the point.

The point he is making is, there is a law by which men are/were under before Moses came along, and it’s called the law of sin and death;
the soul that sins must die.

Which is why sin was indeed imputed to all men, because the law of sin and death,which has always been in effect before the law of Moses was added as well as after the law of Moses was abolished, thus making both Jew and Gentile subject to the same law and needing a Savior in the same way.

Here are some questions for us to answer to see where we disagree.

Did death spread to all men? Yes
Did all sin? Yes
Did death reign from Adam to Moses? Yes

Therefore sin was indeed imputed because there was indeed a law;
the law of sin and death.

Why? Because the law of sin and death made every man guilty of sin, and therefore subject to the punishment of death.


When Paul says, sin is not imputed when there is no law… He is using a legal construct to make his point that sin was indeed imputed to all men because all sinned, and therefore there was a law in place.

The law of sin and death.


Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
Romans 5:12-14





JLB

No, the point he is making is "until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law." God did not impute their sins to them as they were not under law.

You are adding to Scripture by saying sin was imputed because there was a law. If there was a law, there is no need for imputation. Sin was not imputed to Adam. He broke the law.

You are making those from Adam to Moses sinners by law totally contradictory to what it says. You're removing imputation just to bring them under law.

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
2Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Paul's point is that Jesus, who is sinless, was made our sin offering like that of the blood of unblemished lamb's sacrificed in the Temple. How does a lamb/Lamb (Jesus) become sinful that knows no sin.

By taking sin upon Himself could He finally defeat sin, death and Satan. In a sense it was like Jesus going into battle for all with sin being the enemy and defeating it as He paid the price for our sin and gave us His righteousness.

God's point is clear. Christ was made sin for us.

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Again, please show me where it says we are imputed with Adam's sin in Romans 5:14.

Yes, we must pay for our own sin like the similitude of Adam. Deu 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Spiritual death is separation from God as we have no fellowship with Him because of walking in disobedience to His commands and when we physically die, as it is appointed to everyone, because of sin entering into the world by that of Adam's sin, now God's judgement comes to all.

I have shown you. Read or reread post #(41,56,66,74,83,100,101,112).

Really? Then you don't need Christ. Go ahead and pay for your sin.

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
If this is true could you explain Cain's sin of disobedience, which was similar as Adam's sin was also that of disobedience to God's commands and every generation after him. If there was no law in the days of Adam then Adam didn't sin? I'm not talking about the Mosaic 613 laws. Apparently you have never heard of the Noahic laws before the flood. It's a good study.

Adam sinned against a law. Those from Adam to Moses did not. (Rom. 5:14)

Prior to the fall, Adam was under law. "Thou shalt not eat" After the fall, that law was no more and the way to the garden was guarded.

There was plenty of sin from Adam to Moses. But those sins were not imputed to them. (Rom. 5:12-14) They died because of their guilt with Adam's sin.

Any laws given to Noah and broken did not introduce sin. Sin was already present, which is why any other laws are given.

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Hebrews 7:4-10 has no relevance to imputed sin. It's about paying tithes so I do not see the relevance.

????

The book of (Hebrews) is about the superiority of Christ over the Mosaic Law and priesthood in every aspect. Christ is superior to the angels. Christ is superior to Moses. Christ blood is superior to animal blood. Christ's sacrifice is superior to animal sacrifices. The New Covenant is superior to the Old. etc. etc. etc.

In (Hebrews 7) we are shown the superiority of the priesthood of Melchisedec. This is important because Christ is a Priest after the order of Melchisdec, not after the Levitical priesthood. (Ps. 110:4) (Heb. 7:17).

The proof that God is submitting here, that proves the superiority of the priesthood of Melchisedec over the Levitical priesthood, is that Levi paid tithes to Melchisedec. (Heb. 7:9) But Levi wasn't even born yet. So how could he pay tithes to Melchisedec?

(Heb. 7:9-10) "And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. For he was ye in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him."

Imputation.

God said Levi paid tithes to Melchisedec. Did he?

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
What you are not seeing is that God gave a law to Adam, "Don't eat of that particular tree or you will surely die" and he chose to ignore it. By Adam's disobedience sin now entered into the world by one man so death (Spiritual and physical) passed unto all men. Laws are God's commandments and His judgement is righteous.

Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

I've always said Adam sinned against law.

Yes, Adams sin brought death to his whole race. I have never said otherwise.

Sin was imputed to all those of Adam's race. (Rom. 5:12) Just like Abraham's action of paying tithes to Melchisedec was imputed to Levi, as he was in his loins. (Heb. 7:9-10)

Quantrill
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
28,619
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
No, the point he is making is "until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law."

Yes, exactly.

Before the law of Moses, sin was in the world, because the law of sin and death was in the world.


Paul is showing them, especially the Jewish community in Rome, who had knowledge of the Old Testament, that there is a law apart from the law of Moses, before the law of Moses as well as after the law of Moses, being a greater law, and governed both Jew and Gentile;
making both Jew and Gentile guilty, in which both needed a Savior.

As Paul goes on to say…


Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law),… For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.


There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Romans 8:1-4


Paul was teaching the Church, especially the Jewish community within the Church at Rome, that there is another law, other than the law of Moses, that they needed to understand about, and that they needed to live their new Christian lives, according to the Spirit within them, rather than trying to keep the law of Moses by the flesh.


Paul was always building legal arguments that the Jewish mind could relate to, in order to make His point.




JLB
 
Last edited:

wondering

Supporter
From
Italy
Gender
Female
Messages
18,013
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
I have given Scripture and explanation.

(Rom. 5:12-14) does support the imputation of Adams sin to the human race. (5:12) declares it. (5:13-14) illustrates and explains it.

Babies don't have to know about sin to be born guilty of Adam's sin. It doesn't matter.

Whether a child or infant can subdue sin is immaterial to Adam's sin being imputed to the human race.

If you reject this imputation of Adams sin to the human race, then why do you accept the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the believer? If man was not imputed with Adam's sin, then every man is on his own. He is not a sinner until he sins. Christ cannot die for all in One Man if all are not guilty in one man. He can die for one. Who will it be...you maybe?

Quantrill
I'm starting a thread on Romans 5,,,,I'll tag you in.
 
Last edited:

wondering

Supporter
From
Italy
Gender
Female
Messages
18,013
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
I think James had some difficulty letting go a righteousness by law.

Acts 21 seems to suggest this.
When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul: “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law.
He got Paul caught up in this.
Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so that they can have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law
Seemed to appease Paul's stance with grace with this.
As for the Gentile believers, we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.”

But we know Gods chosen.
Acts 23:11
The following night the Lord stood near Paul and said, "Take courage! As you have testified about me in Jerusalem, so you must also testify in Rome

Its clear to me Paul saw all the law as law, (as I also do), and Paul considered the law in judgments he made such as, "“Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain."
I'm not sure what you're saying above.
I have the feeling that, maybe, many of the Jewish Christians had some problem letting go of The Law, which they were accustomed to living with.

Also what does Acts 23:11 have to do with the difference between Paul and James?

Maybe I don't understand your post well because I don't see a real difference between Paul and James.
Paul believed in grace and faith and works.
James believed in grace and faith and works.
 

wondering

Supporter
From
Italy
Gender
Female
Messages
18,013
Joined
Dec 26, 2015
I already have posted verses.

By the way, no one seems to want to address my question concerning (Heb. 7:4-10), and how that too is imputation. So, did Levi pay tithes to Melchisedec or not? Where is the word 'imputation' in there?

Quantrill
As I said I'm starting a thread on Romans 5:12-14 and will tag you in.
Also, I hope JLB and for_his_glory join us with their contribution.

As to Hebrews 7:4-10.
What does imputation have to do with these verses?
Levi wasn't born yet.
It's speaking about tithing and Melchizedek.
 

Randy

Member
Christian
Yes
Messages
2,162
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
I'm not sure what you're saying above.
I have the feeling that, maybe, many of the Jewish Christians had some problem letting go of The Law, which they were accustomed to living with.

Also what does Acts 23:11 have to do with the difference between Paul and James?

Maybe I don't understand your post well because I don't see a real difference between Paul and James.
Paul believed in grace and faith and works.
James believed in grace and faith and works.
Perhaps the circumcision group was others but Paul associated them from James. This new faith is new to James as well. I think there was a learning process going on but what Paul learned was from above by revelation.

For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. Clearly then Peter was not identified as part of that group but himself was swayed by their actions.

Ref: Acts 23
James should not have asked Paul to prove himself. He should have addressed faith and grace of the covenant introduced by the blood of Jesus with those zealous with the law. Perhaps his theology at that time didn't have that depth to do so? But Paul became all things to all people that some may be saved and at the same time never backed down from grace in his writings. Paul himself was not a believer when Jesus called Him. That's grace. But Jesus sent Paul to turn people from darkness to light that they might "receive" a place with those sanctified by faith in Him. Meaning repentance, faith and grace.

I think the differences are in the covenants. Original vs the one Jesus introduced in His blood.
We have a NT with a long established history. Those in James and Paul's day did not. While I do believe James ultimately came on board with grace and faith I can see him struggling with letting go of a way of life dictated by Torah.

I am neither kosher nor do I keep a sabbath day as in the law but I have the Spirit of Christ in me. So Paul's grace stance prevails in me. Paul wasn't speaking against the law rather he was speaking Christ crucified.

Bottom line I do see some differences in those early days between Paul and James in regard to importance with the law but a unity in regard to who Jesus was and a need for Him for life.

In regard to James's letter I see the same themes in 1John.
Whoever says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

As Jesus stated a good tree doesn't bear bad fruit.

So good fruit should accompany those who claim to have faith in Jesus. Or at least a lack of bad fruit.

As Paul wrote the importance not in works of the law such as circumcision but in, "faith expressing itself through love"
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
Yes, exactly.

Before the law of Moses, sin was in the world, because the law of sin and death was in the world.


Paul is showing them, especially the Jewish community in Rome, who had knowledge of the Old Testament, that there is a law apart from the law of Moses, before the law of Moses as well as after the law of Moses, being a greater law, and governed both Jew and Gentile;
making both Jew and Gentile guilty, in which both needed a Savior.

As Paul goes on to say…


Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law),… For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.


There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
Romans 8:1-4


Paul was teaching the Church, especially the Jewish community within the Church at Rome, that there is another law, other than the law of Moses, that they needed to understand about, and that they needed to live their new Christian lives, according to the Spirit within them, rather than trying to keep the law of Moses by the flesh.


Paul was always building legal arguments that the Jewish mind could relate to, in order to make His point.




JLB

The law of sin and death has nothing to do with God imputing or not imputing sin.

That sin and death existed after Adam is known. (Rom. 5:12) Just because that existed doesn't matter. What mattered was the Law that God gave to man, the Mosaic Law. (Rom. 5:13-14)

The death that man experienced between Adam and Moses, was not due to the sins of the people. It was due to the sin of Adam that had been imputed to them. (Rom. 5:13-14)

Again, you are adding to Scripture. You are removing imputation completely and having man under law. Totally opposite to what is being said. "sin is not imputed when there is no law". (Rom. 5:13) Where in your explanation is sin not imputed because of no law?

Quantrill
 

Quantrill

 
Member
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
1,363
Joined
Jul 21, 2020
As I said I'm starting a thread on Romans 5:12-14 and will tag you in.
Also, I hope JLB and for_his_glory join us with their contribution.

As to Hebrews 7:4-10.
What does imputation have to do with these verses?
Levi wasn't born yet.
It's speaking about tithing and Melchizedek.

See post #(131).

Quantrill
 

JLB

Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life
Staff member
Administrator
From
Texas
Gender
Male
Messages
28,619
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
The law of sin and death has nothing to do with God imputing or not imputing sin.

Sin is imputed because of the law God has already put in place.


The law of gravity.


If a person steps off of an airplane at 10,000 feet, the law of gravity will take affect, and the result will be death. God did not grab that person and slam him to the ground, they simply choose to transgress the law of gravity.

Death, a person splattered on the ground is the proof there is a law of gravity.


Death being spread to all men is the proof there was a law in effect before the law of Moses called the law of sin and death.

If you sin, disobey God, you die.

And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.” Genesis 2:16-17


  • for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”




JLB
 
Top