Paul, James and Sotereology

[for_his_glory]

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

Please show me where I distorted what you said. I said I wasn't following your logic. Here is our conversation.

Your post #99 you said: Man's forgiveness is forgiving a wrong without making a person pay for it.

my reply in post #104 Why would man make anyone pay a price in order to forgive them? Not following you here.

I was questing your statement as I was not following what you meant by this.

Your explanation post #109 If someone does me wrong and I seek to right that wrong against him in whatever way I can, and accomplish it, then I cannot say I forgive you now. Because I didn't forgive him. I made sure he paid for it.

Post #118 was my reply to you.

 

[Quantrill]

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

Again, that is not imputation. If you would address the whole of what I said, instead of just one sentence others could see that.

Is that why you just select one sentence? A launching pad.

"for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die" is not imputation.

Imputation is that 'in the day that you shall eat of it your whole race dies'.

Which (Rom. 5:12-14) describes. Which you are attempting to, not ignore, but change. As I said, you play a dangerous game with Scripture.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Please show me where I distorted what you said. I said I wasn't following your logic. Here is our conversation.

Your post #99 you said: Man's forgiveness is forgiving a wrong without making a person pay for it.

my reply in post #104 Why would man make anyone pay a price in order to forgive them? Not following you here.

I was questing your statement as I was not following what you meant by this.

Your explanation post #109 If someone does me wrong and I seek to right that wrong against him in whatever way I can, and accomplish it, then I cannot say I forgive you now. Because I didn't forgive him. I made sure he paid for it.

Post #118 was my reply to you.

I gave explanation in post #(126).

Quantrill

 

[for_his_glory]

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

Your rudeness and condensation put on others is not appreciated. Knock it off!!!

 

[for_his_glory]

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

You are just to indoctrinated by the teachings of John Nelson Darby who has blinded you to believe a lie. This is the same person who started the pre-trib theories that are also false teachings. I don't expect you to agree with this.

 

[JLB]

Again, that is not imputation. If you would address the whole of what I said, instead of just one sentence others could see that.

Is that why you just select one sentence?

It’s the part of your post that I disagree with.

 

[JLB]

Again, that is not imputation.

Did people sin and die from Adam to Moses?

 

[Quantrill]

Your rudeness and condensation put on others is not appreciated. Knock it off!!!

You want to use (Deut. 24:16) as proof that God does not impute the sin of Adam to the human race because every man must pay for his sin. But, this work of imputation on God's part is for the very purpose of Christ paying for man's sin.

Because God found all guilty in one man, Adam, He can redeem all in One Man, Jesus Christ.

In other words, mans relations to man or God under the law, does not negate God's plan of salvation. Does not mean Christ cannot die for all. Does not mean Adam's sin was not imputed to his race.

I have said before, if man is not guilty in one man Adam, then God cannot redeem him in One Man, Christ.

First Adam, Adam. Last Adam, Christ. (1 Cor. 15:45) Two representative heads of their race. Adam produces children after his kind, sinners. Christ produces children after His kind, righteous.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

It’s the part of your post that I disagree with.

Really? So, concerning my post #(138), you agree that 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. Correct?

And my question in (138) was, where in your explanation is sin not imputed because of no law?

Again, what you describe is not imputation. What you describe is simply man obeying or breaking a law.

Quantrill

 

[JLB]

Really? So, concerning my post #(138), you agree that 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. Correct?

Each person sinned because they were born with a physical body, that contained sin, the sin that was passed on to the human race from Adam.

1. to reckon in, set to one's account, lay to one's charge, impute

The point I think we disagree about, I think, is the phrase that says…

• (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Here Paul is using a Greek linguistic device, that seems to be the opposite (in English) to make a legal point.

It appears that he is saying “sin in not imputed “because” they was no law.


It’s quite the opposite, he is saying … ”because” there was sin and death experienced in the world from Adam to Moses, it demonstrates that there was a law; the law of sin and death.


The law of sin and death (the parent) would be the founding principle, from which the law of Moses (the child) had it’s origin.


The law of sin and death, was the founding principle that governed the Abrahamic Covenant, to which the law of Moses was added.


The Abrahamic Covenant is what we are grafted into, in Christ, which became the New Covenant; Renewed Covenant.


The law of sin and death is in effect today, but as long as we are in Christ, we are transcending that law, (by the law of the Spirit of Life) much in the same way a person transcends the law of gravity by being in an airplane, flying high above the earth. As long as the person who is “in the airplane” does not transgress, they will continue to operate in a dynamic law that causes them to transcend the law of gravity…



JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

Quantrill
Hi Q,
Guess you've had enough of this topic.
I tagged you to the new post in Bible Study.
I think we have Romans 5:12-14 all messed up.

 

[for_his_glory]

You want to use (Deut. 24:16) as proof that God does not impute the sin of Adam to the human race because every man must pay for his sin. But, this work of imputation on God's part is for the very purpose of Christ paying for man's sin.

Because God found all guilty in one man, Adam, He can redeem all in One Man, Jesus Christ.

In other words, mans relations to man or God under the law, does not negate God's plan of salvation. Does not mean Christ cannot die for all. Does not mean Adam's sin was not imputed to his race.

I have said before, if man is not guilty in one man Adam, then God cannot redeem him in One Man, Christ.

First Adam, Adam. Last Adam, Christ. (1 Cor. 15:45) Two representative heads of their race. Adam produces children after his kind, sinners. Christ produces children after His kind, righteous.

Quantrill

impute: ascribed to someone by virtue of a similar quality in another.
(Similar sin, in this case the sin of disobedience and not that of the sin Adam commited as that was his sin and we are not guilty of another persons sin as it is their own.)

Christ's righteousness has been imputed to us so that we can be made righteous before God, by the righteousness of God, by His grace through Christ Jesus in justification s we are sanctified by the sacrifice of Christ made for all who will believe by faith in Him.

Because of the similar sin of Adam, being disobedient, the sin of disobedience has been brought into the world as man walks in it. No one here on earth is excluded or without excuse for their own sins, not the sins of their fathers, but of walking in disobedience. Deuteronomy 24:16; Exodus 34:7; Psalms 51:5; Ezekiel 18:19-20; John 9:1-3; Romans 3:23; 5:12-21; 6:23; Titus 3:5

 

[for_his_glory]

You want to use (Deut. 24:16) as proof that God does not impute the sin of Adam to the human race because every man must pay for his sin.

Are we responsible for Adam's sin, no, it was his own that he was held accountable for. It's only our own sin, because of Adam introducing sin into the world that we are responsible for that similar sin of disobedience, but not his own. I really can't understand why you want to be responsible for another persons sin.

 

[Quantrill]

Each person sinned because they were born with a physical body, that contained sin, the sin that was passed on to the human race from Adam.

1. to reckon in, set to one's account, lay to one's charge, impute

The point I think we disagree about, I think, is the phrase that says…

• (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Here Paul is using a Greek linguistic device, that seems to be the opposite (in English) to make a legal point.

It appears that he is saying “sin in not imputed “because” they was no law.


It’s quite the opposite, he is saying … ”because” there was sin and death experienced in the world from Adam to Moses, it demonstrates that there was a law; the law of sin and death.


The law of sin and death (the parent) would be the founding principle, from which the law of Moses (the child) had it’s origin.


The law of sin and death, was the founding principle that governed the Abrahamic Covenant, to which the law of Moses was added.


The Abrahamic Covenant is what we are grafted into, in Christ, which became the New Covenant; Renewed Covenant.


The law of sin and death is in affect today, but as long as we are in Christ, we are transcending that law, (by the law of the Spirit of Life) much in the same way a person transcends the law of gravity by being in an airplane, flying high above the earth. As long as the person who is “in the airplane” does not transgress, they will continue to operate in a dynamic law that causes them to transcend the law of gravity.



JLB

So, in other words you didn't agree with the rest of what I said in post #(138). But you chose one statement that you believe you can defend more easily and ignore the rest and use it as a launch pad.

The point is, the peoples sins between Adam and Moses were not imputed to them. Thus they died because of Adams sin. The people were guilty of Adams sin, by imputation.

No, Paul is not using a 'Greek linguistic device' that makes what he says mean the opposite. What a testimony that is. You are admitting that you are changing what is being said.

The law of sin and death has nothing to do with imputation. As I have already pointed out. You are simply removing God's work of imputation and making man's obedience or disobedience the determining factor. Good luck with that.

Your doctrine removes God from being able to save. If God can't count all guilty of Adam's sin, then neither can He count all righteous in Christ's gift. (Rom. 5:16).

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Quantrill
Hi Q,
Guess you've had enough of this topic.
I tagged you to the new post in Bible Study.
I think we have Romans 5:12-14 all messed up.

I don't know what you mean that you 'tagged me to a new post'.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

impute: ascribed to someone by virtue of a similar quality in another.
(Similar sin, in this case the sin of disobedience and not that of the sin Adam commited as that was his sin and we are not guilty of another persons sin as it is their own.)

Christ's righteousness has been imputed to us so that we can be made righteous before God, by the righteousness of God, by His grace through Christ Jesus in justification s we are sanctified by the sacrifice of Christ made for all who will believe by faith in Him.

Because of the similar sin of Adam, being disobedient, the sin of disobedience has been brought into the world as man walks in it. No one here on earth is excluded or without excuse for their own sins, not the sins of their fathers, but of walking in disobedience. Deuteronomy 24:16; Exodus 34:7; Psalms 51:5; Ezekiel 18:19-20; John 9:1-3; Romans 3:23; 5:12-21; 6:23; Titus 3:5

Your definition of 'impute' is false.

Did Levi pay tithes to Melchisedec? The very act of Abraham is imputed to Levi.

So, you think, by your definition of impute, that you had a similar quality of Christ's righteousness, and that is why Christ's righteousness was imputed to you? My oh my. It is not Adam's sin imputed that bothers you. It is Christ's righteousness imputed to you, that bothers you.

Why? Because you want to be seen as measuring up to that righteousness. You don't. Christ's righteousness is imputed to you. You are not worthy of it. You are declared righteous, but you arn't righteous. And that righteousness that is imputed to you, is not yours to maintain. It is yours by declaration only, due to the great work of imputation by God.

All the people from Adam to Moses were excluded from their own sins, as God did not impute those sins to them. But God imputed Adam's sin to them, and so they died. (Rom. 5:13-14)

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Are we responsible for Adam's sin, no, it was his own that he was held accountable for. It's only our own sin, because of Adam introducing sin into the world that we are responsible for that similar sin of disobedience, but not his own. I really can't understand why you want to be responsible for another persons sin.

Did Levi pay tithes to Melchisedec or not?

Yes, when Adam sinned, we sinned. That is imputation.

It's not a question of what I want. It's a question of the great work of salvation that God has done. God declares all guilty in Adam. He can save all in Christ. If you want to reject God's work of finding all guilty in Adam, then you can't save all in Christ.

Are you the one individual that Christ died for? If you reject the imputation of Adams sin to the human race, then there can only be one.

I find it very interesting that those who don't want to be found guilty of Adam's sin, by imputation, also don't want to be found righteous in Christ by imputation. They want to be found righteous by their own obedience.

Quantrill

 

[JLB]

So, in other words you didn't agree with the rest of what I said in post #(138). But you chose one statement that you believe you can defend more easily and ignore the rest and use it as a launch pad.

Im not really interested in “defending” my point. I just wanted to clarify what some may have misunderstood by Paul saying…For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.


I gave a synopsis of some things that Paul was pointing out; some things some may not understand, and was using your discussion point to do so.

Im just sharing some things that I believe are relevant to the discussion.

It doesn’t seem you agree. So be it.


If you have a specific question, then please ask me, and I will focus on answering your question to the best of my ability.



JLB

 

[JLB]

The point is, the peoples sins between Adam and Moses were not imputed to them. Thus they died because of Adams sin. The people were guilty of Adams sin, by imputation.

Let me get this straight.

You believe people were imputed and therefore guilty of Adam‘s sin, but not imputed and therefore not guilty for their own sin?


Do you honestly think that is just?

Do you honestly believe God is just in doing something like that?





JLB

 

[Quantrill]

Let me get this straight.

You believe people were imputed and therefore guilty of Adam‘s sin, but not imputed and therefore not guilty for their own sin?


Do you honestly think that is just?

Do you honestly believe God is just in doing something like that?





JLB

The whole race of Adam had Adams sin imputed to them. Yes, they are guilty with Adam. The people form Adam to Moses sinned, but their sins were not imputed to them. God did not reckon it to them. They were guilty of them, but they were not reckoned to them.

Of course it is just. It is way more than just. It is grace.

Quantrill