ECT The Most Misunderstood Passage in the Bible--Romans 5:12-18

[Nang]

It is true that Christ had to be perfectly righteous to become the sacrifice for sin and that it is through believing in Him that we are cleansed and made righteous. Nevertheless "justification" is not the result of God "imputing" the merits of Christ's righteous life "to our account."

That is not what I believe, either. I tried to make clear in my earlier post, that they are two distinct teachings; however closely they necessitate each other.

No Justification . . No imputation of righteousness.

It is through being forgiven that we are cleansed from unrighteousness and restored to right standing with God.

Agreed. This is Justification. Imputation is the means by which the cross work of Christ is particularly and forensically applied to justified souls.

We are able to receive this forgiveness by believing in Christ rather than through works of the Law.

Agreed. This is Justification.

When the Lord forgives us He does not "count" our sins against us. That is what forgiveness means.

Agreed. But this necessitates a change in the records. We have guilt imputed to us because of Adam, but this must be forensically reversed and removed from the believer's record, to reflect a new imputation that declares us pardoned and now righteous in Christ.

While the natural consequences of the Fall necessarily affect us God does not hold one person liable for the sins of an ancestor.

Agreed.

We all suffer from the consequences of Adam's sin but his personal guilt but God judges people to be culpable for their own sins not for the sins of their ancestors.

Adam's guilt is imputed to our account because He was created as Federal Head of the human race.

Jesus Christ's righteousness is imputed to our account (on the basis of Justification) because He incarnated as Federal Head of His spiritual offspring (church).

12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned (Romans 5:12).

All this verse says is that sin entered the world through Adam. It does not say the his guilt was "imputed" to us individually because he was our "federal representative."

The doctrine of Federal Headship has its basis in the teaching of Christ being head of His church (Ephesians 5:23). And because of the typology found in the contrasts of the two "Adams" revealed in I Corinthians 15:45-49

If he was our "federal representative" who gave him that office and when was that stated?

Was not Adam created with all humanity in his loins? Was Adam not commanded by his Creator God to populate the earth? Genesis 1:28

It is an important question since if he had NOT been then the legal culpability for his crime would not have been imputed to us.

Exactly . . and if he had not been created Federal Head over humanity, why the comparison with Jesus Christ, who is clearly taught to be Federal Head over the Justified?

As to the multigenerational transmission of the sin nature, I think you are caught between two contradictory explanations. One is the forensic model of imputation. Then you bring up traducianism which ties this transfer to organic descent.

Well, if you believe in legal imputation, traducianism is unnecessary.[/quote]

If imputation of guilt did not occur with the first Adam, and procreation is not a natural generation, the only alternative theory is "Creationism." Which is the belief that each child conceived is a new creation; innocent of sin and guilt altogether. Here is the collision between "original sin" and those who deny the sin of Adam had any effect upon the rest of mankind.

Imputation of guilt works in harmony with Trudicianism, to explain the need for Justification at all; which necessitated the Incarnation and death of Jesus Christ. IOW's denial of original sin, eventually leads to denial of the necessity of a Savior, who alone could forgive sin, remove guilt, and forensically impart righteousness to sinners.

It is more compatible with traducianism to say that a non-living human spirit (spiritual death) was passed on and that sin came out of that.

Except it is not biblical. Conception occurs in sin; specifically the Mother's. Psalm 51:5 "The wicked are estranged from the womb, and go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies." Psalm 58:3

1 John 1:7-9 says that cleansing, forgiveness as well as being made righteous (by the removal of unrighteousness) are an ongoing process not a one-time event.

No, this passage describes Sanctification. Justification and Sanctification are distinct doctrines. The RCC erroneously and badly convolutes the two.

The verbs used here are in the present tense which denotes action that is durative, repetitive, or continuous. These are not one-time events. The meaning of this passage verse does not agree with your belief.

This is Sanctification, which is progressive. Justification is a one-time event, both in the cross works of Jesus Christ as well as in the lifetime of every Christian.

I suspect you are from a Roman Catholic background or are Catholic yourself. It would explain this discussion, for I am of the Reformed Faith, which protested the RCC over matters such as these almost 500 years ago.

 

[glorydaz]

I understand your point Glory days... but Romans 7 suggests other wise. More specifically... if the "knowledge of good and evil" is "sin"... then this would be suggesting that God beholds (Sin)... (Gen. 3:22)..

Well, God says He knows good and evil, and man has become like God in that way. Since God didn't sin in order to know good and evil, you're probably correct. And God had no reason to ever feel guilt, either. So the knowing of good and evil can't be anything bad, can it? Then what can it be other than the law and the fact that the law has consequences? :idunno:

But, no, because that would be something God would want us to know.

I guess we need another thread on this one thing. The trees in the garden. We might even have an old one around here....I seem to remember we did.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

That is because he CHOOSES to persevere by obeying Jesus.

It is the LORD who is doing the perserving, not Paul.

Besides that, the Lord Jesus says that those who believe receive eternal life (Jn.5:24)and He also says that those to whom He gives eternal life shall never perish (Jn.10:28).

But you defy the Savior and say that they can perssh!

 

[God's Truth]

What sin? He who has died has been freed from sin. God's Truth is an example on TOL that I was just talking about. GT has not received his eternal life by his own testimony.

If you are still sinning, then how can you say what sin?

Dying to sin means you will no longer live for the sins of the world.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Adam's sin was different than Eves... Eve sinned the moment she was deceived into disbelieving God. There is your initial entry of deceit into human... spiritual logic.

When Eve partook of the fruit... she sealed her fate to creation, instead of her Creator. Adam is clearly upset when he discovers what Eve has done and was most likely away from Eve... but when he shows up... He takes the fruit. It is only implied why he blatantly "disobeyed" as the verse Nick M. brought up... but I believe he is a typification of Jesus in this, that Adam would have rather died then have lived without his "Bride".

It was a transgression that Adam ate... but the full burden rests on the deceiver... We can see this by God doling out consequences...

The serpent is destined to have it's head crushed!
Eve is going to be "saved through birth pains"
Adam is cursed to return to dust and toil the soil.

This is what I am implying...

I further state that is merely my perspective... but I am thoroughly enjoying this incredible dialogue!

Only thing I'd change is Satan's fate.

Haven't read in scripture his manner of destruction.

Other than fire.

Just sayin'.

 

[glorydaz]

Perhaps.

I tend to not want to add much speculation because one could come up with a dozen or more speculative reasons.
I'n not against speculation, but it must remain speculation and forced to fit.
I feel confident that you feel the same.

So I'm gonna stick with Adam didn't have knowledge he was naked or that nakedness was shameful.
He got that knowledge when he ate the fruit.

And I think the premise of the analogy Paul uses fits.

Romans 7:9 KJV
(9) For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

For Paul had just told us that he had no knowledge that his lust was lust until the law gave him the knowledge that coveting was sin in verse 7.

And since one cannot know they are a sinner unless they know what sin is, then they can't feel guilty or shame and seek forgiveness.


So as far as I can tell, you and I are pretty much on the same page.

We are....but you expressed it perfectly. Thanks, Tam.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

GOBLYGOOK

Do you not think that there is such a thing as spiritual death?

Do you think that someone can die spiritually unless he is first alive spiritually?

 

[God's Truth]

It is the LORD who is doing the perserving, not Paul.

Besides that, the Lord Jesus says that those who believe receive eternal life (Jn.5:24)and He also says that those to whom He gives eternal life shall never perish (Jn.10:28).

But you defy the Savior and say that they can perssh!

Jesus lives in us and wills us to obey him. That means he gives us the desire to keep believing and obeying, but he does not do the obeying and he does not make us obey.

We are warned for a reason. Why don't you believe Paul?

See Galatians 5:4; 1 Corinthians 10:12; 1 Corinthians 15:2, 2 Thessalonians 2:15; Romans 11:19-21.


I have more scriptures for you if you think Paul is the writer of Hebrews.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Only thing I'd change is Satan's fate.

Haven't read in scripture his manner of destruction.

Other than fire.

Just sayin'.

LOL... are you messing with me.. I'm referring to the ProtoEvangelum

: )

 

[Right Divider]

Do you not think that there is such a thing as spiritual death?

Do you think that someone can die spiritually unless he is first alive spiritually?

Pay no attention to a guy that can't even spell gobbledygook.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

We also die physically because God did not want to contend with man and his sinful ways.

No?

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief" (1 Tim.1:15).​

Your ignorance of the Bible knows no bounds.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Pay no attention to a guy that can't even spell gobbledygook.

The guy is very well educated but sometimes he gets lazy when it comes to spelling. And sometime he gets lazy and doesn't want to study the Scriptures but instead depends on what some men say about the Scriptures instea.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Well, God says He knows good and evil, and man has become like God in that way. Since God didn't sin in order to know good and evil, you're probably correct. And God had no reason to ever feel guilt, either. So the knowing of good and evil can't be anything bad, can it? Then what can it be other than the law and the fact that the law has consequences? :idunno:

Good and Evil are the burden of the One just Judge. This is clearly cited as the position of the Morning Star...

We see an abuse of this name and a false right hand of God... The Abuse is seen in Isaiah 14 and the Reconciliation is found in Revelations. We know that Jesus is the true MORNING STAR ... and we further see that He alone is worthy to "Judge". In the end... this is seen as the 24 elders cast their crowns to Jesus. This is cited throughout scripture... but the place where we see that Satan desired and falsly held the position of "judge" in Zech. 3:1 ... He's at the right hand of "YeHOshua". This is unmistakable as the stone with 7 is referred to at the end of Zechariah 3.

The bottom line is that Only God is deserving of distinguishing Good from Evil. He alone is Good. (Mk. 10:18)

But, no, because that would be something God would want us to know.

I guess we need another thread on this one thing. The trees in the garden. We might even have an old one around here....I seem to remember we did.

This thread is fine. It ties into our evaluation of the Augustine doctrine of original sin, so the tree is a natural topic, in conjunction with Romans 5.

 

[steko]

GOBLYGOOK


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

Uh... wasn't he the last of th' Mohicans?

 

[God's Truth]

No?

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief" (1 Tim.1:15).​

Your ignorance of the Bible knows no bounds.

Don't you at least try to find out before you look ignorant by calling others ignorant for speaking the truth?

Do all people have to be named called by you until you are shown to be wrong?

Why don't you learn how to act?


Genesis 6:3 Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years."

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

If you are still sinning, then how can you say what sin?

Dying to sin means you will no longer live for the sins of the world.

Because we "Die" when we are 'shown" the "Face" of God.

Do you understand? Our flesh "Dies" and our "spiritual eyes" are opened, by the birth of "Him" within our "hearts".

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jesus lives in us and wills us to obey him.

So if He wills it then all Christians will always obey him and never sin?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

LOL... are you messing with me.. I'm referring to the ProtoEvangelum

: )

Naw, was just thinkin' more that Jesus bruised his head and if I seek refuge in him the evil one will duck for cover.

 

[God's Truth]

Because we "Die" when we are 'shown" the "Face" of God.

Do you understand? Our flesh "Dies" and our "spiritual eyes" are opened, by the birth of "Him" within our "hearts".

I have to force myself to read what you write.

However, since what you wrote is not too long, I will address it.

We chose to die to the sins of the world, to die to Christ and raise up to live like Christ, live to please Christ.

If you are still living through sin, if you are still making excuses for your sins, then you did not die to sin.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Why don't you learn how to act?

Why don't you learn to use your brain?

"Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim.3:17).​