A man would only be able to pay for his own sins through his death (separation from God, as opposed to separation from his body). A mere man could not pay once for the sin of all mankind, past, present, and future.
The wages of sin is death. Not physical death, where the spirit is separated from the body, but spiritual death, separation from God. It wouldn't be much of a punishment if you sin and then are separated only for an arbitrary amount of time and then let back into the presence of God. This is contrasted in that verse by the gift of God, which is eternal life, or endless communion with God.
You are correct in saying only a man could pay for a man's sin. That's why God the Son became a man and died on the cross, to pay for all of mankind's sin. He had to be sinless, or else He would only be able to pay for his own sin, and no one else's. The only one who is sinless and who has the ability to remain sinless even in the face of trials and temptation is God. If Jesus were only a mere man, and not God, He most likely would have sinned well before he reached the age of 30, thereby rendering Himself unable to save anyone but Himself.
Read Romans 5 (and note the difference between "man" and "Man"):
Spoiler
Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.And not only that, but we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance;and perseverance, character; and character, hope.Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet perhaps for a good man someone would even dare to die.But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.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.But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many.And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification.For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more,so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. - Romans 5:1-21 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans5:1-21&version=NKJV
When we read any version of God's word, we must remember it is what? A version.
It is not the original, nor was it translated from the original. It was, at best, translated from copies that may or may not have been copied correctly from older copies.
The Old Greek texts did have some words capitalized and others not.
Thus any capitalization in the version you are reading is private interpretation.
Thus to capitalize Man or not to capitalize man is private interpretation.
If you are a thinker, you know where I am going with this
For that matter, what is it that you think makes man "mere"?
God called the work He put into producing Adam and Eve what?
a. mere
b. crappy
c. very good
d. what was I thinking?
God's Adam and Eve God called "very good"
Who,may I ask, are you to contradict God and call what He calls "very good" mere?
You know what you stupidity, your absolute arrogance is so profound and offensive, I am done with you.
Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous
When we read any version of God's word, we must remember it is what? A version.
It is not the original, nor was it translated from the original. It was, at best, translated from copies that may or may not have been copied correctly from older copies.
The Old Greek texts did have some words capitalized and others not.
Thus any capitalization in the version you are reading is private interpretation.
Thus to capitalize Man or not to capitalize man is private interpretation.
If you are a thinker, you know where I am going with this
For that matter, what is it that you think makes man "mere"?
God called the work He put into producing Adam and Eve what?
a. mere
b. crappy
c. very good
d. what was I thinking?
God's Adam and Eve God called "very good"
Who,may I ask, are you to contradict God and call what He calls "very good" mere?
You know what you stupidity, your absolute arrogance is so profound and offensive, I am done with you.
Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous
I am not the teacher you seek. You need to find someone who will take time to explain it to you. It is not that I disrespect you, for the problem is me; I have a hard time writing long explanations.
My advice; ask AMR about the hypostatic union, then if you wish another opinion, ask Clete, next time he is on TOL to explain the nature of Jesus to you. You might ask Knight.
And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
Was he god or not?
You are right, God is not a human, so how can God tell Moses that God made Moses a god.
Your definition of the word "theos" or "elohim" ie, god is the problem
It is far too narrow
If you are looking for an evening dress, and go into a dress shop and ask to see evening dresses, the salespeople can point you to evening dresses. But not all dresses are evening gowns, are they?
To say that the word dress means evening gown is far too narrow to be useful in general
Likewise, the word "god" as theologians of the trinitarian persuasion have used "god" is far too narrow to be used in Biblical studies. For scripture speaks of men being gods and other objects of worship, ie, idols, being gods.
A better definition is "an object or being that is deemed (truly or falsely) superior in any way and worthy of greater respect than others" That definition is broad enough to cover most if not all uses of the word "god" in scripture.
Until trinitarians are willing to really look at scripture instead of their threeology, they will continue to believe error instead of truth
We as believers are instructed by Jesus the Christ of GOD to not call any a fool and to be eager to explain the reasons, opinions, and effects of our faith to any.
Show me how I disrespected GOD by attempting to remind you of the direction of GOD.
are you turned against me so easily due to a minor rebuke? If I didn't care for you then I would have let it ride.
I'm not offended so much as surprised. And not surprised so much as disappointed.
But I'm not your righteous judge and my opinion won't make or break you. I'm not really speaking opinion though; I'm reiterating the Word of GOD found within sacred scripture. Take it how you want, though I would much prefer you took it as intended, which is a reminder of your own love of GOD and as such; all creation, and your neighbor, not just your brother.
Being on the defensive for excess amounts of time can take its toll on you. Please understand that my words were not an agreement with those whom you called stupid.
Where you make your mistakes is believing God is a person. Jesus became flesh some 2000 years ago, yet he has always existed. God, 'the father' is not older than God 'the son' and as confusing as this seems, it has been well understood by theologians for centuries.
And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
Was he god or not?
You are right, God is not a human, so how can God tell Moses that God made Moses a god.
Your definition of the word "theos" or "elohim" ie, god is the problem
It is far too narrow
If you are looking for an evening dress, and go into a dress shop and ask to see evening dresses, the salespeople can point you to evening dresses. But not all dresses are evening gowns, are they?
To say that the word dress means evening gown is far too narrow to be useful in general
Likewise, the word "god" as theologians of the trinitarian persuasion have used "god" is far too narrow to be used in Biblical studies. For scripture speaks of men being gods and other objects of worship, ie, idols, being gods.
A better definition is "an object or being that is deemed (truly or falsely) superior in any way and worthy of greater respect than others" That definition is broad enough to cover most if not all uses of the word "god" in scripture.
Until trinitarians are willing to really look at scripture instead of their threeology, they will continue to believe error instead of truth
Right, except for Jesus. He was not like other men in every way....according to God's UNtruth. :doh:
I guess her claim is that it was the HOLY SPIRIT here who groaned and was troubled, instead of our Lord's own human spirit. "Who knoweth the things of a man except the spirit of man that is in Him?"
John 11:32-34
32 Then when Mary was come where Jesus was, and saw him, she fell down at his feet, saying unto him, Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. 33 When Jesus therefore saw her weeping, and the Jews also weeping which came with her, he groaned in the spirit, and was troubled. 34 And said, Where have ye laid him? They said unto him, Lord, come and see.
Our Lord Jesus Christ well knew the things of man AND the things of God. He was both in all ways.
1 Corinthians 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
And the Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
Was he god or not?
You are right, God is not a human, so how can God tell Moses that God made Moses a god.
Your definition of the word "theos" or "elohim" ie, god is the problem
It is far too narrow
If you are looking for an evening dress, and go into a dress shop and ask to see evening dresses, the salespeople can point you to evening dresses. But not all dresses are evening gowns, are they?
To say that the word dress means evening gown is far too narrow to be useful in general
Likewise, the word "god" as theologians of the trinitarian persuasion have used "god" is far too narrow to be used in Biblical studies. For scripture speaks of men being gods and other objects of worship, ie, idols, being gods.
A better definition is "an object or being that is deemed (truly or falsely) superior in any way and worthy of greater respect than others" That definition is broad enough to cover most if not all uses of the word "god" in scripture.
Until trinitarians are willing to really look at scripture instead of their theology, they will continue to believe error instead of truth
All of this you say is very mixed up. You really need to talk to a minister. Do you know what a minister is for? They are there to help you follow God's word. Do not try to do it yourself. You need to have someone more educated and one called to preach to set you straight on your thinking.
All of this you say is very mixed up. You really need to talk to a minister. Do you know what a minister is for? They are there to help you follow God's word. Do not try to do it yourself. You need to have someone more educated and one called to preach to set you straight on your thinking.
Oh, the usual, he's got me over a barrel, he is actually has truth and scriptural logic, and I have none so oatmeal gets to be insulted instead of replied to.
