What Changed?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Rufus said:
As stated earlier if Adam's sin is not imputed to all his progeny then neither is the Last Adam's perfect obedience imputed to the "many" to make them righteous.
Click to expand...

Adam's sin was not imputed to his offspring; his offspring inherited his spiritually dead nature. Having been ejected from God's presence, without perfect communion with God they lacked perfect knowledge, and without perfect knowledge, they sinned. In this way the effect of Adam's disobedience passed onto all men.
 
Rufus said:
Only God's elect who are indwelt by the Holy Spirit can produce the fruits of the Spirit. It's an oxymoron to say those in the flesh (in Adam) can either hear the Spirit and produce His fruit.

The only ones who HEAR God are his sheep -- those whom God effectually calls (John 10).
Click to expand...

How then do men learn of the father before coming to faith in Christ?
 
Cameron143 said:
Jesus not only performed every commandment perfectly outwardly, but inwardly as well. This is not true of the unregenerate. There is more to the keeping of a commandment than mere outward conformity. The Pharisees themselves were whited sepulchers full of dead men's bones. So is anyone who only appear outwardly obedient, but who do not have the same inward reality. Thus, a rich man can throw an exorbitant amount into an offering and a poor widow can give a mite and it be far greater.
Click to expand...

What does this mean? How did the Samaritan in Luke 10:30 not perform his deed of compassion perfectly? He acted from the heart. Jesus' said he did the will of God, ie, loved his neighbor as his self.
 
ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
You avoided the point I was making. Christ's righteousness was imputed to us via blood covenant exchange, ie, we received his righteousness and he received our sins. Adam had no way to impute his sin to us. Sin isn't a substance that gets incorporated into DNA or flesh
Click to expand...

Adam did not impute his sin to us. God did! Evidently, according to Rom 5:12ff. God in eternity decreed that Adam would be the federal head of the human race. As such, all Adam's progeny participated in Adam's sin -- again, by God's eternal decree.

I quoted Rom 5:15, 18-19 to PT recently. You should study those verses. Also see 1Cor 15:21-22. Note carefully how v. 22 begins, "For as in Adam all die..." The operative phrase here is "in Adam".

Also, I believe Original Sin (different subject from imputed sin) affected the whole man; therefore, when Adam sinned it impacted him physiologically -- i.e. physically, mentally, logically, emotionally, spiritually. And I believe the sin nature is passed on to the human race by man's sperm, which accounts for the necessity of the virgin birth.
 
ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
What does this mean? How did the Samaritan in Luke 10:30 not perform his deed of compassion perfectly? He acted from the heart. Jesus' said he did the will of God, ie, loved his neighbor as his self.
Click to expand...

Why would you not believe that the Good Samaritan was one of God's elect, instead of a reprobate sinner?
 
ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
Adam's sin was not imputed to his offspring; his offspring inherited his spiritually dead nature. Having been ejected from God's presence, without perfect communion with God they lacked perfect knowledge, and without perfect knowledge, they sinned. In this way the effect of Adam's disobedience passed onto all men.
Click to expand...
See Rom 5:15, 18-19; 1Cor 15: 21-22. Again, if Adam's sin is not imputed to us by divine decree than neither is the Last Adam's righteousness imputed to any of us, nor any of our sins imputed to Him. Adam is a type of Christ, and the typology would be virtually destroyed if we reject the imputation of Adam's sin to his progeny.
 
Rufus said:
Adam did not impute his sin to us. God did!
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is that God holds mankind responsible for Adam's sin. Not scriptural

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Ezekiel 18:20.
 
Rufus said:
See Rom 5:15, 18-19; 1Cor 15: 21-22. Again, if Adam's sin is not imputed to us by divine decree than neither is the Last Adam's righteousness imputed to any of us, nor any of our sins imputed to Him. Adam is a type of Christ, and the typology would be virtually destroyed if we reject the imputation of Adam's sin to his progeny.
Click to expand...

You keep saying this without any scriptural support. Scripture in fact contradicts it. And you ignore my claim that Christ's righteousness was imputed by covenant exchange.
 
ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
So what you're saying is that God holds mankind responsible for Adam's sin. Not scriptural

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Ezekiel 18:20.
Click to expand...

Of course it's scriptural. Imputation is clearly taught in Romans 5 and 1Cor 15.

The passage you quote is not pertinent to imputation. The passage is talking about personal sins, not imputed sin -- "the soul that [actually] sinneth. Everyone will be judged on the basis of their own personal sins and not on the basis of others' sins.
 
ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
That's avoiding the point. How did the Samaritan know to do good?
Click to expand...
He was a God-fearing believer. How else? God's grace was working in his heart to the extent that he did what was counter-intuitive: He actually loved his enemy! (Jews and Samaritans didn't get along very well, in case you didn't know that.)
 
ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
You keep saying this without any scriptural support. Scripture in fact contradicts it. And you ignore my claim that Christ's righteousness was imputed by covenant exchange.
Click to expand...

I cited passages. Why don't you try reading them? And what precisely is a "covenant exchange"? And which covenant was "exchanged"?
 
Rufus said:
Of course it's scriptural. Imputation is clearly taught in Romans 5 and 1Cor 15.

The passage you quote is not pertinent to imputation. The passage is talking about personal sins, not imputed sin -- "the soul that [actually] sinneth. Everyone will be judged on the basis of their own personal sins and not on the basis of others' sins.
Click to expand...

So explain what imputed sin is
 
Rufus said:
I cited passages. Why don't you try reading them? And what precisely is a "covenant exchange"? And which covenant was "exchanged"?
Click to expand...

In a blood covenant between two parties everything that belongs to one party becomes the other's and vice versa. So that is the exchange I'm referring to. When the new covenant was cut we received Christ's righteousness and he received the debt for our sins. Christ in us, us in Christ. In effect, the two parties become one; at oneness, or at-one-ment, ie, atonement. The only place I know where the word atonement is used in the bible is Romans 5:11 in the KJV. All other bibles it seems translate the word as reconciliation. The word means exchange, ie reconciliation through covenant exchange that produces at oneness, or atonement

And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. Romans 5:11

Atonement
G2643 καταλλαγή katallage (ka-tal-la-ǰee') n.
1. an exchange.
2. (figuratively) an adjustment, reconciliation.
3. (specially) restoration to the divine favor.
 
Rufus said:
He was a God-fearing believer. How else? God's grace was working in his heart to the extent that he did what was counter-intuitive: He actually loved his enemy! (Jews and Samaritans didn't get along very well, in case you didn't know that.)
Click to expand...

But he was unregenerate because Christ hadn't died yet and the spirit hadn't been poured out. So you're explanation verifies what I said earlier that unregenerate people can and do learn of the father through the holy spirit. They have no other way of knowing because there dwells nothing in the flesh that is able to inform them.
 
Rufus said:
Well...I'm operating on the assumption that you know how to read. And I did point to the passage in which imputation is clearly taught. But since you, evidently, don't read too swell, here are the specific texts:

Rom 5:15
15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!
NIV

And,

Rom 5:18-19
18 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.
NIV

As stated earlier if Adam's sin is not imputed to all his progeny then neither is the Last Adam's perfect obedience imputed to the "many" to make them righteous.
Click to expand...

It is obvious that you don't have any scripture that says Adam's sin is imputed to anyone else, nor that Jesus' righteousness is imputed to anyone else. Through the disobedience of Adam, bringing sin and death into the world, many (not all) were made sinners. Those not yet at an age of accountability for deliberately choosing to do evil were not made sinners. If The were, then the scripture would say, "19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man all were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous."

How are the many made sinners through the disobedience of Adam? The text does not say. Was it by Adam and Eve, having set off on a path of distrust toward God and trust toward satan, subsequently keeping on setting bad examples for many of their kids, and many of their kids badly training many of their kids? Maybe. Was it that bring in inevitable mortality to mankind through denial of access to the tree of life, humans were more pressured into taking moral shortcuts to avoiding the suffering and maximising the pleasure they would experience before death? Maybe. But it certainly does not say anywhere that they were made sinners by Adam's sin being imputed to them. That is your inference, but not the only possible inference.

You say, "If Adam's sin is not imputed to all his progeny then neither is the Last Adam's perfect obedience imputed to the "many" to make them righteous."
Nowhere are we told that Jesus' perfect obedience is imputed to anyone. When our sins are removed, we become righteous, clean in God's sight, just as clean as Jesus is in God's sight. We do not need to have Jesus' righteous behaviour imputed to us to become and remain righteous before God. Why did you change "many" to "all" regarding the sinner part of the equation in v. 19? There is no warrant for you to do that. You did it just to write your Doctrines of Grease into the biblical text.
 
ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
What does this mean? How did the Samaritan in Luke 10:30 not perform his deed of compassion perfectly? He acted from the heart. Jesus' said he did the will of God, ie, loved his neighbor as his self.
Click to expand...
Who says the Samaritan didn't act perfectly? I never referred to him. He's your example. I gave 2 examples where this was not the case. And that's the point. A rich man giving millions to feed the poor so that people will think highly of him did not give to the glory of God but the glory of self. His actions were still unacceptable before God even though his action appeared to be noble.
This was in reference to your earlier claim that an unregenerate man would please God. He would not because his actions are motivated by a self love and not a love towards God.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rufus
ChristRoseFromTheDead said:
But he was unregenerate because Christ hadn't died yet and the spirit hadn't been poured out. So you're explanation verifies what I said earlier that unregenerate people can and do learn of the father through the holy spirit. They have no other way of knowing because there dwells nothing in the flesh that is able to inform them.
Click to expand...
This is poor theology. Abraham belonged to Christ and rejoiced to see His day according to Jesus. And to belong to Christ one must be a partaker of the Holy Spirit.
What had yet to be given was the gift of the Father prophesied by Joel which is the baptism with the Holy Spirit foretold also by John of Jesus that He would baptize with fire and the Holy Ghost. This occurred on Pentecost and subsequently throughout the book of Acts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back