Sinners do not owe God to pay for their own debt then?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Confusion on just what is PSA
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
Men owe God for their very existence. But no, there is no debt for men to pay to God in order to settle a sin account. It simply doesn't work that way.
It was not a matter of law keeping. It was a matter of the Incarnation, Death, and Resurrection. Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.
One problem here is you keep looking as if Jesus came to obey the Law rather than to fulfill it. The Law itself bears witness to Christ - not the other way around.
Jesus fulfilled all of the requirements of the law, correct? It was Him living a sinless life, being God, and death by His shed blood in our place, correct?
The "requirements"? No. Jesus fulfilled the law - Christ is the One to Whom the Law was but a witness.
In other words, Jesus did not come to obey the law so that His perfect law-keeping could be attributed to us. Instead Jesus is the righteousness of God manifest apart from the Law as the Law and prophets bear witness to Christ.
Likewise, the Law was not a set of rules we had to obey in order to merit righteousness. Paul makes this very clear when he explains that the purpose of the Law was not to justify but to magnify to mankind their own sinfulness.
Adam was under the Covenant of Works before the fall though, correct?
And if Jesus ever failed one time to not perfectly keep the law, was he still qualified to be messiah?
I looked through the concordance for "covenant of works" and did not see the term listed. Additionally, I copied and pasted Genesis 1-4 on a word document and did a search rendering absolutely nothing for "covenant of works". I used the NASB. Am I spelling it right?
I cannot find the trinity or the Bible in there either, so none of them count?
Thank you. Please understand that I cannot respond to what you know, but only to what you write.
That's strange; I looked through a concordance for 'Trinity' and couldn't find that. Then I looked for 'silly, brainless arguments' and that wasn't there either, but you are certainly using one here.
I know from a previous discussion you believe the doctrine of a Triune God only implied in Scripture. And you know I disagree. So I won't go into that topic as we know where we stand.
What verses do you find that place men under a "covenant of works" in terms of reconciliation to God?
You are welcome. My belief here is written, and has been discussed by you and I previously. I'm not going to repeat it, but can assure you it necessitates the Cross.Thank you. Please understand that I cannot respond to what you know, but only to what you write.
You can't find verses stating Scripture as God "breathed", or verses proving God is Spirit, Father and Son? Start a thread and ask for help. I'm sure many here will point you to the applicable verses.
But where is this "covenant of works" spoken of?
The Lord Jesus certainly fulfilled the law, but He also fulfilled the requirements of the law.
Romans 2:26. 'Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements [Gk. dikaioma] of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision?' But of course, there is no one, circumcised or not, who keeps these requirements, which is why the Lord Jesus had to come and suffer and die in the place of sinners.
Colossians 2:14. '.....Having wiped out the handwriting of requirements [Gk. dogma] that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.'
Romans 8:4. 'That the righteous requirements [Gk. dikaioma) might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.'
I should also add that He pays our 'sin debt' on the cross. We pray, 'forgive us our debts' (Matthew 6:12), and surely the parable of the unjust servant makes no sense unless the vast debt forgiven is our sins?
A false dichotomy, I think. To be sure, the Lord Jesus is the righteousness of God personified, but His perfect righteousness is nonetheless credited to us and our sins laid upon Him (Romans 5:2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Corinthians 1:30)
Deuteronomy 5:33. 'You shall walk in all the ways which the LORD your God has commanded you, that it may be well with you, and that you may prolong your days in the land which you shall possess' (cf. also Exodus 19:5-6). Romans 8:3-4 does not teach that the law is weak in itself, but 'through the flesh'-- sinful men and women can't keep it. Had Adam kept the law given to him by God, doubtless he would have merited eternal life (Romans 4:4). But he fell, breaking most, if not all of the Decalogue. It was not the law that was weak, it was Adam and Eve. So in our fallen state, the law can save no one, but that does not mean that the moral law is not a set of rules that Christians must seek to obey (1 Corinthians 9:21); in fact they are written on the Christian's heart (Hebrews 8:10) and he does not find them burdensome (1 John 5:3); in fact he finds them delightful (Psalm 1:2; 40:8; 119:passim).
In fact, I find it 'necessarily contained' in Scripture (1689 Confession). However, it is not explicitly stated as you know very well.
The Covenants Part 1. The Covenant of Works
Yes, I know it isn't stated.
Are you suggesting that the Law was intended as a means of salvation?
Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 11 PM Pacific.
This thread will be closed sometime after 11 PM Pacific.
God, who knows the end from the beginning, knew that mankind would not keep the law. But, 'the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.' It would have saved Adam had he kept it and it would save us if we would keep it, but we don't, so it doesn't and that's why we need a Saviour.
Yes, the law is holy, just and good. That does not mean the law was meant to save man. In fact, Paul tells us just how wrong this type of conclusion really is. Instead, Paul tells us that the Law was meant to magnify sin.
How does it do this? Because the "Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good" and men are not.
Is there a reason that you believe the law that God gave to Adam in the form of a commandment, one he transgressed, served a different purpose than the Law God gave to Israel, the one they transgressed?
- Status