In what sense did Christ die for all sinners?

[JonC]

If its not he correct viewpoint, then you are gutting out of the bible Pauline Justification

No. If not correct what is ruled out is what you believe Paul was teaching.

"Pauline Justification" actually means the understanding that Paul intended his words to convey.

Some believe Paul meant what is stated in God's Word (objective, based on the text of Scripture or "what is written")) while others believe Paul meant what it is they believe Paul's words teach
(subjective, various beliefs based on theological conclusions and revisions throughout history).

For example, Calvinism is dependent on viewing Scripture through over a millenia of theological developments and reforms to bring those conclusions closer to Scripture.

Jesus died in the stead and place of Indisual sinners, not for an entire group or a plan

This is an excellent example of what I mean by "what is written" vs "what is taught". In God's Word there are no indications that Jesus died in the stead and place of individual sinners. BUT this came to be considered what Scripture taught over centuries of theological developments and reforms (specifically the reform of Aquinas' doctrine).

As evidence, consider the fact that nowhere in Scripture is Jesus' death said to have been in our stead or place. What Scripture DOES state is that Jesus died for our sins, recieved the stroke that we deserved, it is by His stripes we are healed, etc.

There are several doctrines like this. Earlier you took for granted that the Fall changed human nature. The closest we can get to that idea, however, is that the Fall revealed human nature.

IMHO we need to be more careful with God's Word. We are all subject error, but we really should be able to at least identify what is in Scripture and what we infer from Scripture. That way we have Scrioture in common, do not elevate our understanding to the level of Scripture (and us to God), and are able to honestly discuss differences in opinion.

 

[JonC]

This is getting a little off the OP, but... I'm interested in your thoughts here.

(1) Christ's death is a substitutionary sacrifice that satisfies God's demands of "justice" regarding sin.

Could you tell me how you disagree with my statement above? I would ask that you critique exactly what I wrote and not any other presuppositions of what Penal Substitution theory is or is not.

Peace to you brother

Sure.

1. I disagree that Christ's death is a substitutionary sacrifice (instead of us). Instead I believe Christ's death to have been representative substitution.

In legal contexts, "representative substitution" refers to replacing a party in a lawsuit or legal proceeding with their legal representative. The representative does not suffer instead of the party being represented. Insofar as Jesus goes, this would be presented as Jesus being another type of Adam (a "Second Adam").

2. I disagree that this sacrifice satisfies the demands of justice regarding sin. Instead I believe that Jesus became a curse, was made sin for us, shared in our infirmity, and died for our sins. I believe that Jesus died under the curse, under the powers of sin and death, the powers of darkness, that held mankind in bandage.


The reason I disagree is that there are no passages that states Jesus died in our stead or that Jesus' death satisfied God's demands of justice. This idea came about by reforming Aquinas' view and shifting from divine merit to divine justice.

 

[Wesley Briggman]

I know what free will is and I know what salvation is and both are found in scripture. Those that freely place their faith in Christ will be saved.

Please share the passage of scripture supporting free will.

 

[Silverhair]

Please share the passage of scripture supporting free will.

Pro_3:5-7 Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths. Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and depart from evil.

Jos_24:15
And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

Joh_7:17
“If anyone’s will is to do God’s will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority.”

Rev_3:20
“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”

1Co_10:13
No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.

Rom_10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Rom_10:13 For "whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved."

Gal 1:6 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel,

Mat_6:15 "But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.

Rom_6:12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts,

Mar_1:15 and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel."

I could go on but I am sure you get the idea. The bible shows man's God given free will.

"God took the ultimate risk: He gave us free will, and in doing so, took the risk that we would reject Him; that our choice would result in eternal separation from Him.

Creatures that are free to love must be free to choose.

God's love and gift of freedom are genuine - so genuine that they include the power to choose evil and, if we wish, to freely send ourselves to Hell."
Kenneth Miller, in Finding Darwin's God [pp. 285-291]

 

[Charlie24]

Pro_3:5-7 Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths. Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and depart from evil.

Jos_24:15
And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

Joh_7:17
“If anyone’s will is to do God’s will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority.”

Rev_3:20
“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”

1Co_10:13
No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.

Rom_10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Rom_10:13 For "whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved."

Gal 1:6 I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel,

Mat_6:15 "But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.

Rom_6:12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts,

Mar_1:15 and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel."

I could go on but I am sure you get the idea. The bible shows man's God given free will.

"God took the ultimate risk: He gave us free will, and in doing so, took the risk that we would reject Him; that our choice would result in eternal separation from Him.

Creatures that are free to love must be free to choose.

God's love and gift of freedom are genuine - so genuine that they include the power to choose evil and, if we wish, to freely send ourselves to Hell."
Kenneth Miller, in Finding Darwin's God [pp. 285-291]

Matt. 23:37

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Hebrews 3:12

"Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God."

 

[Paleouss]

1. I disagree that Christ's death is a substitutionary sacrifice (instead of us). Instead I believe Christ's death to have been representative substitution.

In legal contexts, "representative substitution" refers to replacing a party in a lawsuit or legal proceeding with their legal representative. The representative does not suffer instead of the party being represented. Insofar as Jesus goes, this would be presented as Jesus being another type of Adam (a "Second Adam").

Another great day, JonC.

It would seem that after readying what you wrote. My OP fits nicely within your concept of "representative substitution".

I'm trying to think of a more clear distinction, for me, between the two (Substitutionary vs Representative). What I see at first blush, is a distinction that takes one in a different direction from the typical Limited Atonement debate.

Substitutionary would seem to revolve around payment for individual sin (debating whether it be more like commercial or criminal law). Substitutionary would seem to focus on "particular" sin (like of each individual).

Would you say that Representative, in contrast, might revolve around a concept of "global" sin instead of "particular" sin? That is, representative substitution might forward the idea that Christ's death was "of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world." (Dort, 2nd Head, Article 3)? This statement from Dort appears to be global in nature.

Peace to your brother.

 

[JesusFan]

This is getting a little off the OP, but... I'm interested in your thoughts here.

(1) Christ's death is a substitutionary sacrifice that satisfies God's demands of "justice" regarding sin.

Could you tell me how you disagree with my statement above? I would ask that you critique exactly what I wrote and not any other presuppositions of what Penal Substitution theory is or is not.

Peace to you brother

Death of Jesus paid our sin dent owed to The father for breaking the Law, and appeased the due wrath and judgement/condemnation that we earned as sinners

 

[JesusFan]

Assumptions and theology don't go together, but we all have them (presuppositions). Disagreements often arise when people do not share the same assumptions.

But here a lot of the disagreement is talking past one another and using non-agreed upon definitions (different presippositions).

For example, Calvinists focus on atoning for individual sinful acts/ thoughts. Others view sinful acts as manifestations of a deeper problem addressed by Christ, and these others don't always agree with what this deeper problem is.

Penal Substitutionary model of Atonement not only view but seems to fit what the Apostles, especially Paul, saw it as being, in the very framework of Isaiah 53

 

[JesusFan]

Actually after researching a bit about Pelagius it would seem he was victim of Augustine's mischaracterization. "To a large degree, "Pelagianism" was defined by its opponent Augustine. He was attacked by Augustine and his supporters, who had opposing views on grace, predestination and free will."
"Augustine certainly wanted Pelagius condemned as a heretic because they disagreed on theological matters. But, aside from Augustine’s (kind-of) friend Jerome, not many others thought Pelagius was a heretic. He was largely praised by fellow writers and theologians for his teachings and commitment to the Christian life while he was alive – something that angered Augustine to no end."

Augustine, as has been shown, do draw a number of his theological views from the pagan philosophies that he had been involved with.

Now as for Arminius, his views on regeneration were biblical. He taught that regeneration is the rebirth or a spiritual birth. Which is what we see in scripture.

Have not looked at Baxter so will not comment on him.

he denied Original Sin, denied have now a fallen sin nature, as basically we were still sorta good, not spiritually dead in sins and transgressions as Bible affirms

 

[JesusFan]

Another great day, JonC.

It would seem that after readying what you wrote. My OP fits nicely within your concept of "representative substitution".

I'm trying to think of a more clear distinction, for me, between the two (Substitutionary vs Representative). What I see at first blush, is a distinction that takes one in a different direction from the typical Limited Atonement debate.

Substitutionary would seem to revolve around payment for individual sin (debating whether it be more like commercial or criminal law). Substitutionary would seem to focus on "particular" sin (like of each individual).

Would you say that Representative, in contrast, might revolve around a concept of "global" sin instead of "particular" sin? That is, representative substitution might forward the idea that Christ's death was "of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world." (Dort, 2nd Head, Article 3)? This statement from Dort appears to be global in nature.

Peace to your brother.

Under penal view though of the Atonement, the Father accepts as payment in full the work of atoning for His own elected remnant people so Jesus dies for each individual who is within that cooperate Group, aka, His church

 

[JesusFan]

No. If not correct what is ruled out is what you believe Paul was teaching.

"Pauline Justification" actually means the understanding that Paul intended his words to convey.

Some believe Paul meant what is stated in God's Word (objective, based on the text of Scripture or "what is written")) while others believe Paul meant what it is they believe Paul's words teach
(subjective, various beliefs based on theological conclusions and revisions throughout history).

For example, Calvinism is dependent on viewing Scripture through over a millenia of theological developments and reforms to bring those conclusions closer to Scripture.




This is an excellent example of what I mean by "what is written" vs "what is taught". In God's Word there are no indications that Jesus died in the stead and place of individual sinners. BUT this came to be considered what Scripture taught over centuries of theological developments and reforms (specifically the reform of Aquinas' doctrine).

As evidence, consider the fact that nowhere in Scripture is Jesus' death said to have been in our stead or place. What Scripture DOES state is that Jesus died for our sins, recieved the stroke that we deserved, it is by His stripes we are healed, etc.

There are several doctrines like this. Earlier you took for granted that the Fall changed human nature. The closest we can get to that idea, however, is that the Fall revealed human nature.

IMHO we need to be more careful with God's Word. We are all subject error, but we really should be able to at least identify what is in Scripture and what we infer from Scripture. That way we have Scrioture in common, do not elevate our understanding to the level of Scripture (and us to God), and are able to honestly discuss differences in opinion.

We have original Sin affecting us, which means that just as Adam was judged at the Fall and cursed with both a Spiritual death and physical death to come, so are we all who are in Him have now received dsame Judgement as he did already, and only by being found in Christ can that be reversed and cancelled out

 

[JesusFan]

Sure.

1. I disagree that Christ's death is a substitutionary sacrifice (instead of us). Instead I believe Christ's death to have been representative substitution.

In legal contexts, "representative substitution" refers to replacing a party in a lawsuit or legal proceeding with their legal representative. The representative does not suffer instead of the party being represented. Insofar as Jesus goes, this would be presented as Jesus being another type of Adam (a "Second Adam").

2. I disagree that this sacrifice satisfies the demands of justice regarding sin. Instead I believe that Jesus became a curse, was made sin for us, shared in our infirmity, and died for our sins. I believe that Jesus died under the curse, under the powers of sin and death, the powers of darkness, that held mankind in bandage.


The reason I disagree is that there are no passages that states Jesus died in our stead or that Jesus' death satisfied God's demands of justice. This idea came about by reforming Aquinas' view and shifting from divine merit to divine justice.

He took upon Himself Hell while upon that Cross, as he experienced for first and only time the Wrath of Go towards sins, and what the lost will fce in hell, eternal separation from God the father

 

[Silverhair]

Matt. 23:37

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Hebrews 3:12

"Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God."

Free will is all over the bible once you get past your restrictive theological grid.

 

[atpollard]

Free will is all over the bible once you get past your restrictive theological grid.

Sort of ... there is a strong tendency to 'customize' the definition of "FREE WILL" and argue past each other over two completely different things ... by all sides. It is a very sloppy and imprecise term.

FEW believe that people are "robots" [no 'free will'] and FEW believe that people choose Christ without God doing anything to help [complete 'free will' untainted by sin] ... but MANY accuse their opponent of holding that belief. Thus reducing most arguments to "semantics".

 

[Silverhair]

he denied Original Sin, denied have now a fallen sin nature, as basically we were still sorta good, not spiritually dead in sins and transgressions as Bible affirms

You should do some research and not just repeat talking points.

From what I have seen the Pelagius is just the calvinist boogeyman.

 

[Silverhair]

Sort of ... there is a strong tendency to 'customize' the definition of "FREE WILL" and argue past each other over two completely different things ... by all sides. It is a very sloppy and imprecise term.

FEW believe that people are "robots" [no 'free will'] and FEW believe that people choose Christ without God doing anything to help [complete 'free will' untainted by sin] ... but MANY accuse their opponent of holding that belief. Thus reducing most arguments to "semantics".

I agree we need a clear understanding of what biblical free will actually is

This would seem to fit the bill

What can free will mean if not free will?
Free will is the capacity for agents to choose between different possible courses of action (aka choosing “otherwise”). This does not require the person to be able to choose anything, nor does it require the absence of other influencing factors. It only requires the ability for a person confronted with a decision to be able to choose from among one or more possible options.
Free will is closely linked to the concepts of moral responsibility, praise, guilt, sin, and other judgements which apply only to actions that are freely chosen.

"In Chapters 18 and 33 are contained some of the most thorough, carefully expressed, and absolutely clear discourses on the topic of the responsibility of the individual for his or her own sins found anywhere in the Bible. These passages provide a valuable correction to the potential errors of fatalism, rigid determinism, and blame-avoidant judgmentalism."

Eze 18:4 "Behold, all souls are Mine; ... The soul who sins will die.

Father
Eze 18:5 "But if a man is righteous and practices justice and righteousness 9 ...—he is righteous and will surely live,

Son
Eze 18:10 "Then he may have a violent son 13 ... his blood will be on his own head.

Grandson
Eze 18:14 "Now behold, he has a son who has observed all his father's sins... observing does not do likewise.

Eze 18:17 ...he will not die for his father's iniquity, he will surely live.

Eze 18:20 "The person who sins will die.

Eze 18:21 "But if the wicked man turns from all his sins...he shall not die. 22 "All his transgressions ...will not be remembered 23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?

Eze 18:24 "But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness...he will die

Eze 18:26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, ... he will die.
Eze 18:27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness ...he will save his life.
Eze 18:28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

Eze 18:30 ..."Repent and turn away from all your transgressions,
Eze 18:31 Cast away from you all your transgressions ....and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die
Eze 18:32 "Therefore, repent and live."

The life or death of the people depended on their individual responses to God. Those who continued to rebel would die; those who repented and turned from sin would live.

 

[Charlie24]

I agree we need a clear understanding of what biblical free will actually is

This would seem to fit the bill

What can free will mean if not free will?
Free will is the capacity for agents to choose between different possible courses of action (aka choosing “otherwise”). This does not require the person to be able to choose anything, nor does it require the absence of other influencing factors. It only requires the ability for a person confronted with a decision to be able to choose from among one or more possible options.
Free will is closely linked to the concepts of moral responsibility, praise, guilt, sin, and other judgements which apply only to actions that are freely chosen.

"In Chapters 18 and 33 are contained some of the most thorough, carefully expressed, and absolutely clear discourses on the topic of the responsibility of the individual for his or her own sins found anywhere in the Bible. These passages provide a valuable correction to the potential errors of fatalism, rigid determinism, and blame-avoidant judgmentalism."

Eze 18:4 "Behold, all souls are Mine; ... The soul who sins will die.

Father
Eze 18:5 "But if a man is righteous and practices justice and righteousness 9 ...—he is righteous and will surely live,

Son
Eze 18:10 "Then he may have a violent son 13 ... his blood will be on his own head.

Grandson
Eze 18:14 "Now behold, he has a son who has observed all his father's sins... observing does not do likewise.

Eze 18:17 ...he will not die for his father's iniquity, he will surely live.

Eze 18:20 "The person who sins will die.

Eze 18:21 "But if the wicked man turns from all his sins...he shall not die. 22 "All his transgressions ...will not be remembered 23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?

Eze 18:24 "But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness...he will die

Eze 18:26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, ... he will die.
Eze 18:27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness ...he will save his life.
Eze 18:28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

Eze 18:30 ..."Repent and turn away from all your transgressions,
Eze 18:31 Cast away from you all your transgressions ....and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die
Eze 18:32 "Therefore, repent and live."

The life or death of the people depended on their individual responses to God. Those who continued to rebel would die; those who repented and turned from sin would live.

Ezekiel 18:26 is one of the most important verses in understanding "free will."

It proves that man can willfully choose God, and willfully turn away from God.

It's one of the most chilling verses in all of Scripture, that man controls his own destiny (Heaven or Hell) with the Almighty.

 

[atpollard]

"In Chapters 18 and 33 are contained some of the most thorough, carefully expressed, and absolutely clear discourses on the topic of the responsibility of the individual for his or her own sins found anywhere in the Bible. These passages provide a valuable correction to the potential errors of fatalism, rigid determinism, and blame-avoidant judgmentalism."

Eze 18:4 "Behold, all souls are Mine; ... The soul who sins will die.

Father
Eze 18:5 "But if a man is righteous and practices justice and righteousness 9 ...—he is righteous and will surely live,

Son
Eze 18:10 "Then he may have a violent son 13 ... his blood will be on his own head.

Grandson
Eze 18:14 "Now behold, he has a son who has observed all his father's sins... observing does not do likewise.

Eze 18:17 ...he will not die for his father's iniquity, he will surely live.

Eze 18:20 "The person who sins will die.

Eze 18:21 "But if the wicked man turns from all his sins...he shall not die. 22 "All his transgressions ...will not be remembered 23 "Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?

Eze 18:24 "But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness...he will die

Eze 18:26 "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, ... he will die.
Eze 18:27 "Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness ...he will save his life.
Eze 18:28 "Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die.

Eze 18:30 ..."Repent and turn away from all your transgressions,
Eze 18:31 Cast away from you all your transgressions ....and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die
Eze 18:32 "Therefore, repent and live."

The life or death of the people depended on their individual responses to God. Those who continued to rebel would die; those who repented and turned from sin would live.

So how do we reconcile that with:

John 6:41-45 [ESV]
41 So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven." 42 They said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, 'I have come down from heaven'?" 43 Jesus answered them, "Do not grumble among yourselves. 44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets, 'And they will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me--

Romans 3:9-20 [ESV]
9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; 11 no one understands; no one seeks for God. 12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." 13 "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips." 14 "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness." 15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16 in their paths are ruin and misery, 17 and the way of peace they have not known." 18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes." 19 Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

Ephesians 2:1-10 [ESV]
1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-- 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved-- 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

Ezekiel appears to say it is all "OUR CHOICE", while John and Ephesians appear to say it is "GOD'S CHOICE" and Romans appears to say that we all "CHOOSE NO". There are an infinite number of verses to support both sides (thus the reason the debate still rages on with 'scripture pong').

Here is the issue in a nutshell ...

John 3:16-21 ESV]
16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.
18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.
19 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. 20 For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed.
21 But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God."

The goal is to get to [v16] "whoever believes".
Nobody STARTS life at "whoever believes", we all start at sinners in need of a savior.
But [v19-20] state that people that "do wicked things" (sinners like us), "do not come to the light" and "love darkness" ... which implies that we will HIDE rather than CHOOSE to be "whosoever believes".
Furthermore, [v21] tells us that the good works are not carried out IN US, they are carried out "in God".
At first glance, that sort of leaves us stuck on the "condemned already" side of [v18] unless GOD does something.

 

[JonC]

He took upon Himself Hell while upon that Cross, as he experienced for first and only time the Wrath of Go towards sins, and what the lost will fce in hell, eternal separation from God the father

Are you quoting Scripture or a theological opinion?

If Scripture:

1. What passage speaks of Jesus as experiencing God's wrath?

2. What passage states that Jesus experienced what the lost will experience in Hell?

3. What passage states that Jesus experienced any, much less an eternal, separation from God the Father?


If not Scripture:

Why post it as if it were Scripture itself?


I ask those questions because I believe that foundational doctrines (I believe the topic here is foundational as doctrines are built upon our understanding of the Cross) should be biblical ("what is written") rather than biblical opinion (what various people or sects believe is taught).

 

[JonC]

We have original Sin affecting us, which means that just as Adam was judged at the Fall and cursed with both a Spiritual death and physical death to come, so are we all who are in Him have now received dsame Judgement as he did already, and only by being found in Christ can that be reversed and cancelled out

I agree that man was cursed to work the land (as opposed to the status in Eden), that man' became like God knowing good and evil, and that death entered through Adam and spread to all men because all have sinned.

I'm not sure where you read that other stuff, and I do not hold that belief myself. If you don't mind, provide the book that gave you that belief and I'll take a look. Insofar as what I believe on this topic, that will be the Bible.