Are words of life meant for only those already living?

[Skandelon]

So, as through one offense, there resulted condemnation to all men,
so also, through one righteous deed, there resulted justification of life to all men.
We know that inserting the words "there resulted" into the text is correct by simple logic. The offense of Adam resulted in condemnation to all men--no one disputes that. Adam represented all his people (everybody) in the garden. When he sinned, we fell with him. There was a result, an actual result to his sin: condemnation. It follows that "there resulted" should be in the second part of the sentence as well because the second part has the same syntax as the first and says "also." That is, Paul is implying a parallel between the actions of Adam and the actions of Jesus. Adam represented his people; Jesus represented His.
1) The structure of the first and the second parts of the verse are the same: adverb(s), preposition, noun, (verb place), noun, and object.
Paul is trying to make it clear in this verse that the deeds of the respective persons had definite results upon those whom they represented. That is why the verse is really two sentences of identical structure.
Adam's sin resulted in condemnation to all
Jesus' sacrifice resulted in justification to all
Where the first Adam brought condemnation to all, the second Adam (Jesus is called the second Adam in 1 Cor. 15:45) brought justification to all--that is what the text says, despite the apparent problem of "all people being justified."
Justification is being declared legally righteous before God. If someone is declared legally righteous before God, then he is saved. Only the saved are justified: "Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him " (Rom. 5:9). Since the Scriptures clearly teach that not all men are saved (Matt 25:31-33), we know that the "all" in this verse can't refer to every individual. It must refer to something other than everyone who ever lived. I conclude that the "all" can only mean the Christians. God was so sure of His predestination that to Him, the elect are the "all" He wishes to save.

Gene,

I was reading back through some post just now and came across this.

I agree that there seems to be a problem with the idea of "all people being jusified," but I wonder if you may be overlooking some other potential options. Your conclusion, if I'm correctly understanding, it that Adam represented "his people" while Christ represented "his people."

But the text clearly says "all men" and there is no argument that we were all represented by Adam, so why would you just assume that we weren't all represented by Christ, being the second Adam?

The only reason you make that assumption is because you presume that providing all men justification must equal salvation unto eternal life for all men, but I submit that one can be justified in some sense, yet still condemned. How?

By Christ's death all men are justified in regard to the law (Old Covenant) and therefore will not be judged in regard to the works required by the law in that Covenant. Instead they will be judged by the requirements of the new covenant of Grace. There is only one requirement. FAITH.

So, because of Christ's work on the cross, no one is now born under the curse of the law for it has been fulfilled once and for ALL by Christ. No one is required to meet the standard of the law and in that sense is justified according to the demands of the first covenant.

So, does that mean everyone one is saved? No. Why? Because there is a New Covenant by which men will be judged. Men will not longer be judged by the demands of the law, they will be judged by their response to the message of Grace. Those under the law will be judged by the law, but we are under Grace and will be judged by our response to the gospel of grace.

John 12:44 Then Jesus cried out and said, "He who believes in Me, believes not in Me but in Him who sent Me. 45 And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me. 46 I have come as a light into the world, that whoever believes in Me should not abide in darkness. 47 And if anyone hears My words and does not *believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. 48 He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him--the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.

You can see from this verse that Christ is not judging men for their sin in regard to the law, instead he is judging them based upon their response to his Words, which are the gospel message of reconcilation for the world.

Let's look at an analogy (which all fall short, so don't nit-pick it). Let's say you break into a home and steal all their money and you get caught three weeks later. You are brought before the judge and the plantiff, who you stole the money from, says, "I will not press charges IF you return my money." So, in a sense you have been pardoned from punishment, but its conditional. You must return the money, but you have already spent it so even if you tried you couldn't meet that condition for pardon, so the condition initially set is too high for you to meet (like the law). The plantiff son stands up and says, "Here is the money dad, the debt is paid." The plantiff then look to the man and says, "The condition that you couldn't meet has now been met by my son, and now all I ask you to do is repent and you will be forgiven." (Pause)

At this moment would it be inaccurate to say that this man has shown you incrediable mercy? Would it be inaccurate to say that he has provided justification? The condition hasn't been met but the provision has been made. The plantiff has done everything needed for the defendant to be completely pardoned.

In that regard the defendants have been justified.

 

[Wes Outwest]

Wonderfully accurate depiction of God's Grace Skandelon. The one with the compliant, the one who satisfies the complaint, and the one who benefits by the actions of THE SON! What marvelous Grace.

 

[Skandelon]

Gene? Are you there?

 

[Skandelon]

Gene????

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by Skandelon:
Gene????

It was them sireens. They done loved him up, and turned him into a horny toad.

 

[GeneMBridges]

so why would you just assume that we weren't all represented by Christ, being the second Adam?

Sorry I didn't get back here sooner. I'm having headaches to beat the band these days, because of some medicine I'm taking, so I try not to do the computer very long at one sitting.

Was Adam's fall actual or potential? Your view is that Adam's fall was actual but Christ's was necessarily potential. That's the only way you can end up with general atonement.

It is inconsistent exegetically to say that Adam's fall was actual with respect to all men and then say that this is not true of the atonement in Christ. This is no assumption on my part, it is an assumption on YOUR part that is inconsistent with your assumption about the fall in Adam. You must approach the text with potential atonement in mind in order to arrive at your conclusion. I'm approaching the text in a manner that is hermaneutically consistent.

Did all really fall in Adam or not? Yes, of course they did. You do not deny this.

Then if the all who are in Christ is all men everywhere then are they really justified or not? If so, then you end up with universalism. If not, you end up with limited atonement. The only way you can say what you say is to say that the atonement was potential and not actual, but that would require the fall in Adam to be potential as well. To do that you must assume that all means all men everywhere and that the design of the atonement is general. On the other hand, my interpretation simply follows on with the same logic applied to 5:12 with regard to the fall in Adam.

Adam’s one sin brought death into the world as the certain consequence of sin. This was real and actual, correct?

Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come."

This was real and actual. The text is explicit on that, correct?

But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many

The text does not say ALL. It says MANY. All men died in Adam, many are justified in Christ. The atonement is somehow limited, correct?

For if by one man's offence death reigned by one;

Which we all affirm was real and actual, not symbolic and potential, correct?

much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

Then why is it necessary exegetically for you to say that this is symbolic and potential and not real and actual?

Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation;

Again, you agree this is real and actual...

even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life'"

Is the actual or potential? To be exegetically consistent it must be actual, not potential. Why?
Because What happens to the representative must, of absolute necessity, also happen to all he represents. Adam's disobedience guaranteed the condemnation of all he represented and Christ’s obedience guarantees the justification of all He represented. If Jesus represents all men, not only those that are given to Him by the Father (John 6), then you end up with universalism."This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day." John 6:39

Linguistically, the verbs in Romans 5 are also indicative with respect to both are they not? This necessarily tells us, by the very rules of Greek grammar that these are not potentialities, these are real states. With respect to being made righteous, this is future tense, indicative mood, passive voice. The indicative mood expresses real, actual facts in causal, temporal, and result clauses. This use fits that description. Thus we are talking about an actual, not a potential. By defintion, if the atonement is actual, it must be limited in scope, not power, or you end up with universalism. Therefore, this passage, exegetically, grammatically can not support general atonement because of the mood of the verbs.

Also, who is the "we" of 5:1? Is it also all men everywhere or Christians? The text indicates Christians. It is also inconsistent to plug in a potential and general atonement on that basis as well and then say that the "we" of 5:1 refers only to Christians, because these verses about Adam and Christ are expounding on those verses preceding. 5:6 uses "we" again. "While WE were still helpless..." Now, is Paul being hypothetical here or not? That is absolutely necessarily grammatically to render a teaching on general atonement out of this passage. What clue do you see that I do not that this is demanded by the text? Is it not more consistent to say that the Christ died for the ungodly, specifically us, e.g. us Christians, since there is nothing here to demand a hypothetical "we" in 5:6 and 5:1, particularly when we do not believe that Paul is speaking of a hypothetical all men with respect to Adam later in this discourse. You end up flipping between the hypothetical, potential "all" and the real, actual "all" if you go with your view, not to mention ignoring the indicative mood of the verbs and what that means grammatically.

You also end up with Jesus interceding for those for whom He did not die, and the Father not granting the requests of the Son, which puts the Godhead at cross purposes.

[ January 05, 2005, 11:46 PM: Message edited by: GeneMBridges ]

 

[Ray Berrian]

The first Adam brought to sinners the Adamic nature, the proclivity toward sinning. The second Adam {Christ} died for every sin that ever will be committed by sinful human beings. [John 1:29 & I John 2:2] The Adam in the Garden affected actual sin for every human created being. Jesus died for the actual not potential sin of every human soul. This is what makes unbelief so wicked and such an affront to Almighty God.

At the judgment bar of God every sinner will be without excuse in that Jesus actually died for the sins of the world. [John 1:29 & I John 5:19]

Those who believe savingly become His elect. The second Adam is ‘spiritual’ [I Cor. 15:46c] He is from Heaven [vs. 47] and this last Adam is ‘a quickening spirit.’ Those who trust in Jesus for salvation are made alive in the Spirit and at death will be spirited away to the felicity of Heaven. [II Cor. 5:8 & Philippians 1:23]

All sinners are represented in Christ as He has actually died for all of His lost created beings that have come from the first Adam in the Garden of Eden.

Jesus plan was not to die just for only some of His lost created human beings. His love is for all. [John 3:16] Christ's attribute of Divine justice precludes Him from any partiality. [Deut. 10:17; Job 34:19 & Romans 2:11]

Now watch some poster ignore most or all of this truth, backed up with the Word of God Himself.

 

[Skandelon]

Gene,

Did you actually read my post? I only ask because you really didn't appear to interact with my points. I was arguing that both were "actual."

You presume, as you did the first time, that Jesus must be "potential" in order to believe in a general atonement. That is what I argued against in my last post and you really didn't address my points of contention, you simply restated your position. I understand your position, now I want you to deal with my arguments against it. Here is a summary of it copied for you:

By Christ's death all men are justified in regard to the law (Old Covenant) [that is not potential, its actual] and therefore will not be judged in regard to the works required by the law in that Covenant. Instead they will be judged by the requirements of the new covenant of Grace. There is only one requirement. FAITH.
So, because of Christ's work on the cross, no one is now born under the curse of the law for it has been fulfilled once and for ALL by Christ. No one is required to meet the standard of the law and in that sense is justified according to the demands of the first covenant.

BTW, your argument concerning "many" must not be "all" fails because then that would necessarily mean that not "all" died either. The same "many" who died is the same "many" who Christ represented. My point was that a person can be "justified" in regard to the law, yet still not be saved. How? When means for salvation is not the law but faith; and the reason for condemnation is not breaking the law but unbelief.

 

[Wes Outwest]

Very concise and CLEAR, easy to understand SKANDELON!

Keep up the good work of Clarifying God's Word!

 

[Ray Berrian]

All people have died spiritually in Adam; the second Adam makes it possible for all to be adopted sons and daughters of the living God. If the Effectual Call is correct then many of the writers of the New and Old Covenant made mistakes in their manuscripts and the Scripture is not as flawless as we all believe. Either Jesus ‘ . . . tasted death for every person or He did not. [Hebrews 2:9] If God ‘cherry picks’ His elect than the first Adam’s Fall was more deadly than the second Adam’s Divine ability to save all lost souls. Did Jesus die only for His select, favored ones, or has His love extended to each of us? John the Apostle makes it radiantly clear that Christ did die for our sins, but did not neglect atoning for all of the sons and daughters of Adam’s/God’s human race. [I John 2:2] There is no favoritism in the balances of the Lord’s attribute of Divine Justice.

Either God through Christ has ‘taken away the sins of the world’ [John 1:29] or John the Baptist was wrong. If we cannot trust the truth that Jesus removed the ‘sins of every son and daughter of Adam’ we could jump the fence also and begin to doubt whether He was and is the ‘Lamb of God.’ Did He not pay the ‘ransom for all?’ Jesus through the Apostle Paul to the church reminds us not only that He is the only Mediator for sinners and saints, but that His precious blood is adequate in it’s ability to take away anyone’s sins.

Confession of sins

is what makes His covering of sins viable. [Acts 2:21 & I John 1:9]

 

[Skandelon]

Gene?

 

[Skandelon]

I guess Gene left???