How is God a Just God AND a Savior?

[KenH]

The problem comes in when people understand aspects of redemption differently and are ignorant of other views.

But he is obviously lacking in understanding when it comes to views other than his own.

Bill Parker is a friend of mine. I have heard lots and lots of his messages. He has published several books. I have eaten with him and talked with him in person back in May. He is not ignorant of the views of others.

Now you are equating the gospel of Jesus Christ with one's understanding of imputation, which would mean it is not Christ but our understanding of the effect of redemption that saves.

Ignorance in understanding the imputation of Christ's righteousness to God's elect and Christ as the Lord our Righteousness is extremely dangerous.

For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. - Romans 10:3

 

[Van]

CEV
Christ never sinned! But God treated him as a sinner, so Christ could make us acceptable to God.
MOUNCE
He made him who knew no sin to be a sin-offering for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
NLT
For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ.
TLV
He made the One who knew no sin to become a sin offering on our behalf, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.
2Co 5:21 (NASB)
He made Him who knew no sin to be [fn]sin in our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
Footnote: Or Sin Offering.

Thus the basis of the false doctrine that Jesus was "sin" and also "just" is the majority choice of translators to perhaps unwittingly create an inconsistency in God's inspired text.

God sacrificed the just (His sinless lamb) for the unjust (all sinners) to satisfy His justness. So the answer to the question "How is God a just God and Savior" is simple, the cross of Christ.

 

[KenH]

@Van I had previously told you that I would not be responding to you any further on this board. In my post #14 in this post I quoted you and responded. I apologize.

 

[Van]

@Van I had previously told you that I would not be responding to you any further on this board. In my post #14 in this post I quoted you and responded. I apologize.

Apology accepted.

2 Corinthians 5:21 Jesus was our sin offering, the just for the unjust so we could become the righteousness of God in Him.

 

[JonC]

Bill Parker is a friend of mine. I have heard lots and lots of his messages. He has published several books. I have eaten with him and talked with him in person back in May. He is not ignorant of the views of others.



Ignorance in understanding the imputation of Christ's righteousness to God's elect and Christ as the Lord our Righteousness is extremely dangerous.

For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. - Romans 10:3

It does not matter who is a friend of who. I'm not talking bad about the pastor. I might even agree with his view of imputation.

But in the end of the day he is asking people to believe his view is the only one that glorifies Christ and presents God as just and the justifier of sinners. That is asking people to believe a lie.

I was giving him the benefit of the doubt. If you are correct, then the pastor is intentionally dishonest.

Maybe he isn't ignorant of other views. Maybe he knows his isn't the only one that glorifies Christ while presenting God as just and justifier. Maybe he is lying to the church so that they will depend on him rather than God. I don't know.

But I prefer to think better of people.

Romans 10:3 offers no support for your position. It also does not justify your pastor friend teaching his own understanding as if it was God's Word.

I've preached from the same ground on which your friend now stands. He needs to be more careful.

 

[KenH]

But in the end of the day he is asking people to believe his view is the only one that glorifies Christ and presents God as just and the justifier of sinners.

The gospel is the only view that glorifies Christ and presents God as just God AND a Savior. Bill Parker is a faithful preacher of the gospel of Christ.

I take personal umbrage at you calling him a liar.

I encourage you, as well as anyone else reading this post, to read this book(for free), entitled What is Salvation?:

SKU-000697434_TEXT.indd (b5z.net)

Also, this is a GREAT website:

Reign of Grace Ministries at Eager Avenue Grace Church in Albany, Georgia (rofgrace.com)

 

[JonC]

The gospel is the only view that glorifies Christ and presents God as just God AND a Savior. Bill Parker is a faithful preacher of the gospel of Christ.

I agree that the gospel is the only view that glorifies Christ and presents God as just God AND a Savior.

And I don't doubt that Pastor Parker is a faithful preacher of the gospel of Christ.

My point is that faithful preachers of the gospel of Christ should not diminish one another's positions by claiming theirs is the only interpretation that glorifies Christ and preserves God as just and justifier.

 

[JonC]

@KenH

Let me give you an example of what I mean.

I could be a preacher who holds Recapitulation as true (I'm not) and be faithful to the gospel of Christ. Now, Recapitulation highlights Christ as the "Last Adam". But if I were to say that Recapitulation is the ONLY understanding that views Christ as the "Last Adam" then I would have made a false statement.

There are two possibilities that could account for the error.

I could simply not understand other views (ignorance of how Ransom Theory, Christus Victor, Satisfaction, Penal Substitution Theory, etc. view Christ as "the Last Adam"). Were this the case then I may be an honest teacher, just ignorant in that I lack in understanding other views.

OR, I could understand the other views and that they also present Christ as the "Last Adam" yet choose to lie to the congregation. Maybe this is so that they would not stray from my understanding (what I believe is the correct view). If I keep them ignorant of other views then they are more likely to hold what I believe is true. Then I may be a pastor with good intentions, but I would also be dishonest and leaning on my own understanding by forcing it upon others without their knowledge.

A good Pastor would teach Scripture, explain other interpretations, offer tge reason he believes his correct, and let God's Word stand.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Christians would be better people of they would explain their views rather than trying to explain away the positions of others. Perhaps that is a lesson this pastor would benefit in learning (a lesson he could easily learn by reading Paul's first letter to the church in Corinth).

The very same Paul wrote some rather harsh, but truthful words in Galatians 1:6-9. Or how about Galatians 5:12?

 

[KenH]

@JonC It is clear that we disagree about the gospel of Christ and the necessity of believing the one true gospel of Christ. Let's just leave it at that and disengage from each other in this thread. I am not ecumenical. Okay? I don't go along with the idea that some apparently have that "Well, as long as you believe certain historical facts about Jesus, or well, just as long as you love Jesus, nothing else really matters."

 

[JonC]

@JonC It is clear that we disagree about the gospel of Christ and the necessity of believing the one true gospel of Christ.

We may, but that is why I am asking (to flesh out if you truly believe "another gospel").

Here is where we now stand:

I have not disagreed with your position of imputation (I have not said either way, other than pointing to Isaiah 61:10...and I susoect we agree there)..


Where we disagree is if it is appropriate for a pastor to mislead a congregation (regardless of intent) into believing the pastor's interpretation of Scripture is the only interpretation that addresses the issues in question. I believe it is wrong (it is lening on one's own understanding).

You present the pastors understanding of imputation as the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Regardless of the validity of that pastors interpretation, if it is taken as the gospel of Christ then it is "another gospel".

There is only one true gospel. What you need to do is provide a passage that teaches one must agree with your pastors interpretation of imputation in order to be saved. Prove all of those Christians who hold different interpretations are lost.

There is only one gospel. This gospel is held by Calvinists, non-Calvinists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Catholics, Lutherans....by ANY person who is a child of God.

They may disagree in understandings, but these are disagreements in understanding the same gospel that was the power of their salvation.

 

[JonC]

The very same Paul wrote some rather harsh, but truthful words in Galatians 1:6-9. Or how about Galatians 5:12?

Exactly. And this is what @KenH is doing.

He is telling us that his pastors understanding on imputation IS the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I'm not saying his view of imputed righteousness is wrong. I am, however, saying that it is not the gospel itself.

Christians, even we'll meaning ones, often overstate their position. I pray this is what Padtor Parker and Ken have done. But I don't know that. Both could hold to "another gospel". Both could lean on their understanding of imputed righteousness as the gospel itself.

 

[KenH]

There is only one gospel. This gospel is held by Calvinists, non-Calvinists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Catholics, Lutherans....by ANY person who is a child of God.

I disagree. The gospel of Christ is the gospel of Christ. Imputation is taught in the Bible. Christ fulfilled all of the conditions for God's elect. Christ alone is the Lord our Righteousness.

Looking to man fulfill conditions of various kinds is a false gospel.

Looking to man to have some part in creating his own righteousness is a false gospel.

Saying that man does not have to have a perfect righteousness to stand before a perfectly holy God is another gospel.

There is no salvation in a false gospel.

There is no other way for a man to have his sin debt paid except for his sins to have been imputed to Christ and Christ to have paid his sin debt.

There is no other way for a man to have a perfect righteousness except to have Christ's righteousness imputed to him.

This all very clear to those whose eyes and ears have been opened by God in His power:

For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

(emphasis mine)

 

[KenH]

“What do I need to cure me of the deadly disease of sin? I need a glorious person who is able to work out a perfect righteousness so that I can stand before God, the righteous Judge, and be whole. Well, who is it? That’s Christ. And His righteousness came out of His obedience unto death. And so we wear His cloak, so to speak, symbolically, meaning His righteousness is imputed to us.” - Bill Parker, pastor of Eager Avenue Grace Church in Albany, Georgia

 

[KenH]

"Do You Really Want to Know the Gospel?" - by Henry Mahan

Audio of Sermon - SermonAudio - Media Player

Text of Sermon - (Microsoft Word - 2006.01.25.A Do You Really Want to Know the Gospel - Henr\205) (sermonaudio.com)

 

[JonC]

I disagree. The gospel of Christ is the gospel of Christ. Imputation is taught in the Bible. Christ fulfilled all of the conditions for God's elect. Christ alone is the Lord our Righteousness.

Looking to man fulfill conditions of various kinds is a false gospel.

Looking to man to have some part in creating his own righteousness is a false gospel.

Saying that man does not have to have a perfect righteousness to stand before a perfectly holy God is another gospel.

There is no salvation in a false gospel.

There is no other way for a man to have his sin debt paid except for his sins to have been imputed to Christ and Christ to have paid his sin debt.

There is no other way for a man to have a perfect righteousness except to have Christ's righteousness imputed to him.

This all very clear to those whose eyes and ears have been opened by God in His power:

For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

(emphasis mine)

I know we disagree.

To be clear - so that I understand your position - and no foul regarding your answer (I am asking you....nobody else....and you will not be penalized for your answer).

I believe the gospel of Jesus Christ as recorded as the gospel itself (the gospel, literally, is Christ).

But what you are talking about is doctrines about the gospel.

A man may believe the boat will save him if he gets in. Your argument is the man must get in, but also understand physics as it reates to buoyancy, the construction process of the boat, etc.

I believe that the Father made His Son - who knew no sin - sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.

But I believe your doctrine - NOT the passage - is false.

So in your mind I believe "another gospel" because I reject your understanding of that passage.

To you, does that mean I am not saved or does that mean that there are many gospels of Jesus Christ that is the power of salvation?

 

[Alan Gross]

There are some who ridicule me and other Gospel preachers for emphasizing the Biblical truth of imputation - the elect's sins imputed to Christ whereby He was justly condemned by the Father and for which He died on their behalf, and Christ's righteousness imputed to the elect whereby they are all justified before God and from which they are all born again and brought to faith in Christ and repentance of dead works. But any of you who do not understand the value of imputation, think about this -- When we preach the Gospel stating emphatically that the Lord Jesus Christ died for the sins of His people, that He died "the just for the unjust," we beg the question (from the Word of God), how can God be just to punish His Son Who knew no sin, and how can God be just to declare His people righteous who have no righteousness in themselves? The only answer that glorifies the Lord is by the imputation of our sins to Christ and HIs righteousness to us. When we ask, "How can God justify the ungodly," we can say that it is by the death of Christ, and this is not wrong. He justifies His elect by the death of Christ. But God must be just when He justifies sinners. HOW CAN THIS BE? It is only by the Divine reality of imputation. Herein is God both A JUST GOD AND A SAVIOR, and there is no other way.

- by Bill Parker, pastor of Eager Avenue Grace Church in Albany, Georgia, via Facebook.

"Mercy and Truth are met together;
Righteousness and Peace have kissed each other." Psalm 85:10

 

[Alan Gross]

The gospel of Christ is not a smorgasbord(Galatians 1:6-9).

Galatians 1:6-9;

6 "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7 "Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you,
and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8 "But though we, or an angel from heaven,
preach any other gospel unto you
then that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 "As we said before, so say I now again,
If any man preach any other gospel unto you
than that ye have received, let him be accursed."

 

[Alan Gross]

@JonC I am not ecumenical. Okay? I don't go along with the idea that some apparently have that "Well, as long as you believe certain historical facts about Jesus, or well, just as long as you love Jesus, nothing else really matters."

That religion would mass-produce lost folks into being deceived,
by thinking they have a home in Heaven and, "All is Well with Their soul".

 

[JonC]

That religion would mass-produce lost folks into being deceived,
by thinking they have a home in Heaven and, "All is Well with Their soul".

The problem here is Christians (true Christians) teaching a false gospel (their understanding of Scripture in addition to the gospel of Jesus Christ).

I was saved believing a general free will presentation of the gospel. I came to reject that free will presentation, but it was still the same gospel that saved me.

Many here are like that. Several on this board have testified of being saved in Arminian churches only to become a Calvinist later in their Christian walk. Others were saved in Reformed churches and abandoned Reformed doctrine later in life.

To say that one's understanding of the effects of the gospel is the gospel itself is to teach "another gospel".

@KenH suggests that anybody who rejects Pastor Parkers understanding of imputation is lost (they believe "another gospel"). That is simply a false teaching.

And that is probably why God commanded us not to make such judgments of other Christians.

People can hold incorrect beliefs about the gospel by which they were saved. If this were not true then spiritual growth and learning them rough studying God's Word is a myth.