Spiritual death has been "passed" from Adam

[JonC]

But let's see how 'not an enemy of God' works as a translation of yasar.
Psalms 25:8. 'Good and not an enemy of God is the LORD......'
Hosea 14:9 'For the ways of the LORD are not an enemy of God; the righteous walk in them, but transgressors stumble in them.'.
Exodus 15:26. 'If you diligently heed the voice of the LORD your God, and do what is not an enemy to God in His sight, give ear to all His commandments and keep all His statutes........'

Yep! It works wonderfully . Have you considered a career in Bible translation?

I see. You confused my statement with a definition. It's a common mistake.....I guess.

 

[The Biblicist]

I agree with this.

My only point is that I believe that God's righteousness extends beyond what is moral. So I believe that the law is only one aspect of God's righteousness (it shows what is required to obtain righteousness through moral behavior and serves to demonstrate our sin).

It seems that this discussion centers around your understanding and application of the term "moral." Why can't you accept that "moral" cannot be limited to conduct or to a code, but primarily defines character? This is the way it is used in scripture as the writers use moral terms "righteousness" and "unrighteousness" not merely to describe conduct but to define character. God describes his own character in moral terms.

No moral code was provided mankind until Moses, and yet character had been defined in moral terms since creation. The law REVEALS the nature of God's moral character as righteous and holy in contrast to the nature of man's moral character as unrighteous and unholy.

 

[loDebar]

but we agree that sin exists without a moral code?

 

[JonC]

It seems that this discussion centers around your understanding and application of the term "moral." Why can't you accept that "moral" cannot be limited to conduct or to a code, but primarily defines character? This is the way it is used in scripture as the writers use moral terms "righteousness" and "unrighteousness" not merely to describe conduct but to define character. God describes his own character in moral terms.

No moral code was provided mankind until Moses, and yet character had been defined in moral terms since creation. The law REVEALS the nature of God's moral character as righteous and holy in contrast to the nature of man's moral character as unrighteous and unholy.

The problem, for me, goes back to the RCC. I do not believe that this forensic view of the Atonement is legitimate. It is a hold over from the Roman Catholic Church (it is a Reformed doctrine....a Protestant idea). I believe that the Church has existed throughout the centuries plagued by Catholic doctrine. I believe that true church doctrine has existed along side the falseness presented by the Catholic Church. So I believe that prior to any idea of forensic justificaiton there has existed a justification (and a righteousness) that stands apart from the law.

That is, granted, my view among other ideas. But it is where I stand. I do not believe the true church is Protestant nor do I believe it is dependent upon Protestant doctrine. That said, I do not deny that God has used both the Catholic and Protestant Church.

 

[The Biblicist]

So I believe that prior to any idea of forensic justificaiton there has existed a justification (and a righteousness) that stands apart from the law.

"the righteousness which is of the law" refers to righteousness obtained by obedience to the law. Christ did not obey the law to be righteous and we cannot obey the demands of the law whether lost or saved. Why? Because the righteousness demanded by the law requires is above and beyond what we are capable of doing as demands being perfect "EVEN AS God is perfect" and "being holy EVEN AS God is holy." Hence, it reveals what kind of righteousness belongs exclusively to sinless beings. Righteousness is not obtained by obedience to law either by Christ or by us, it simply reveals the righteousness that characterizes Christ - sinlessness. Hence, righteousness must be imparted and imputed but never is obtained by obedience because if you have to obey it to obtain it, it proves you are already disqualified, already failed, already violated it.

 

[loDebar]

Can one sinless man save many? If one was sinless but not God how many are saved?

 

[InTheLight]

While taking a quick glance over the thread titles on the forum title page I saw:

Spiritual Death has been "passed" from Admin



Carry on...

 

[The Biblicist]

Can one sinless man save many? If one was sinless but not God how many are saved?

According to the Divine Law that governs the rules of atonement (Leviticus) one without spot and blemish can suffer and be put to death "for the people...because of their transgresssions" (Lev.16).

American, Roman and Jewish jurisprudence denies the just can suffer for the unjust but divine jurisprudence which governs atonement demands that only the "just" can be an atonement for the unjust.

 

[The Biblicist]

While taking a quick glance over the thread titles on the forum title page I saw:

Spiritual Death has been "passed" from Admin



Carry on...

Physial death is the consequence, not the cause of spiritual death. We are subject to physical death in the womb from the time of conception and thus there must be a cause for physical death inseparable from our own person while in the womb for that to be so.

 

[loDebar]

According to the Divine Law that governs the rules of atonement (Leviticus) one without spot and blemish can suffer and be put to death "for the people...because of their transgresssions" (Lev.16).

American, Roman and Jewish jurisprudence denies the just can suffer for the unjust but divine jurisprudence which governs atonement demands that only the "just" can be an atonement for the unjust.

We are not under the Law, We sin on our own and as the Law shows our sin, we still suffer the consequences of that sin as all did from Adam to Moses who had no knowledge of the Law. Physical death is not the consequences of sin, spiritual death is.The physical suffers from the sin but is not the sin.

If one man. one guy, lived a sinless physical life, who would have eternal life?

 

[The Biblicist]

We are not under the Law,

Never said we are! I said it is Divine Law = God's Word that governs and defines atonement and that is revealed in the book of Leviticus. Jesus was born under the Law and Jesus did fulfill the divine demands as a proper atonement which are determined and defined by God's Law/Word.

 

[loDebar]

You only respond to phrases you choose. Answer the last question.

If one man. one guy, lived a sinless physical life, who would have eternal life?

 

[InTheLight]

While taking a quick glance over the thread titles on the forum title page I saw:

Spiritual Death has been "passed" from Admin



Carry on..

.

Physial death is the consequence, not the cause of spiritual death. We are subject to physical death in the womb from the time of conception and thus there must be a cause for physical death inseparable from our own person while in the womb for that to be so.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

No moral code was provided mankind until Moses

Wrong.
And Moses gave nothing to "mankind".
The Mosaic Law was for the Jews.
Mankind in general has always had a moral code, and they are abundantly aware of it.

 

[loDebar]

According to the Divine Law that governs the rules of atonement (Leviticus) one without spot and blemish can suffer and be put to death "for the people...because of their transgresssions" (Lev.16).

American, Roman and Jewish jurisprudence denies the just can suffer for the unjust but divine jurisprudence which governs atonement demands that only the "just" can be an atonement for the unjust.

MORE DEFLECTION, what is your answer?

If one person, one normal person WAS sinless, would they get to go to heaven?

 

[The Biblicist]

Wrong.
And Moses gave nothing to "mankind".
The Mosaic Law was for the Jews.
Mankind in general has always had a moral code, and they are abundantly aware of it.

How do you explain the universal language used by Paul in Romans 3:19-20 and the singular "Law"?

19 ¶ Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

 

[loDebar]

Rom 2:12
¶
For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

The law did not make them sinner, it makes us understand our guilt

 

[HeirofSalvation]

How do you explain the universal language used by Paul in Romans 3:19-20 and the singular "Law"?

19 ¶ Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

There's nothing to explain.
Every man is under law.
Even those without Torah are a law unto themselves.
But the Torah was given to the Jews, not gentiles.
The Universal Moral Law is eternal, universal, understood by all man and not disputed.
Moses didn't give "mankind" that law, he gave God's covenant people their Torah.

Do you labour under the assumption that "Thou shalt not murder" was some unique new revelation not ever comprehended by man?

Did Moses have to flee Egypt after killing the Egyptian because Pharaoh read the Pentateuch?
Did Cain fear losing his life because of what was written in Exodus 20?
Does Genesis 9 prescribe the death penalty for the shedder of blood because of the Ten Commandments?
God doesn't need the Torah to condemn, it wasn't written to you anyway.

 

[The Biblicist]

There's nothing to explain.
Every man is under law.
Even those without Torah are a law unto themselves.
But the Torah was given to the Jews, not gentiles.
The Universal Moral Law is eternal, universal, understood by all man and not disputed.
Moses didn't give "mankind" that law, he gave God's covenant people their Torah.

Do you labour under the assumption that "Thou shalt not murder" was some unique new revelation not ever comprehended by man?

Did Moses have to flee Egypt after killing the Egyptian because Pharaoh read the Pentateuch?
Did Cain fear losing his life because of what was written in Exodus 20?
Does Genesis 9 prescribe the death penalty for the shedder of blood because of the Ten Commandments?
God doesn't need the Torah to condemn, it wasn't written to you anyway.

No, I basically agree with you. However, neither the law of conscience or the law of Moses was the basis of universal death between Adam and Moses. But, there was the law in Genesis 2:17 that was the basis for universal death and Paul makes a very clear and repetitive case that was the law that brought universal death upon all mankind.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 11 PM Pacific.