The plausibility of John 3:18

[The Biblicist]

I agree. It was by that one transgression that sin entered the world.

Ah, but that is not what that text says. It says by one man's transgression condemnation came, and it came upon all men. This is the root cause for our condemnation, not the consequential causes in our own experience (depraved nature, unbelief, doing evil, etc.) all of which we are brought under further condemnation without doubt.

But "sin" is not that "one transgression", it is more than that. It is the power of sin, or the "sin nature", that has enslaved mankind.

Look at the whole context from Romans 5:12-19 and see if you can find any other stated kind of sin other than that one singular sin" for judgement, death, condemnation, made sinners upon all men? It is not sin, but the consequence of sin - "death" or separation from God and subjugation to Satan is where the "power" of sin is traced. The void of God is filled by the love for darkness and hatred of light and that is the substance of the "power" of sin. Just as the "power" of godliness is ultimately traced to the kingdom of God so the "power" of sin is ultimatey traced to the Kingdom of darkness.

 

[MB]

They know there is God, but they know Him as Creator and not Saviour. YUGE difference. They don’t know the gospel of the Christ via natural revelation. Psalms 19 and Romans 1 speak about NR, not a gospel proclamation.

So when Adam sinned he was committing suicide and he knew he would die? That doesn't seem likely. He knew there was nothing to be gained from it but death. So why die?

MB

 

[JonC]

They know there is God, but they know Him as Creator and not Saviour. YUGE difference. They don’t know the gospel of the Christ via natural revelation. Psalms 19 and Romans 1 speak about NR, not a gospel proclamation.

I agree that they do not know Christ as Savior (only the saved do). BUT I am not sure that your comments are not heresy in regard to knowing God as Creator, and even the Godhead. It seems you are reducing this suppressed knowledge of God as no knowledge at all. They are guilty of rejecting God. I do not think that Paul left you enough wiggle room to avoid that conclusion.

The gospel is that the Savior has come. Even the lost should acknowledge the gospel. But they do not because of what they have rejected.

 

[JonC]

@SovereignGrace , It seems to me that the reason that you reject John 3:18 (as literally rendered) is simply because you cannot accept that those who have not heard the gospel message can be held guilty for rejecting Christ. This IS the point Paul was addressing. They are without guilt, period.

Salvation is NOT dependent on man, period. It is not an issue of a man deciding if he will believe or if he will not believe. You reduce the gospel down to human decision and effort - like deciding wither to have a t-bone steak or a salad. It is not that simple.

Mankind is guilty of rejecting Christ because the Godhead is known. You may not accept it, but all of Creation was created THROUGH Christ and FOR Christ. Man cannot be saved without the gospel, but man can be condemned for rejecting Christ nonetheless. All your wiggling will not change this truth.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I agree that they do not know Christ as Savior (only the saved do). BUT I am not sure that your comments are not heresy in regard to knowing God as Creator, and even the Godhead. It seems you are reducing this suppressed knowledge of God as no knowledge at all. They are guilty of rejecting God. I do not think that Paul left you enough wiggle room to avoid that conclusion.

The gospel is that the Savior has come. Even the lost should acknowledge the gospel. But they do not because of what they have rejected.

Here’s what I mean. Look at all the idols in the world, even today. I read an article from 4/2018 that said 3.2 BILLION ppl out of 7.1 billion(~ 40%) haven’t heard the gospel. Many have some sort of god they worship. They know there is a god, but they don’t know the true God of the Bible. To truly know the Father is to know the Son.

 

[JonC]

Here’s what I mean. Look at all the idols in the world, even today. I read an article from 4/2018 that said 3.2 BILLION ppl out of 7.1 billion(~ 40%) haven’t heard the gospel. Many have some sort of god they worship. They know there is a god, but they don’t know the true God of the Bible. To truly know the Father is to know the Son.

This is proof that the Godhead is made known through Creation. Paganism looks for God on it's own terms. BUT it looks for God because GOD HAS MADE HIMSELF KNOWN. They are guilty for rejecting God, period.

 

[SovereignGrace]

@SovereignGrace , It seems to me that the reason that you reject John 3:18 (as literally rendered) is simply because you cannot accept that those who have not heard the gospel message can be held guilty for rejecting Christ. This IS the point Paul was addressing. They are without guilt, period.

I am not rejecting that verse, but your twisting of it.

He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.[John 3:18]

He is condemned already. End of story.

 

[The Biblicist]

@SovereignGrace , It seems to me that the reason that you reject John 3:18 (as literally rendered) is simply because you cannot accept that those who have not heard the gospel message can be held guilty for rejecting Christ. This IS the point Paul was addressing. They are without guilt, period.

Salvation is NOT dependent on man, period. It is not an issue of a man deciding if he will believe or if he will not believe. You reduce the gospel down to human decision and effort - like deciding wither to have a t-bone steak or a salad. It is not that simple.

Mankind is guilty of rejecting Christ because the Godhead is known. You may not accept it, but all of Creation was created THROUGH Christ and FOR Christ. Man cannot be saved without the gospel, but man can be condemned for rejecting Christ nonetheless. All your wiggling will not change this truth.

The term "Christ" is a redemptive term attached to the gospel not to the Godhead.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

.
I an suggesting that those who are condemned are so because they do not believe.

I believe that all judgment has been given to the Son. At the same time the passage reads Christ judges no one. I interpret this to be a final judgment centered on Christ.

The condemned are in their sins, as were we. They are now condemned for disbelief because if they would believe they would be saved.

No. With respect, this is the deadly danger of taking one text and bouncing up and down on it like a trampoline.
Those who are condemned are so because they do not believe, but the reason that they are condemned is that their sins are not forgiven. 'Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.' On the cross, Christ has paid in full for the sins of everyone who will trust in Him (John 1:36) -- He is the propitiation for their sins (1 John 1:5 - 2:2).. But He who does not believe is not united to Christ by faith and therefore has no propitiation for His sins and will therefore die in them.

 

[Reformed1689]

James 4 7

How in the world does James 4:7 show that sin is never a moral transgression?

 

[loDebar]

How in the world does James 4:7 show that sin is never a moral transgression?

James 4 :17 my bad

We can sin by not doing what we should,

 

[JonC]

I am not rejecting that verse, but your twisting of it.

He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.[John 3:18]

He is condemned already. End of story.

I am not twisting anything. I am saying that he who does not believe has been judged already because he has not believe in the name of Christ. The verse states "he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

If you disagree than I suspect it is your theology guiding your misinterpretation as the text is very plainly stated. Unless, of course, you reject that Christ IS the "only begotten Son of God"....that is the only part I was not exact on (I used "Christ" instead of "only begotten Son of God").

 

[JonC]

No. With respect, this is the deadly danger of taking one text and bouncing up and down on it like a trampoline.
Those who are condemned are so because they do not believe, but the reason that they are condemned is that their sins are not forgiven. 'Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.' On the cross, Christ has paid in full for the sins of everyone who will trust in Him (John 1:36) -- He is the propitiation for their sins (1 John 1:5 - 2:2).. But He who does not believe is not united to Christ by faith and therefore has no propitiation for His sins and will therefore die in them.

Of course they will die in their sins. Scripture repeatedly states that forgiveness is obtained through repentance and belief, and that Christ is the Object of that belief.

That said, the "deadly danger" is John's writing, not JonC's writing.

 

[JonC]

James 4 :17 my bad

We can sin by not doing what we should,

More than that, Jesus, Paul, and John both present "sin" as something other than a moral transgression. All three present it as a power to which mankind is enslaved.

 

[loDebar]

More than that, Jesus, Paul, and John both present "sin" as something other than a moral transgression. All three present it as a power to which mankind is enslaved.

Not enslaved but common bad decisions against God's will

 

[Reformed1689]

James 4 :17 my bad

We can sin by not doing what we should,

That does not show that sin is never a moral transgression which is what I asked you to prove. That being said, if I see someone being beaten, and I do nothing to try and stop it, whether it is intervene or call the police, do you think that is not a moral transgression?

 

[The Biblicist]

More than that, Jesus, Paul, and John both present "sin" as something other than a moral transgression. All three present it as a power to which mankind is enslaved.

I asked for scriptural references to support this assertion but never noticed any given. Is sin ever found in a context or a relationship where there is no moral implications or relationship?

 

[JonC]

Not enslaved but common bad decisions against God's will

I didn't come up with "enslaved" (that is actually the word the Bible uses), but I get your point.

 

[JonC]

I asked for scriptural references to support this assertion but never noticed any given. Is sin ever found in a context or a relationship where there is no moral implications or relationship?

Yes. And I did give you several on the Atonement thread (Jesus speaking of "sin" as a power enslaving man, Paul and John speaking of sin in the same way, Jesus and Paul speaking of "sin" as an issue between the interpersonal relationships between members of the "body", etc.).

Don't take my word for it....I know you are tempted to do so .....but research for yourself. Paul uses "sin" as a power over mankind more than he uses "sin" as a moral (or immoral) action. Jesus spoke of "sin" in at least three contexts (as a power, a moral issue, and an interpersonal issue between believers). Paul did the same. John dealt with sin as a moral issue and as a power (perhaps as an interpersonal issue, but I cannot think of a passage).

 

[Reformed1689]

Yes. And I did give you several on the Atonement thread (Jesus speaking of "sin" as a power enslaving man, Paul and John speaking of sin in the same way, Jesus and Paul speaking of "sin" as an issue between the interpersonal relationships between members of the "body", etc.).

Don't take my word for it....I know you are tempted to do so .....but research for yourself. Paul uses "sin" as a power over mankind more than he uses "sin" as a moral (or immoral) action. Jesus spoke of "sin" in at least three contexts (as a power, a moral issue, and an interpersonal issue between believers). Paul did the same. John dealt with sin as a moral issue and as a power (perhaps as an interpersonal issue, but I cannot think of a passage).

So let me get this straight, we are condemned because of a power that we have nothing to do with and somehow controls us? Then why in the world are we at fault?