Are we born justified?

[pnattmbtc]

 

 

You could make the same argument regarding any person taken into heaven!  Some people will be taken into heaven.  Since there is no partiality with God (see Rom 2:11; Acts 10:34; Eph 6:9), all people will be taken to heaven.

To say that there is no partiality with God means He treats people fairly, not favoring one over another without cause.  But if there is cause, then for God to act one way towards one, and a different way towards another, does not mean God is being unfair.  In regards to children, if indeed it does make a difference how children are raised, which inspiration teaches us (both Scripture and the Spirit of Prophesy), then some children may be taken to heaven and others not, without there being partiality on the part of God.

If your position were true, it wouldn't make any difference how children were raised before the age of accountability as regards their eternal salvation.  This would be a very dangerous position for any parent to take.

Edited May 20, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[Robert]

​It MEANS that one has believed and therefore received the indwelling of the Spirit of Christ. 

​No, absolutely not!  "In Christ" is the gospel.  It refers to Christ as God assuming our corporate humanity from the womb of Mary and thus becoming the last Adam.  "In Christ" we already stand justified, sanctified and glorified.

1 Cor 1:30 "But you--and it is all God's doing--are in Christ Jesus: He has become for us a wisdom which is from God, consisting of righteousness (justification) and sanctification and deliverance...."

 

 

[Robert]

It (in Christ) refers to Christ as God assuming our corporate humanity from the womb of Mary and thus becoming the last Adam.  "In Christ" we already stand justified, sanctified and glorified.

When did Christ as God unite himself to our humanity? At the incarnation.

"Was the human nature of the Son of Mary changed into the divine nature of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person—the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died. Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible." Ellen White

"Humanity died: divinity did not die." Ellen White

Note "humanity" died when Christ as the last Adam died.  Hence "when One died, all died"!  That occurred over 2000 years ago.  

​Paul states that "our old life was crucified with Christ" (Rom 6:6) and that we "died to the law in the body of Christ" (Rom 7:4).  Why?  The law demands our death.  Since all of us share Adam's fallen life that life has already been terminated in the doing & dying of Christ because He assumed our corporate life and has legally saved the human race from under the curse of the law (the 2nd death) and justified us unto life.  

Edited May 21, 2015 by Robert

[pnattmbtc]

No, absolutely not!  "In Christ" is the gospel.  It refers to Christ as God assuming our corporate humanity from the womb of Mary and thus becoming the last Adam.  "In Christ" we already stand justified, sanctified and glorified.

"Maybe not," would be more prudent.  "In Christ" is used different ways, sometimes corporately, sometimes not.  As is so often the case, the context matters.

Forensic justification is not the entirety of the Gospel either, although I understand where you're coming from, which is "good news" vs. "good advice".  However, statements like Jesus' (from memory, so approximate) "If any of you thirst, let him come to me and drink" is certainly the best of good news to any who have experienced it.  If one looks at the Gospels, it's hard to find forensic justification represented anywhere.  It's hard to believe there's no Gospel in the Gospels!

[Robert]

 

"Maybe not," would be more prudent.  "In Christ" is used different ways, sometimes corporately, sometimes not.  As is so often the case, the context matters.

Forensic justification is not the entirety of the Gospel either, although I understand where you're coming from, which is "good news" vs. "good advice".  However, statements like Jesus' (from memory, so approximate) "If any of you thirst, let him come to me and drink" is certainly the best of good news to any who have experienced it.  If one looks at the Gospels, it's hard to find forensic justification represented anywhere.  It's hard to believe there's no Gospel in the Gospels!

​Paul was chosen of both God the Father and Christ to present the gospel in unmistakable clear terms.

Rom 1:1  Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God-- 2 the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures 3 regarding his Son, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David, 4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. 

Gal 1:1 Paul, an apostle—sent not from men nor by a man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father...

 

[pnattmbtc]

 

Why?  The law demands our death.

I think this can be a misleading phrase.  I assume it's based on Gal. 3:13, which speaks of the curse of the law (if you have some other verse in mind, please let me know).  However Galatians 3:13 is a reference to Deuteronomy 28, which speaks of the curses and blessings.  If one looks at this chapter, we can see that these curses and blessings are cause and effect, not an arbitrary penalty or reward prescribed by some law.  The thought is "if you act contrary to what the law says, bad things will result."  

When it comes to the moral law, if one acts contrary to it, death results, but not because of an arbitrary act of power on the part of God to execute those who disobey.  Rather, God is the source of life, and to act contrary to the law is to act contrary to God's character of love, which is to act according to the principle of self-love, which cannot possible lead to anything but death.  One cannot separate oneself from God and live.  So even if the law did not exist (e.g. wasn't known about or written down), it would still be the case that those disobeyed it would die.

Edited May 21, 2015 by pnattmbtc

[Robert]

​

 

No, that's not the context:

 

Gal 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." 

11 But that no one is justified by the law in the sight of God is evident, for "the just by faith shall live." 

12 Yet the law is not of faith, but "the man who does them shall by them live." (in other words to gain eternal life one must keep the law)

13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us .....

 

Note Christ took the curse, the 2nd death, because we have failed to live a selfless life of agape. That's what the law requires.

 

19 What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions (compare to Rom 5:20 - it was added to turn ignorant sin into known transgression), till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made;....

21 Is the law then against the promises of God? Certainly not! For if there had been a law given which could have given life, truly righteousness would have been by the law. 

22 But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 

23 But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 

24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 

25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor (i.e, under law).

​

 

 

 

[Samie]

pnattmbtc said:

To say that there is no partiality with God means He treats people fairly, not favoring one over another without cause.  But if there is cause, then for God to act one way towards one, and a different way towards another, does not mean God is being unfair.  In regards to children, if indeed it does make a difference how children are raised, which inspiration teaches us (both Scripture and the Spirit of Prophesy), then some children may be taken to heaven and others not, without there being partiality on the part of God.

I would appreciate if you can provide Scriptural basis for your final phrase in the last sentence above.

Here's Scriptures for God's treatment of children below the age of accountability:

NKJ Deuteronomy 1:39 'Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.

[8thdaypriest]

According Samie, EVERYONE is "indwelt and led by the Holy Spirit".  REALLY ??   Pagans who had never heard of Yahweh, who sacrificed their own infants to Baal or Molech were "indwelt and led by the Holy Spirit".  That's heard to believe. 

So - according to Samie, each person is already saved and "in Christ" with every sin forgiven, UNTIL such time as he/she fails to "overcome", AFTER he/she HEARS the law of God, and the gospel of Christ.  

If every sin has already been forgiven, then how can future sins be held against anyone??   What about the "unpardonable sin" ??

WHAT is it that the individual must "overcome" - in order to remain "in Christ" ??

Is it SIN that the individual must "overcome"  ?            Must he overcome all sin in his life, or just certain ones brought to his awareness? 

It sounds like you are equating the "unpardonable sin" with "failure to overcome". 

 

 

[8thdaypriest]

According to Robert, ALL SINS - past/present/future sins, were paid for by the death of Christ, therefore ALL SINS of ALL PEOPLE are forgiven. 

UNTIL the person is presented with the gospel of Christ.  At that time, IF he "fails to believe" THEN he is separated from Christ and will be lost. 

So with Robert, it is failure to "believe", and with Samie it is failure to "overcome" that results in an individual being "lost". 

Does not failure to believe RESULT FROM resisting the Spirit ??  And does not failure to overcome RESULT FROM resisting the Spirit of Christ ?? 

And resisting the Spirit IS the "unpardonable sin".  Correct ? 

So Christ's death did not/does not cover the "unpardonable sin".  Correct? 

So - according to Robert and Samie, a person IS SAVED until/unless they commit the "unpardonable sin". 

[8thdaypriest]

Romans Cpt 11 presents an explanation of salvation.  Individuals are "grafted in" to the "olive tree"  

The "root is holy" - therefore the ROOT is Christ.  

The tree trunk would be Abraham/Isaac/Jacob, and the branches are Israel. 

Galatians makes it clear that "only those of faith are sons of Abraham" (Gal. 3:7).  

After the death of Christ, the only branches left on that tree, were those who believed in Christ.  All the rest were "broken off"  "because of unbelief". 

To be "grafted in" to the tree, one must believe in Christ [come to faith]. 

One who had been "grafted in", could later be "broken off" if he failed to continue in faith. 

When Paul said, "and thus all Israel will be saved", he was NOT speaking of DNA descendants from Jacob.  He was speaking of those who have believed and walk by faith.    Every person on earth is either "grafted in"  OR  never "grafted in"  OR   was "grafted in" but is now "broken off". 

NEVER IN - or - IN - or - SEPARATED 

Paul is saying that ONLY Israel will be saved.  And Israel consists of "those of faith". 

Romans Cpt 11 does not present the idea that every person is already part of the tree ("in Christ"). 

And just before he gives the tree analogy, Paul makes it clear that people MUST HEAR the gospel, in order to believe and thus be "grafted in" to the tree.  He is specifically speaking about the Jews, but goes on to say that this applies to Gentiles also. 

Romans 10:9-11  "if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For one believes with the heart and so is justified, and one confesses with the mouth and so is saved. 11 The scripture says, "No one who believes in him will be put to shame." (Rom 10:9 NRS)

Romans 10:14 "But how are they to call on one in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in one of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone to proclaim him?  (Rom 10:14 NRS)

Verse 10 does not sound like one is "born justified", but is justified WHEN he believes. 

So I would add that everyone MUST HEAR.  The ONLY WAY to bring that about, is to resurrect those who have never HEARD, teach them the Gospel, and then allow them to respond.  THAT is why I believe that "the rest of the dead" are NOT the condemned, but are those who lived and died in ignorance (including all children). 

[8thdaypriest]

Our Savior Himself EXPLICITLY said a time is coming when ALL in the graves will be resurrected (John 5:28, 29) and this is at the SC where every eye will see Him come in the clouds (Rev 1:7). That is why He said EVERY MAN will be rewarded at the Second Coming (Matt 16:27; Rev 22:12), because everyone is present to receive his own reward according to what he has done (Rom 2:5-11).

​It has been noted several times that the word "ALL" , as used in Scripture, is dependent upon the context.  

Samie concentrates on "all who are in the graves" and says this ALL includes every human being who has ever lived.  I do not agree.  I believe this "all" will include ONLY those who have "done good" and "those who have done evil". 

In this context, Jesus says that ALL who have done good, will rise to "the resurrection of life".   AND   ALL "who have done evil", will rise to "the resurrection of condemnation". 

This agrees with Daniel 12:2-3.  But Daniel 12:2-3 says "many of those who sleep in the dust will awake".  That passage does NOT SAY "all of those who sleep in the dust". 

Which is WHY I believe the "all" in John 5:28-29 is relative. 

John 5:28 "Do not be astonished at this; for the hour is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and will come out -- those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation. (NRS)

What about those who have done NEITHER good NOR evil.  

When one sins in ignorance, that sin is NOT regarded as "evil" in the sight of God.    That sin is "covered" until such time that it becomes known to the individual. 

EVIL is that which is done knowingly against the LORD. 

As I've said in other posts, the view that Jesus will resurrect the dead at the SC, judge them and then leave them to die in 7 awful plagues, only to resurrect them AGAIN 1000 years later, to judge them AGAIN, and then execute them AGAIN in fire, presents a God who's justice is not satisfied with two deaths (once at natural death, and again at the SC).  He must wake you AGAIN to execute you AGAIN before His wrath is exhausted.  This is WHY I believe that "the rest of the dead" will NOT be the condemned from the first 6000 years, but instead will be those who died in ignorance of God and His Christ. 

[8thdaypriest]

 

The question being considered was whether there was an offering for sins of ignorance as of the time of the offering.  This is being suggested.  I'm not aware of any Scripture which teaches this.

​The priest offered the "daily" (continual, morning/evening) sacrifice - NOT - the sinner himself/herself/themselves.  The "daily" covered sins committed in (unwilling) ignorance.  The "daily" was a "sin offering". 

Later WHEN one of those sinners, came to understand that his past actions were sins against Yahweh, THEN he would bring a "sin offering".  This "sin offering" would then be in addition to the "daily" which had covered him while he remained ignorant. 

Since the death of Christ, we understand that BOTH sacrifices symbolized Christ our Savior.   The TWO sacrifices (the "daily" and the "sin offering")  symbolized God's response to sins. 

1.  sins of ignorance - "covered"  (means probation extended)

2.  known sin - must bring a "sin offering", then "forgiven" 

3.  willful rebellious sin (with attitude) - "there remains no sacrifice"

King David committed known rebellious sin, when he kidnapped and raped Bathsheba, and then sent her husband to his death.  He only confessed when his sin was condemned publicly by the prophet Nathan.  One wonders HOW David could be forgiven.  No wonder he spent a week on his face.  It seems that a willful sin, CAN be "forgiven" if the sinner truly humbles his heart to the LORD.  Thank God!!!!

[8thdaypriest]

​No, absolutely not!  "In Christ" is the gospel.  It refers to Christ as God assuming our corporate humanity from the womb of Mary and thus becoming the last Adam.  "In Christ" we already stand justified, sanctified and glorified.

1 Cor 1:30 "But you--and it is all God's doing--are in Christ Jesus: He has become for us a wisdom which is from God, consisting of righteousness (justification) and sanctification and deliverance...."

 

 

​The "you" in this passage,  (you -- are in Christ Jesus) is addressing BELIEVERS at Corinth - NOT all mankind. 

[JoeMo]

The guilt offering described in Leviticus 4 and 5 seems to describe an offering for unintentional sin.

Lev. 5:2-6: "‘If anyone becomes aware that they are guilty—if they unwittingly touch anything ceremonially unclean (whether the carcass of an unclean animal, wild or domestic, or of any unclean creature that moves along the ground) and they are unaware that they have become unclean, but then they come to realize their guilt; or if they touch human uncleanness (anything that would make them unclean) even though they are unaware of it, but then they learn of it and realize their guilt; or if anyone thoughtlessly takes an oath to do anything, whether good or evil (in any matter one might carelessly swear about) even though they are unaware of it, but then they learn of it and realize their guilt— when anyone becomes aware that they are guilty in any of these matters, they must confess in what way they have sinned. As a penalty for the sin they have committed, they must bring to the Lord a female lamb or goat from the flock as a sin offering^[a]; and the priest shall make atonement for them for their sin."

Lev. 5:17-19: "If anyone sins and does what is forbidden in any of the Lord’s commands, even though they do not know it, they are guilty and will be held responsible. They are to bring to the priest as a guilt offering a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value. In this way the priest will make atonement for them for the wrong they have committed unintentionally, and they will be forgiven. It is a guilt offering; they have been guilty of^[e] wrongdoing against the Lord.

Of course, this applies once someone realizes in hindsight that they have sinned.

 

[8thdaypriest]

When did Christ as God unite himself to our humanity? At the incarnation.

"Was the human nature of the Son of Mary changed into the divine nature of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person—the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died. Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible." Ellen White

"Humanity died: divinity did not die." Ellen White

Note "humanity" died when Christ as the last Adam died.  Hence "when One died, all died"!  That occurred over 2000 years ago.  

​Paul states that "our old life was crucified with Christ" (Rom 6:6) and that we "died to the law in the body of Christ" (Rom 7:4).  Why?  The law demands our death.  Since all of us share Adam's fallen life that life has already been terminated in the doing & dying of Christ because He assumed our corporate life and has legally saved the human race from under the curse of the law (the 2nd death) and justified us unto life.  

​Thank you Robert, for stating your position clearly.

Paul ALSO STATES that human beings are "baptized into His death".

"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?" (NRS)

So which is it ?????

Are we all corporately DEAD ?   (I guess some of us get declared NOT DEAD, if/when we don't believe.) 

OR

Are individuals incorporated into His death, WHEN they believe, and express that belief through baptism?   (The same idea as being "grafted in" to the tree.) 

[8thdaypriest]

When did Christ as God unite himself to our humanity? At the incarnation.

"Was the human nature of the Son of Mary changed into the divine nature of the Son of God? No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person—the man Christ Jesus. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died. Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible." Ellen White

"Humanity died: divinity did not die." Ellen White

Note "humanity" died when Christ as the last Adam died.  Hence "when One died, all died"!  That occurred over 2000 years ago.  

​Paul states that "our old life was crucified with Christ" (Rom 6:6) and that we "died to the law in the body of Christ" (Rom 7:4).  Why?  The law demands our death.  Since all of us share Adam's fallen life that life has already been terminated in the doing & dying of Christ because He assumed our corporate life and has legally saved the human race from under the curse of the law (the 2nd death) and justified us unto life.  

​Now we're getting into the nature of Christ.  I remember Mrs White also wrote that "Christ came forth from the grave to power that was in himself".  That quote may not be exact, but it's pretty close.  Some have believed that Christ raised himself from the grave.  But that is NOT what Scripture says.

    Acts 3:15 “ ... and killed the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses.” (Acts 4:10)

Acts 13:30   “But God raised Him from the dead.”

    Acts 17:31 “ ... because He [the Father] has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.”

Romans 4:24 “It shall be imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead,”

Romans 6:4 “Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.”

    Romans 8:11 “But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.”

    Romans 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.”

Galatians 1:1 “Paul, an apostle not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him from the dead,”

    Ephesians 1:17-20 “that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places,”

1Thessalonians 1:10 “ ... and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come.”

    1 Peter 1:3 “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,”     [See also Romans 6:9, Romans 7:4, Colossians 2:12]

The divinity which "did not sink and die" was in indwelling spirit of His Father.  THAT INDWELLING spirit of His Father, explains HOW the human Jesus Christ, overcame every temptation and then was raised from death.  This indwelling spirit will be the MEANS by which those who BELIEVE will be resurrected to immortality at the SC.  "He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.”

The absence of this indwelling spirit, also explains how those without it will be consumed.

Rachel Cory, prophecyviewpoint.com 

 

[JoeMo]

When scripture says we are "in Christ", could it possibly mean that in a spiritual sense, those of us who believe were "in Christ" when He suffered and died?  Crazy idea - I know.  But if it were plausible, would it mean that we who are "in Christ" died with Him, therefore in an allegorical sense, have already paid the penalty for our sins through His death?

Like I said - crazy idea.

[8thdaypriest]

The guilt offering described in Leviticus 4 and 5 seems to describe an offering for unintentional sin.

Lev. 5:2-6: "‘If anyone becomes aware that they are guilty—if they unwittingly touch anything ceremonially unclean (whether the carcass of an unclean animal, wild or domestic, or of any unclean creature that moves along the ground) and they are unaware that they have become unclean, but then they come to realize their guilt; or if they touch human uncleanness (anything that would make them unclean) even though they are unaware of it, but then they learn of it and realize their guilt; or if anyone thoughtlessly takes an oath to do anything, whether good or evil (in any matter one might carelessly swear about) even though they are unaware of it, but then they learn of it and realize their guilt— when anyone becomes aware that they are guilty in any of these matters, they must confess in what way they have sinned. As a penalty for the sin they have committed, they must bring to the Lord a female lamb or goat from the flock as a sin offering^[a]; and the priest shall make atonement for them for their sin."

Lev. 5:17-19: "If anyone sins and does what is forbidden in any of the Lord’s commands, even though they do not know it, they are guilty and will be held responsible. They are to bring to the priest as a guilt offering a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value. In this way the priest will make atonement for them for the wrong they have committed unintentionally, and they will be forgiven. It is a guilt offering; they have been guilty of^[e] wrongdoing against the Lord.

Of course, this applies once someone realizes in hindsight that they have sinned.

 

​The "sin offering" ("guilt offering") differed, depending upon just WHO had sinned [whole congregation, one of the common people, anointed priest or ruler].  (See Lev. cpt 4).

The "daily" or "continual burnt offering", or "evening/morning"  is described in Exodus 29:38-42 and in Numbers 28:3-8.  It is mentioned in several other places, without the full description.   "The priest' killed this offering.  The "continual" ministries included the continual "bread of the presence" and the continual light from the lampstand, and the morning and evening incense offering. 

The "fire" to light the incense, was brought FROM the alter, and originally the "fire  to light the lamps.  The Alter was therefore the SOURCE of the light for the Tabernacle. 

I have been looking thru a stack of commentaries, for the REASON given for the "daily".  It seems my understanding that it provided "covering" for sins of ignorance, was from Rabbinic sources.  No other commentary even ventured to posit a reasonable guess.  If we KNOW that God will not condemn for "sins of ignorance" - that he "overlooks" those sins (at least until they are known) , it does seem reasonable that the "daily" represented Christ's continual presentation of His death, on behalf was all those who sin ignorantly.

 

[8thdaypriest]

 

I think this can be a misleading phrase.  I assume it's based on Gal. 3:13, which speaks of the curse of the law (if you have some other verse in mind, please let me know).  However Galatians 3:13 is a reference to Deuteronomy 28, which speaks of the curses and blessings.  If one looks at this chapter, we can see that these curses and blessings are cause and effect, not an arbitrary penalty or reward prescribed by some law.  The thought is "if you act contrary to what the law says, bad things will result."  

When it comes to the moral law, if one acts contrary to it, death results, but not because of an arbitrary act of power on the part of God to execute those who disobey.  Rather, God is the source of life, and to act contrary to the law is to act contrary to God's character of love, which is to act according to the principle of self-love, which cannot possible lead to anything but death.  One cannot separate oneself from God and live.  So even if the law did not exist (e.g. wasn't known about or written down), it would still be the case that those disobeyed it would die.

​I agree!

At the SC, most are "slain by the brightness of His coming".  This is instant.  They do not have the indwelling Spirit, therefore they cannot survive His presence.  Those who are LEFT to die in the seven last great plagues, die BECAUSE they have chosen (by their actions) to be separated from the LORD.  The plagues are CAUSED by the LORD separating Himself from the earth. 

Those [from "the rest of the dead"] who die at the Gog/Magog Battle, die BECAUSE the LORD is defending His people and His city.  It's not as if He doesn't warn them of what will happen. 

My personal belief concerning the final "lake of fire" is that ONLY Satan and his angels will be alive when they are "thrown in" to that fire.  Concerning human beings who have already died, either at the SC or at the Gog/Magog attack on the City, I believe it is only God's retained "memory" of them, that is "consumed".   The "great white thrown" judgment FOLLOWS Gog/Magog - at least from the way Revelation 20 reads. 

[LifeHiscost]

 

My personal belief concerning the final "lake of fire" is that ONLY Satan and his angels will be alive when they are "thrown in" to that fire.  Concerning human beings who have already died, either at the SC or at the Gog/Magog attack on the City, I believe it is only God's retained "memory" of them, that is "consumed".   The "great white thrown" judgment FOLLOWS Gog/Magog - at least from the way Revelation 20 reads. 

​What thought do these two statements bring to your mind?

…8"According to what I have seen, those who plow iniquity And those who sow trouble harvest it. 9"By the breath of God they perish, And by the blast of His anger they come to an end....Job 4

…2"But for you who fear My name, the sun of righteousness will rise with healing in its wings; and you will go forth and skip about like calves from the stall. 3"You will tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet on the day which I am preparing," says the LORD of hosts.... Malachi 4

God is Love!  Jesus saves! 

[pnattmbtc]

​The priest offered the "daily" (continual, morning/evening) sacrifice - NOT - the sinner himself/herself/themselves.  The "daily" covered sins committed in (unwilling) ignorance.  The "daily" was a "sin offering". 

Later WHEN one of those sinners, came to understand that his past actions were sins against Yahweh, THEN he would bring a "sin offering".  This "sin offering" would then be in addition to the "daily" which had covered him while he remained ignorant. 

Since the death of Christ, we understand that BOTH sacrifices symbolized Christ our Savior.   The TWO sacrifices (the "daily" and the "sin offering")  symbolized God's response to sins. 

1.  sins of ignorance - "covered"  (means probation extended)

2.  known sin - must bring a "sin offering", then "forgiven" 

3.  willful rebellious sin (with attitude) - "there remains no sacrifice"

King David committed known rebellious sin, when he kidnapped and raped Bathsheba, and then sent her husband to his death.  He only confessed when his sin was condemned publicly by the prophet Nathan.  One wonders HOW David could be forgiven.  No wonder he spent a week on his face.  It seems that a willful sin, CAN be "forgiven" if the sinner truly humbles his heart to the LORD.  Thank God!!!!

​This is just repeating what was stated earlier.  What I said I'm not aware of any Scripture which speaks of an offering for unknown sins of ignorance.  I still don't know of any such scripture.  The way I could become aware of such a scripture would be to present a scripture which says that.  I don't even know what scripture you're thinking of.  There's one in Numbers speaking of a continual offering.  Is that the one?  Or some other text?

Please cite whatever text you're thinking of, and why you think it's dealing with unknown sins of ignorance.

 

If you just think of it in terms of logic, what should the requirement be for an unknown sin?  Wouldn't it be making it known?  Why would God require a sacrifice for it?  In real life, if someone offends you purely out of ignorance, you don't require anything from them to forgive them, right?  However, if they did it on purpose, then action would be required to keep the relationship in tact.

[Samie]

According Samie, EVERYONE is "indwelt and led by the Holy Spirit".  REALLY ??   Pagans who had never heard of Yahweh, who sacrificed their own infants to Baal or Molech were "indwelt and led by the Holy Spirit".  That's heard to believe.

​It's what Scriptures say. Please read Rom 1:18-25; 8:4-17

So - according to Samie, each person is already saved and "in Christ" with every sin forgiven, UNTIL such time as he/she fails to "overcome", AFTER he/she HEARS the law of God, and the gospel of Christ. 

​Minor correction. It should be, each person is already saved and "in Christ" with every sin forgiven, UNTIL such time that his name is blotted out when he dies for refusing to overcome evil while alive.

    If every sin has already been forgiven, then how can future sins be held against anyone??  

​They are not counted against us (2 Cor 5:18,19) by our Lord Who was resurrected for our justification (Rom 4:25). This is why sin cannot have dominion over us anymore (Rom 6:14). But the act of sinning is proof that a person has not yet overcome evil with good.

     WHAT is it that the individual must "overcome" - in order to remain "in Christ" ??

Is it SIN that the individual must "overcome"  ?            Must he overcome all sin in his life, or just certain ones brought to his awareness? 

​A person must overcome and win his own fight (1 Tim 6:12). We each have our own battle to win (2 Tim 4:7). It is what you call "certain ones brought to his awareness".

NIV Philippians 3:15-16   15 All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you.  16 Only let us live up to what we have already attained.

    

What about the "unpardonable sin" ?? . . .

      

It sounds like you are equating the "unpardonable sin" with "failure to overcome". 

​Not just simply "failure to overcome"; it is "REFUSAL to overcome". Being written in the book of life, people are attached to the Body of Christ Who is our Strength for overcoming evil with good.

[pnattmbtc]

​The "sin offering" ("guilt offering") differed, depending upon just WHO had sinned [whole congregation, one of the common people, anointed priest or ruler].  (See Lev. cpt 4).

The "daily" or "continual burnt offering", or "evening/morning"  is described in Exodus 29:38-42 and in Numbers 28:3-8.  It is mentioned in several other places, without the full description.   "The priest' killed this offering.  The "continual" ministries included the continual "bread of the presence" and the continual light from the lampstand, and the morning and evening incense offering. 

The "fire" to light the incense, was brought FROM the alter, and originally the "fire  to light the lamps.  The Alter was therefore the SOURCE of the light for the Tabernacle. 

I have been looking thru a stack of commentaries, for the REASON given for the "daily".  It seems my understanding that it provided "covering" for sins of ignorance, was from Rabbinic sources.  No other commentary even ventured to posit a reasonable guess.  If we KNOW that God will not condemn for "sins of ignorance" - that he "overlooks" those sins (at least until they are known) , it does seem reasonable that the "daily" represented Christ's continual presentation of His death, on behalf was all those who sin ignorantly.

 

​These were the texts I was thinking of.  It could be seen as a general portrayal of Christ's mediatorial role.

[pnattmbtc]

Concerning human beings who have already died, either at the SC or at the Gog/Magog attack on the City, I believe it is only God's retained "memory" of them, that is "consumed".

I don't understand this.  Please elaborate (especially the God retained memory part)