Are we born justified?

May 23, 2015

As for all being written in the book of life at birth, John the Revelator disagrees and says:

" The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is." Rev 17:8

This layman had repetitiously posted the phrase "Adam & Eve and all their descendants" as the ones written down in the book of life. That phrase does not include the offspring of evil angels who intermarried with human women and produced demons. These are earth-dwellers whose name were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world (Rev 17:8). Only God knows who these earth-dwellers are. Paul referred to these throng as follows:

NKJ Ephesians 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

NLT Ephesians 6:12 For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against evil rulers and authorities of the unseen world, against mighty powers in this dark world, and against evil spirits in the heavenly places.

NRS Ephesians 6:12 For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

The plan of redemption is only for Adam & Eve and all their descendants.

There is no plan of redemption for Satan and his host. Jesus Himself said the the lake of fire is reserved for them (Matt 25:41).

May 23, 2015

Sammie, your argument is with Peter.Comparing scripture with scripture I would suggest Peter meant willfull disobedience

I have no argument with what are in Scriptures. I merely replied when the idea that only the obedient ones were given the Holy Spirit as per Acts 5:32 for the following reasons:

1. I felt it was a misuse of Scriptures because the Israelites themselves were labeled disobedient and stiffnecked by God Himself, yet the Bible says God gave them the Holy Spirit.

2. Peter made the statement prior to the vision given him by God in Acts 10. From that vision Peter learned his lesson.

May 23, 2015

You are in agreement with Robert on justiifcation at the cross, but not on obedience being legalism.

Obedience to what?

May 23, 2015

Once you do the study you see just how spurious the "in Christ" motif really is.

Really? How so?

May 23, 2015

An equally egregious notion that soon follows is that God's laws are impossible to keep....

If you really loved your neighbor as you love yourself you would have no problem living, not for yourself, but for you neighbor's wealth! That's keeping the law....

1 cor 10:24 Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth.

Edited May 23, 2015 by Robert

May 23, 2015

The "in Christ" motif is what spurred me to study ga'al. I spent months studying it. It wasn't an on and off study either. I spent an average of 4-5 hours a day on it. It is so prevalent in the Bible and the SOP that people read right over it and never really see it. But, it's one of those studies that must be done in depth. It requires the usage of tools like Strong's so you can go back and see what Isrealites and disciples and apostles understood by their reading of the OT. Once you do the study you see just how spurious the "in Christ" motif really is.

I have also studied many hours into the ga'al. The kinsman redeemer pays the DEBT that we owe because of our transgression of the law of God. The KJV version of the Lord's Prayer says "forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors". The word debt morphed into "transgressions". But the old wording was based in ga'al. We use the term today. We say, "He has paid his debt to society." when a convict is released having served his term.

Do you have a website? I have several studies up on my website on different aspects of law and covenant. Several deal with viewpoints or objections from the Hebrew Roots point of view. I am not HR, but I attended HR synagogue for several years. They are good people. I just think they go overboard with their "Jewishness".

Blessings, Rachel Cory, prophecyviewpoint.com

May 23, 2015

I believe God gave Peter a vision to teach him an important lesson. What lesson did Peter learn?

Acts 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Sorry to say this, but it appears many have yet to learn what Peter already learned. And that is another thickener to the dividing line: whereas the popular gospel teaches, although indirectly, that only Christians were cleansed from sin, the pure gospel teaches that Adam & Eve and all their descendants were cleansed from sin.

May 23, 2015

From another thread:

Ellen White disagrees with you. I'll give you a quote here that shows how completely she disagrees with. You can quote her where she seems to agree with you, but in making her agree with you you will be making her out to be in conflict with herself. That's dangerous ground for those who claim to believe in the inspiration of Ellen White.

Notice the portion that I bolded. God will be reconciled with repentant and obedient men and taking them into divine favor through the merits of Christ. The contract between Christ and His Father says nothing about justifying all men. It specifically says that only those who are repentant and believing will be reconciled with the Father.

Here's what joeb bolded:

The request of Christ is granted; the church is justified through Him, its representative and head. Here the Father ratifies the contract with His Son, that He will be reconciled to repentant and obedient men, and take them into divine favor through the merits of Christ.

Much as I wish NOT to drag Sister White into any issue, I just want to point out that she herself wanted that the Bible should have the final say:

“When God’s word is studied, comprehended, and obeyed, a bright light will be reflected to the world; new truths, received and acted upon, will bind us in strong bonds to Jesus. The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this holy word will be in harmony. Our own views and ideas must not control our efforts. Man is fallible, but God’s word is infallible. Instead of wrangling with one another, let men exalt the Lord. Let us meet all opposition as did our Master, saying, “It is written.” Let us lift up the banner on which is inscribed, The Bible our rule of faith and discipline.” {RH December 15, 1885, Art. A, par. 16} 1SM 416.2 (Selected Messages Book 1)

So what does the Bible say as to how and when was Reconciliation effected?

Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Another thickener added to the dividing line: Whereas the popular gospel teaches only the repentant and believing are reconciled to God, the pure gospel teaches Adam & Eve and all their descendants were reconciled to God by the death of His Son.

May 23, 2015

So what does the Bible say as to how and when was Reconciliation effected?

Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Bingo!

May 23, 2015

The Bible, and the Bible alone, is to be our creed, the sole bond of union; all who bow to this holy word will be in harmony

Let all prove their positions from the Scriptures and substantiate every point they claim as truth from the revealed Word of God. [Ellen G. White, Letter 12, 1890, as quoted in Evangelism page 256]

May 23, 2015

Hi pnattmbtc;

I am transferring our discussion from the thread "Made Him to be sin" to this thread to honor that thread starter's request.

Why do I see a legal aspect in this statement of Waggoner?

"If anyone has not this blessing, it is because he has not recognized the gift, or has deliberately thrown it away."

From my viewpoint, there is legality when, prior to reaping the benefit, a requirement had to be fulfilled first by the supposed beneficiary.

In the issue at hand, the benefit is to be written in the book of life. My position is already clear: Contingent upon Christ's life, death and resurrection, names of Adam & Eve and all their descendants were written in the book of life from the foundation of the world. No requirement to fulfill. All by God's grace through Christ. This "no-requirement-phase" applies ONLY to the past tense of salvation. And there are two tenses more - the present and the future tenses. Let's discuss the past tense of salvation a bit further.

In the past tense of salvation, the issue is how to have one's name get written in the book of life. And God provided the solution. Not an iota of human participation. All God's work FOR man. We were born with our names in the book of life. Being written in the book of life means one is attached to the body of Christ and member of the family of God. Being attached to the Body of Christ means one is EMPOWERED to do what the Head wants His Body part to do. Being a member of the family of God means one is a citizen of the heavenly kingdom.

The past tense of salvation for Adam & Eve and all their descendants was put in place before the foundation of the world and ratified by the life, death and resurrection of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Foreshadowed by the death of that animal in Eden that same day Adam & Eve fell into sin, and with subsequent sacrifices for sin in the Old Covenant, His death on the cross forgave and cleansed us from all sin, sanctified and reconciled us to God. All these benefits are ours, sans human participation. This is where the dividing line lies between the gospel popularly being preached and what this layman calls the pure gospel.

I see Waggoner's statement as placing a requirement, albeit how small. This makes his statement at par with the gospel popularly being preached: That God's grace is OFFERED to humans; they must ACCEPT first, before reaping the benefit. Waggoner requires man's recognition of the gift; the popular gospel requires man's acceptance of the gift.

From this layman's viewpoint, human participation comes in the present tense of salvation. To be continued next post . . .

Why do you think there is a legal requirement involved? Also your explanation seems to m to be much more complicated than necessary. How about saying it like this: As soon as there was sin, there was a Savior. Had Christ not intervened at the very beginning, when Adam sinned, where would we be? We wouldn't exist. So every human being is indebted to the work of Christ as our Savior for every breath of life. Grace of infinite value gives us the gift of life. This same grace will give us the gift of eternal life, if we don't "neglect the gift, or deliberately throw it away." This seems to me to be a powerful and simple way of communicating a similar idea to what you are saying.

May 23, 2015

Whereas the past tense of salvation EMPOWERED man to be able to do what the Head wants His Body part to do, the present tense of salvation GIVES the part of the Body the opportunity to exercise the power to do the bidding of the Head. The past tense of Salvation is the EMPOWERING phase; the present tense of Salvation is the DOING phase; the future tense of Salvation is the REWARDING phase.

The present tense of salvation for an individual starts at conception and birth and ends at the person's death or at the Second Coming, whichever comes first. At the Second Coming, the future tense of salvation commences.

With his name already written in the book of life, a person is born heaven-bound, for ONLY those whose names are in the book of life will be allowed to enter the heavenly portals. Note that our being heaven-bound entailed NOTHING from us. That benefit is ours PASSIVELY. We were born with it. Just like Princess Charlotte. She was born a princess, whether she likes it or not, whether she acknowledges it or not, whether she knows it or not; she is a princess. So with us - we were born children of the King.

This is another thickener to the dividing line that divides the popular gospel from what this layman calls the pure gospel - the gospel Jesus wanted preached to all the world before He comes again. Whereas the popular gospel requires people to first believe to become children of the King; the pure gospel tells people they are children of the King.

To be continued next post . . .

I understand where you're coming from. This idea was first presented by Ballenger, as far as I know, around the turn of the 20th century. He used the analogy of the emancipation proclamation, where all the slaves had been freed by proclamation, but they didn't experience freedom individually until they heard the good news. I also understand the idea, and importance, of understanding the gospel as good news as opposed to good advice. So I'm agreeing with these ideas in concept, but I differ in regards to what I believe the content of the good news is.

I believe the good news is not primary legal, that a legal problem was solved, and I don't believe this will have much traction for many people. The good news is about God! God has been accused by the evil one of being unfair, and this is the basis of all sin, by both humans and angels. The solution to this problem is the revelation of Jesus Christ.

The very attributes that belonged to the character of Satan, the evil one represented as belonging to the character of God. Jesus came to teach men of the Father,

SEVERE, EXACTING, REVENGEFUL, ARBITRARY

to correctly represent him before the fallen children of earth. Angels could not fully portray the character of God, but Christ, who was a living impersonation of God, could not fail to accomplish the work. The only way in which he could set and keep men right was to make himself visible and familiar to their eyes. That men might have salvation he came directly to man, and became a partaker of his nature.

The Father was revealed in Christ as altogether a different being from that which Satan had represented him to be. Said Christ, “Neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.”

This is from an article written by Ellen White called "God Made Manifest in Christ." Here's some more:

When the object of his mission was attained,--the revelation of God to the world,--the Son of God announced that his work was accomplished, and that the character of the Father was made manifest to men. The Signs of the Times, January 20, 1890

This is the Good News! The Good News is about God.

May 23, 2015

The kinsman redeemer pays the DEBT that we owe because of our transgression of the law of God.

Where does this idea come from? I mean, the idea that the kingsman pays a debt that is owed because of transgression to the law of God? What scripture says this?

It's not necessary to think of redemption or ransom in terms of a legal debt, and for thousands of years this wasn't a thought in Christianity (or ever in Judaism). If my claim here is disputed, I'd be happy to be shown to be wrong, but I'm unaware of any Jewish document or early Christian document (written before, say, the 10th century) that puts forth this idea.

May 23, 2015

From another thread:

Here's what joeb bolded:

Much as I wish NOT to drag Sister White into any issue, I just want to point out that she herself wanted that the Bible should have the final say:

So what does the Bible say as to how and when was Reconciliation effected?

Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Another thickener added to the dividing line: Whereas the popular gospel teaches only the repentant and believing are reconciled to God, the pure gospel teaches Adam & Eve and all their descendants were reconciled to God by the death of His Son.

An interesting question to ask is what this means. If we think in normal terms, as to what reconciliation means, it would be something along the lines that you have a grudge against someone, but then something happens, and you no longer hold a grudge against them. However, God obviously had to already have been in the state of not having a grudge against man, or He wouldn't have given His Son to die for man in the first place. So what happened, or happens, must happen to man, not God, as the cross didn't change God in any way.

May 23, 2015

Hi pnattmbtc;

I guess you didn't notice I don't have the same idea as Ballenger's. Whereas Ballenger says the slaves "didn't experience freedom individually until they heard the good news", my position is God through Christ FREED us from sin, whether we know it or not.

May 23, 2015

Unless FREED from sin, we remain spiritually DEAD and can do NOTHING spiritual like believing, repenting, or deciding to be baptized.

And that's another thickener to the dividing line: Whereas the popular gospel teaches that people need to believe and repent so they can be made spiritually alive, the pure gospel teaches that people can believe and repent because they are spiritually alive.

May 23, 2015

An interesting question to ask is what this means. If we think in normal terms, as to what reconciliation means, it would be something along the lines that you have a grudge against someone, but then something happens, and you no longer hold a grudge against them. However, God obviously had to already have been in the state of not having a grudge against man, or He wouldn't have given His Son to die for man in the first place. So what happened, or happens, must happen to man, not God, as the cross didn't change God in any way.

It's grudge that separates friends; it's sin that separates man from God. It's man that has grudge (sin), not God. Man cannot remove his sin. So God removed it, and man was reconciled to God.

May 23, 2015

The cross made provision for the forgiveness of our sins, but our response to the cross determines whether we are forgiven or not.

If not forgiven, man is spiritually dead. The spiritually dead cannot do any spiritual act like responding to the cross and asking forgiveness. So how can man be forgiven?

If man can respond to the cross, then man is spiritually alive. If man is spiritually alive then man has been forgiven.

May 23, 2015

On the cross, how many sins were forgiven?

NASB Colossians 2:13 And when you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions 14 having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us and which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

May 23, 2015

No it didn't change God, but the cross provided the justice needed before reconciliation was possible. The wages of sin was death and that sentence must be carried out or justice could not be done.

Jesus voluteered to be the propitiation for sinners taking the penalty for them, thereby fulfilling the requirement for justice. God is infinitely merciful, but the same applies to His justice.

1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son [to be] the propitiation for our sins.

(Propitiation- An atoning sacrifice or anything that appeases.(Webster’s Dict.)

Now here comes the “Controversy”. If God’s Law is perfect, then to mete out perfect justice a sinner must die. But then is God without mercy ? Yet ,if he shows mercy, how can God say His law is perfect? If he pardons a law breaker(sinner), then he lessens the demands of the law. He perverts true justice and shows that His decree stating“The wages of sin is death” is not to be believed. This would allow all creation to doubt what God decrees, and to wonder what else has God said that may not be believed?

This is where mercy and forgiveness come in. Mercy and forgiveness are shown by God giving His son as a propitiation for our sins, and Jesus willingly offering himself s the perfect sacrifice provides the justice as well as the mercy

Psalms 85:10 Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed [each other].

Without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin

Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.

That is why it was necessary for Jesus’ side to be pierced by the spear; for his blood had to be shed. Additionally , and just as important, the sacrifice also had to be without spot or imperfection, Jesus had to live a perfect , sinless life. He did so and his sacrifice was acceptable to God for the remission of sins.

The cross made provision for the forgiveness of our sins, but our response to the cross determines whether we are forgiven or not.

Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
3:26 To declare, [I say], at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

May 23, 2015

The cross made provision for the forgiveness of our sins, but our response to the cross determines whether we are forgiven or not.

That's what I call a heresy because you are stating that Christ's work of redemption actually did nothing in that it was only provisional. Let me ask you this, when did your humanity die to sin:

1] At the cross

or

2] When you believed

If # 2 then why are you still sinning? I mean you aren't loving your neighbor (much less your enemeies) as you naturally love self, no?

So # 1 is the only answer: Rom 6:6 (NIV)

"...our old self (our life from fallen Adam) was crucified with him so that the body of sin (our humanity indwelt by our bent-to-self) might be destroyed, and we (our corporate life) might no longer be enslaved to sin."

Notice the pass tense! Your life from Adam died in Christ Jesus over 2000 years ago. Why? 1] The law demands your death. 2] So you wouldn't be a slave to your love of self because of your bent-to-self.

Both of these things have already occurred in Christ and therefore they are not provision, rather this truth is an historic fact!!!

Edited May 23, 2015 by Robert

May 23, 2015

"...our old self (our life from fallen Adam) was crucified with him so that the body of sin (our humanity indwelt by our bent-to-self) might be destroyed, and we (our corporate life) might no longer be enslaved to sin."

Notice the pass tense! Your life from Adam died in Christ Jesus over 2000 years ago. Why? 1] The law demands your death. 2] So you wouldn't be a slave to your love of self because of your bent-to-self.

Both of these things have already occurred in Christ and therefore they are not provision, rather this truth is an historic fact!!!

Here's more:

Romans 8:1

1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

We were put into Christ at the incarnation when Christ's Deity was blended with our corporate, fallen humanity. Because of Christ's doing & dying He has legally reversed "all men's" condemnation in Adam and justified all unto life. How?

2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set us free from the law of sin and of death.

"In Christ Jesus " "the law of the Spirit" (i.e., the power of the Holy Spirit) has set us (our corporate humanity) free from two things:

1] The law of sin (that is, the sinful nature)

2] The curse of the law, i.e., the 2nd death.

Hence all men have been delivered (past tense) and therefore there is no condemnation. But, many will reject this truth and be lost. Why? Self-righteousness!!!! The legalists (and men by nature is legalistic and proud) think they can stand before God's law on their own steam.

Edited May 23, 2015 by Robert

May 23, 2015

... many will reject this truth and be lost. Why? Self-righteousness!!!! The legalists (and men by nature is legalistic and proud) think they can stand before God's law on their own steam.

E.G., "Recent studies find our first impulses are selfless.....

if human nature is simply the way we tend to act based on our intuitive and automatic impulses, then it seems that we are an overwhelmingly cooperative species, willing to give for the good of the group even when it comes at our own personal expense."

Who said this? Science....

Here's the whole article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-probe-human-nature-and-discover-we-are-good-after-all/

Edited May 23, 2015 by Robert

May 24, 2015

Do you have a website? I have several studies up on my website on different aspects of law and covenant. Several deal with viewpoints or objections from the Hebrew Roots point of view. I am not HR, but I attended HR synagogue for several years. They are good people. I just think they go overboard with their "Jewishness".

No, I no longer have a website. I used to keep one for business purposes 8 or 9 years ago, but when my business went south so did the internet account, website, and the domainname. I ran my own physical server, webserver(apache), database server, email server, etc....

May 24, 2015

E.G., "Recent studies find our first impulses are selfless.....

if human nature is simply the way we tend to act based on our intuitive and automatic impulses, then it seems that we are an overwhelmingly cooperative species, willing to give for the good of the group even when it comes at our own personal expense."

Who said this? Science....

Here's the whole article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-probe-human-nature-and-discover-we-are-good-after-all/

Anyone who will buy that will believe anything. I don't care how "scientific" it is.

Sign In

Are we born justified?

Recommended Posts

Samie

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Gerr

debbym

joeb

Samie

Robert

Robert

Robert

8thdaypriest

Samie

Samie

Robert

Robert

pnattmbtc

pnattmbtc

pnattmbtc

pnattmbtc

Samie

Samie

Samie

Samie

Samie

Robert

Robert

Robert

Robert

joeb

joeb

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity