Who is the One New Man Created on the Cross?

[8thdaypriest]

16 hours ago, Samie said:

And by His death, ALL human beings died:

 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵ and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

The Biblical logic is simple: if one died for all, then all died. It follows that if Christ died for all human beings (and He did), then all human beings died.

So how were those who died made alive? Your position is:

Sorry, but your order of events is incorrect. In your order of events, one first believes before being regarded as having died with Him. But when were they made alive?

In Scriptures, one dies first by virtue of Christ's death (2 Cor 5:14), and then made alive TOGETHER with Him when He resurrected (Col 2:13; Eph 2:4-6), being part of His body (Eph 2:11-19). Then one can believe, that is, overcome the evil of unbelief.

Did you forget that the church is that which God purchased with His own blood - the blood of Christ? And Christ had purchased all human beings with His blood, having died for them all. But only overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL.

When did I say, since I joined CA, that "all mankind DIED the "second death"? 

What I said was that Jesus died that death which no one before has experienced nor will ever experience after. Only Jesus went there.  That death was represented by the uninhabited place where Jesus as our Scapegoat was led to by the Fit Man (He Himself) at Yom Kippur.  That death was not the Second Death. The lake of fire is the Second Death which is reserved for Satan and his host and the non-overcomers - those whose names were blotted out from the BOL.

Jesus DID NOT pay the "redemption price" for those who will be lost, any more than He paid it for Satan and his angels.  IF Jesus DID pay the price for them, then they - by logic - should NOT be "lost".  This is the whole argument for universalism.   Your theory - on the other hand - says that EVERYONE was "saved", but some are thrown back, because Jesus doesn't want them any more.  They "failed to overcome". 

You take Ephesians 2:4-6, and Colossians 2:13 OUT OF CONTEXT, and then build a whole doctrine on your belief that these verses were addressed to all mankind.  They were addressed to believers. 

You have repeated the same arguments a hundred times.  And we have countered a hundred times.  I think you just keep putting up threads, to keep the issue before the readers at this forum, hoping to get someone to agree with you.  I admire your persistence, but I'm not sure that I can continue to be part of keeping this issue prominent - top of the list - at the Theology forum.  If I see a DIFFERENT argument, based upon DIFFERENT Scriptures, then I may answer. 

 

[pnattmbtc]

I didn't understand the question relating to Jeremiah, if there was one, but I can address the question of God's knowing, which is an important one.  When God knows something, He knows it as it is, so, for example, if God knows something (such as what you will eat for lunch tomorrow or in a year) as something which is certain to occur, then that event *is* certain to occur, and this is one of the places where a paradox occurs.  You can't have free will in the sense that Arminians speak of (but you *can* have free will as Calvinists speak of it) if you are unable to make more than one choice, and you cannot logically choose to do something different than what God is certain will happen, not because God is controling you in an any way or causing something to happen, but as a logical impossibility.

The real issue, and this is where people seem to have difficulty, has nothing whatsoever to do with God at all, as it is an ontological issue (having to do with the state of being, in this case, of the future) and not an epistemological one (having to do with what someone knows, in this case God).

I'm sure we would all agree that anything God knows, say X, whatever X is, God knows accurately.  So what we're really discussing is, what is X?  That is, in the context of the future, we can all agree that God sees it perfectly, but what is it that God sees?  Does He see one thing happening, like a movie, so that time would be like a movie, and we're only aware of what we've up to now, but God has seen the whole movie; is the future like this?  I'm saying that it isn't like this, but would instead by represented by a whole host of movies, gazillions of them (that's the technical term), fanning out into more and more movies as time goes on, and the possibilities increase through time.  So when God sees the future, He sees the sum of all of these movies, not just one movie, because there is no one movie which can be seen; such a thing doesn't exist.

I hope this is a clear enough explanation.

Regarding God's knowing the hour of Jesus' return, there's a possibility I've heard which makes sense to me.  Say you have a child, not old enough to date, and your the only parent.  You could say something like, "No one but me knows when my child is old enough to date", by which you mean you know when the time is right, and when the time is right, you will act.  I think much of our interpretation of Scripture has been influenced by Greek philosophy, so when we read certain things we think it's talking about one thing, when it's actually talking about something else, and this could be one of those times.

[Wingnut]

12 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

 I'm saying that it isn't like this, but would instead by represented by a whole host of movies, gazillions of them (that's the technical term), fanning out into more and more movies as time goes on, and the possibilities increase through time.  So when God sees the future, He sees the sum of all of these movies, not just one movie, because there is no one movie which can be seen; such a thing doesn't exist.

 

As someone who likes maths you may understand that with 7 billion humans all interacting it creates gazillions of permutations each second.  Add creatures like my cat with free will also interacting.  And weather may be random.  And physics speaks of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and quantum mechanics where matter may be random and unpredictable and affect us.  And God has to compute all this.   The possibilities of the combinations and permutations become infinite almost immediately.

In seconds, Big Blue in heaven would need more drive space.  

And God does this for what?

I so much prefer my idea that God and man interact just as humans do on earth.  God is in a video game, playing with us in real time.  How exciting for Him.  What a privilege for us.

[pnattmbtc]

2 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

As someone who likes maths you may understand that with 7 billion humans all interacting it creates gazillions of permutations each second.  Add creatures like my cat with free will also interacting.  And weather may be random.  And physics speaks of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and quantum mechanics where matter may be random and unpredictable and affect us.  And God has to compute all this.   The possibilities of the combinations and permutations become infinite almost immediately.

In seconds, Big Blue in heaven would need more drive space.  

And God does this for what?

I so much prefer my idea that God and man interact just as humans do on earth.  God is in a video game, playing with us in real time.  How exciting for Him.  What a privilege for us.

The quantum observation is a good one.  The idea physicists have is if you were to ask God, "What will this particle do?" (talking about the ones which act randomly) God would respond, "there's a 50% chance it will do this, and a 50% chance it will do that."  That is, the fact that the particles are described to act in a certain way, probabilistically, is not due to a lack of knowledge, but is because this is the way the particles work, or, we (who believe in a Creator) would say, this is the way they were designed.

God is really, really smart.  He can take all of this in because He is so smart.  Really, really big brain.

I don't disagree with the video game interaction idea, however.  When free will enters into the question, very interesting things can happen (even for God, with His enormous brain). 

[pnattmbtc]

This came to mind (regarding the price that Christ paid):

Quote

Christ's offering was exceedingly abundant to reach every soul that God had created. It could not be restricted so as not to exceed the number who would accept the great Gift. All men are not saved; yet the plan of redemption is not a waste because it does not accomplish all that its liberality has provided for. There must be enough and to spare. DA 565.5

 

[Wingnut]

2 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

The quantum observation is a good one.  The idea physicists have is if you were to ask God, "What will this particle do?" (talking about the ones which act randomly) God would respond, "there's a 50% chance it will do this, and a 50% chance it will do that."  That is, the fact that the particles are described to act in a certain way, probabilistically, is not due to a lack of knowledge, but is because this is the way the particles work, or, we (who believe in a Creator) would say, this is the way they were designed.

God is really, really smart.  He can take all of this in because He is so smart.  Really, really big brain.

I don't disagree with the video game interaction idea, however.  When free will enters into the question, very interesting things can happen (even for God, with His enormous brain). 

Einstein kept insisting God does not play dice.

But modern science seems to say the opposite with quantum physics.  In the past we believed in a mechanistic universe whereby if we could know everything about the present we could accurately predict the future.  Science has given up that idea.i

[pnattmbtc]

3 minutes ago, Wingnut said:

Einstein kept insisting God does not play dice.

But modern science seems to say the opposite with quantum physics.  In the past we believed in a mechanistic universe whereby if we could know everything about the present we could accurately predict the future.  Science has given up that idea.i

Besides the random element, there is also chaos theory, an element of which is that very small differences in initial conditions can wind up with very, very large differences in behavior, once you reach a certain horizon.  When you combine these two elements, randomness and chaos, you really do wind up with a world which is spontaneous, exciting, alive, or, in the words of Genesis "very good" (even for God).

[Wingnut]

 

Revelation 3:11

Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.

For this to be honest, there must be the possibility of me losing out to another.  God may offer me a position in His kingdom if I overcome, but if I slack, He offers it to another.  It sounds so fluid and like any business today.  I hate it when folks get "spiritual" and have to invoke a "magic" solution instead of an easy natural one.  Why can God with all His power not just let the future happen, adding a touch of correction here or there?

[pnattmbtc]

Another principle which comes into play is that even though individual elements can act randomly, there can still be predicable behavior in regards to the group.  There are many applications of this, including how gasses and chemicals behave, colonies (such as ants or termites), or people in society.

[Wingnut]

5 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

Another principle which comes into play is that even though individual elements can act randomly, there can still be predicable behavior in regards to the group.  There are many applications of this, including how gasses and chemicals behave, colonies (such as ants or termites), or people in society.

Good point.  If stats is good at making predictions imagine how good God must be with perfect data.

[Samie]

2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

Jesus DID NOT pay the "redemption price" for those who will be lost, any more than He paid it for Satan and his angels.  IF Jesus DID pay the price for them, then they - by logic - should NOT be "lost". 

Samie:  They were written in the BOL. In that situation, they are in the "saved" condition.

This is the whole argument for universalism.   Your theory - on the other hand - says that EVERYONE was "saved", but some are thrown back, because Jesus doesn't want them any more.  They "failed to overcome". 

Samie:  And were blotted out from the BOL. Which only signifies their names were initially written otherwise there was nothing to blot.

You take Ephesians 2:4-6, and Colossians 2:13 OUT OF CONTEXT, and then build a whole doctrine on your belief that these verses were addressed to all mankind.  They were addressed to believers. 

Samie: Addressed to believers but with general application. This simply means the letter to the Ephesians which of course was addressed to the Ephesians only, but what are in the letter can be generally applied. For example, the choosing mentioned in Eph 1:3-6.  It could not be considered as being applicable only to the Ephesian addressee.  This is easily seen from the fact that when the choosing was done, the earth did not yet exist.  And when it got finally ratified on the cross, there was yet no Gentile believer, yet Eph 2:11-19 tell us of the one new man that was created on the cross, composed of both Jews and Gentiles as body, and Jesus as the Head.

You were shown Scriptures that says "if one died for all, then all died; and He died for all". These were written and addressed to the Corinthians, but you see the application is a general one.  That death is the price of redemption and covered everyone. Despite this you still insist that only those who believe are the ones considered to have died with Christ on the cross. That is incorrect application being a selective one, since the text explicitly says ALL DIED. Your selective application also goes against your own position that Christ died for all human beings.

You have repeated the same arguments a hundred times.  And we have countered a hundred times.  I think you just keep putting up threads, to keep the issue before the readers at this forum, hoping to get someone to agree with you.  I admire your persistence, but I'm not sure that I can continue to be part of keeping this issue prominent - top of the list - at the Theology forum.  If I see a DIFFERENT argument, based upon DIFFERENT Scriptures, then I may answer. 

Samie:  There was a different argument and different Scriptures, thanks to you.   You raised the issue of the resurrection of Lazarus which you paralleled with people being made spiritually alive. And you were shown that as Lazarus never did anything for him to be made alive, so people did not do anything to be made spiritually alive. This goes against your contention that people had to do something first (believe) before they can be made alive.

Since then, you seemed to have shied away from that Lazarus-related discussion given the turn of events which did not prove beneficial to your position.

 

[Samie]

Here's another argument based on another set of Scriptures: Joshua, the High Priest.  Zech 3:1-10

Question:  What did Joshua do first that PROMPTED God to tell him:

 

^KJV Zechariah 3:4  Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment.

In the narrative, there is nothing Joshua did that prompted God to forgive Joshua and cause the removal of his filthy garments, and clothe him with a clean one. 

This seem to ratify my position that it was on the cross where Jesus cleansed us from all sin, and our righteousness which are as filthy rags removed and changed with the righteousness of Christ having been made part of His Body and made spiritually alive when He resurrected.  

In all these, just like Joshua, we did not put in anything to PROMPT God to do that for us.

Your turn.

[pnattmbtc]

The reference to Joshua reminded me of the following:

Quote

 

But we will carry the figure a step further, and that will relieve the matter of all difficulty. Zech. 3:1-5 furnishes the solution; it reads thus:— "And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist Him. And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee; is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the Angel. And He answered and spake unto those that stood before Him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him He said, Behold I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment. And I said, Let them set a fair miter upon his head. So they set a fair miter upon his head, and clothed him with garments. And the Angel of the Lord stood by."

Notice in the above account that the taking away of the filthy garments is the same as causing the iniquity to pass from the person. And so we [66] find that when Christ covers us with the robe of His own righteousness, He does not furnish a cloak for sin, but takes the sin away. And this shows that the forgiveness of sins is something more than a mere form, something more than a mere entry in the books of record in heaven, to the effect that the sin has been canceled. The forgiveness of sins is a reality; it is something tangible, something that vitally affects the individual. It actually clears him from guilt; and if he is cleared from guilt, is justified, made righteous, he has certainly undergone a radical change. He is, indeed, another person. For he obtained this righteousness for the remission of sins, in Christ. It was obtained only by putting on Christ. But "if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature." 2 Cor. 5:17. And so the full and free forgiveness of sins carries with it that wonderful and miraculous change known as the Christ And His Righteousness. new birth; for a man cannot become a new creature except by a new birth. This is the same as having a new, or a clean, heart.

The new heart is a heart that loves righteousness and hates sin. It is a heart of willingness to be led into the paths of righteousness. It is such a heart as the Lord wished Israel to have when He20 said, "O that there were such a heart in them, that they would fear Me, and keep all My commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children forever!" Deut. 5:29. In short, it is a heart free from the love of sin as well as from the [67] guilt of sin. But what makes a man sincerely desire the forgiveness of his sins?—It is simply his hatred of them, and his desire for righteousness, which hatred and desire have been enkindled by the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit strives with all men. It comes as a reprover; when its voice of reproof is regarded, then it at once assumes the office of comforter. The same submissive, yielding disposition that leads the person to accept the reproof of the Spirit, will also lead him to follow the teachings of the Spirit, and Paul says that "as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." Rom. 8:14.

Again, what brings justification, or the forgiveness of sins? It is faith, for Paul says: "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Rom. 5:1. The righteousness of God is given unto and put upon everyone that believeth. Rom. 3:22. But this same exercise of faith makes the person a child of God; for, says the apostle Paul again, "Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus." Gal. 3:26.

The fact that everyone whose sins are forgiven is at once a child of God, is shown in Paul's letter to Titus. He first brings to view the wicked condition in which we once were, and then says (Titus 3:4-7):— "But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour [68] Christ And His Righteousness. toward men appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which He shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; that being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life."

 

Regarding what Joshua did, he believe in Christ, of course, the same as for anyone whose sins are forgiven.  This is Paul's point in many places.

[Samie]

8thdaypriest wanted a new argument, a new set of Scriptures. I provided what she wanted. She has yet to reply.

In Pnatt's recent post, he again brings out the old arguments.  If I again address Pnatt's arguments, we will again get back to what 8thdaypriest has been protesting against.

If 8thdaypriest is now observing, she may want to request Pnatt to refrain from resorting to his old tactics.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

 

Samie: Addressed to believers but with general application. This simply means the letter to the Ephesians which of course was addressed to the Ephesians only, but what are in the letter can be generally applied. For example, the choosing mentioned in Eph 1:3-6.  It could not be considered as being applicable only to the Ephesian addressee.  This is easily seen from the fact that when the choosing was done, the earth did not yet exist.  

And when it got finally ratified on the cross, there was yet no Gentile believer, yet Eph 2:11-19 tell us of the one new man that was created on the cross, composed of both Jews and Gentiles as body, and Jesus as the Head.

 

1.The new man was not created on the cross, but by the cross.  The cross is the method by which enemies are reconciled.  The enmity is in the mind (we were "enemies in our own mind" "alienated from God").  The reconciliation takes place when the goodness of God leads the believer to repentance (Romans 2:4).

16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

2.The choosing is in Christ, not apart from Christ.  Those who believe are chosen to salvation.  It's not saying the certain individuals were chosen, as individuals (this is the Cavlinist position), but that individuals as a class, namely the class of those who believe in Christ, were chosen (this is the Arminian position, which we, as SDA's have always held).  This controversy (as to whether Paul is referring to God's choosing people as individuals or as a class) is one which has been going on for centuries.

3.Why would you think there weren't any Gentile believers?  I can think of several (think of the lineage of Christ, for example).  There's certainly nothing in Scripture which says there weren't any Gentile belivers.

[pnattmbtc]

13 minutes ago, Samie said:

8thdaypriest wanted a new argument, a new set of Scriptures. I provided what she wanted. She has yet to reply.

In Pnatt's recent post, he again brings out the old arguments.  If I again address Pnatt's arguments, we will again get back to what 8thdaypriest has been protesting against.

If 8thdaypriest is now observing, she may want to request Pnatt to refrain from resorting to his old tactics.

Which old arguments?  What old tactics?  What are you talking about?  This is a discussion board.  You made a post, and I'm discussing it.  I'm not sure what you're doing.

Regarding what Waggoner wrote, he was one who understood the gospel far better than you or I (he was given special light on the subject), and it would do as well to study what we wrote.  What I quoted was presented at the 1888 General Conference Session in Mpls, of which Ellen White responded that when she heard it "every fiber of my heart said, 'Amen!'"

[Scuba]

 

[Samie]

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is SOLELY the act of God.  And in that resurrection where Jesus was made alive, Scriptures tell of people who were made alive TOGETHER with Him:

^NKJ Ephesians 2:4-5   4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,  5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ.

In the above verses, Paul was addressing the Ephesians, and by using the words “we” and “us”, he was identifying himself with these Ephesians as among those made alive together with Christ.  The reason provided for God’s making them alive is God’s great love, no more, no less.

But does God love only those at Ephesus and Paul? How about those at Corinth?  If God made alive the Ephesians and Paul simply because of His great love for them, what would prevent Him from making alive all others He likewise loved?  And Jesus said God so loved the world!!! And that includes every human being.

I believe that when Jesus resurrected, we all human beings, simply because God loves us all, were made alive together with Him!  And to be alive is to be in Christ Who is our Life (Col 3:4), to be part of His body.

Sadly, many had been blotted out from the BOL for not overcoming evil with good.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

 

Samie: The resurrection of Jesus Christ is SOLELY the act of God.  And in that resurrection where Jesus was made alive, Scriptures tell of people who were made alive TOGETHER with Him:

NKJ Ephesians 2:4-5   4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,  5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ.

In the above verses, Paul was addressing the Ephesians, and by using the words “we” and “us”, he was identifying himself with these Ephesians as among those made alive together with Christ.  The reason provided for God’s making them alive is God’s great love, no more, no less.

But does God love only those at Ephesus and Paul? How about those at Corinth?  If God made alive the Ephesians and Paul simply because of His great love for them, what would prevent Him from making alive all others He likewise loved?  And Jesus said God so loved the world!!! And that includes every human being.

I believe that when Jesus resurrected, we all human beings, simply because God loves us all, were made alive together with Him!  And to be alive is to be in Christ Who is our Life (Col 3:4), to be part of His body.

When trying to determine what a person means, A. Graham Maxwell suggested asking some questions.
1.What did the person actually say?
2.What did the person mean when he said what he said?

When Paul said we were made alive together with Christ, he might have meant that all of us were together at the same time made alive, or he might have meant that in raising Christ God effected our being able to made alive through the same resurrection power by faith.

Here is a comment from Meyers NT Commentary

Quote

God has made believers alive with Christ; i.e. in Christ’s revivification, which God has wrought, theirs also is included. By virtue of the dynamic connection in which Christ stands with His believers, as the head with its body (Ephesians 1:23), their revivification is objectively comprehended in His,—a relation, in fact, of which the Christian is conscious in faith; “quum autem fides suscipitur, ea omnia a Deo applicantur homini, et ab homine rata habentur,” Bengel. So the matter stands in the view of the apostle as accomplished, because the making alive of Christ is accomplished; the future actual making alive, or, as the case may be, change at the Parousia (1 Corinthians 15:23), is then the subjective individual participation of that which is already objectively given on the part of God in the resurrection of Christ. Certainly Paul might, in accordance with another mode of looking at it, have expressed himself by the future, as at 1 Corinthians 15:22; cf. Romans 8:17; but who does not feel that by means of the aorist (“ponitur autem aoristus de re, quae, quamvis futura sit, tamen pro peracta recte censeatur, cum … alia re jam facta contineatur,” Fritzsche, ad Rom. II. p. 206) the matter stands forth more forcibly and triumphantly out of the believing conviction of the apostle? οὓς ἐδικαίωσε τούτους καὶ ἐδόξασε , Romans 8:30.

What this is saying is that Paul could have used a different tense than the aorist to make clear he wasn't meaning the events take place at the same time (i.e., that believers and Christ are made alive at the same time), as he did in other places which were cited, but chose not to do so here to emphasize the effect of Christ's having been made alive.

How do we know that Paul doesn't mean that all are being made alive at the same time?  There are several ways.

1.It's not possible, since not all exist at the same time.  To be "made alive", one would need to exist.  It's doubtful such a thought would have even entered Paul's mind, that he could be misunderstood on this point.

2.Paul emphasized throughout his writings the importance of faith.  For example, by faith we are justified, become heirs according to the promise, receive the Holy Spirit, who witnesses to us that we are children of God.  We are made spiritually alive when we believe, which is when we become children of God, and receive the Spirit, who testifies to this fact.  Romans 8, for example, but Paul speaks along these lines often.

3.In the passage itself, Paul speaks of being dead in tresspasses and sins in which you used to walk.  That is, Paul is referring to a specific class of people when he defines what it means to be spiritually alive, which is to not walk in trespasses and sins as one used to walk.  To have an idea that to be spiritually alive has nothing to do with how one is living is completely foreign to Paul's thought here.

So to summarize, the the idea that one is made spiritually alive without existing is contradicted by logic (how can one who does not exist be made anything?), by the context of Paul's writings as a whole, and by the specific context of the passage.

Also, regarding this comment:

Quote

Sadly, many had been blotted out from the BOL for not overcoming evil with good.

This is inaccurate as the verse does not state that the reason for being blotted out of the BOL is for not overcoming evil with good, but that those who do not overcome evil with good will be blotted out.  In other words, not overcoming is a symptom of the problem, but not the problem itself, which is not believing in Christ, as the following verse makes clear.

Quote

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. (1 John 3:18).

Condemnation comes upon those who do not believe in Christ.  The only way to overcome is by faith in Christ, so unbelievers and those who do not overcome comprise the same class of people, but we should be clear what the cause of the problem is, which has to do with believing, or not believing, in Christ.

[Samie]

9 hours ago, Samie said:

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is SOLELY the act of God.  And in that resurrection where Jesus was made alive, Scriptures tell of people who were made alive TOGETHER with Him:

^NKJ Ephesians 2:4-5   4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,  5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ.

In the above verses, Paul was addressing the Ephesians, and by using the words “we” and “us”, he was identifying himself with these Ephesians as among those made alive together with Christ.  The reason provided for God’s making them alive is God’s great love, no more, no less.

But does God love only those at Ephesus and Paul? How about those at Corinth?  If God made alive the Ephesians and Paul simply because of His great love for them, what would prevent Him from making alive all others He likewise loved?  And Jesus said God so loved the world!!! And that includes every human being.

I believe that when Jesus resurrected, we all human beings, simply because God loves us all, were made alive together with Him!  And to be alive is to be in Christ Who is our Life (Col 3:4), to be part of His body.

Sadly, many had been blotted out from the BOL for not overcoming evil with good.

Did everyone die that God had to make alive every human being TOGETHER with Christ at His resurrection? Yes, Scriptures say so:

 NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵ and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

It was through the death of Christ that we died; it was through His resurrection that we were made alive TOGETHER with Him!  Now that we are alive, we are admonished to live for Him Who died for us and rose again.  And living for Him simply translates to overcoming evil with good. Jesus assures us that overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL (Rev 3:5).

[Samie]

13 minutes ago, Samie said:

Did everyone die that God had to make alive every human being TOGETHER with Christ at His resurrection? Yes, Scriptures say so:

 NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵ and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

It was through the death of Christ that we died; it was through His resurrection that we were made alive TOGETHER with Him!  Now that we are alive, we are admonished to live for Him Who died for us and rose again.  And living for Him simply translates to overcoming evil with good. Jesus assures us that overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL (Rev 3:5).

God caused our death TOGETHER with Christ; He caused our being made alive TOGETHER with Him when He raised Him from the dead.

How did God cause our death TOGETHER with Christ?  Through Christ, He attached us all with all our sins to His Son on the cross thereby making Him Who knew no sin TO BE SIN for us that we might become the righteousness of God in Him (2 Cor 5:21).  Yes, He bore our sins and took them all away:

^NKJ John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

This act of bearing and taking away all our sins was appropriately represented by the scapegoat at Yom Kippur.

^KJV Leviticus 16:21-22   ²¹ And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness: ²²And the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited: and he shall let go the goat in the wilderness.

Christ is our sin-bearer represented by the scapegoat at Yom Kippur.  As Aaron the High Priest put all the transgressions of Israel upon the head of the scapegoat, so Jesus our High Priest took upon Himself on the cross all our sins.

^NAS 1 Peter 2:24 and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.

As the scapegoat, led by a fit man, bore upon him all the sins of the people and carried them to a land not inhabited, so Christ Himself was the Fit Man Who led Himself laden with all our sins to Death, the land not inhabited. He was alone in that Death. No man was in that Death before He died. No man will experience that Death after He died. That Death was inhabited by no one when He went there. No one will inhabit it forever.

[pnattmbtc]

 

Quote

 

Did everyone die that God had to make alive every human being TOGETHER with Christ at His resurrection? Yes, Scriptures say so:

 NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

It was through the death of Christ that we died; it was through His resurrection that we were made alive TOGETHER with Him! 

 

 

If we don't exist, we can neither live nor die.  In Ephesians, it is clear that when Paul spoke of being made alive, he was talking to believers, as he said that they used to be dead in trespasses and sins, and used to walk in them, but no longer did.  So the being alive was in reference to behavior they had as believers.  Paul could have had unbelievers in mind, because they *are* dead in trespasses and sins, and walk in them.

Regarding the 2 Cor. passage, if you look at the context, just a couple of verse later, it can be seen that Paul said:

Quote

 

19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

 

Once again, Paul could not have possibly had all in mind as those who were reconciled because he says, "Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God."  Our message to others cannot be "be ye reconciled to God" if they already are reconciled to God!  So once again the context is bearing out that Paul is not speaking of reconciliation impacting all simultaneously in terms of time or irrespective of faith.  

Regarding "therefore all died", here's the Pulpit Commentary:

Quote

What compels Paul to sacrifice himself to the work of God for his converts is the conviction, which he formed once for all at his conversion, that One, even Christ, died on behalf of all men (Romans 5:15-19) a redeeming death (ver. 21); and that, consequently, in that death, all potentially died with him - died to their life of sin, and rose to the life of righteousness. The best comments on this bold and concentrated phrase are - "I died to the Law that I might live to Christ;" "I have been crucified with Christ" (Galatians 2:19, 20); and, "Ye died, and your life has been hidden with Christ in God" (Colossians 3:3). When Christ died, all humanity, of which he was the federal Head, died potentially with him to sin and selfishness, as he further shows in the next verse. 

I think this is accurate, which is essentially the same idea I shared regarding Ephesians 2.  Another possibility that comes to mind is the idea that had Christ not died for us, we would have died, which the grammar of the KJV suggests ("therefore were all dead"), but I'm not sure about the Greek.  That is, I'm not sure if the KJV is a good translation, although, in general, the translators for the KJV did an excellent job, so it seems at a minimum quite possible that this is a viable idea.

Regardless of how we translate this, it simply must be the case that Paul cannot be contradicting what he himself says in the same train of thought, a couple of verses later.  If our message, as believers, to non-believers is, "Be ye reconciled to God," it obviously cannot be the case that Paul had the idea that there were already reconciled to God.  Our understanding of 2 Cor. 15 has be reconcile with that (pun intended).

Quote

Now that we are alive, we are admonished to live for Him Who died for us and rose again.  And living for Him simply translates to overcoming evil with good. Jesus assures us that overcomers will not be blotted out from the BOL (Rev 3:5).

It is true that now that we are alive, we are admonished to live for Him who died for us, but how are we made alive?  It is by faith that we become sons of God:

Quote

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: (John 1:12)

When we receive Christ, which is to say believe in Him, or believe in His name, we are born again, becoming "the sons of God", and we are given the Holy Spirit, who testifies to this:

Quote

 

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you....

14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

This bring out how Paul conceives of death and life and the resurrection.  Paul applies being alive here and having the Spirit, and being made alive ("quicken") with being children of God, by faith in Christ.

[Samie]

19 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

If we don't exist, we can neither live nor die.

Sounds very natural; thoughts of a natural man. But we speak of things spiritual, and spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

Yes, we didn't yet exist when Christ died on the cross, but is it possible for God to consider us as being existent even if we don’t yet exist? Yes, Scriptures say so:

^NKJ Romans 4:17 (as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations") in the presence of Him whom he believed -- God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

[Samie]

By His death, we died. By His resurrection, we lived. All credit belongs to Him. I wonder why Pnatt wants to have a share in that credit by teaching that unless people believe, God could not do it for them.  Scriptures say we were made alive TOGETHER with Him, but Pnatt insists people are made alive when people believe.

51 minutes ago, pnattmbtc said:

This bring out how Paul conceives of death and life and the resurrection.  Paul applies being alive here and having the Spirit, and being made alive ("quicken") with being children of God, by faith in Christ.

Funny, people can believe while dead?  Remember, all died when Christ died.

NKJ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15   ¹⁴ For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died;  ¹⁵and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote

 

Me: If we don't exist, we can neither live nor die.Samie: Sounds very natural; thoughts of a natural man.

 

This is a bit on the ad hominem side, and should be avoided.  If someone disagrees with you, say they are lacking in spiritual discernment.  This is just name-calling and adds nothing to the discussion.

This sort of comment would be in line if I were suggesting that miracles were impossible, for example.  I'm not dismissing in any way God's ability to do things, or any spiritual realities, but am simply disagreeing with you on how a verse should be interpreted, and that we should exist in order to live or die is just one of the arguments.

The principle argument I've had regarding your ideas is that they contradict what Paul, and other scripture writers wrote elsewhere, and in the case of Paul, the elsewhere is in the immediate context in addition to other letters.

 

Quote

 

But we speak of things spiritual, and spiritual things are spiritually discerned.

Yes, we didn't yet exist when Christ died on the cross, but is it possible for God to consider us as being existent even if we don’t yet exist? Yes, Scriptures say so:

NKJ Romans 4:17 (as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations") in the presence of Him whom he believed -- God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;

 

The context doesn't apply here.  In the case of Abraham, God made a promise regarding something which had not yet happened.  God knows what He is capable to do, and here is speaking of that.  In the case of Paul in Ephesians, Paul is speaking of something which God had already accomplished, which was to make the believers spiritually alive when the believed in Christ.  That Paul has this in mind is very clear, as he writes:

Quote

1And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Eph 2

The being dead is referring to a time period when the people to whom he was addressing existed and were doing things, namely walking according to the prince of the power of the air.  Their being dead was in reference to this, as was their being made alive.  That they needed to exist to be dead or alive in the manner of which Paul is speaking is not a matter of reasoning according to the natural mind, but simply reading the words that Paul wrote.