How can God justify the ungodly and still maintain His integrity to His law?
- Thread starter Roberth
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The Gospel is very simple. It is so simple that unschooled ordinary men such as Simon Peter and Andrew could understand it. At Pentecost, 3000 Jews responded to the Gospel. The Ethopian Eunuch understood it. The gentiles understood. The Jailer in Acts 16 understood it.
Why do we complicate the Gospel?
When did Paul say that basic understanding of the Gospel is "not enough?" Would appreciate some Bible verse.
Yes, the letters (epistles) tell us that we must mature in Christ and move on from milk to solid food. But this does not mean that we must dabble in theology and eschatology, etc. (although it's good to know more). After all, God has not revealed everything to man. No one can say that they have arrived, as far as Biblical knowledge is concerned.
Why do we complicate the Gospel?
When did Paul say that basic understanding of the Gospel is "not enough?" Would appreciate some Bible verse.
Yes, the letters (epistles) tell us that we must mature in Christ and move on from milk to solid food. But this does not mean that we must dabble in theology and eschatology, etc. (although it's good to know more). After all, God has not revealed everything to man. No one can say that they have arrived, as far as Biblical knowledge is concerned.
Technically, it's s simile when we are directly compared,to sheep, not a metaphor. 
When you say the word "wayness," now that's a metaphor.
Now let's come to the point....
Romans 6:6 and 7:4 is addressed to the Jews. The Jews were obligated to the Law; the Gentiles weren't.
Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear?Acts 15:10
In Acts 15, the Jewish believers wanted the Gentile believers to get circumcised according to the Law. They believed that there is no salvation without circumcision. Peter told them that the "yoke" of the Law must not be put on the Gentiles. This was the Jerusalem council where Paul and Barnabas and the elders were present.
When you say the word "wayness," now that's a metaphor.
Now let's come to the point....
Romans 6:6 and 7:4 is addressed to the Jews. The Jews were obligated to the Law; the Gentiles weren't.
Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear?Acts 15:10
In Acts 15, the Jewish believers wanted the Gentile believers to get circumcised according to the Law. They believed that there is no salvation without circumcision. Peter told them that the "yoke" of the Law must not be put on the Gentiles. This was the Jerusalem council where Paul and Barnabas and the elders were present.
...means "he bore our sins"
How? All I know is that when I was offered the free gift(salvation), I grabbed it. The "hows" did not matter. Yes, I know that Christ paid for it by his blood!
You ask, "How did he bear our sins?" Maybe you should give out your answer(your understanding), since you do not agree with most of us on this thread.
How? All I know is that when I was offered the free gift(salvation), I grabbed it. The "hows" did not matter. Yes, I know that Christ paid for it by his blood!
You ask, "How did he bear our sins?" Maybe you should give out your answer(your understanding), since you do not agree with most of us on this thread.
ok, yes, i see -- but this is for we who are immersed into Him (Romans 6:3)
all men "may" be - but whoever does not believe, and so take part in Him, stands condemned already.
Romans 5:17 -- this justification falls on those who receive the abundance of grace, and the free gift, not "everyone" - even though it is "for" everyone, and sufficient for all. it's not universal salvation, as it's prophesied that it will not be universally received, but it is sufficient grace for universal salvation.
yes
yes, and already does. if we do not accept His redemption and become immersed in Him, we are all condemned already.
all men "may" be - but whoever does not believe, and so take part in Him, stands condemned already.
Romans 5:17 -- this justification falls on those who receive the abundance of grace, and the free gift, not "everyone" - even though it is "for" everyone, and sufficient for all. it's not universal salvation, as it's prophesied that it will not be universally received, but it is sufficient grace for universal salvation.
yes
yes, and already does. if we do not accept His redemption and become immersed in Him, we are all condemned already.
i believe we were crucified with Him thousands of years ago.
i also believe we are crucified with Him when we hear and believe.
those moments reach out across time & touch each other, and a new man is born in Him as the old one dies.
i don't think we should get too hung up on time, because this transcends time - we are made to have part with the One who created time, and stands above it - the One who speaks of the future in past tense, and calls that which is not, as if it were. it's not a "different gospel" IMHO simply because one doesn't perceive the particular time of their death in Christ as being at that moment on Golgatha -- though it is a different gospel if we do not believe that in Him, we also are crucified to sin.
because this is how we know we live with Him -- because we also died with Him
((see: Romans 6:8))
i also believe we are crucified with Him when we hear and believe.
those moments reach out across time & touch each other, and a new man is born in Him as the old one dies.
i don't think we should get too hung up on time, because this transcends time - we are made to have part with the One who created time, and stands above it - the One who speaks of the future in past tense, and calls that which is not, as if it were. it's not a "different gospel" IMHO simply because one doesn't perceive the particular time of their death in Christ as being at that moment on Golgatha -- though it is a different gospel if we do not believe that in Him, we also are crucified to sin.
because this is how we know we live with Him -- because we also died with Him
((see: Romans 6:8))
i was thinking that too, when i read the comment about God not being able to "ethically" punish the innocent in place of the guilty.
He's the source of true ethos -- He's not judged by human ethic. i was trying to get across that this very thing happens in the law - an "innocent" animal was slain in place of the guilty, and God forgave sin.
the particular objection may be wiped out in some sense by our death with Him, but this only is true because He in fact did die - we take part in His very death, to which He went willingly, for our sake. if Christ did not die on the cross, then neither did we. He has authority to lay down His life, as He said, and so He did. to say He cannot have died? that does impose limits on God, and in fact contradicts what He Himself said, in more than one place.
He's the source of true ethos -- He's not judged by human ethic. i was trying to get across that this very thing happens in the law - an "innocent" animal was slain in place of the guilty, and God forgave sin.
the particular objection may be wiped out in some sense by our death with Him, but this only is true because He in fact did die - we take part in His very death, to which He went willingly, for our sake. if Christ did not die on the cross, then neither did we. He has authority to lay down His life, as He said, and so He did. to say He cannot have died? that does impose limits on God, and in fact contradicts what He Himself said, in more than one place.
I am he that liveth, and was dead;
and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen
(Revelation 1:18)
and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen
(Revelation 1:18)
Last edited:
Romans 6:6 does not use the words "2000 years ago," Yes, Jesus died approx 2000 years ago.
Romans 5:18 says that "all men" are given the opportunity to be justified (right standing with God) as a result of the righteousness of one man, Jesus. Note the word "leads to"..Most translations use the simple present tense. I don't know which version/ translation you are using. But irrespective of the Bible version, all other verses agree with the fact that justification comes when one believes. All man are not justified automatically.
Note that Romans 5:19 says that "many" will be made righteous, not "all men"
Galatians 3:23-25 is again addressed to the Jews, who were under the Law. The entire chapter emphasizes the importance of faith, rather than dependence on the Law.
Romans 2:12 is not saying that God will judge (or condemn) mankind in general according to the Law.
Romans 5:18 says that "all men" are given the opportunity to be justified (right standing with God) as a result of the righteousness of one man, Jesus. Note the word "leads to"..Most translations use the simple present tense. I don't know which version/ translation you are using. But irrespective of the Bible version, all other verses agree with the fact that justification comes when one believes. All man are not justified automatically.
Note that Romans 5:19 says that "many" will be made righteous, not "all men"
Galatians 3:23-25 is again addressed to the Jews, who were under the Law. The entire chapter emphasizes the importance of faith, rather than dependence on the Law.
Romans 2:12 is not saying that God will judge (or condemn) mankind in general according to the Law.
And full justification is to be stretched or shrunk to align completely. (Marc, I like your comparison!)
Roberth, thank you for answering my direct question in your post. I still get a bit of a sense that you are pressing an agenda, to declare the "common gospel" to be false. In post #90, you criticized another for allegedly judging you, yet in post #87 you wrote, "the gospel commonly taught many Christians is what I term unethical." It seems to me that you are standing in judgment over the gospel.
Because I hope you will stick around and be sharpened both in your understanding and in your interaction (as I have been), I offer these words: Asking questions with the sincere desire to learn is fantastic. As a new member, asking questions with the intention to correct others, or by baiting to get a specific answer, is offensive. Had you begun this thread by presenting what you've heard (the 'unethical gospel'), suggesting why you think it is incorrect, and asking for input, the tone of this thread would be very different. Generalized criticism is not well-received, but a humble spirit is.
(Marc, I like your comparison!)Roberth, thank you for answering my direct question in your post. I still get a bit of a sense that you are pressing an agenda, to declare the "common gospel" to be false. In post #90, you criticized another for allegedly judging you, yet in post #87 you wrote, "the gospel commonly taught many Christians is what I term unethical." It seems to me that you are standing in judgment over the gospel.
Because I hope you will stick around and be sharpened both in your understanding and in your interaction (as I have been), I offer these words: Asking questions with the sincere desire to learn is fantastic. As a new member, asking questions with the intention to correct others, or by baiting to get a specific answer, is offensive. Had you begun this thread by presenting what you've heard (the 'unethical gospel'), suggesting why you think it is incorrect, and asking for input, the tone of this thread would be very different. Generalized criticism is not well-received, but a humble spirit is.
Rom 5:18
So then as through one transgression (Adam's) there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted (past tense, refers to the cross) justification of life to all men. (NASB*)
* https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-American-Standard-Bible-NASB/
"The original NASB has earned the reputation of being the most accurate English Bible translation"
So then as through one transgression (Adam's) there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted (past tense, refers to the cross) justification of life to all men. (NASB*)
* https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-American-Standard-Bible-NASB/
"The original NASB has earned the reputation of being the most accurate English Bible translation"
Last edited: