The Letter to the Romans...
- Thread starter Yahshua
- 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.
No it was I just a thought. as a side note, I realize that even typing posts on this forum bears a weakness of interpretation...because we're each reading through our lenses.
Yes I'll also continue later with more passages studying Romans (heading to bed until the morning).
---
Again thanks for the contributions people. I'm sure it's edifying someone out there in CC land.
Yes I'll also continue later with more passages studying Romans (heading to bed until the morning).
---
Again thanks for the contributions people. I'm sure it's edifying someone out there in CC land.
Last edited:
On that we are all agreed.
However, we are not agreed that it's faith alone, and not it's necessary obedience,
that justifies (removes guilt, gives right standing before God), as shown by
Abraham who was justified before any obedience occurred (Ge 15:6).
The Abrahamic covenant (Ge 15:9-21) contained the gospel of grace (Gal 3:8);
i.e., justification/righteousness by faith alone (Ge 15:6),
and the promise (covenant) based on faith alone (Ge 15:18),
before there was any circumcision (Ge 17:10), which was simply the sign, a seal
guaranteeing justification/righteousness (guiltlessness, right standing before God) by faith alone.
However, we are not agreed that it's faith alone, and not it's necessary obedience,
that justifies (removes guilt, gives right standing before God), as shown by
Abraham who was justified before any obedience occurred (Ge 15:6).
The Abrahamic covenant (Ge 15:9-21) contained the gospel of grace (Gal 3:8);
i.e., justification/righteousness by faith alone (Ge 15:6),
and the promise (covenant) based on faith alone (Ge 15:18),
before there was any circumcision (Ge 17:10), which was simply the sign, a seal
guaranteeing justification/righteousness (guiltlessness, right standing before God) by faith alone.
Last edited:
The result of believe is LOVE, God's type best described in 1 Cor. 13:4-13
The only thing that is blasphemous is unbelief against the Holy Ghost's testimony of Christ and Father
Father's imputed righteousness shining through the believer is santification, where the believer trusts in nothing else but God. All, credit to God through Son.
For Father through son's death sees us as made perfect and is ready to give us new life in the Spirit once we accept by Christ we are forgiven, this takes place, and we are sanctified
Believe, Receive and see
No seeing the kingdom without being born again by the Spirit of God from God sending this a free gift to the beleiver in the finished work of Christ at the cross, death first for justification then new life for sanctification
The only thing that is blasphemous is unbelief against the Holy Ghost's testimony of Christ and Father
Father's imputed righteousness shining through the believer is santification, where the believer trusts in nothing else but God. All, credit to God through Son.
For Father through son's death sees us as made perfect and is ready to give us new life in the Spirit once we accept by Christ we are forgiven, this takes place, and we are sanctified
Believe, Receive and see
No seeing the kingdom without being born again by the Spirit of God from God sending this a free gift to the beleiver in the finished work of Christ at the cross, death first for justification then new life for sanctification
Yes, truth Sister, and then he did as God led, this sanctified his belief. Just as when I go and do what God says it is sanctified. Just as Christ did nothing or said nothing without the lead of Father via the Holy Ghost that told him what Father wants. Sanctification is shown being a doer, already justified in Christ death, forgiven,
Hebrews 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
1 Peter 3:15 but sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
1 Thessalonians 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
After belief this is waht we grow into the sanctification of the Lord, growing us up unto perfection as we are already made perfect
[h=3]1 John 3[/h]Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
3 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. [SUP]2 [/SUP]Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. [SUP]3 [/SUP]And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.
Hebrews 13:12 Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.
1 Peter 3:15 but sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:
1 Thessalonians 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.
After belief this is waht we grow into the sanctification of the Lord, growing us up unto perfection as we are already made perfect
[h=3]1 John 3[/h]Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
3 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. [SUP]2 [/SUP]Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. [SUP]3 [/SUP]And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.
Thanks Karraster. I see this thread is getting a lot of readers but not many chiming in for explanation. So I'm going to take the liberty to elaborate on this point for the reader's edification.
Reference: The word "atonement" comes from the Hebrew word "Kappur" and means "to cover".
There were two things needed for the symbolic foreshadowing ritual of Atonement: Blood and a pure High Priest.
1. Blood shed (received from the death of the pure animal)
2. A High Priest takes the blood in the Most Holy Place to sprinkle it
3. The Most Holy Place was in the Temple on Earth
...and in fulfillment of this...
1. Christ was the fulfillment of the animal whose blood would be shed
2. Christ was High Priest tasked to take his blood and sprinkling it in the Most Holy Place
3. The Most Holy Place was in the Temple in Heaven
Rhetorical: If Christ is both Lamb AND High Priest, how can he take his blood into heaven if (a) it was not yet shed out of his body after crucifixion and (b) he was not yet resurrected back to life to ascend to heaven and actually sprinkle it? The answer is "he can't". This is why Paul specifically says what he says in Romans 4:23-25.
Christ's death on the cross *provided* the pure blood FOR atonement/covering...but it did not atone; not yet. It's only in resurrection that our High Priest is alive to ascend to heaven to *perform* the atonement/covering on the heavenly altar.
Notice when Christ was finally resurrected that he told Mary not to touch him because he hadn't yet ascended to his Father. This means when he was dead for 3 days and 3 nights he wasn't yet in the Most Holy Place in heaven to cover believers with his blood.
It's his resurrection from the grave that's for the believer's justification, not his death on the cross. Christ's death on the cross was another work; it was the payment (i.e. "end") for our sin penalty on our behalf (one of multiple tasks he had to complete per Daniel 9:24)...but Christ's resurrection into heaven was for our reconciliation to God.
Reference: The word "atonement" comes from the Hebrew word "Kappur" and means "to cover".
There were two things needed for the symbolic foreshadowing ritual of Atonement: Blood and a pure High Priest.
1. Blood shed (received from the death of the pure animal)
2. A High Priest takes the blood in the Most Holy Place to sprinkle it
3. The Most Holy Place was in the Temple on Earth
...and in fulfillment of this...
1. Christ was the fulfillment of the animal whose blood would be shed
2. Christ was High Priest tasked to take his blood and sprinkling it in the Most Holy Place
3. The Most Holy Place was in the Temple in Heaven
Rhetorical: If Christ is both Lamb AND High Priest, how can he take his blood into heaven if (a) it was not yet shed out of his body after crucifixion and (b) he was not yet resurrected back to life to ascend to heaven and actually sprinkle it? The answer is "he can't". This is why Paul specifically says what he says in Romans 4:23-25.
Christ's death on the cross *provided* the pure blood FOR atonement/covering...but it did not atone; not yet. It's only in resurrection that our High Priest is alive to ascend to heaven to *perform* the atonement/covering on the heavenly altar.
Notice when Christ was finally resurrected that he told Mary not to touch him because he hadn't yet ascended to his Father. This means when he was dead for 3 days and 3 nights he wasn't yet in the Most Holy Place in heaven to cover believers with his blood.
It's his resurrection from the grave that's for the believer's justification, not his death on the cross. Christ's death on the cross was another work; it was the payment (i.e. "end") for our sin penalty on our behalf (one of multiple tasks he had to complete per Daniel 9:24)...but Christ's resurrection into heaven was for our reconciliation to God.
Continuing...
Romans 5:12-13
What Paul's Saying...
(Following the context of all believers being reconciled by one man, Christ) Paul begins comparing it to how sin entered the world through one man, Adam.
1. One man sinned
2. That sin brought death
3. Death spread to all because all have sinned (too)
4. So by these facts sin existed in the world before God's Law was given
[IMPORTANT: Note that the text does not say "before God's law was *created*". It merely says "before God's law was *given* (to the world)" at this point.]
5. But (in agreement to Romans 3:19-20; Post #35) sin could not be pointed out until God's law was (in context) "given to the world" to perform its work/action/task of revealing sin.
If you agree with this interpretation, “like” it.
If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.
If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.
Romans 5:12-13
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.
What Paul's Saying...
(Following the context of all believers being reconciled by one man, Christ) Paul begins comparing it to how sin entered the world through one man, Adam.
1. One man sinned
2. That sin brought death
3. Death spread to all because all have sinned (too)
4. So by these facts sin existed in the world before God's Law was given
[IMPORTANT: Note that the text does not say "before God's law was *created*". It merely says "before God's law was *given* (to the world)" at this point.]
5. But (in agreement to Romans 3:19-20; Post #35) sin could not be pointed out until God's law was (in context) "given to the world" to perform its work/action/task of revealing sin.
If you agree with this interpretation, “like” it.
If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.
If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.
Romans 5:14
Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
What Paul's Saying...
(Even though God's law wasn't yet given to reveal sin) Because sin brought death, Paul explains that death ruled from Adam to Moses...even over those who didn't sin like Adam did.
If you agree with this interpretation, “like” it.
If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.
If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.[/QUOTE]
Romans 5:15
But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have {the grace of God} and {the free gift by the grace} of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.
What Paul's Saying...
(Concerning Death spreading to many by one man's sin) Paul says the free gift (of Justification, in context) abounds for many from the one man, Christ....by the grace of God and the grace of Christ.
If you agree with this interpretation, “like” it.
If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.
If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.
Romans 5:16
And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification.
What Paul's Saying...
But Paul says there's a difference between Death and Justification. After just one sin came the condemnation (to death; in context). However, after many sins came the free gift (of Justification, in context).
If you agree with this interpretation, “like” it.
If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.
If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.
Romans 5:17
For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.
What Paul's Saying...
(Supporting his last statement) If death ruled (the world) through Adam because of Adam's one sin, then indeed life will rule for those who receive Grace and Justification through Christ.
---
To this statement I then wonder to myself...why do so many Christians still live life acting as if death rules over them? If I updated Paul statement here to modern times it may read:
"If death rules (the world) through mankind because of Adam's one sin, then indeed life should rule for those who've receive Grace and Justification through Christ...shouldn't it?"
If you agree with this interpretation, “like” it.
If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.
If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.
Romans 5:18-19
Therefore, as one trespass led {Past Tense} to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads {Present tense} to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man's disobedience the many were {Past tense} made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be {Future Tense} made righteous.
What Paul's Saying...
Paul concludes this point (note the difference in tenses):
1. Sin led to the condemnation for all (past tense)
2. Christ act leads to Justification & life (present tense; so why do believers operate under death?)
3. From one man's disobedience, many were made sinners (Past tense)
4. From one man's obedience, many will be made righteous (future tense)
If you agree with this interpretation, “like” it.
If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.
If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.
Romans 5:20-21
Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
What Paul's Saying...
(Now Paul switches focus to God's Law for a moment to show its interplay in all of this). God's Law was brought in [again, it doesn't say "created" as if it never existed prior]; God's Law was brought in to magnify sin; to bring it to its full measure. In other words, to reveal what actions/works of men are "sins" in order to show how unrighteous *men without Christ* are.
But Paul assures that while sin is magnified like this, Grace [God's power for salvation; Romans 1:16-17] is even more magnified. [Because, in context, with God's grace the believer is no longer weak to sin (Romans 5:6-8). With God's grace, they don't have to be sin's slave like before].
If you agree with this interpretation, “like” it.
If you disagree with this interpretation, post an alternative for others to agree with.
If you’d like further elaboration of an interpretation, feel free to ask.
It was the name for the cover of the Ark in the Holy of Holies.
The animal sacrifices of the OT only covered sin (Ro 4:7), they did not take away sin (Heb 10:4).
The sins of the OT saints were only covered, they were not remitted (taken away) until Christ
shed his blood on the cross (Ro 3:25).
I'm not sure where you get that the High Priest who offered sacrifice was pure.
The High Priest who offered the great sin sacrifice on the Day of Atonement was not pure
(Heb 5:1-3, 7:27-28).
His sins were only covered (Heb 10:4) by the special sin offering (Lev 16:4, 11-14,)
which he made before the great sin offering (Lev 16:15-16) on the Day of Atonement,
for defilement of the tabernacle by being in the midst of a sinful people (Lev 16:16).
But that occurred only once a year, on the Day of Atonement.
Sacrifices were offered every day, but their blood was not taken in the Most Holy Place,
it was sprinkled on, and poured out at the base of, the altar.
And Hebrews shows us the meaning of this physical picture depicting an immaterial heaven.
"For it was necessary, then. . .for the heavenly things to be purified with better sacrifices than these.
For Christ. . .entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence (Heb 9:23-24)
where he ever lives to make intercession (Ro 8:34; Heb 7:25).
Christ's sacrifice (blood) is presented in heaven in his daily intercession in the presence of God
for us, where Christ applies the benefits of (sprinkles) his blood; e.g.,
guaranteeing our redemption,
working out everything for us in accordance with God's will,
preparing a place for us.
I'm not sure where you get this.
Christ's blood was poured out at the base of the cross (Jn 19:34, 36-37; Lk 22:20) just as
the blood of the sacrificial animal was poured out at the base of the altar (Lev 4:7, 18, 25, 30, 34).
That assumes physical meaning of an immaterial heavenly reality, which Hebrews indicates (above)
is not a physical sprinkling of it, but the application of its benefits through Christ's ever-living
intercession for us.
The sprinkling of the blood on the horns of the altars on the Day of Atonement
was the application of the blood's benefits; i.e., cleansing of the holy things from defilement.
The Greek word translated "touch" here is haptomai, which means "to hold on, to embrace."
Jesus is telling her that she can no longer have him in the physically human way as before,
but can have him now only through the Holy Spirit, whom he will send after he returns to heaven.
It means he had not yet ascended to the presence of his Father where he would apply
the benefits of (sprinkle) his blood in ever-living intercession for us.
Christ's death on the cross paid the penalty for the sin of those who believe in him.
Christ's resurrection acquitted us of guilt (justified) in that it showed the Father
did regard our debt as paid, his justice as satisfied and we did, indeed,
have a guiltless right standing before him, reconciling us.
However, keep in mind that Paul more often refers to Christ's death on the cross without
the resurrection, assuming its inclusion rather than as a separate work, in reconciling us
to God (e.g., Col 1:20; Eph 2:16; 2Co 5:20-21).
The sprinkling of Christ's blood in heaven is the application of his blood's benefits
through his ever-living intercession for us in the presence of God (Heb 9:23-24).
The animal sacrifices of the OT only covered sin (Ro 4:7), they did not take away sin (Heb 10:4).
The sins of the OT saints were only covered, they were not remitted (taken away) until Christ
shed his blood on the cross (Ro 3:25).
I'm not sure where you get that the High Priest who offered sacrifice was pure.
The High Priest who offered the great sin sacrifice on the Day of Atonement was not pure
(Heb 5:1-3, 7:27-28).
His sins were only covered (Heb 10:4) by the special sin offering (Lev 16:4, 11-14,)
which he made before the great sin offering (Lev 16:15-16) on the Day of Atonement,
for defilement of the tabernacle by being in the midst of a sinful people (Lev 16:16).
But that occurred only once a year, on the Day of Atonement.
Sacrifices were offered every day, but their blood was not taken in the Most Holy Place,
it was sprinkled on, and poured out at the base of, the altar.
And Hebrews shows us the meaning of this physical picture depicting an immaterial heaven.
"For it was necessary, then. . .for the heavenly things to be purified with better sacrifices than these.
For Christ. . .entered heaven itself, now to appear for us in God's presence (Heb 9:23-24)
where he ever lives to make intercession (Ro 8:34; Heb 7:25).
Christ's sacrifice (blood) is presented in heaven in his daily intercession in the presence of God
for us, where Christ applies the benefits of (sprinkles) his blood; e.g.,
guaranteeing our redemption,
working out everything for us in accordance with God's will,
preparing a place for us.
I'm not sure where you get this.
Christ's blood was poured out at the base of the cross (Jn 19:34, 36-37; Lk 22:20) just as
the blood of the sacrificial animal was poured out at the base of the altar (Lev 4:7, 18, 25, 30, 34).
That assumes physical meaning of an immaterial heavenly reality, which Hebrews indicates (above)
is not a physical sprinkling of it, but the application of its benefits through Christ's ever-living
intercession for us.
The sprinkling of the blood on the horns of the altars on the Day of Atonement
was the application of the blood's benefits; i.e., cleansing of the holy things from defilement.
The Greek word translated "touch" here is haptomai, which means "to hold on, to embrace."
Jesus is telling her that she can no longer have him in the physically human way as before,
but can have him now only through the Holy Spirit, whom he will send after he returns to heaven.
It means he had not yet ascended to the presence of his Father where he would apply
the benefits of (sprinkle) his blood in ever-living intercession for us.
Christ's death on the cross paid the penalty for the sin of those who believe in him.
Christ's resurrection acquitted us of guilt (justified) in that it showed the Father
did regard our debt as paid, his justice as satisfied and we did, indeed,
have a guiltless right standing before him, reconciling us.
However, keep in mind that Paul more often refers to Christ's death on the cross without
the resurrection, assuming its inclusion rather than as a separate work, in reconciling us
to God (e.g., Col 1:20; Eph 2:16; 2Co 5:20-21).
The sprinkling of Christ's blood in heaven is the application of his blood's benefits
through his ever-living intercession for us in the presence of God (Heb 9:23-24).
Last edited:
Alternative.
Which is it?
No, sir. . .that's an altered translation from the Judaizers' playbook for the Bible.
The Greek text reads:
"but death reigned from Adam until Moses, even on those who had not sinned
(by transgressing God's law)
in the likeness of Adam's transgression (who had transgressed God's law, "Thou shalt not eat of it.")
They had not sinned as Adam had sinned in breaking God's law.
The Judaizer's playbook twists the text to the opposite meaning.
And the dilemma is still on the table, Paul has not answered it. . .yet.
How could there be guilt of sin which causes death (Ro 6:23)
when sin is not taken into account?
Which is it?
No, sir. . .that's an altered translation from the Judaizers' playbook for the Bible.
The Greek text reads:
"but death reigned from Adam until Moses, even on those who had not sinned
(by transgressing God's law)
in the likeness of Adam's transgression (who had transgressed God's law, "Thou shalt not eat of it.")
They had not sinned as Adam had sinned in breaking God's law.
The Judaizer's playbook twists the text to the opposite meaning.
And the dilemma is still on the table, Paul has not answered it. . .yet.
How could there be guilt of sin which causes death (Ro 6:23)
when sin is not taken into account?
Last edited:
Alternative.
And here Paul gives the answer to the dilemma:
How could there be guilt of sin which is the casue of death (Ro 6:23)
when sin is not taken into account?
His answer: they were held guilty of the sin of Adam, "many died through one man's trespass."
Here Paul presents an analogy between Adam and Christ, but it is an analogy of contrast.
The one man through his sin brought universal ruin (death because of guilt), whereas
the one man through his grace brought universal blessing.
But note that it was their personal guilt of Adam's sin that caused many to die,
just as it is their personal blessing of Christ's grace that causes many to live (eternal life).
And here Paul gives the answer to the dilemma:
How could there be guilt of sin which is the casue of death (Ro 6:23)
when sin is not taken into account?
His answer: they were held guilty of the sin of Adam, "many died through one man's trespass."
Here Paul presents an analogy between Adam and Christ, but it is an analogy of contrast.
The one man through his sin brought universal ruin (death because of guilt), whereas
the one man through his grace brought universal blessing.
But note that it was their personal guilt of Adam's sin that caused many to die,
just as it is their personal blessing of Christ's grace that causes many to live (eternal life).
Elin I started a thread replying to this post to debate you on this point. It can be found in this link:
http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...atone-did-christs-life-atone.html#post1393967
http://christianchat.com/bible-disc...atone-did-christs-life-atone.html#post1393967