How can God justify the ungodly and still maintain His integrity to His law?

[Roberth]

1 cor 1:29 so that no one may boast before him. 30 It is because of him (God the Father) that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God--that is, our justification, sanctification and redemption. 31 Therefore, as it is written: "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord."

"In Christ" we stand justified, sanctified and redeemed (glorified). This is our standing in Christ through faith. In Him we are perfect now and in the judgment. We can add nothing to this through our works. To try to add to God's work "in Christ" is legalism.

Gal 5:4 You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

 

[Gr8grace]

God has solved all our problems "in Christ Jesus". He did this work of redemption with absolute integrity. We are complete in Christ.

I agree. And it is not the answer I expected. I may have read "into" the OP question and read from a Bias. I apologize, and will go back with this perspective in mind.

 

[Roberth]

I agree. And it is not the answer I expected. I may have read "into" the OP question and read from a Bias. I apologize, and will go back with this perspective in mind.

Thanks....

 

[pwrnJC]

Apparently, you've never heard or experienced a 'generational curse". You and I inherited the downfall of mankind just because we came after Adam and Eve, who were created perfect but still chose to sin. Lucifer, who was created beautiful and held an anointed position also chose to sin. Yes, I've known holy spirit filled people who gave birth to children who 'broke their parent's hearts" by the choosing of sin in their lives. I'm sure you know many examples of sinful natures giving birth to children who also live by the example set by their parents. How does GOD justify the ungodly? Humm..seems to me that you never took to heart the real Christmas story...when GOD sent His only son to be born like you and I..in all of our humanity, ugliness and pain to share and identify with. GOD did this for the ungodly...because a GODLY human is few and far between..very rare and scarce when compared to the total world population. The ungodly can be justified through JESUS CHRIST.....much to the surprise of those who claim they are GODLY! Funny...nobody was born knowing JESUS CHRIST..in fact..you could say all mankind is born atheist......always questioning and trying to look up to a god in some form or fashion. Once we find JESUS...it is not up to us to decide why GOD does this or that...all we need to do is rest assured that we have the ultimate Supreme perfect spirit within us to be our Comforter, guide and loving Creator. If we connect JESUS to the ungodly....we are doing a good thing because we are all ungodly without HIM.

 

[posthuman]

that the just may die for the unjust:

Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust,
so that He might bring us to God,
having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit
(1 Peter 3:18)​

Peter doesn't separate "Christ the man" from "Christ the Son of God" - it is one and the same Christ; the Word that was God become flesh and who pitched His tent among us. He was put to death for us.

for sure, death could not hold Him - but this is that love that no man has greater than, that He laid down His life. i don't think we need to try to separate out God from man in the God-man in order to rectify that the Lord did something we didn't think He could or ought to do - nothing is impossible for Him; just like the muslim can scarcely conceive that God could have a son, yet here is the Son of God - maybe we can hardly understand how God could die, yet Christ died and rose again.

maybe the issue isn't so much whether He died or not - because He certainly did - but what "death" is. . ?

 

[posthuman]

i see what you mean about Christ dying or not, thanks.

i'm not "trying to refute you" -- trying to match up my pace with yours while we walk, that's all as much trying to understand as anything else, and that happens in part by raising objections and seeing how they can be answered.
please don't take me as being adversarial - i'm not, just searching things out. it's much harder to tell people's demeanor through text, without all the nuances of face-to-face conversation. you'd find in person that i'm not yelling or getting red in the face or anything, lol. kind of staring into space, murmuring a little, actually.

i'm an idiot, too, so maybe i say things wrong; i love it if you show me where i might do that.

 

[passing_through]

Summary:

1] In Christ our old life from Adam was made obedient to God's law.

2] In Christ our old life from Adam, indwelt with our bent (i.e, the sin nature), died on the cross. This answered the justice of God's law.

This legally qualified Christ to be our righteousness and deliver us from under law to under grace.

You've got a handle on it, brother, you said it best, very well done, beautiful.

 

[Utah]

God has solved all our problems "in Christ Jesus". He did this work of redemption with absolute integrity. We are complete in Christ.

That should have been the title of your thread.

 

[Gr8grace]

That should have been the title of your thread.

Gosh darn, I agree. I sure hope I am not this confusing in my posts. Why should it take 10 pages of ambiguity and confrontation to say such a simple truth?

 

[Utah]

Gosh darn, I agree. I sure hope I am not this confusing in my posts. Why should it take 10 pages of ambiguity and confrontation to say such a simple truth?

I don't know, Brother.

I'm just glad to see he understands God's saving grace in Jesus Christ, and for that I rejoice.

 

[onlinebuddy]

if He has clothed you in His own righteousness, you have no more need of the law.

the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ,
that we might be justified by faith.
(Galatians 3:24)

​

​

When did the law point you to Christ? Within the last 100 years, unless you are older than that, right? That means that the law wasn't done away with at the cross. If it was you wouldn't have known you are a sinner in need of Christ. Think it out....

The Book of Galatians was written about 57AD; that is one thousand nine hundred and fifty eight years ago.
Paul is speaking to the Galatians, and not to posthuman or Roberth or onlinebuddy.

When did the Law point the Galatians to Christ? About 1958 years ago...

Going offline now....will write more later....

Everything written was for those of that time and to whom it was written to and was also written for those who belong to the entire church period. What God is saying through Paul to the Galatians, he is saying to us and the same with all the letters of Scripture.

What you say is undeniably true; but, all that is included in cannon is there because of a consensus that it contains teaching that is valuable to the Church in all times and places.

Ahwatukee and MarcR,
My emphasis was on the time frame.
I'm not denying the applicability of the OT or the NT to our lives today.

All things in the Bible are for us, but not about us.
There are certain instructions in the Bible that were limited to a particular time frame, and are not applicable to us today. A general application of bible verses without referring to the context could lead to error in understanding the message of Christ. The context is of utmost importance. I know that you agree.

 

[onlinebuddy]

if He has clothed you in His own righteousness, you have no more need of the law.

the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ,
that we might be justified by faith.
(Galatians 3:24)

​

​

When did the law point you to Christ? Within the last 100 years, unless you are older than that, right? That means that the law wasn't done away with at the cross. If it was you wouldn't have known you are a sinner in need of Christ. Think it out....

You've made my point. The law was still around after the cross.

No, I didn't.
The Law points everyone to Christ, even today. However, we are not obligated by it once Christ died for ur. We are obligated to Christ.
The Law is included in the cannon for us to learn from it, and not the be obligated by it.

I repeat what I have said earlier: The Law was a shadow; transitory; temporary; schoolmaster; a means to an end-Jesus! The Law has done it's work: to point us to Jesus.
Jesus is the reality!

 

[onlinebuddy]

if i'm understanding you right, Robert, mainly what you're saying is that (a) our death occurred at the moment Christ died on the cross ((whatever argument i have with that is based on the transcendence of the event with regard to time, so in my view that's homomorphically true, yes)) & (b) in regard to the justice of the law, and its fulfillment, our death in Christ satisfies the requirement of sin.

Bingo, you've got it....

(a) our death occurred at the moment Christ died on the cross ((whatever argument i have with that is based on the transcendence of the event with regard to time, so in my view that's homomorphically true, yes)) &

How did we die 2000 years ago, when we were not yet born?
What died? Our bodies, souls, spirits, sinful natures....?
What is "transcendence" and "homomorphism?"

(b) in regard to the justice of the law, and its fulfillment, our death in Christ satisfies the requirement of sin.

Please elaborate!

 

[onlinebuddy]

What kind of death was that?
We were born in the 20th century. Logically speaking, how could we die 2000 years ago?
This is the question I'm asking all along.
Also, what did that death do to our status? Did it wipe our slate clean?

Please explain the concept of "transcendence" and "homomorphism."

Again, what kind of death did we die? Why would we look to the law for justice? We are not obligated to the Law.

Are you saying that man's death (in whatever form, and in whatever transcendence of time) was his penalty according to the Law?

Roberth places himself under the law. He said in one of his posts that: he was under the Law before he came to believe in Christ. (pls correct me if I'm wrong)

If every man who ever lived died when Jesus died, why did God

We believers cannot fulfill the law. Only Jesus was capable of that.

Why did man need Christ, if the death he died 2000 years ago was required by the Law. What did that death do to our status? Did it fulfill the blood requirement? If that death did not fulfill the blood requirement why was that death required by the Law?

My Bible says in Romans 1: 2 that we died....but we died to sin, and that happened when we made Jesus, (the Son of God, who came in the flesh), our Lord!

So then, you aren't sinning? You are without sin????

Please do not misquote me. Please read the post in its entirety.
Romans 6:2 uses the words, "died to sin"
Dying to sin is different from being without sin. Only Jesus was without sin!

 

[onlinebuddy]

Dying to sin, and being crucified with Christ as a result, are conscious decisions. Did we have any consciousness 2000 years ago?

Please do me a favour, posthuman. Where else in the Bible does it say that immersion was literal participation in the death of Christ. I know the NT is replete with words such as "buried with him" and "died with him." I thought that our immersion was symbolic. Symbolic, because we did not feel the pain (except the pain of hurting God). We were not shamed. Our blood was not shed. Yes, when we came out of the waters, our spirits were renewed by His power. Our bodies and minds and sinful natures were still intact (that that's how we will be till we see his glory when he returns). What was different was that when we came out of the immersion waters, we made a pledge never to play with sin again, and to always to live for Christ. Our new resolve was strengthened by the Holy Spirit given to us.

If my memory serves me right, RobertH believes that Christ died, but he does not believe Christ died for the sins we had committed. Robert believes that Christ did not take our punishment, because a righteous person cannot be punished instead of a sinner, according to THE LAW.

Brothers, if i'm wrong, I would be more than happy to stand corrected. I know we have Christ in common, but we tend to converse at different wavelengths, since our understanding of the extent of His grace differs.

If my memory serves me right, RobertH believes that Christ died, but he does not believe Christ died for the sins we had committed. Robert believes that Christ did not take our punishment, because a righteous person cannot be punished instead of a sinner, according to THE LAW.

You are confused.....

Please correct me then, wherever I have understood your words incorrectly.
All along, you are saying that an innocent person (Jesus) cannot be punished for our sins, for the Law forbids it. Isn't this what you are saying?
Furthermore, there are so many of my questions that you have left unanswered.

It is you who are spreading confusion!

 

[onlinebuddy]

God's moral law is reflected in the teachings of Jesus; for eg: the sermon on the mount. The sermon on the mount takes God's righteous requirements and the definition of sin to a much higher level.
The Mosiac law and its requirements (such as circumcision) were made obsolete by Jesus. Once the Law was fulfilled, it would no longer be in effect. Jesus has fulfilled the law and made it obsolete. I have provided the verses in one of my posts above.

Those who were born after the New Covenant was established by Jesus, are not under the Law. If you would share the gospel with a tribe in the Amazon, who have never heard of the Law, what would you tell them? Would you teach them the Law or would you teach them faith in the Son of God?

The Law was a transitory phase; a shadow; a schoolmaster.
Jesus, the Son of God, who came in flesh, is the reality of the Law.

What kind of death is that?
Can you elaborate on how you died as one who is under the Law?
So you are saying that by dying, you have paid the penalty for not being able to keep the Law.
This means that no grace was given to you.
Why then, according to you, did Christ have to die?

How did we meet our end?
What died? The body, the soul, the spirit, the sinful nature....

The Law demanded the death of those who were born under it. We are born under the New Covenant of grace.
Paul was speaking to those who knew the Law (v1) and who were born under the Law.

...and you have made void the sacrifice of Jesus, because you claim to have yourself died for not being able to keep the Law. So you are actually implying that Christ and his sacrifice is not required.

The NC was legally established at the cross, but before the cross Abraham was justified by faith alone. He was under the NC.

You aren't born under the NC. You are born under the power of sin and when the law exposes your situation you come under law. To escape the law you need to accept Christ. Then you come under grace, the NC.

The NC was legally established at the cross, but before the cross Abraham was justified by faith alone. He was under the NC.

Yes, it was in effect at the time of Abraham, because grace is one of the prominent characteristics of our God.
Grace(mercy), which flowed freely when the NC was established at the cross, was always one of the weightier matters of the Mosiac Law. (Mt 23:23)

when the law exposes your situation you come under law. To escape the law you need to accept Christ.

I repeat my question from a previous post: If you would share the gospel with a tribe in the Amazon, who have never heard of the Law, what would you tell them? Would you teach them the Law or would you teach them faith in the Son of God, who was manifested in the flesh for our sake?

In Acts 8:26, Paul was in the middle of the desert. He began answering the questions the Ethiopian Eunuch has asked about Isaiah 53. Then he proceeded to tell him about the good news (gospel) of Christ.

 

[onlinebuddy]

Roberth,
I have quickly skimmed through your last bunch of posts. I seem to be in agreement with your understanding in general. Will read in detail later.

You finally seem to be answering the questions posed by yourself. I had asked for clarification earlier, but all I got were more questions. I understand your stance as the OP.

However, some of my questions still remain unanswered. Would appreciate if you read through my posts and answer.
I will read your last bunch of posts again, and try to find if you have answered my questions therein.

 

[posthuman]

How did we die 2000 years ago, when we were not yet born?
What died? Our bodies, souls, spirits, sinful natures....?
What is "transcendence" and "homomorphism?"
Please elaborate!

by transcendent i mean that our life in Christ extends beyond our normal experience of "time" -- in Ephesians we read that we are already seated with Him in heavenly places, though we now experience ourselves on earth. and we read there too that He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, though to our experience we only see Him coming into our life when we first heard the gospel and believed it. so our position in Him "transcends" time because He chose us long before we had any sense of ourselves "choosing" Him - in fact long before we were even born on this earth; before the earth was born. and it transcends space and time as in Him, we are already seated in heaven.
God doesn't sit on a line called time and peer far down into the future or past and see these things - He is above time, seeing all of it in whole, and seeing beyond it completely - He transcends time, is greater than time, works beyond the limitations of time.
in the same way, i can understand that becoming crucified with Him goes beyond our ordinary experience of time - it occurs both when we believe, and simultaneously we are with Him on the cross - mustn't it be like this, if He also bore our sin there? because as we experience it on earth, our sin occurred over 1900 years later, but as HE experienced it on the cross, it was laid on Him then.

an homomorphism is a mathematical term describing a smooth transformation of a thing from one coordinate system to another, one that preserves certain measures and can be inverted back to its original coordinate system. in a sense it means that two things that are homomorphic to each other are identical, though they appear different, owing to the transformation of coordinates.
what i meant by it here is that seeing ourselves crucified with Him on golgatha has a certain equivalence to being cruicified with Him in 2015 as well, or at any year, when we receive the gospel -- because that unity with Him is a thing cosmically greater than time itself, standing above it, lasting beyond time and apart from time, so our experience of it is in a way "relative" to a sort of particular coordinate system. in the here and now, maybe we understand ourselves being crucified with Him when we believed, but standing above time - in eternity, we see ourselves being linked back to the moment He took up His own cross. those moments are inexorably linked, and can be described as the same moment, when measured by some 'coordinate system'

i hope that makes some kind of sense, buddy.. ?
it might just be that i'm nuts, study too much math, and "much learning hath made me mad" lol

 

[posthuman]

(b) in regard to the justice of the law, and its fulfillment, our death in Christ satisfies the requirement of sin.

Please elaborate!

this is Robert's opinion.
i think, basically is this - that by the law, sin requires that we die, so having died with/in Christ, the law is satisfied.

i don't think i agree with him totally about that. in the law, there is atonement. an animal was sacrificed in place of the sinner's own blood. i think this is what we have in Christ - He is our passover lamb.
in Him, we die also, but not as atonement for our own sin.

i don't think that what Robert's trying to get across to us is legalism at all -- he's just looking at how the law is satisfied in Christ, how that justification according to the law is accomplished in us through being brought into Christ.

my objection is that Christ Himself fully satisfied the law, apart from us, and imputed that to us on the basis of faith. His death atoned for our sin - it doesn't take our death. being in Him, spiritually we become dead to sin and also to the law, so that sin has no mastery over us, and the law has no power over us to condemn us. i don't believe we are "crucified by the law" in any sense - but to the law. Christ after all, wasn't condemned and crucified by God's law - but unjustly, and He went willingly to this atoning death, as both High Priest and Sacrifice - not as a criminal facing what He deserved. if His righteousness is imputed to us and we share in His death and resurrection, it is in the same way -- by grace we are forgiven, and we also go willingly to our own crucifixion, dying to sin, and being redeemed from the law that would otherwise require our blood.

but maybe i'm wrong -- i gotta think and pray on this more.

 

[posthuman]

Christ Himself fully satisfied the law, apart from us, and imputed that to us on the basis of faith. His death atoned for our sin - it doesn't take our death.

if this is right, then onlinebuddy, i guess i agree with you -- that seeing our death in Christ as our own atonement for sin makes Christ's own sacrifice worthless.. ? not sure if that's what you're saying, Robert, or if we're reading too much into it. something i think we well ought to consider.

because if we spiritually die to satisfy the law, why did Christ die?

many things to do today. back later.