Checking for sound theology

[_Jordan_]

Hi Jordon, I read through most of your thread, but something that seems to be missing is an acknowledgment of the third essential, that of the righteous life that Jesus led for on our behalf. As St. Paul tells us,

"God made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." ~2 Cor 5:21​

We cannot be "saved" apart from the perfect, righteous life that Christ lived for us ("merited" for us), because it is also on that basis that God chooses to graciously save us. And just to be clear, Jesus was NOT a sinner Himself, rather, God made Him who knew no sin to be "sin" on our behalf (IOW, God counted our sins to His Son's account and declared Him "sin") so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him

The kind of "righteousness" described above in 2 Cor 5:21 far exceeds the righteousness that can be achieved by the living of an utterly perfect/sinless life, but let's leave that for a later discussion.

What seems important in a basic understanding of the Gospel where the work of Christ is concerned are these three, His life, His death, and His Resurrection (i.e. 1 Corinthians 15:17)

Yours and His,
David

Thanks David, Yea I completely agree! will edit this in for the time, if so, that I use my script. I will refresh myself on those scriptures you've posted and after reading Romans3, I've decided to simply use this, and let the bible speak for itself. The main theme I was wanting to isolate was how God upholds his righteousness in forgiving wicked sinners, as in proverbs17,15 it states

"He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the righteous are alike an abomination to the LORD"

This theme and the "dilemma" proposed is answered in Romans3,21, in propitiation. Obviously as you've rightly pointed out there is so much more to what Christ achieved on the cross. Perhaps I could do more accurate "summary" on these things another day, I would love too, but yes honestly for fear of misrepresenting Gods word (as a lot of people seem to be implying here) by trying to use my own words, or not including crucial things, I am just going to stick to quoting Romans3,23-25 and perhaps giving some definitions for words used that people may not know.

Thank you again David for you help, I appreciate it, God bless

 

[St_Worm2]

Hi Jordon, that's fine, of course. I would think it advisable to run your final draft past your pastor/priest as well as he is your under-shepherd in the Lord, not us

Hopefully this will also help alleviate any, "fear of misrepresenting God's word", on your part! I think you are to be highly commended for being as concerned as you are about this

--David

 

[hedrick]

the essence of what I was trying to say is Romans3,23-25. Literally all that is said there, what Paul was communicating there, as in, the upheld righteousness in God through the propitiation of Jesus' death.

Unfortunately the meaning of Rom 3:25 is less clear than many think. First, there’s nothing about wrath in that passage. The occurrences of wrath in Romans involve the final judgement. There’s no suggestion of a wrath that was propitiated.

Second, the key phrase describing the atonement is ilasterion. This is an allusion to the OT sacrificial system. But nowhere in the OT does it say how that system works. Is it actually propitiating God’s wrath? I’m not convinced that this is the understanding that the prophets had of it. Ps 51 and other statements say that God doesn’t need sacrifice to forgive. What he wants is repentance. What then does the sacrificial system do? I claim that it is in effect sacramental, that it makes visible the person’s repentance and God’s forgiveness. The book of Hebrews presents Jesus' death as a covenant sacrifice, something also suggested by the Words of Institution. Thus the word in Rom 3:25 is often translated by a more neutral “atonement” or “expiation.”

In Rom 3, Paul seems to say that God forgave people’s sins before Christ. So he didn’t need Christ’s death. So if God can forgive without propitiation, what difference does Christ make? Before Christ, God simply passed over sin. With Christ he actually deals with it. Rom 6: we die with him and rise to a new life, with sin behind us.

The idea that Christ died to propitiate God’s wrath is not the most ancient Christian understanding of the atonement, and is by no means universal even now. Thus a presentation that features it is really a presentation of recent Western, and in the specific terms you use, Calvinist, theology. While conservative Reformed would agree with you, even many current Reformed do not.

There’s no reason not to present conservative Calvinist theology, as long as you understand that it is only one interpretation of what is going on in Christ.

 

[keltoi]

At what point were we 'created in the image of God', whatever that may be taken to mean?

Genesis 1 (verse 26 to be specific)

If we are created in the image of God, at what point, bearing in mind the word of God in Jeremiah 1:5, which goes back before we are in our mother's womb, did the process of 'being marred' begin?

Genesis 3 (verses 6-7 to be specific).

If we were 'marred' prior to our existence in our mother's womb, whilst under God's protection, how could that happen, and who might be responsible?

Where does it say anything about babies in wombs being under God's protection?

The answers to these questions may resolve the question about a baby's 'sin capability' and, therefore, ours. In a very basic question: is it original sin from which we cannot escape, or is it down to the choices we make as we grow from birth in this fallen world?

Both. We are descended from Adam and Eve they sinned against God and instead of saying "it's my fault I did the wrong thing" they both blamed someone else so the sin continued.

 

[Meowzltov]

Just a few comments. To start with, I'm nit picking because you've asked me to

1. You spend a full HALF of your time talking about sin and God's wrath and the need for salvation. The need for salvation is important, but this is disproportionate.

2. Christ is not "clothed" in flesh. This idea that the spirit of God somehow merely possessed the body of a man is a type of Apollinarian heresy. The correct orthodoxy is that Christ BECAME FLESH. He was one person, fully God and fully man.

3. You speak of God's wrath, rather than God's love. The whole reason for the incarnation and God's sacrifice upon the cross was LOVE. It's not that God doesn't hate sin. But he loves US.

4. The way you talk about Christ, it is not really clear that he is God.

5. You didn't really mention our part. Scripture mentions many things in respect to salvation, i.e. the necessity of repentance and baptism for the forgiveness of sins, but you mention none of these things. It seems to me that you aren't just making the Gospel simple; you are oversimplifying the gospel. It is true that God makes the first move -- grace comes first, and that grace empowers our response. But we still must respond of our own free will to that grace, and I don't think your summation will be complete unless you include what our response must be.

6. You need to tell why all this is the Gospel, aka GOOD NEWS. And I don't just mean mentioning eternal life. I mean mentioning how we are freed from bondage to sin, how our lives are transformed, how being saved is just the beginning of the journey.

 

[Heber Book List]

Genesis 1 (verse 26 to be specific)

Thank you, I knew that - I was taking the question at a much deeper level.

Several times on this thread the term 'made in the image of God' occurs, so what does being 'made in the image of God', actually mean?

As he is not like us, Scripture tells us, how are we made in his image, what do we mean by that belief?

If we are made in his physical image, are we back to the Victorian image of God with a long grey beard sitting on a cloud? This, it might be argued, could be upheld by Scripture telling us that God has eyes, arms and legs and can cry, speak, walk, gets frustrated, angry etc etc

If it has a spiritual meaning, we are again in difficulty, because he cannot sin, but we can, and do.

All this begs the question: is that claim still true? If so, to what extent, and in which ways do we see this 'likeness'?

 

[keltoi]

Thank you, I knew that - I was taking the question at a much deeper level.

Several times on this thread the term 'made in the image of God' occurs, so what does being 'made in the image of God', actually mean?

As he is not like us, Scripture tells us, how are we made in his image, what do we mean by that belief?

We are spiritual beings like God is a spiritual being. No other creature on earth is a spiritual being.

If we are made in his physical image, are we back to the Victorian image of God with a long grey beard sitting on a cloud? This, it might be argued, could be upheld by Scripture telling us that God has eyes, arms and legs and can cry, speak, walk, gets frustrated, angry etc etc

Apart from Adam and Eve, and I think 1 other human in Genesis, no other person has seen God (the Father) but God in human form has been on earth a few times so yes there is a physical aspect to it as well.

If it has a spiritual meaning, we are again in difficulty, because he cannot sin, but we can, and do.

Define sin.

All this begs the question: is that claim still true? If so, to what extent, and in which ways do we see this 'likeness'?

Ye it is still true. I believe I have already answered the latter part of this paragraph.

 

[Heber Book List]

We are spiritual beings like God is a spiritual being. No other creature on earth is a spiritual being.

Apart from Adam and Eve, and I think 1 other human in Genesis, no other person has seen God (the Father) but God in human form has been on earth a few times so yes there is a physical aspect to it as well.

Define sin.

Ye it is still true. I believe I have already answered the latter part of this paragraph.

a] If God is a spiritual being surely he cannot be seen by us, and the anthropomorphic attributes in Scripture are not factual.
b] I think maybe Moses, Elijah and Isaiah might need to be thought of as 'seeing' God, excluding the manifestation of Jesus into the world, who said that he and the Father are one, and then there is Philippians 2 to take into account as well.
c] Sin is clearly defined in Scripture - disobedience to / violation of God's Law / teaching.
d] I'm not sure I saw an answer in the post mentioned, which essentially points to where the wording is used in Scripture. My question was, is: is that valid for us, today, or was it not more a case of how God saw us before the so-called fall of man, that we were created in his image in a sense that, perhaps, we do not really understand today, just as we do not fully understand the use of the words 'us' and 'our' that precede the likeness statement?

Maybe we need another thread so as not to derail this one, but I think it is relevant to the OP because it is an essential part of the account of Creation.

 

[_Jordan_]

what difference does Christ make? Before Christ, God simply passed over sin.

Umm I don't know if I agree with you, I don't think Paul is trying to trick people, he seems very clear to me. And yes, what was the reason God was able to pass over former sins of the people in the OT?

"God put forward [Jesus] as a propitiation ... This was to show Gods righteousness, because in divine forbearance he had passed over former sins."

So Jesus death atoned for all believers sins even OT saints, they were forgiven and in divine forbearance were atoned for later by Jesus. This seemed very clear to me. Again Ps17,15,

"He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the righteous are alike an abomination to the LORD "

How else is this dealt with. And after reading Psalm 51 just there, I disagree. The only section speaking on Scrafice is.

"For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; you will not be pleased with a burnt offering" (v16)

Which seems to only add to my point. Lets look at Hebrews 10:4,

"For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins"

This is completely coherent.

 

[~Anastasia~]

Just one little point. I would say that sin is not defined in Scripture as disobedience to God or "doing bad things" but rather sin is "missing the mark".

It does indeed include evil acts, and disobedience to God. But it also includes not doing all the good we can. We are never acting perfectly to the standard as Christ. We always miss the mark of His standard in any number of ways. We have both intentional, and known sin, and there is also unintentional and unknown sin.

 

[_Jordan_]

Just one little point. I would say that sin is not defined in Scripture as disobedience to God or "doing bad things" but rather sin is "missing the mark".

It does indeed include evil acts, and disobedience to God. But it also includes not doing all the good we can. We are never acting perfectly to the standard as Christ. We always miss the mark of His standard in any number of ways. We have both intentional, and known sin, and there is also unintentional and unknown sin.

Yes, 100% agree to this. Amen, it is definitely an important point to make. Thank you

 

[jerry kelso]

Umm I don't know if I agree with you, I don't think Paul is trying to trick people, he seems very clear to me. And yes, what was the reason God was able to pass over former sins of the people in the OT?

"God put forward [Jesus] as a propitiation ... This was to show Gods righteousness, because in divine forbearance he had passed over former sins."

So Jesus death atoned for all believers sins even OT saints, they were forgiven and in divine forbearance were atoned for later by Jesus. This seemed very clear to me. Again Ps17,15,

"He who justifies the wicked, and he who condemns the righteous are alike an abomination to the LORD "

How else is this dealt with. And after reading Psalm 51 just there, I disagree. The only section speaking on Scrafice is.

"For you will not delight in sacrifice, or I would give it; you will not be pleased with a burnt offering" (v16)

Which seems to only add to my point. Lets look at Hebrews 10:4,

"For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins"

This is completely coherent.

jordan,

1. Man was never predestined to hell or wrath. There is no scripture that says or implies that.

2. The plan of redemption was predestined in Ephesians 1:4-5; for all men before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love. Verse 5 shows the adoption of children which is the redemptive plan of God that was predestined. Also in Romans 8:29 we are predestined to be conformed to the image of God's son which deals with sanctification of the believer.
Hell is the result of disobedience which is the wages of sin that is death Romans 6:23 and it is the destination of the wicked who disobey which all sin is unrighteousness and the works of the flesh Galatians 6:7-8; 1 John 5:17, Revelation 20:11-15.

3. James 2:2; Jesus is the propitiation of our sins as our advocate and the sins of the whole world. Christ was the propitiation or the sacrificial atonement that satisfied the penalty for sin bought by the price of suffering to reconcile the world to him so the possibility would be made to attain to salvation through his blood of which there is no remission of sins. Romans 3:25; 2 Corinthians 5:18; 2 John 1:7; 2:2 and 4:10. He also reconciles the believer 1 John 2:2 which is in the throne room where he is ever interceding in time of need Hebrews 4:16.

4. Hebrews 9:12-18 the blood of bulls and goats could only cover and not save but the blood of the divine crucified Lord could. There is no testament unless the testator dies and without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.
Christ in his earthly ministry forgave sins and he was the lamb slain from the foundation of the world John 8:11 and Revelation 13:8.
This was before the cross and the cross had to happen so he could shed his blood for his blood is the new testament Matthew 26:28 and so we could be perfected in him who is our salvation Hebrews 2:10 and 11:40.

5. Romans 3:23-25: For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God; being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus whom God had set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.
Without the actual shedding of blood there would have never been a propitiation for our sins as in Christ or completion in salvation and we all would have died in our sins never to be saved.
Awake in his likeness in the act of salvation had to have the propitiation for us to be completely saved to the uttermost in order for salvation to be complete. Jerry Kelso

 

[imstillstanding]

I am wanting to make a short video (~1-2 minute) with a concise, dense, accurate message of the gospel.I am aware it's possible to mistakenly write things which aren't true, which is why I'm asking this. My memory of specific verses isn't very good so making sure/biblically proving, all of which I am wanting to write is true is somewhat hard. Mishandling Gods word greatly worries me and I don't want to mistakenly eisegesis verses when I come to research/quote verses to back up this. The following script is what I've wrote so far and is the essence of the gospel how I've understood it from reading the bible and listening to sermons over the years. I would like as much people, preferably reformed/orthodox, to look at what I've wrote, tell me if I need correction, or need to add anything in? I want it to flow as logically and biblically as possible in a concise short fashion.



Man sinned against God

The nature of sin is infinitely evil, evidenced by the majesty of whom it’s against.

God is morally perfect in justice; the judgement of sin can’t be eternally postponed, which would be to disregard sin hence invalidate Gods justice.

The result of God’s justice and man’s sin is divine wrath.

Divine Wrath is the application of justice through retribution according to each’s deeds

Only God’s infinite worthiness could account for the atonement of the infinite weight our of sin.

God clothed himself in flesh so that he could physically bear Gods wrath

Therefore, Jesus’ death appeased the wrath of god for those who by faith repent and trust the propitiation provided by Jesus.

This was a free act of Grace, not deserved nor achievable, but brought about by Gods unfathomable love.

Through this, reconciliation to God is achieved and true enjoyment of God can be experienced

Just a grammar thing: you don't need to capitalize grace and it should be "brought about by God's..." (possessive not plural).

 

[Heber Book List]

and, for the sake of consistency, there should be a capital 'G' as a first letter, each time the word 'God' is used. I am not too sure that 'each's' is a correct word - it might be better to say 'each person's... '

 

[civilwarbuff]

Would you English teachers please stop......

 

[keltoi]

Would you English teachers please stop......

Sorry

 

[mark46]

Just one little point. I would say that sin is not defined in Scripture as disobedience to God or "doing bad things" but rather sin is "missing the mark".

It does indeed include evil acts, and disobedience to God. But it also includes not doing all the good we can. We are never acting perfectly to the standard as Christ. We always miss the mark of His standard in any number of ways. We have both intentional, and known sin, and there is also unintentional and unknown sin.

Amen

 

[keltoi]

c] Sin is clearly defined in Scripture - disobedience to / violation of God's Law / teaching.

This is very minimalist. Yes sin is violating Gods law but Gods law is a reflection of God himself so sin is a violation of Gods character. God cannot violate his own character but we can because our character contains sin.

Maybe we need another thread so as to derail this one, but I think it is relevant to the OP because it is an essential part of the account of Creation.

If you want to start one let me know where you put it and I'll be there.

 

[jerry kelso]

Yes, 100% agree to this. Amen, it is definitely an important point to make. Thank you

jordan,

1. Sin is unrighteousness and it is disobedience to God which would be missing the mark. Sin is also the transgression of the law.

2. The act of disobedience is missing the mark and sin for all unrighteousness is sin.
Romans 5:19; For as by ONE MAN'S DISOBEDIENCE MANY WERE MADE SINNERS, SO BY THE OBEDIENCE OF ONE SHALL MANY BE MADE RIGHTEOUS.

3. Romans 6:16; KNOW YE NOT, THAT TO WHOM YE YIELD YOURSELVES SERVANTS TO OBEY, HIS SERVANTS YE ARE TO WHO YE OBEY; WHETHER OR SIN UNTO DEATH. OR OBEDIENCE UNTO RIGHTEOUSNESS?

4. So to say that sin is not defined as disobedience to God is not scriptural.
It is true that the bible says he that knoweth to do good and doeth it not to him it is sin is disobedience. Saul was told specifically by Samuel to kill all the philistines including men, women and children and he didn't do it but took some alive.

5. We are not perfect in our knowledge and so we can miss the mark at times unknowlingly. Even the jews had sins of omission and on some of them had to wait until the law came to knowledge for it to incur a judgement.

6. So missing the mark is the actual result of a sinful act.
I don't disagree with the overall thought in that one can commit a sin or miss the mark unknowingly and not have knowledge of what they did wrong and will not necessarily have bad motives involved. For example, one could say certain things that are true facts and yet in a wrong context that is not good for the situation and not known to be doing that. A specific context would be; many christians are taught their weakness of the flesh and it is true that the talents of men will always fail without God and we need to be anointed by God. But then an altar call to the saved repeatedly could teach the saved are always backslidden and need to rededicate their lives to God and they never learn to overcome sin but live in it more. Paul shows this type of life under the Mosaic law that was taken advantage of by the law of sin and death and made them live to the frailty of man according to sin. Romans 8:2 the law of sin and death was done away with by the law of the Spirit so we wouldn't live in the frailty of sin but become more than conquerors by Christ who overcame. Romans 8:37. 1 Peter 4:1-2, Peter said we have ceased from sin so we won't fulfill the things of the flesh. It doesn't mean we cannot have the possibility to sin and that we will not commit any sin or miss the mark but we need a higher thinking of overcoming sin through the new covenant and not the frailty of man in sin because of the Mosaic law that could not help you do the commandment and over come. The person of Jesus Christ can do that.

7. The point is I think we have to be careful of the way we term things that the scripture says or don't say. Jerry Kelso

 

[Heber Book List]

This is very minimalist. Yes sin is violating Gods law but Gods law is a reflection of God himself so sin is a violation of Gods character. God cannot violate his own character but we can because our character contains sin.
If you want to start one let me know where you put it and I'll be there.

It is, but why use 50 words when a dozen or so will make the same point!