Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No, one is "remission (Gr. aphesis) of sin by faith,"Agree with you.
Both? Isn't that the same thing?
Yep, that's a typo. . .should be Eph 2:15. . .fixed it. . .thanks.That's how you show your teaching is NT apostolic teaching? Ok? Not that different from what they are doing imo.
Btw, in post #111 you quote Ephesians 3:15. Did you get the right verse?
We are made righteous through faith, that much I know.No, one is "remission (Gr. aphesis) of sin by faith,"
the other is "declaration (by the Divine Court) of forensic righteousness (Gr: dikaiosis) by that faith," because of the remission of sin.
Forensic righteousness is not actual righteousness, as in holiness, it is simply a right standing with justice (not guilty).
'Occurring simultaneously' is not the same as 'the same thing'. The one is logically descendent from the other.Agree with you.
Both? Isn't that the same thing?
Justification (dikaiosis) is a forensic righteousness only, it is not actual righteousness of holiness, which is by sanctification through obedience in the Holy Spirit, which leads to righteousness leading to holiness (Ro 6:16, Ro 6:19).We are made righteous through faith, that much I know.
What use do we have of actual righteousness from a salvific standpoint, when we have been forensic righteous?Justification (dikaiosis) is a forensic righteousness only, it is not actual righteousness of holiness, which is by sanctification through obedience in the Holy Spirit, which leads to righteousness leading to holiness (Ro 6:16, Ro 6:19).
Justification is a declaration of right standing with justice. . .time served. . .guilt removed. . .in good standing with the Court, law.
Sanctification is actual righteousness of holiness.
This might be relevant if I hadn’t already been quoting scriptures to support my position. The scriptures, early church writers, and the apostolic church teachings regarding this matter are all in unison with one another.Assertion without Biblical demonstration is assertion without Biblical merit.
I’ve left no hole at all, you simply dismiss verse 12. All died because all sinned not because Adam’s sin was imputed upon them. Your position contradicts Ezekiel 18:20.Nothing of which Iranaeus received from his sources would be in disagreement with the NT Scriptures, which we also have and by which we can measure everything.
You still have not adequately dealt with Ro 5:12-15, being true to its words, context and the issues it raises. . .and thereby leaving a hole in your theology.
Dikaiosis (justification) is simply (in our legal terms) a verification/delcaration by the Court that one has paid the penalty of his crime, that one is no longer guilty of that crime, and that one is in right-standing with justice, the Court. No knocking on your door and arresting you for that crime again. Your business with the Court is completed. But it does not alter, has no bearing on one's personal righteousness.What use do we have of actual righteousness from a salvific standpoint, when we have been forensic righteous?
Really? How many time did Jesus have to explain the scriptures to men who knew them extensively? What you’re saying doesn’t make any sense because men have struggled with interpretation of the scriptures since they were first written even going all the way back to the Old Testament and the scriptures themselves prove that.Nope, the text itself in the context of all Scripture carries all the weight.
You have not addressed the Scritures nor the points of my responses to your assertions, regarding:This might be relevant if I hadn’t already been quoting scriptures to support my position. The scriptures, early church writers, and the apostolic church teachings regarding this matter are all in unison with one another.
I’m not sure I understand what you’re asking here. Are you asking me to provide scriptures that indicate that the earlyPlease Biblically demonsrate, not just assert, this position.
You simply take v.12 out of context, and still fail to deal with the whole passage (Ro 5:12-15) and the issues it presents.I’ve left no hole at all, you simply dismiss verse 12. All died because all sinned
Previously addressed (posts #120, #130, #131). . .with no response.not because Adam’s sin was imputed upon them. Your position contradicts Ezekiel 18:20.
See post #151.I’m not sure I understand what you’re asking here. Are you asking me to provide scriptures that indicate that the early
church writers and apostolic churches refuted Calvin’s theology?
If we have Dikaiosis (justification), but not live in obedience to the Holy Spirit, then what?Dikaiosis (justification) is simply (in our legal terms) a verification/delcaration by the Court that one has paid the penalty of his crime, that one is no longer guilty of that crime, and that one is in right-standing with justice, the Court. No knocking on your door and arresting you for that crime again. Your business with the Court is completed. But it does not alter, has no bearing on one's personal righteousness.
Our personal righteousness; i.e., sanctification, comes by obedience in the Holy Spirit, which leads to righteousness leading to holiness (Ro 6:16, Ro 6:19).
You either didn't have dikaiosis because habitual disobedience demonstrates false faith, or you're headed for a severe correction.If we have Dikaiosis (justification), but not live in obedience to the Holy Spirit, then what?
Thank you for the responses! God bless!You either didn't have dikaiosis because habitual disobedience demonstrates false faith, or you're headed for a severe correction.
I’ve dealt with it this entire conversation. I’ve explained it in detail several times. You remember the posts where I capitalized the word RESULTED? That was directly addressing Romans 5:12-15. Paul said that our condemnation was a result of Adam’s transgression he did not say anything about Adam’s sin being imputed upon us. This is directly addressing Romans 5:12-15 so please don’t make anymore false accusations about me not addressing it.You simply take v.12 out of context, and still fail to deal with the whole passage (Ro 5:12-15) and the issues it presents.
Previously addressed (posts #120, #130, #131). . .with no response.
Paul did not say "impute" in Ro 5:12-15, as he did of Abraham in Ro 4:3, but he did describe/present imputation in Ro 5:12-15.I’ve dealt with it this entire conversation. I’ve explained it in detail several times. You remember the posts where I capitalized the word RESULTED? That was directly addressing Romans 5:12-15. Paul said that our condemnation was a result of Adam’s transgression he did not say anything about Adam’s sin being imputed upon us.
You did not address and reconcile the issues Paul raised, which lead to only one conclusion: imputation by God of Adam's sin/guilt; to wit:This is directly addressing Romans 5:12-15 so please don’t make anymore false accusations about me not addressing it.
You say I take verse 12 out of context, so how to you interpret it?You simply take v.12 out of context, and still fail to deal with the whole passage (Ro 5:12-15) and the issues it presents.
Previously addressed (posts #120, #130, #131). . .with no response.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?