Unjustified Imputed Guilt

[RaymondG]

Unjustified Imputed Guilt

Many hold to a version of imputed guilt whereby God reckons people guilty of crimes they haven't actually committed. That itself would seem to be a definition of injustice. In fact some such people I have spoken to will end up saying in defense, "God is not just in human terms." To which I respond that they can drop the phrase "in human terms" seeing as the Bible was written to humans. If they are preaching to humans, they should just come out and admit that according to their theology God is unjust.

As for cases in point take for example the theory of Unconditional Election in which people are fated to eternal damnation prior to them even being born, and thus prior to them committing sin. Reasonable people recognize that as being inherently unjust.

Many Christians reckon people born guilty of Adam's sin. Adam's sin was Adam's sin, not the sin of others who had not even been born. Likewise many think the God pretended that Jesus was guilty of the sins of the world, crimes that he didn't actually commit, and that God consequently pour wrath on him, knowing that he was innocent.

What do these say of the character of the god that such people believe in? In contrast to such a god, the God of scripture is just. (Rom 3:26, 2Thess 1:6) Many fail to interpret scripture in light of God's character and end up believing in a different god.

Can you say with 100% certainty, that you were not there in the beginning? That you were not the adam who ate the fruit??? What if the bible is about you.....and it is explaining how you can get back to where you were?.....For your Father is waiting with the calf and balloons?

 

[RaymondG]

Pease explain Paul's argument in Romans 5:12-21.

This passage contrasts Adam's sin and Jesus's Sacrifice.......stating that Jesus' Sacrifice is greater. It seems that you may believe that, because of Adam....sin is imputed to every child born without choice.

Do you also believe that Salvation is imputed to every child born, without choice?

And if not, do you disagree with the passage you posted stating the Jesus' actions was greater or more powerful than Adams?

 

[lsume]

Unjustified Imputed Guilt

Many hold to a version of imputed guilt whereby God reckons people guilty of crimes they haven't actually committed. That itself would seem to be a definition of injustice. In fact some such people I have spoken to will end up saying in defense, "God is not just in human terms." To which I respond that they can drop the phrase "in human terms" seeing as the Bible was written to humans. If they are preaching to humans, they should just come out and admit that according to their theology God is unjust.

As for cases in point take for example the theory of Unconditional Election in which people are fated to eternal damnation prior to them even being born, and thus prior to them committing sin. Reasonable people recognize that as being inherently unjust.

Many Christians reckon people born guilty of Adam's sin. Adam's sin was Adam's sin, not the sin of others who had not even been born. Likewise many think the God pretended that Jesus was guilty of the sins of the world, crimes that he didn't actually commit, and that God consequently pour wrath on him, knowing that he was innocent.

What do these say of the character of the god that such people believe in? In contrast to such a god, the God of scripture is just. (Rom 3:26, 2Thess 1:6) Many fail to interpret scripture in light of God's character and end up believing in a different god.

Rom.9 Verses 17 to 24

1. 
   
   [17] For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
   [18] Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
   [19] Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
   [20] Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
   [21] Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
   [22] What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
   [23] And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
   [24] Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

1. 
   

 

[BNR32FAN]

Unjustified Imputed Guilt

Many hold to a version of imputed guilt whereby God reckons people guilty of crimes they haven't actually committed. That itself would seem to be a definition of injustice. In fact some such people I have spoken to will end up saying in defense, "God is not just in human terms." To which I respond that they can drop the phrase "in human terms" seeing as the Bible was written to humans. If they are preaching to humans, they should just come out and admit that according to their theology God is unjust.

As for cases in point take for example the theory of Unconditional Election in which people are fated to eternal damnation prior to them even being born, and thus prior to them committing sin. Reasonable people recognize that as being inherently unjust.

Many Christians reckon people born guilty of Adam's sin. Adam's sin was Adam's sin, not the sin of others who had not even been born. Likewise many think the God pretended that Jesus was guilty of the sins of the world, crimes that he didn't actually commit, and that God consequently pour wrath on him, knowing that he was innocent.

What do these say of the character of the god that such people believe in? In contrast to such a god, the God of scripture is just. (Rom 3:26, 2Thess 1:6) Many fail to interpret scripture in light of God's character and end up believing in a different god.

I agree according to John 3:18 we are judged according to whether or not we believe in Christ. Double predestination teaches that we cannot believe unless God has chosen us. So that would ultimately make God responsible for the unbelief of nonbelievers since they are incapable of believing unless they are chosen which would make God unjust for judging and condemning people who are incapable of believing. This is just one example amongst many of why predestination does not work.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

Due to Adam's sin we are born with its effects: which are, for example: Death, sickness, and most of all the SIN NATURE...

But we are NOT imputed with the sin of any other person.

A cockroach is not satiated because its parent ate bird droppings. Yet, it will also eat bird droppings because it inherited its nature from its parent. This is analogous to what you're saying.

I don't care what it eats. I'm stomping on it because it's a cockroach.

The distinction between a person's nature and what that person does is not relevant. Given the opportunity, the behavior always, always, follows the nature. There are no exceptions. If someone is inclined to do something, but they don't do it, then it was only for lack of opportunity, and that's no noble reason at all. If by conflicting desires they neglect one tendency in favor of another, then that is still their nature, and they followed it exactly.

 

[GodsGrace101]

A cockroach is not satiated because its parent ate bird droppings. Yet, it will also eat bird droppings because it inherited its nature from its parent. This is analogous to what you're saying.

I don't care what it eats. I'm stomping on it because it's a cockroach.

The distinction between a person's nature and what that person does is not relevant. Given the opportunity, the behavior always, always, follows the nature. There are no exceptions. If someone is inclined to do something, but they don't do it, then it was only for lack of opportunity, and that's no noble reason at all. If by conflicting desires they neglect one tendency in favor of another, then that is still their nature, and they followed it exactly.

I don't understand your reply at all.
I think you're agreeing with me....
I said that we TEND toward evil until we get in touch with the God part of us...our spirit part.

 

[Peter J Barban]

Here is my opinion of why God considers that all have sinned in Adam but salvation only comes to some.

God created Adam and appointed him ruler of the earth, under God. Eve sinned first, but her sin did not trigger universal damnation as she was not the head.

When Adam sinned, he, as lord or universal head of humankind, transferred his authority over the Earth to Satan. That is how Satan became the ruler of the nations and on that basis offered these nations to Jesus if Jesus would worship Satan.

Henceforth, all humans were born under the authority of Satan, you could say that Satan was their new father. As Satan was doomed to eternal hell, all those under him were also doomed.

Jesus, while human, was not born under the headship of Adam because his father was God. When God's son Jesus died on the cross, Satan was judged guilty of going beyond his authority and his headship over man was stripped (at least partially now and completely when Satan is fully judged) from him and given to Jesus.

So why are not all saved now? and why are we not all born saved? We are still born under Satan's authority. Salvation is based repenting from sin (Satan's headship) and on belonging to the New Covenant under the authority of Jesus Christ. God has made it clear that we must choose to accept the sacrifice and lordship of Jesus (for the names Christ/Messiah/Anointed One all imply headship) for salvation.

That is the short version; if you want more, buy a book on Systematic Theology.

 

[Dave L]

Can you two explain why, you believe, God decided to make the guilt of Adams sin falling on man Mandatory....But the Salvation of Jesus' Sacrifice optional?

Both are mandatory without options.

 

[MDC]

When you are dead and in the kingdom of heaven the earthy questions you pose will not matter, and to top it off everything will be full of life and love for ever.

Why ponder on if God is just?

You are judging Gods character over other people opinions and others twisting scripture.

Jesus was a sacrifice for us, our sin so we can go to heaven, its a free gift, If Jesus death was unjust then what about his resurrection back to life to be the king of all kings?

Also if Living in the kingdom for ever with perfect love is our reward for the torment we live on this earth, how is that unjust?

Also We do not need to be judged for Adams sins when we have our own sins.

Also All children are perfect till they grow into the sin filled ways we live now.

Also sin has nothing to do with anything any longer due to Jesus forgiving us for our sins.

Then answer why infants and children die if they aren’t imputed the guilt of Adam’s transgression. Assuming you mean sinless without guilt when you mean all children are perfect

 

[HatGuy]

Unjustified Imputed Guilt

Many hold to a version of imputed guilt whereby God reckons people guilty of crimes they haven't actually committed. That itself would seem to be a definition of injustice. In fact some such people I have spoken to will end up saying in defense, "God is not just in human terms." To which I respond that they can drop the phrase "in human terms" seeing as the Bible was written to humans. If they are preaching to humans, they should just come out and admit that according to their theology God is unjust.

As for cases in point take for example the theory of Unconditional Election in which people are fated to eternal damnation prior to them even being born, and thus prior to them committing sin. Reasonable people recognize that as being inherently unjust.

Many Christians reckon people born guilty of Adam's sin. Adam's sin was Adam's sin, not the sin of others who had not even been born. Likewise many think the God pretended that Jesus was guilty of the sins of the world, crimes that he didn't actually commit, and that God consequently pour wrath on him, knowing that he was innocent.

What do these say of the character of the god that such people believe in? In contrast to such a god, the God of scripture is just. (Rom 3:26, 2Thess 1:6) Many fail to interpret scripture in light of God's character and end up believing in a different god.

Putting aside the justice question for a moment, the fact remains that it is experimentally true - everyone sins and seems to be bent towards it. That's what the Bible is telling us, and not a single person has experienced otherwise.

Given that fact, it ought to inform what it means that we carry the guilt of Adam's sin, and what Romans 5 means. There is certainly something wrong with humanity in general, and that needs to be accounted for. Romans 3:23 is certainly true - that all have sinned.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Then answer why infants and children die if they aren’t imputed the guilt of Adam’s transgression. Assuming you mean sinless without guilt when you mean all children are perfect

It's an EFFECT of Adam's sin.
We have lost our preternatural gift of immortality.

 

[danielmears]

The error is it seems to, you, unjustified guilt. God is in and through all things in the scriptures and is not human. He is outside of time as you can see with all of the Biblical prophecies. Therefore, He would know if a certain person discovered, the Way, had faith, was filled with the love of God, believed Jesus and lived a good life or not. God already knows how this life works out for us before we are even born. Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations. Jeremiah 1:5

 

[Calvin_1985]

When you are dead and in the kingdom of heaven the earthy questions you pose will not matter, and to top it off everything will be full of life and love for ever.

Why ponder on if God is just?

You are judging Gods character over other people opinions and others twisting scripture.

Jesus was a sacrifice for us, our sin so we can go to heaven, its a free gift, If Jesus death was unjust then what about his resurrection back to life to be the king of all kings?

Also if Living in the kingdom for ever with perfect love is our reward for the torment we live on this earth, how is that unjust?

Also We do not need to be judged for Adams sins when we have our own sins.

Also All children are perfect till they grow into the sin filled ways we live now.

Also sin has nothing to do with anything any longer due to Jesus forgiving us for our sins.

You took the words right out of my mouth. Thank you.

 

[The Righterzpen]

I agree according to John 3:18 we are judged according to whether or not we believe in Christ. Double predestination teaches that we cannot believe unless God has chosen us. So that would ultimately make God responsible for the unbelief of nonbelievers since they are incapable of believing unless they are chosen which would make God unjust for judging and condemning people who are incapable of believing. This is just one example amongst many of why predestination does not work.

There seems to be two issues here:

1. Just what of the fall (related to Adam) is passed onto the rest of humanity?

2. What is the difference between wrath earned and righteousness imputed?

Adam and the fall:
What came about as a result of Adam's transgression was the severance of fellowship from God for the rest of humanity. This is what some have coined as "sin nature". The propensity to sin is a different issue than choice to commit sin.

Propensity to sin means that the heart is naturally inclined to that end. Now will the person manifest sin in external action is a matter of conscious choice. I'm suffering from greed in my heart but do I make the choice to rob the bank? One is the manifestation of the state of the other. The dismal state of the fallen heart is what's inherited from Adam. One poster said: We do not start as a clean slate. This is true.

The wages of sin:
Punishment for sin committed is something the sinner earns. That punishment is ratcheted upon the severity of the sin committed.

If one high school student gets into a fist fight with another high school student because they both have egos bigger than the state of Texas and think they need to prove themselves; that's one type of sin. Yet if another student who thinks he needs to prove some point, goes into the school and guns down a bunch of students and staff; that is a different (and far more serious) manifestation of sin.

If never redeemed; all three students will face punishment for what they did. The one who massacred a bunch of people will face a far more serious punishment at the judgement throne than the two who fought each other.

This is the case for all who commit sin and all commit sin based on the natural inclination of the heart that is dead in trespass and sin. Some commit more heinous sin than others. And the choice to do so is a function of human conscious.

The doctrine of election:
Now the doctrine of election states that because the human heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked; this requires the intervention of God to regenerate an individual unto salvation. God does this because without His intervention, no one would believe. This is because of "total depravity".

Now "total depravity" does not mean "depraved totally". The conscience is still intact. Humanity inherently knows the difference between right and wrong. We are capable of making moral and ethical decisions. That is a different issue though than faith (or trust) in God. We do not bear that naturally. That requires a supernatural awakening.

The wages of sin earned is predicated upon what is done. That is not "double predestination" because the sin that is committed is what earns the punishment. It's also not imputing Adam's personal sins to any individual who did not commit them. The flip side of this though is that if any of us were put in Adam's position, we would have done the same thing. The fall was inevitable because of the temporal nature of the created.

Now one may argue that it is "not fair" that God awakens some unto salvation and leaves others to bear the consequence of their sin. Yet if God were to do what was fair; all would suffer the wrath of God for their sin.

 

[Calvin_1985]

Just stay away from anything Calvinistic. Your only going to cause yourself strife by the gymnastics that it puts upon the scripture. Take it from someone who once was a staunch Calvinust, it will only destroy your Faith and will cause secret sins to grow stronger in your life because it causes the word of God to be of no effect while being shrouded in a fake piety of intellectualism and convoluted phrases. Please, even though you seem to be against Calvinism, don't pay any attention to it as it will only lead you don't a bad road.

 

[BNR32FAN]

There seems to be two issues here:

1. Just what of the fall (related to Adam) is passed onto the rest of humanity?

2. What is the difference between wrath earned and righteousness imputed?

Adam and the fall:
What came about as a result of Adam's transgression was the severance of fellowship from God for the rest of humanity. This is what some have coined as "sin nature". The propensity to sin is a different issue than choice to commit sin.

Propensity to sin means that the heart is naturally inclined to that end. Now will the person manifest sin in external action is a matter of conscious choice. I'm suffering from greed in my heart but do I make the choice to rob the bank? One is the manifestation of the state of the other. The dismal state of the fallen heart is what's inherited from Adam. One poster said: We do not start as a clean slate. This is true.

The wages of sin:
Punishment for sin committed is something the sinner earns. That punishment is ratcheted upon the severity of the sin committed.

If one high school student gets into a fist fight with another high school student because they both have egos bigger than the state of Texas and think they need to prove themselves; that's one type of sin. Yet if another student who thinks he needs to prove some point, goes into the school and guns down a bunch of students and staff; that is a different (and far more serious) manifestation of sin.

If never redeemed; all three students will face punishment for what they did. The one who massacred a bunch of people will face a far more serious punishment at the judgement throne than the two who fought each other.

This is the case for all who commit sin and all commit sin based on the natural inclination of the heart that is dead in trespass and sin. Some commit more heinous sin than others. And the choice to do so is a function of human conscious.

The doctrine of election:
Now the doctrine of election states that because the human heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked; this requires the intervention of God to regenerate an individual unto salvation. God does this because without His intervention, no one would believe. This is because of "total depravity".

Now "total depravity" does not mean "depraved totally". The conscience is still intact. Humanity inherently knows the difference between right and wrong. We are capable of making moral and ethical decisions. That is a different issue though than faith (or trust) in God. We do not bear that naturally. That requires a supernatural awakening.

The wages of sin earned is predicated upon what is done. That is not "double predestination". It's also not imputing Adam's personal sins to any individual who did not commit them. The flip side of this though is that if any of us were put in Adam's position, we would have done the same thing. The fall was inevitable because of the temporal nature of the created.

Now one may argue that it is "not fair" that God awakens some unto salvation and leaves others to bear the consequence of their sin. Yet if God were to do what was fair; all would suffer the wrath of God for their sin.

Man has not been out of fellowship with God since Adam. There were many men who were in God’s favor and considered righteous by God long before Jesus came to bring us the new covenant. Methuselah, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jacob, Saul, Samuel, David, Job, and Rahab are just a few examples.

 

[BNR32FAN]

There seems to be two issues here:

1. Just what of the fall (related to Adam) is passed onto the rest of humanity?

2. What is the difference between wrath earned and righteousness imputed?

Adam and the fall:
What came about as a result of Adam's transgression was the severance of fellowship from God for the rest of humanity. This is what some have coined as "sin nature". The propensity to sin is a different issue than choice to commit sin.

Propensity to sin means that the heart is naturally inclined to that end. Now will the person manifest sin in external action is a matter of conscious choice. I'm suffering from greed in my heart but do I make the choice to rob the bank? One is the manifestation of the state of the other. The dismal state of the fallen heart is what's inherited from Adam. One poster said: We do not start as a clean slate. This is true.

The wages of sin:
Punishment for sin committed is something the sinner earns. That punishment is ratcheted upon the severity of the sin committed.

If one high school student gets into a fist fight with another high school student because they both have egos bigger than the state of Texas and think they need to prove themselves; that's one type of sin. Yet if another student who thinks he needs to prove some point, goes into the school and guns down a bunch of students and staff; that is a different (and far more serious) manifestation of sin.

If never redeemed; all three students will face punishment for what they did. The one who massacred a bunch of people will face a far more serious punishment at the judgement throne than the two who fought each other.

This is the case for all who commit sin and all commit sin based on the natural inclination of the heart that is dead in trespass and sin. Some commit more heinous sin than others. And the choice to do so is a function of human conscious.

The doctrine of election:
Now the doctrine of election states that because the human heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked; this requires the intervention of God to regenerate an individual unto salvation. God does this because without His intervention, no one would believe. This is because of "total depravity".

Now "total depravity" does not mean "depraved totally". The conscience is still intact. Humanity inherently knows the difference between right and wrong. We are capable of making moral and ethical decisions. That is a different issue though than faith (or trust) in God. We do not bear that naturally. That requires a supernatural awakening.

The wages of sin earned is predicated upon what is done. That is not "double predestination" because the sin that is committed is what earns the punishment. It's also not imputing Adam's personal sins to any individual who did not commit them. The flip side of this though is that if any of us were put in Adam's position, we would have done the same thing. The fall was inevitable because of the temporal nature of the created.

Now one may argue that it is "not fair" that God awakens some unto salvation and leaves others to bear the consequence of their sin. Yet if God were to do what was fair; all would suffer the wrath of God for their sin.

There are no levels of sin. There is only sin or no sin. If you are guilty of breaking one law you are guilty of breaking all of them. If you accept Christ as your Savior and you abide in Him all your sins will be forgiven. If your the nicest guy in the world and never hurt a single fly but don’t believe in Jesus you will burn in the lake of fire.

 

[BNR32FAN]

There seems to be two issues here:

1. Just what of the fall (related to Adam) is passed onto the rest of humanity?

2. What is the difference between wrath earned and righteousness imputed?

Adam and the fall:
What came about as a result of Adam's transgression was the severance of fellowship from God for the rest of humanity. This is what some have coined as "sin nature". The propensity to sin is a different issue than choice to commit sin.

Propensity to sin means that the heart is naturally inclined to that end. Now will the person manifest sin in external action is a matter of conscious choice. I'm suffering from greed in my heart but do I make the choice to rob the bank? One is the manifestation of the state of the other. The dismal state of the fallen heart is what's inherited from Adam. One poster said: We do not start as a clean slate. This is true.

The wages of sin:
Punishment for sin committed is something the sinner earns. That punishment is ratcheted upon the severity of the sin committed.

If one high school student gets into a fist fight with another high school student because they both have egos bigger than the state of Texas and think they need to prove themselves; that's one type of sin. Yet if another student who thinks he needs to prove some point, goes into the school and guns down a bunch of students and staff; that is a different (and far more serious) manifestation of sin.

If never redeemed; all three students will face punishment for what they did. The one who massacred a bunch of people will face a far more serious punishment at the judgement throne than the two who fought each other.

This is the case for all who commit sin and all commit sin based on the natural inclination of the heart that is dead in trespass and sin. Some commit more heinous sin than others. And the choice to do so is a function of human conscious.

The doctrine of election:
Now the doctrine of election states that because the human heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked; this requires the intervention of God to regenerate an individual unto salvation. God does this because without His intervention, no one would believe. This is because of "total depravity".

Now "total depravity" does not mean "depraved totally". The conscience is still intact. Humanity inherently knows the difference between right and wrong. We are capable of making moral and ethical decisions. That is a different issue though than faith (or trust) in God. We do not bear that naturally. That requires a supernatural awakening.

The wages of sin earned is predicated upon what is done. That is not "double predestination" because the sin that is committed is what earns the punishment. It's also not imputing Adam's personal sins to any individual who did not commit them. The flip side of this though is that if any of us were put in Adam's position, we would have done the same thing. The fall was inevitable because of the temporal nature of the created.

Now one may argue that it is "not fair" that God awakens some unto salvation and leaves others to bear the consequence of their sin. Yet if God were to do what was fair; all would suffer the wrath of God for their sin.

If predestination were true then why in John 15:1-10 would Jesus warn his 11 faithful apostles of the consequences of failing to abide in Him if they are incapable of failing to abide? The consequences that result in loss of salvation according to verses 2 and 6. Surely these faithful 11 apostles were in fact chosen by God as Jesus plainly stated in John 15:16.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Man has not been out of fellowship with God since Adam. There were many men who were in God’s favor and considered righteous by God long before Jesus came to bring us the new covenant. Methuselah, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jacob, Saul, Samuel, David, Job, and Rahab are just a few examples.

And that was because Jesus was the lamb slain from the foundations of the world. If it weren't for the atonement, none of that would have been possible.

 

[BNR32FAN]

And that was because Jesus was the lamb slain from the foundations of the world. If it weren't for the atonement, none of that would have been possible.

Then we agree that man has not been out of fellowship since Adam’s fall. So where does that put us with total depravity?