jlay wrote:Without the work of the cross their could be no salvation. I don't see how anyone can seperate salvation from the work of the cross.
Where did I say that there could be salvation without the work of the Cross? Let's not read into my words, J. Can you quote me where I said that? That is a serious question. Please don't ignore it.
No, we don't agree on that. People who refuse to trust in Jesus.
So you don't believe John 3:18? Of course you do. People who put their faith in Jesus are saved. People who don't are condemned.
"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death."
Rev. 21:8
God is not sending people to hell for failing to hear about Jesus. Unbelief is mentioned, ignorance is not. And it is labeled with all other sins. If those sins are atoned for then why are they punished for them?
Does the text say they go to Hell
because they are cowardly, unbelieving, vile, murders, etc.? Are you, J, not all of those things? You will (hopefully) point out that while you may be those things in the flesh, God sees you as the righteousness of Christ.
It is, then, your
position by which you are saved--the fact that you are in Christ, and being in Christ, you have life. Likewise, if you are in Adam, you are dead, and being in Adam, you are condemned, since you are not found in the book of life. Again, keep all this in context. Rev. 21:8 may say those particular people are in Hell, but in already had given the
basis of their condemnation: not being found in the book of life.
Paul does not make this distinction. He makes clear the reality of sin, the work of the law, and justification in the same discourse.
Romans 3:9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin;
Are they under sin or not? Either the cross has been applied to all or it has not. They are justified from their sin, when they trust.
I think you may have misunderstood Paul's theology of imputation . . . chapters 1-3 show that all people are sinners, the necessary result being that all people have died (presently: all people are dead, apart from Christ). He makes that point very clearly in Rom. 5. So first he shows that all Gentiles are "under sin." Then he shows that all Jews are "under sin," and that keeping the Law does not remove them from being "under sin." He goes on in ch. 4 to say that where this is no law (specifically talking about the Mosaic Law) there is no
imputation of sin; thus Paul distinguishes between the real and judicial effects of sin. The real effect is death (all who sin die physical and spiritual). The judicial effect is legal guilt. The latter was taken care of by Christ at the Cross. In fact, we see that Paul DOES make the distinction that I am talking about. Observe:
- 12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come. (Rom 5:12-14)
First off, I can explain in more detail later, but the translation "because all sinned" is inappropriate. It should simply be rendered "for all sin" or "for all have sinned." Verses 13 and 14 explain that clause. Going back to 4:15, Paul notes that before the Law, there was sin, even though sin is not imputed without the Law. Why, then, do men die? He takes up that question in 14. EVEN THOUGH sin was not imputed (judicial guilt), men STILL died. Why? Because all sin, and sin brings for death (the real effect). Rom 3:25 reminds us the reason that the judicial guilt was not imputed--Christ paid it all. The Law, then, was a shadow of the Cross, and any efficacy it had was only because it pointed to the Cross.
Now, we may need to go deeper into this, but in any case, I am glad you brought it up, because it does show that Paul is making the same distinction. His concern is with death, which is the result of sin--not with sin itself (as it relates to justification; sin is any issue we must deal with in sanctification, but he takes that up in Rom 6-8)
21-23 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;
Not sure why you are quoting this specifically . . . he is wrapping up his discussion on Jews. They, too, are condemned, even though they have the Law, for the Law cannot bring life. It only brings death, because the Law brings the imputation of sin. But apart from the Law, those who have faith are justified freely by God--all those who believe.
Nice to point out AGAIN that the ONLY thing necessary for salvation is mere belief. Not repentance. Not baptism. Not continued faith. Just belief.
Gal 3:23 But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed.
[/quote]
Have you ever tracked the pronoun usage in Gal? You should know that first person pronouns refer to Jews. Second person pronouns refer to the Galatians. Third person pronouns refer to the Judiaziers. Here, Paul is saying that the Jews (of which he was a member)--as a people--were kept "in custody." I would also encourage you to look at the phrase "under." It is never used in a good way in Galatians. To be "under the law" was bad. We can walk through that in some detail later, but here's a few thoughts for you:
1. Paul uses several word pictures to describe the Law, including: a jailor, a house manager, and a pedagogue.
2. Look at Gal 3:24. Most of your translations say something like the law came "to lead us to Christ." The word for "to lead us to" is
eis, which can be translated directionally (as in most translations) or temporally ("until"). Look at the surrounding context and remember that the "us" refers to the Jewish people. It should be translated temporally. The law was the Jews' pedagogue
until Christ came. Then it was no more.
The point to all this? No one is under the law any longer. Faith has brought maturity to Israel and to the Church. We are saved, and more importantly sanctified, by mere faith (see Gal 3:1). Most people misunderstand Galatians. They think it is a treaty on justification by faith alone. It isn't. It is about sanctification by faith alone.
AGAIN, we see Paul's interest is in mere faith alone, and, in fact, proves in this book that people can fall away from the faith
and still be saved. That is, they can come to believe a false Gospel and still be going to heaven. Now, false is false. There are no degrees of falseness. So if a genuine believer can fall to a false Gospel, then it doesn't matter if he just comes to accept a works based salvation or if he comes to reject the entire notion of salvation and become an atheist. Again, false is false.
So thanks for the supportive verses.
