An Article on free will

[Kermos]

Yes, of course I have defended the truth of the free will for all. But I didn't say anything like your accusation. I did not claim or suggest that, as you said in your reply #7878, "free-will is separated from God in such a way that you can choose God in your own initiative." That is strictly from you, not me. You lie in that way a lot. You need to stop it. I did not say any such thing.

A critical patt of Free-willian Philosophy is "free-will is separated from God in such a way that you can choose God in your own initiative"; otherwise, it's not free-will. That is the conclusion of free-will.

The Christ of us Christians says “you did not choose Me, but I chose you” (John 15:16) and “I chose you out of the world” (John 15:19).

 

[civic]

The Holy Spirit reveals to me that the love of Christ controls us Christians (2 Corinthians 5:14), so my faith is the work of God because the Word of God tells me “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

According to your Free-willian Philosophy, you are free to deny the above blessings by saying they are not directed to you.

Importantly, the Lord says "by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned" (Matthew 12:37).

Lord and God Jesus Christ declares His Sovereignty as shown in His sayings above, and He amplifies the treasure of the Word of God with "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day" (John 12:48).

Ane we know you reject Jesus teachings on faith and mans responsibility.

 

[civic]

You believe that your will is separated from God in such a way that you can choose God in your own initiative and that God in no way controls your will to accomplish your exclusive choice. This is your side of the transaction.

Your choice results in God responding to you by supplying you with salvation, and herein resides God's side of the transaction.

Your choice purchases salvation from God in an exchange.

You believe that without your choice, then you would not have salvation, so God does not provide salvation to you in the absence of your choice; therefore, without your choice initiating the transaction, you wouldn't have salvation.

Hence, Free-willian Philosophy accurately leads to "apart from Christ, I chose to believe in Christ so Christ must profit me with salvation".

Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE JESUS!!!

Refuting your false teaching IS EASY WITH SCRIPTURE EXPOSING YOUR EISEGESIS.

Without faith it is impossible to please God. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ ( the gospel ). No one is saved apart from believing the gospel. And faith is mans responsibility as per Jesus teaching in John 3:16-18 and over a dozen other passages.

Jesus also taught that a persons faith comes before they are healed or saved. The saving/healing doesn't come before faith. Calvinism has it just the opposite.

Here is how some would rewrite Jesus words below and add to scripture things that were never said nor implied.

Parenthesis is Calvinism false assertion below that God gives faith. Jesus said it was THEIR faith that saved them.

Luke 7:50
And he said to the woman, Thy faith ( I have given you )hath saved thee; go in peace.

Luke 8:48
"Daughter," said Jesus, "your faith ( I have given you )has healed you. Go in peace."

Luke 17:19
Then Jesus said to him, "Rise and go; your faith( I have given you ) has made you well!"

Luke 18:42
"Receive your sight!" Jesus replied. "Your faith( I have give you ) has healed you."

Matthew 8:10
When Jesus heard this, He marveled and said to those following Him, "Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.

Matthew 8:13
Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go! As you have believed, so will it be done for you." And his servant was healed at that very hour.

Matthew 9:2
Just then some men brought to Him a paralytic lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, "Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.

Matthew 9:22
Jesus turned and saw her. "Take courage, daughter," He said, "your faith has healed you." And the woman was cured from that very hour.

Matthew 9:29
Then He touched their eyes and said, "According to your faith will it be done to you."

Matthew 15:28
"O woman," Jesus answered, "your faith is great! Let it be done for you as you desire." And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

Mark 5:34
"Daughter," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be free of your affliction."

Mark 10:52
"Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." And immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

John 4:53
So the father knew that it was at the same hour, in the which Jesus said unto him, Thy son liveth: and himself believed, and his whole house.

The BIBLICAL ORDER BELOW

Ezekiel 18:30-32
“Therefore, you Israelites, I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!

Notice what comes first

1- Repent , turn away from sin
2- the after you repent you get a new heart/spirit ( calvinism- regeneration, new life)
3- repent then you live, have life- ie new heart, spirit.

John has the same order in in his opening of the gospel and in his purpose statement for writing his gospel.

John 1:12-13
“Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

Same order as above receive, believe, call on Him then the new birth follows.

John 20:31
“But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Once again the order is consistent with the OT- belief/repentance precedes life.


Romans 10:8-13
But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: 9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Again above we see its hearing the gospel, believing the message , confessing then calling upon the Lord results in salvation.

Acts tells us the same order in 11:18- "So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.” Repent precedes life.

Paul confirms the order in Ephesians below as well. Hearing and believing precedes the Holy Spirit that we were sealed with not before belief.

Ephesians 1:13
“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit

James and Peter have the same exact order in James 1:18 , 1 Peter 1:23.

See how scripture is consistent when you do not read your doctrine into it but read it objectively, without bias ?
Calvinism has it backwards with life,regeneration, the new birth preceding faith.

conclusion: as we read in these SALVIFIC passages there is a consistent order.

1- hearing the word, the gospel
2- believing the gospel
3- receiving the gospel
4- calling upon the Lord
5- confessing Jesus is Lord
6- resulting in the new birth, born of God, salvation, eternal life


hope this helps !!!

 

[Johann]

There is no covenantal federal headship imputing the sins of one to anyone else. That is a man-made construct. The attempt to apply, Paul's statement in Romans 5:12 that "all have sinned" to infants at birth is refuted by the very next statement in Romans 5:13 that "sin is not counted where there is no law", together with Romans 2:12-16, showing that there was/is law even if there was/is no law of Moses. It is only with the very young and the mentally deficient that it can be said that there is no law.

You cannot correctly or logically change the meaning of "all men" mid-sentence in Romans 5:18 or the meaning of "the many" mid-sentence in Romans 5:19 in order to defend a false concept of original sin.

Finally, the "you shall surely die" of Genesis 2:17 can only be said of dying spiritually in sin.

And your implication of 2 Corinthians 5:21as being condemned in Adam a requirement for being justified in Christ is simply not there.

With all due respect Jim.

"There is no covenantal federal headship imputing the sins of one to anyone else."

Biblical Response: Romans 5:12–19

TR (Rom 5:12): Διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ δι’ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, ἐφ’ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον.

The phrase δι’ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ("through one man") introduces Adam’s instrumental role in the entry of sin and death.

ἐφ’ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον ("upon which all sinned") is best read causally as "because all sinned" in connection with Adam’s act. This supports a doctrine of participation in Adam’s sin, not merely imitation.

A.T. Robertson (Grammar, p. 579): confirms that ἐφ᾽ ᾧ can have causal nuance, indicating that all sinned in consequence of Adam's act.

Therefore (dia touto). “For this reason.” What reason? Probably the argument made in Rom_5:1-11, assuming our justification and urging exultant joy in Christ because of the present reconciliation by Christ’s death and the certainty of future final salvation by his life.
As through one man (hōsper di' henos anthrōpou). Paul begins a comparison between the effects of Adam’s sin and the effects of the redemptive work of Christ, but he does not give the second member of the comparison.

Instead of that he discusses some problems about sin and death and starts over again in Rom_5:15. The general point is plain that the effects of Adam’s sin are transmitted to his descendants, though he does not say how it was done whether by the natural or the federal headship of Adam.

It is important to note that Paul does not say that the whole race receives the full benefit of Christ’s atoning death, but only those who do. Christ is the head of all believers as Adam is the head of the race. In this sense Adam “is a figure of him that was to come.”

Sin entered into the world (hē hamartia eis ton kosmon eisēlthen). Personification of sin and represented as coming from the outside into the world of humanity.

Paul does not discuss the origin of evil beyond this fact. There are some today who deny the fact of sin at all and who call it merely “an error of mortal mind” (a notion) while others regard it as merely an animal inheritance devoid of ethical quality.

And so death passed unto all men (kai houtōs eis pantas anthrōpous diēlthen). Note use of dierchomai rather than eiserchomai, just before, second aorist active indicative in both instances. By “death” in Gen_2:17; Gen_3:19 physical death is meant, but in Rom_5:17, Rom_5:21 eternal death is Paul’s idea and that lurks constantly behind physical death with Paul.

For that all sinned (Ephesians' hōi pantes hēmarton). Constative (summary) aorist active indicative of hamartanō, gathering up in this one tense the history of the race (committed sin). The transmission from Adam became facts of experience. In the old Greek Ephesians' hōi usually meant “on condition that,” but “because” in N.T. (Robertson, Grammar, p. 963).


J.B. Lightfoot (Romans, notes): affirms that Paul is describing a corporate solidarity in sin through Adam’s act, not individual imitation alone.

Jewish Parallel: Ben Sira 25:24—“From a woman sin had its beginning, and because of her we all die”—shows that corporate consequences from the first sinner were present in Second Temple thought.

Federal Headship Before Augustine

Irenaeus (Against Heresies, V.16.3): “Having become disobedient, he [Adam] was made the cause of death for himself and for all his descendants…”

This is not Augustinian but pre-Augustinian theology, affirming a covenantal structure of representation.

"Romans 5:13 refutes infant sin: 'sin is not counted where there is no law.'"

Misreading of ἁμαρτία ἐλλογεῖται ("sin is not imputed")
ἐλλογεῖται = "reckoned," "accounted to one's ledger" (cf. LSJ; BDAG s.v. ἐλλογέω).

Romans 5:13: ἄχρι γὰρ νόμου ἁμαρτία ἦν ἐν κόσμῳ· ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἐλλογεῖται ἁμαρτία μὴ ὄντος νόμου—Sin was present (ἦν) in the world even before Sinai but was not reckoned in the same juridical sense.

Paul’s point is not that sin was absent or that children are sinless, but that the Mosaic Law was not the basis upon which sin was counted during that earlier epoch.

Romans 2:14–15 Clarifies:
Rom 2:14–15: Gentiles have the law “written on their hearts.”
Infants, however, do not yet process this inner law. The absence of reckoning is not the same as the absence of sinful nature. Sin may exist prior to legal consciousness.

"Changing the meaning of 'all men' or 'the many' in Romans 5:18–19 is illogical."

Romans 5:18–19: Parallelism, Not Symmetry
οὕτως οὖν ὡς δι’ ἑνὸς παραπτώματος εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους εἰς κατάκριμα
οὕτως καὶ δι’ ἑνὸς δικαιώματος εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους εἰς δικαίωσιν ζωῆς

Paul uses all and the many symmetrically in Greek idiom, but that does not require universalism or a one-to-one application.

C.F.D. Moule (Idiom Book, p. 138): “The same form may be used with differing effective referents… symmetry in form does not demand identity in extent.”

"All in Adam" = all born in Adam's lineage (cf. Gen 5:3: Seth was begotten in Adam’s image).

"All in Christ" = those united to Christ by faith (ἐν Χριστῷ).

This mirrors 1 Cor 15:22: "As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."

Only those in Christ experience the reversal of Adamic condemnation.

"Genesis 2:17 refers only to spiritual death."

Genesis 2:17:
"In the day you eat of it you shall surely die" (מוֹת תָּמוּת)

The Hebrew idiom "dying you shall die" implies an irreversible consequence that begins at the moment of disobedience. The spiritual aspect is immediate (separation from God), but the process of physical death also begins.

Early Jewish Views:
Wisdom of Solomon 2:23–24: “God created man for incorruption… but through the envy of the devil, death entered the world.”

The idea that death entered the world through disobedience was widespread in Hellenistic Judaism.

"2 Corinthians 5:21 has no implication of condemnation in Adam."

"Him who knew no sin He made to be sin for us, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."

This is substitutionary language. Christ becomes what we were—sin—so that we may become what He is—righteousness.

Paul’s “in Him” and “in Adam” framework (Rom 5, 1 Cor 15, 2 Cor 5) presumes a representational theology:

Adam = representative head of fallen humanity

Christ = representative head of the new creation

The logic of 2 Cor 5:21 does not function unless there is corporate identification with both Adam and Christ. Otherwise, Paul's soteriology collapses into mere individualism.


Claim Being Refuted Biblical and Historical Response
No federal headship Refuted by Rom 5:12–19; Irenaeus; Lightfoot; Adam’s sin corporately affects all.
Infants aren't sinners Rom 5:13 doesn’t deny sin in infants; it denies imputation by Mosaic law.
Can't shift meaning of "all" Greek parallelism allows different referents; “all in Adam” ≠ “all in Christ.”
Genesis 2:17 = spiritual only The phrase includes both spiritual and eventual physical death.
2 Cor 5:21 doesn’t presuppose Adamic condemnation It presupposes corporate solidarity: Christ bore what Adam's race deserved.

This is non negotiable.

J.

 

[GodsGrace]

God Himself has designated what behaviors men exhibit that identifies what they are. If someone steals, they are a thief. If someone changes or adds to God's Word, they are a liar. So, let's look at the Scripture and we'll let God define the behavior:

6 Add thou not unto his words,
Lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
Proverbs 30:6.

In this present instance how do you add to God's Word? By insisting that non-Hebrew Gentiles are included in the Abraham Covenant, a covenant made by God with a man named Abram (the Hebrew).
Here is the Scripture:

12 And they took Lot, Abram’s brother’s son, who dwelt in Sodom, and his goods, and departed.
13 And there came one that had escaped, and told Abram the Hebrew; for he dwelt in the plain of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshcol, and brother of Aner: Genesis 14:12–13.

Not only is the man's name called out but also his family line. In Abram's case he comes from the family of Eber. Scripture proves this with:

10 These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood: 11 And Shem lived after he begat Arphaxad five hundred years, and begat sons and daughters.
12 And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah:
13 And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters.
14 And Salah lived thirty years, and begat Eber:
15 And Salah lived after he begat Eber four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters.
16 And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg:
17 And Eber lived after he begat Peleg four hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters.
18 And Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu:
19 And Peleg lived after he begat Reu two hundred and nine years, and begat sons and daughters.
20 And Reu lived two and thirty years, and begat Serug:
21 And Reu lived after he begat Serug two hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters.
22 And Serug lived thirty years, and begat Nahor:
23 And Serug lived after he begat Nahor two hundred years, and begat sons and daughters.
24 And Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begat Terah:
25 And Nahor lived after he begat Terah an hundred and nineteen years, and begat sons and daughters.
26 And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.
Genesis 11:10–26.

The name "Eber" in the KJV Bible (and generally in the Old Testament) comes from the Hebrew word עֵבֶר (ever).
The etymology of ever is rooted in the verb עָבַר (avar), which means "to pass over," "to cross," or "to go beyond." The implication is that the LORD commanded the people to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth" and the filling of the earth means to disperse, scatter, and occupy the land/earth. But the descendants of Adam did not obey God and remained together in one spot. In the narrative Genesis 11 opens up as follows:

1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. Genesis 11:1–2.

The information in these verses indicates that the people as a whole stayed together after the LORD commanded they "fill the earth" or scatter of disperse. Now, follow the text:

3 And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter.
4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top [may reach] unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. Genesis 11:3–4.

These events are a watershed moment in early history. It identifies a moment that would change the direction of history. It unfolds as follows:

5 And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.
6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. 8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.
9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
Genesis 11:5–9.

Beginning at verse ten the LORD then describes the family of Shem, one of Noah's three sons and his descendants. This is important. Although there is a great deal to cover, for space let me just summarize what followed while the earth was one language and one speech. A man named "Salah" did something significant with his family and that is that Salah took his family and separated from the bulk of humanity. He was obedient to the LORD and separated his family from the rest of the Adamites by "crossing over" what is believed to be the Euphrates River to the "other side.", and to commemorate this act he named one of his sons, "Eber" which is defined to mean "crossed over." Therefore, the meaning of the name "Eber" is often interpreted as "the region beyond," "the other side," or "one who crosses over."

Biblical sources and scholars often suggest a connection between the name "Eber" and the term "Hebrew" (עִבְרִי, ivri). It is believed that the term "Hebrew" may have originated from Eber, possibly signifying people who came from "the other side" of the Euphrates River.
In the KJV Bible, "Eber" primarily refers to a significant patriarch who was a great-grandson of Shem (one of Noah's sons) and an ancestor of Abraham. He is considered an important figure in the lineage leading to the Israelites. In Genesis 14:13 the Holy Spirit not only names Abraham but also his family he descended from, and he descends from "Eber."

As I build up to the Abraham Covenant God made, these points in the text should receive due consideration in order to interpret the text and what the Holy Spirit is trying to communicate in these verses. What I do in my study is read the text to understand the history leading up to Abraham and what took place through exegesis of the text as written. And this is what is written:

27 Now these are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat Lot.
28 And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees.
29 And Abram and Nahor took them wives: the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai; and the name of Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah.
30 But Sarai was barren; she had no child.
31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son’s son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram’s wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.
32 And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah died in Haran.
Genesis 11:27–32.

As I said there is much to cover so let me now prove through the text that as the Holy Spirit is identifying a specific family through which God will reveal His will and begin to develop a relationship with obedient Abram and the covenant of promises that bear his name: the Abrahamic Covenant.

1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. Genesis 12:1–3.

What is meant by "in thee"? It describes the family of Abraham (and Sarai) and the promises God makes to Abraham. "In thee" refers to his seed, the family that God will raise up and make a great nation of people. Yes, that's what the text says. It calls Abraham's future family a "nation." At this point in history the Scripture uses the word "nation" which defined by Strong means "massing" and a population that grows from Abraham's loins, from his seed. "Nations" here in the text cannot mean "Gentile" or "non-Hebrew" but merely a word used to describe a gathering up of a people as a group. The text, again, reads as follows: "and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed."

By signifying "in thee" the Holy Spirit is designating a blessing upon Abraham's descendants. It is not identifying people that are not from his family such as the family of Japheth and/or Ham. The LORD is not addressing anyone but Abraham and his family by the words "in thee."
The construction of "in thee" is a prepositional phrase, with "in" as the preposition and "thee" as its object (a pronoun in the objective case). This phrase functions as an adverbial element in the sentence, modifying the verb "be blessed" by indicating the means or the person through whom the blessing will come. In other words, "in thee" refers to Abraham's family that is to "be blessed." In the verses and chapters that follow we see the LORD beginning to make Abraham's name great and his blessing from the LORD multiplying in the years that follow. But there is one thing missing from the equation and that is that Abraham has no children, no one to whom the blessings promised to him of God he has no one to pass his blessings to. In chapter 15 Abraham challenges the LORD with this fact. What good is all these blessings if I cannot pass it on to my family? Will all these blessings die with me when I die? Is there no future for my family? At this time Abraham's family consisted of only he and Sarai.

1 After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.
2 And Abram said, Lord GOD, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?
3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.
4 And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.
Genesis 15:1–4.

Abraham is looking at what's before him and all he sees is a servant "Eliezer of Damascus." But the LORD already promised to make his name great and that he will be a blessing to a family that will come from his own bowels. Here, the LORD again makes promise to Abraham that through Sarai, an aged woman whose bowels have been empty, shall bring forth an heir. And this is the miracle of the birth of Isaac, and through Isaac the LORD shows Abraham what is to come:

5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. Genesis 15:5.

God is promised a great family from "out of his bowels" that will "fill the earth" and yet Abraham at this point in time doesn't even have an heir. And yet the buildup continues. Instead of waiting on the LORD Sarai hatches a plan that she thinks is in line with the will of God. Well, it is. What follows is the mixed heritage birth of Ishmael.

1 Now Sarai Abram’s wife bare him no children: and she had an handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar.
2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the LORD hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai.
3 And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.
4 And he went in unto Hagar, and she conceived: and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes. Genesis 16:1–4.

Abraham's family grows by one: Ishmael. If you are still with me, I will show through Scripture that the context of WHO is meant when God promises him an heir that will receive not only the blessings God placed on Abraham and his seed, but a promise of land in the exchange between God and Abraham.

1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.
2 And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.
3 And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying,
4 As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations.
5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.
8 And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.
9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.
10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. Genesis 17:1–10.

In verse four the promise of greatness is repeated. And again, the word "nations" is used. Clearly, at this point in time the word does not mean "non-Hebrew Gentiles," but merely a "massing" of people according to Strong.

In verse six God promises to make Abraham "exceeding fruitful" and "nations" and "kings" shall come out of thee.
These nations and kings God promised will come "out of thee" (Abraham), and again the word "nations" cannot mean "non-Hebrew" for "non-Hebrew Gentiles" cannot biologically be born to two Hebrew parents. Now, on to Sarai:

15 And God said unto Abraham, As for Sarai thy wife, thou shalt not call her name Sarai, but Sarah shall her name be.
16 And I will bless her, and give thee a son also of her: yea, I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of people shall be of her.
Genesis 17:15–16.

In all these interactions between God and Abraham the context definitely concerns Abraham and his wife, and the children that shall be of Her. There is no discussion about the seed or families of Japheth or Ham, the other two children of Noah. The focus is on the family of Shem. The "families of the earth" and the "nations" and "kings" all come from the seed of Abraham. This is the only family in view here.

What I have posted is Scripture. I have also pointed out the obvious that any and all blessings God gave to Abraham is directly tied to his seed, those that will come out of he and Sarah. But now, let me ask you this very important question:

Can two Hebrew parents have offspring or a birth that are non-Hebrew?

My answer is "No, it is impossible."

Nor can a Chinese baby be born to two Mexican parents.

You apply and understand the Scripture above OUT OF CONTEXT. You ADD to the Bible things that are not there. As a result, you believe that non-Hebrew Gentiles CAN be born to two Hebrew parents (Abraham and Sarah.)
You need to look at the context and definition of terms. By interpreting "nations" to mean "non-Hebrew" and "Gentile" your conclusions will come out flawed. That is the difference between my understanding of the Scripture which is Biblical, but yours is not Biblical, not when you add things not in Scripture or misunderstand the text that is clearly addressed in Scripture.

The Abraham Covenant is between God, Abraham, and Abraham's seed. Nowhere does God say that "Gentiles" are born to two Hebrew parents.

You should write a book J.
You do realize that you've begun your very own religion.

But you made a statement in your first sentence:
If a person steals they are a thief.

So,

Does a person steal because he is a thief,
or is he a thief because he steals?

 

[brightfame52]

@civic

Without faith it is impossible to please God.

And being in the flesh without the Spirit its not possible to please God Rom 8:8

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I am going to heaven. But yes, this body will be burned up in a crematorium. And that probably not too long from now.

No one going with you? Just you and not anything that helped you?

 

[praise_yeshua]

Most of the life here on this earth is not human life. For the most part it lives in the present, neither considering the past nor the future. And certainly is not groaning and waiting for anything.

Again. Exactly what I already knew about you....

Does your food groan when killed for you? Not that I'm against it but you should realize what helps you to live this life you're obviously tired of living. We all have that problem to some degree or another. Don't forget why you've had a long life. That includes God has subjected together with you in Hope.

Life for life is not only the Story of Redemption is the very story of our own human life.

 

[praise_yeshua]

As stated

You have issues

You go out of your way to bring a false witness against a brother in the Lord

Goodbye

I never do this. I told you the truth. Do whatever you want to do with it. Ask God to judge me for it. (Not that I would recommended this, not that I feel God is angry or would do such for you). You wouldn't be the first person to call God's judgement "down upon me" for telling them the Truth.

Stop quoting other people that wouldn't agree with you if they were here to defend themselves. You can "say" it is isn't plagiarism all you want. It is the spirit of .....

Here. Let me quote "AI".... Bold is mine....

Assuming a quote implies the quoted person would agree with your argument, especially when used out of context, can be considered a form of misrepresentation and a form of plagiarism. It's akin to misquoting or twisting someone's words to fit your narrative, even if the words are presented accurately. This is problematic because it distorts the original meaning and can be seen as presenting someone else's work as your own.

 

[Kermos]

Refuting your false teaching IS EASY WITH SCRIPTURE EXPOSING YOUR EISEGESIS.

Without faith it is impossible to please God. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of Christ ( the gospel ). No one is saved apart from believing the gospel. And faith is mans responsibility as per Jesus teaching in John 3:16-18 and over a dozen other passages.

Jesus also taught that a persons faith comes before they are healed or saved. The saving/healing doesn't come before faith. Calvinism has it just the opposite.

Here is how some would rewrite Jesus words below and add to scripture things that were never said nor implied.

Parenthesis is Calvinism false assertion below that God gives faith. Jesus said it was THEIR faith that saved them.

Luke 7:50
And he said to the woman, Thy faith ( I have given you )hath saved thee; go in peace.

Luke 8:48
"Daughter," said Jesus, "your faith ( I have given you )has healed you. Go in peace."

Luke 17:19
Then Jesus said to him, "Rise and go; your faith( I have given you ) has made you well!"

Luke 18:42
"Receive your sight!" Jesus replied. "Your faith( I have give you ) has healed you."

Matthew 8:10
When Jesus heard this, He marveled and said to those following Him, "Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.

Matthew 8:13
Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go! As you have believed, so will it be done for you." And his servant was healed at that very hour.

Matthew 9:2
Just then some men brought to Him a paralytic lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, "Take courage, son; your sins are forgiven.

Matthew 9:22
Jesus turned and saw her. "Take courage, daughter," He said, "your faith has healed you." And the woman was cured from that very hour.

Matthew 9:29
Then He touched their eyes and said, "According to your faith will it be done to you."

Matthew 15:28
"O woman," Jesus answered, "your faith is great! Let it be done for you as you desire." And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

Mark 5:34
"Daughter," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be free of your affliction."

Mark 10:52
"Go," said Jesus, "your faith has healed you." And immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.

John 4:53
So the father knew that it was at the same hour, in the which Jesus said unto him, Thy son liveth: and himself believed, and his whole house.

The BIBLICAL ORDER BELOW

Ezekiel 18:30-32
“Therefore, you Israelites, I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!

Notice what comes first

1- Repent , turn away from sin
2- the after you repent you get a new heart/spirit ( calvinism- regeneration, new life)
3- repent then you live, have life- ie new heart, spirit.

John has the same order in in his opening of the gospel and in his purpose statement for writing his gospel.

John 1:12-13
“Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

Same order as above receive, believe, call on Him then the new birth follows.

John 20:31
“But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

Once again the order is consistent with the OT- belief/repentance precedes life.


Romans 10:8-13
But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: 9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” 12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Again above we see its hearing the gospel, believing the message , confessing then calling upon the Lord results in salvation.

Acts tells us the same order in 11:18- "So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.” Repent precedes life.

Paul confirms the order in Ephesians below as well. Hearing and believing precedes the Holy Spirit that we were sealed with not before belief.

Ephesians 1:13
“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit

James and Peter have the same exact order in James 1:18 , 1 Peter 1:23.

See how scripture is consistent when you do not read your doctrine into it but read it objectively, without bias ?
Calvinism has it backwards with life,regeneration, the new birth preceding faith.

conclusion: as we read in these SALVIFIC passages there is a consistent order.

1- hearing the word, the gospel
2- believing the gospel
3- receiving the gospel
4- calling upon the Lord
5- confessing Jesus is Lord
6- resulting in the new birth, born of God, salvation, eternal life


hope this helps !!!

You hold to a transaction where your free-will choosing of God purchases forgiveness of sin from God, and you would not have forgiveness of sin without your free-will choosing of God because you did not free-will choose to purchase forgiveness of sin from God.

My God holds me in His Covenant where my Benefactor Jesus Christ delivers forgiveness of sin to me, and I receive forgiveness of my sin for I am secured by the Lord God Almighty in the New Covenant in Christ's Blood wherein “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

 

[GodsGrace]

No,I don't think that is really what tony Warren is saying in that article. He draws a distinction between the two. But I don't think he quite gets it. The Hebrew word for soul, i.e., nephesh, is not the same as the Hebrew word for spirit, i.e., ruach. It is true, however, when speaking of human beings, they are often used interchangeably in the OT. The same is true for the Greek words for soul, i.e., psuche, and for spirit, i.e., pneuma.

The soul is an expression for the physically alive being, whether man or animal. The physically alive being has a body of flesh, whether man or animal. The spirit is almost universally reserved for man. Thus an animal is a soul, a living being, that has a body. But man is a soul, a living being, that has a body and a spirit. Thus, when speaking of the human being, soul and spirit can be used interchangeably in most situations, even though, strictly speaking, they are not the same entity.

As near as I can find, of all the 200+ verses in the OT where we find the word for spirit, only in Ecclesiastes 3:21 does it speak of the spirit of the beast. But in considering all of Ecclesiastes 3, I am not certain that in verse 21 that beast is really referring to animals. See for example verse 18 where it refers to [some] children of man as beasts, that is, the wicked. It seems a strange usage.

Correct.
Man is body, soul and spirit.
Animal is body and soul.

 

[civic]

You hold to a transaction where your free-will choosing of God purchases forgiveness of sin from God, and you would not have forgiveness of sin without your free-will choosing of God because you did not free-will choose to purchase forgiveness of sin from God.

My God holds me in His Covenant where my Benefactor Jesus Christ delivers forgiveness of sin to me, and I receive forgiveness of my sin for I am secured by the Lord God Almighty in the New Covenant in Christ's Blood wherein “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

I hold to scripture unlike you and do not twist it , isolate a verse to support a man made doctrine

 

[Jim]

With all due respect Jim.

"There is no covenantal federal headship imputing the sins of one to anyone else."

Biblical Response: Romans 5:12–19

TR (Rom 5:12): Διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ δι’ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, ἐφ’ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον.

The phrase δι’ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ("through one man") introduces Adam’s instrumental role in the entry of sin and death.

ἐφ’ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον ("upon which all sinned") is best read causally as "because all sinned" in connection with Adam’s act. This supports a doctrine of participation in Adam’s sin, not merely imitation.

A.T. Robertson (Grammar, p. 579): confirms that ἐφ᾽ ᾧ can have causal nuance, indicating that all sinned in consequence of Adam's act.

Therefore (dia touto). “For this reason.” What reason? Probably the argument made in Rom_5:1-11, assuming our justification and urging exultant joy in Christ because of the present reconciliation by Christ’s death and the certainty of future final salvation by his life.
As through one man (hōsper di' henos anthrōpou). Paul begins a comparison between the effects of Adam’s sin and the effects of the redemptive work of Christ, but he does not give the second member of the comparison.

Instead of that he discusses some problems about sin and death and starts over again in Rom_5:15. The general point is plain that the effects of Adam’s sin are transmitted to his descendants, though he does not say how it was done whether by the natural or the federal headship of Adam.

It is important to note that Paul does not say that the whole race receives the full benefit of Christ’s atoning death, but only those who do. Christ is the head of all believers as Adam is the head of the race. In this sense Adam “is a figure of him that was to come.”

Sin entered into the world (hē hamartia eis ton kosmon eisēlthen). Personification of sin and represented as coming from the outside into the world of humanity.

Paul does not discuss the origin of evil beyond this fact. There are some today who deny the fact of sin at all and who call it merely “an error of mortal mind” (a notion) while others regard it as merely an animal inheritance devoid of ethical quality.

And so death passed unto all men (kai houtōs eis pantas anthrōpous diēlthen). Note use of dierchomai rather than eiserchomai, just before, second aorist active indicative in both instances. By “death” in Gen_2:17; Gen_3:19 physical death is meant, but in Rom_5:17, Rom_5:21 eternal death is Paul’s idea and that lurks constantly behind physical death with Paul.

For that all sinned (Ephesians' hōi pantes hēmarton). Constative (summary) aorist active indicative of hamartanō, gathering up in this one tense the history of the race (committed sin). The transmission from Adam became facts of experience. In the old Greek Ephesians' hōi usually meant “on condition that,” but “because” in N.T. (Robertson, Grammar, p. 963).


J.B. Lightfoot (Romans, notes): affirms that Paul is describing a corporate solidarity in sin through Adam’s act, not individual imitation alone.

Jewish Parallel: Ben Sira 25:24—“From a woman sin had its beginning, and because of her we all die”—shows that corporate consequences from the first sinner were present in Second Temple thought.

Federal Headship Before Augustine

Irenaeus (Against Heresies, V.16.3): “Having become disobedient, he [Adam] was made the cause of death for himself and for all his descendants…”

This is not Augustinian but pre-Augustinian theology, affirming a covenantal structure of representation.

"Romans 5:13 refutes infant sin: 'sin is not counted where there is no law.'"

Misreading of ἁμαρτία ἐλλογεῖται ("sin is not imputed")
ἐλλογεῖται = "reckoned," "accounted to one's ledger" (cf. LSJ; BDAG s.v. ἐλλογέω).

Romans 5:13: ἄχρι γὰρ νόμου ἁμαρτία ἦν ἐν κόσμῳ· ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἐλλογεῖται ἁμαρτία μὴ ὄντος νόμου—Sin was present (ἦν) in the world even before Sinai but was not reckoned in the same juridical sense.

Paul’s point is not that sin was absent or that children are sinless, but that the Mosaic Law was not the basis upon which sin was counted during that earlier epoch.

Romans 2:14–15 Clarifies:
Rom 2:14–15: Gentiles have the law “written on their hearts.”
Infants, however, do not yet process this inner law. The absence of reckoning is not the same as the absence of sinful nature. Sin may exist prior to legal consciousness.

"Changing the meaning of 'all men' or 'the many' in Romans 5:18–19 is illogical."

Romans 5:18–19: Parallelism, Not Symmetry
οὕτως οὖν ὡς δι’ ἑνὸς παραπτώματος εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους εἰς κατάκριμα
οὕτως καὶ δι’ ἑνὸς δικαιώματος εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους εἰς δικαίωσιν ζωῆς

Paul uses all and the many symmetrically in Greek idiom, but that does not require universalism or a one-to-one application.

C.F.D. Moule (Idiom Book, p. 138): “The same form may be used with differing effective referents… symmetry in form does not demand identity in extent.”

"All in Adam" = all born in Adam's lineage (cf. Gen 5:3: Seth was begotten in Adam’s image).

"All in Christ" = those united to Christ by faith (ἐν Χριστῷ).

This mirrors 1 Cor 15:22: "As in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."

Only those in Christ experience the reversal of Adamic condemnation.

"Genesis 2:17 refers only to spiritual death."

Genesis 2:17:
"In the day you eat of it you shall surely die" (מוֹת תָּמוּת)

The Hebrew idiom "dying you shall die" implies an irreversible consequence that begins at the moment of disobedience. The spiritual aspect is immediate (separation from God), but the process of physical death also begins.

Early Jewish Views:
Wisdom of Solomon 2:23–24: “God created man for incorruption… but through the envy of the devil, death entered the world.”

The idea that death entered the world through disobedience was widespread in Hellenistic Judaism.

"2 Corinthians 5:21 has no implication of condemnation in Adam."

"Him who knew no sin He made to be sin for us, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."

This is substitutionary language. Christ becomes what we were—sin—so that we may become what He is—righteousness.

Paul’s “in Him” and “in Adam” framework (Rom 5, 1 Cor 15, 2 Cor 5) presumes a representational theology:

Adam = representative head of fallen humanity

Christ = representative head of the new creation

The logic of 2 Cor 5:21 does not function unless there is corporate identification with both Adam and Christ. Otherwise, Paul's soteriology collapses into mere individualism.


Claim Being Refuted Biblical and Historical Response
No federal headship Refuted by Rom 5:12–19; Irenaeus; Lightfoot; Adam’s sin corporately affects all.
Infants aren't sinners Rom 5:13 doesn’t deny sin in infants; it denies imputation by Mosaic law.
Can't shift meaning of "all" Greek parallelism allows different referents; “all in Adam” ≠ “all in Christ.”
Genesis 2:17 = spiritual only The phrase includes both spiritual and eventual physical death.
2 Cor 5:21 doesn’t presuppose Adamic condemnation It presupposes corporate solidarity: Christ bore what Adam's race deserved.

This is non negotiable.

J.

I have read and studied most of what you have posted there. I simply reject it based upon my own reading and studying of the subject. I could, but I won't proceed any further than that other than to note that if God were to impute the sin of Adam upon the whole rest of mankind, then we have no real theological basis for justice of any sort. Such an action by God would be the most unjust of all actions.

I think you are completely misreading Paul's message of Romans 5 and any other passages you think support your view on this. And I will leave it at that.

 

[Jim]

Correct.
Man is body, soul and spirit.
Animal is body and soul.

I believe that but I would say it differently.

Man is a soul; he has a body and a spirit.
Animal is a soul, he has a body.

 

[Jim]

Again. Exactly what I already knew about you....

Does your food groan when killed for you?

Not if I am a good shot. And any groaning it might make certainly is not to be set free from any bondage to corruption as stated in Romans 8.

 

[TomL]

I never do this. I told you the truth. Do whatever you want to do with it. Ask God to judge me for it. (Not that I would recommended this, not that I feel God is angry or would do such for you). You wouldn't be the first person to call God's judgement "down upon me" for telling them the Truth.

Oh, but you did

I do not care to talk to someone who resorts such so

As I stated goodbye

 

[TomL]

The Holy Spirit reveals to me that the love of Christ controls us Christians (2 Corinthians 5:14), so my faith is the work of God because the Word of God tells me “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent” (John 6:29).

According to your Free-willian Philosophy, you are free to deny the above blessings by saying they are not directed to you.

Importantly, the Lord says "by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned" (Matthew 12:37).

Lord and God Jesus Christ declares His Sovereignty as shown in His sayings above, and He amplifies the treasure of the Word of God with "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day" (John 12:48).

You totally ignored this showing the connection between impart and infuse

View attachment 1701

Now let's look at the definition of infuse

To cause a person to become filled with a certain quality or principle

That matches your interpretation of Eph 2:8.

Where God causes man to be filled with faith.

Your theology teaches an infused faith.

 

[TomL]

Something to consider here brother.

I’ve been thinking about your concern that it would be unjust for us to bear guilt because of Adam’s sin, and that verses like Deuteronomy 24:16 seem to contradict the idea of inherited guilt. I get where you’re coming from—it feels unfair, especially if we assume that guilt can only come from personal actions.

But I think there’s a bigger biblical picture we need to keep in view, especially when it comes to how Paul talks about Adam and Christ.

First, let’s make sure we’re not mixing categories. Deuteronomy 24:16 is about human legal justice in Israel’s courts. It says that children shouldn't be executed for their fathers’ crimes, and vice versa.

That’s about criminal law, not about how God deals with humanity as a whole. Paul, on the other hand, is dealing with something covenantal and representative—he’s not talking about individuals getting punished randomly, but about how Adam’s act brought sin and death into the world because he stood as a representative head for the whole human race.

You see this clearly in Romans 5:12–21, especially where Paul says, “through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”

Now, if Paul meant that everyone dies only because they sin personally, it would make no sense that he brings up people who didn’t sin like Adam (Rom. 5:14)—including infants. But they still die. That’s because Adam’s sin had a judicial effect on all humanity. It’s not about being blamed for something we didn’t do—it’s about being in him when he did it, covenantally.

This might sound foreign to modern individualism, but it’s the same logic that explains why we can be declared righteous through Christ’s obedience. If we deny the representative nature of Adam’s sin, we actually undermine the representative nature of Christ’s righteousness.

Isaiah 53 makes this even clearer. “The LORD laid on him the iniquity of us all.” That’s not metaphor—it’s substitution.

Christ wasn’t punished for His own sins; He had none. He bore ours. If you reject the idea of legal substitution and representation, then the whole gospel begins to unravel.

Also, a quick note about the Position of Corporate Election (PCE)—I know it tries to affirm that individuals are only elect “in Christ” and avoids the idea of pre-temporal individual election. That part’s worth considering. But when it shifts the fall into something more corporate in sociology than covenantal in theology, it undercuts what Paul is arguing in Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15. Paul doesn’t just say Adam and Christ affected their respective communities—he says their actions determined the status of those communities.

You’re either in Adam and condemned, or in Christ and justified. It’s binary and judicial, not gradual and cultural.

And just to lay it out more clearly, here’s the comparison Paul draws between Adam and Christ—this isn’t my structure, it’s Paul’s:

Adam and Christ in Paul’s Theology
In Adam In Christ
One man’s sin brought death to all One man’s obedience brings life to many
Many were made sinners Many will be made righteous
Death reigned because of one Believers reign in life through One
All die in Adam All in Christ will be made alive
Earthly image (dust) Heavenly image (glory)
First Adam: living soul Last Adam: life-giving Spirit
See: Romans 5:12–21; 1 Corinthians 15:21–49

I get that this isn’t easy to grasp at first, but the thing that helped me most was realizing that if I throw out Adam’s representational guilt to protect my idea of fairness, I end up throwing out the representational righteousness of Christ too—and that’s a price I can’t afford.

This from Utley.


"one man" This generic phrase (lit. henos anthrôpou) is used to represent Adam (Rom_5:12; Rom_5:16-19) or Jesus (Rom_5:15 [twice], 17 [twice], 18,19). They each represent a group or community (i.e., "many," cf. Rom_5:15 [twice], 19[twice]; "all," cf. Rom_5:12-13; Rom_5:18 [twice]).

"death through sin" Augustine first coined the term "original sin." It describes the consequences of Adam/Eve's choices in Genesis 3. Their rebellion has affected all of creation. Humans are impacted by
1. a fallen world system
2. a personal tempter
3. a fallen nature

Original sin (Rom_5:12-14; Rom_5:16 a,17) forms a partnership with personal sin (Rom_5:12 d,16b) to make all humans sinful! Sin results in "death" (cf. Rom_1:32; Rom_6:13; Rom_6:16; Rom_6:21; Rom_6:23; Rom_7:5; Rom_7:9-11; Rom_7:13; Rom_7:24; Rom_8:13).
The Jerome Biblical Commentary (p. 308) mentions the rabbinical tradition that there were three periods of history.
1. Adam - Moses
2. Moses - Messiah
3. Messiah - eschaton

If Paul was thinking of these divisions then
1. Adam - Moses (original sin, no law but death)
2. Moses - Messiah (personal sin, violation of law)
3. Messiah - (freedom from the Law/law through grace)

"death spread to all men" The major thrust of this paragraph is the universality of the consequences of sin (cf. Rom_5:16-19; 1Co_15:22; Gal_1:10), which is death.
1. spiritual death - Gen_2:17; Gen_3:1-24; Isa_59:2; Rom_7:10-11; Eph_2:1; Col_2:13; Jas_1:15
2. physical death - Gen_3:4-5; Gen_5:1-32
3. eternal death - Rev_2:11; Rev_20:6; Rev_20:14; Rev_21:8

"because all sinned" All humans sin in Adam corporately (i.e., inherited a sinful state and a sinful propensity.) Because of this each person chooses to sin personally and repeatedly. The Bible is emphatic that all humans are sinners both corporately and individually (cf. 1Ki_8:46; 2Ch_6:36; Psa_14:1-2; Psa_130:3; Psa_143:2; Pro_20:9; Ecc_7:20; Isa_9:17; Isa_53:6; Rom_3:9-18; Rom_3:23; Rom_5:18; Rom_11:32; Gal_3:22; 1Jn_1:8-10).

Yet it must be said that the contextual emphasis (cf. Rom_5:15-19) is that one act caused death (Adam) and one act causes life (Jesus). However, God has so structured His relationship to humanity that human volition is a significant aspect of "lostness" and "justification." Humans are volitionally involved in their future destinies! They continue to choose sin or they choose Christ. They cannot affect these two choices, but they do volitionally show to which they belong!
The translation "because" is common, but its meaning is often disputed. Paul used eph' hô in 2Co_5:4; Php_3:12; and Php_4:10 in the sense of "because." Thus each and every human chooses to personally participate in sin and rebellion against God. Some by rejecting special revelation, but all by rejecting natural revelation (cf. Rom_1:18 to Rom_3:20).

Thanks.

J.

You see this clearly in Romans 5:12–21, especially where Paul says, “through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
All have sinned - It does not state all have sinned in Adam
And why should criminal law given by God differ from how god deal with humanity as whole
As for your statement

Isaiah 53 makes this even clearer. “The LORD laid on him the iniquity of us all.” That’s not metaphor—it’s substitution.

Actually it is atonement.

Your argument, however, would seem to require imputation.

Do you believe Christ to be guilty of all the sin of humanity?

 

[Johann]

I have read and studied most of what you have posted there. I simply reject it based upon my own reading and studying of the subject. I could, but I won't proceed any further than that other than to note that if God were to impute the sin of Adam upon the whole rest of mankind, then we have no real theological basis for justice of any sort. Such an action by God would be the most unjust of all actions.

I think you are completely misreading Paul's message of Romans 5 and any other passages you think support your view on this. And I will leave it at that.

I'll leave you with this Jim.

Death has spread to every single person. The precise meaning of the final clause of v 12 is debated. Thomas Schreiner provides the following interpretation:

When Paul says “all sinned,” he indeed means that every human being has personally sinned. Nevertheless, we should not read a Pelagian interpretation from this, for the ἐϕʼ ᾧ phrase explains why all human beings have sinned. As a result of Adam’s sin death entered the world and engulfed all people; all people enter the world alienated from God and spiritually dead by virtue of Adam’s sin.

By virtue of entering the world in the state of death (i.e., separated from God), all human beings sin. This understanding of the text confirms the view of scholars who insist that original death is more prominent than “original sin” in this text.

The personal sin of human beings is explained by the sway death holds over us. Such an interpretation is also supported by the notion that death is a power that reigns and rules over us now (Rom. 5:14, 17) and that culminates in physical death. Moreover, Paul says specifically in 5:15 that human beings “died” because of the trespass of Adam.

Our alienation and separation from God are due to Adam’s sin, and thus we sin as a result of being born into the world separated from God’s life. The notion that we are “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1; cf. Eph. 2:5; Col. 2:13) should be interpreted similarly. This phrase does not mean that first we commit trespasses and sins and as a consequence die. Rather, the idea is that we are born into the world (“children of wrath by nature,” Eph. 2:3) separated from God, and our sins are a result of the spiritual state of death. The entire context of Eph. 2:1–10 supports this interpretation, for God remedies the situation by granting life to those of us who are dead and as a result of his life we do good works. The parallel is remarkable: the consequence of death is trespasses and sins, whereas the result of life is good works. Ephesians 4:17–18 confirms my interpretation. The reason Gentiles live in a way that displeases God is because they are separated from his life. In other words, the result of spiritual death is a lifestyle of sin.

There is no such thing as "easy believism" and we have Pelagian's viewpoints on this forum.

Commentary on Romans 5:12-21

Notes (NET Translation) 12 So then, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all people because all sinned — The words “so then”…

biblicalscholarship.wordpress.com

I’m Fallen and I Can’t Get Up (An Exegetical on Romans 5:12-19) | Bible.org

12 On account of this, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death entered by means of sin, and so death spread into all men, because all sinned. 13 For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 But death reigned from Adam until Moses...

bible.org

https://faithalone.org/journal-articles/universal-sin-and-salvation-in-romans-512-21/?utm_source=chatgpt.com#:~:text=5%3A12%2D21-,Universal%20Sin%20and%20Salvation%20in%20Romans%205%3A12%2D21,-September%201%2C%202017

Romans 5:12-21 - Philip Schaff's Popular Commentary (4 vols)

What does Romans 5:12-21 mean? Commentary, explanation and study verse by verse by Philip Schaff's Popular Commentary on the NT (4 vols). ONLINE and FREE

www.bibliaplus.org

Romans 5:12-21 an Exegetical Investigation

In Romans 5:12-21 Paul uses a comparison between Adam and Christ to explain three facets of the gospel: First, the effect and reach of sin; secondly, the effect and reach of the righteousness of Christ; thirdly, the effect and reach of grace. This project is an exegetical investigation into the...

scholar.csl.edu

This more for the readers sake and the imperative to search the Scriptures diligently, thoughtfully and critically with the help of the Holy Spirit.

God bless.

J.

 

[Johann]

You see this clearly in Romans 5:12–21, especially where Paul says, “through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
All have sinned - It does not state all have sinned in Adam
And why should criminal law given by God differ from how god deal with humanity as whole
As for your statement

Actually it is atonement.

Your argument, however, would seem to require imputation.

Do you believe Christ to be guilty of all the sin of humanity?

ROMANS 5:12–21 – THE GREEK TEXT AND CONTEXTUAL ARGUMENTS
Romans 5:12:
διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ διʼ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν, καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, ἐφʼ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον

The phrase ἐφʼ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον ("because all sinned") is key. The referent of ἐφʼ ᾧ has long been debated. Scholars such as A.T. Robertson (Grammar, pp. 589–590) and B.F. Westcott argue it means "on the basis of which" or "in whom"—meaning in Adam.

Robertson states: "Here ἐφ’ ᾧ is best taken as a causal conjunction meaning 'because,' though it could mean 'in whom.'"

Cranfield (Romans, ICC, vol. 1, pp. 273–81) calls attention to the grammatical parallelism and Paul's Adam-Christ typology in vv. 15–19, indicating that Adam's one act had direct legal consequences for the many.

Furthermore, Romans 5:18–19 directly teaches imputation:

"Through one transgression [διʼ ἑνὸς παραπτώματος] condemnation came to all men"
"Through one man's disobedience [τῆς παρακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς] the many were made sinners"

The verb κατεστάθησαν ("were made") in v.19 is aorist passive indicative and implies a forensic status—not a process of individual sinning. The same verb describes how the righteous are made righteous through Christ's obedience.

Douglas Moo (NICNT Romans, p. 340) affirms this interpretation: “Paul views all people as condemned, not simply because they imitate Adam’s sin, but because they participate in it.”

2. RESPONSE TO YOUR CLAIM: "It does not state all have sinned in Adam"
True, the explicit phrase “in Adam” is not found in verse 12, but the entire structure of the passage is a sustained Adam-Christ parallelism (vv. 12–21). Verse 14 declares that “death reigned from Adam to Moses even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of Adam’s transgression,” meaning their guilt could not be due to personal sin, but to Adam’s.

C.E.B. Cranfield and C.F.D. Moule both argue this passage proves a corporate identity concept: mankind is not just morally influenced by Adam but legally implicated.

J.B. Lightfoot echoes this in his comments on Pauline solidarity: “The many die because they are involved in Adam’s sin, not merely because they repeat it.”

3. RESPONSE TO: “Why should criminal law differ from God’s dealing with humanity as a whole?”
Divine justice transcends modern legal analogies. In federal headship, Adam acted as the covenant representative of mankind (cf. Hos 6:7 – “like Adam, they transgressed the covenant”).

Federal representation is a biblical covenantal structure, not an innovation: Levites in Hebrews 7:9–10 are said to tithe in Abraham, because they were still “in his loins.” This is an ancient Hebrew concept of corporate identity or “seminal headship.”

As A.A. Hodge (Outlines of Theology) notes: "In the covenant with Adam, God dealt with the human race representatively. To reject this is to lose the parallel with Christ’s substitution, which likewise is forensic and representative."

4. ISAIAH 53:6 – IS THIS IMPUTATION OR ATONEMENT?
Isaiah 53:6b: וַיהוָה הִפְגִּיעַ בּוֹ אֵת עֲוֺן כֻּלָּנוּ – "The LORD has caused to meet upon him the iniquity of us all"

The verb הִפְגִּיעַ (“caused to meet/intervene”) implies an action of transference—a judicial laying of sin upon the servant.

This is imputation, not just expiation. The Servant bears guilt not because He sinned, but because our guilt was legally attributed to Him.

As Delitzsch (on Isaiah) states: "This is a judicial transaction; the guilt of all is caused to strike Him."

Moreover, Isaiah 53:11–12 states:

“He shall bear their iniquities” and “He bore the sin of many”—again, a substitutionary and legal concept.
This parallels 2 Corinthians 5:21 — “He was made sin for us, who knew no sin.”

5. RESPONSE TO: “Do you believe Christ to be guilty of all the sin of humanity?”
No, Christ was not morally guilty. The doctrine of imputation maintains a distinction between forensic guilt and moral guilt.

Just as believers are declared righteous through Christ’s righteousness without having themselves performed it, so Christ was declared guilty on account of our sins without Himself having committed them.

H.E. Dana and J.R. Mantey (Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, p. 198) clarify that passive constructions used of Christ (ἐποιήθη ἁμαρτία, 2 Cor 5:21) signal legal transfer, not personal corruption.

Similarly, Athanasius (Against the Heathen, §21) states: “He Himself did not sin, yet He bore the consequences of our sin.”

6. THEOLOGICAL NECESSITY OF IMPUTATION
Without the doctrine of Adamic imputation, the corresponding imputation of Christ’s righteousness collapses (cf. Romans 5:18–19).

As John Owen rightly argued (The Death of Death, Book II), if Christ only bears sin as influence, not imputation, then our justification is likewise psychological, not forensic.

CROSS REFERENCES
+ Romans 5:12–21 – imputation from Adam and from Christ paralleled

+ 1 Corinthians 15:21–22 – “as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive”

+ Isaiah 53:6, 11–12 – substitutionary imputation of sin on the Servant

+ 2 Corinthians 5:21 – forensic transfer of sin to Christ

+ Hebrews 7:9–10 – seminal headship and representation

To reject Adamic imputation is to destabilize the foundation of substitutionary atonement and justification by faith.

Romans 5:12-21 - Philip Schaff's Popular Commentary (4 vols)

What does Romans 5:12-21 mean? Commentary, explanation and study verse by verse by Philip Schaff's Popular Commentary on the NT (4 vols). ONLINE and FREE

www.bibliaplus.org

God bless.

J.