Sin and Righteousness: Imputed or Imparted or Both?

[red beetle]

My reference to ‘mystery’ with regard to the ‘hypostatic union’ was meant mainly as a conciliatory remark given the differences of understanding regarding the effects of Christ being ‘made sin’ (see my comments above). I don’t need to rest upon the matter of ‘mystery’ to support my position.

But you did .


Red Beetle

[red beetle]

You made this argument before and I didn’t bother to pick up on it as it doesn’t hold water.

God is not ‘time-bound’ like you and I. When Christ died He justified all his elect, whether they were born or not. All the sins of all the elect throughout all time were laid upon Him at the cross and borne away.

This is not a Biblical view of God.
You are asserting that we can not move in and out of the future and past, but that God can. The future is not a place. God does not go into it, God is not already there. The future is every decree which God has not executed yet. Again, the future is not a place. You have seen too many movies.

The same ‘problem’ you present here relates to the ‘imputation view’ really just as much as to my beliefs.

Attacking imputation again?
In the Christian view the acts of sin are done, and are in us, not in Christ.
If they were infused into Christ, then they would be His, not ours. You are trying to have your cake and eat it too.

I believe He did more than that. God took my sin and made Christ to be it.

Ian, why do you refuse to say that our sins were infused into Christ. If you do not believe that they were, then please explain the difference. I believe you sense your own blasphemy.

He took all my sins (up until my last day) and laid them upon

This is the language of imputation, not infusion. It also contextually explains the rest of the passage, "who actually bore them in His own body". It is talking about punishment, not our acts of sin.

Thus He as it were waited until my last day upon earth and then took up all my sins and laid them upon the Son, back in time 2000 years prior. A mystery? Well, I believe this and understand it, whether you can comprehend it or not.

Why would God have to wait? Isn't God already there? Isnt' He already in that future place you made for him?

Please.

The future does not exist until God executes those specific decrees, and then it is no longer the future, but the present.


Red Beetle

[Ivor Thomas]

Kingofsportjudo Progressive Sanctification IS not taught in scripture, and it does not matter to me who say's it to be true, by your teaching you would have some christian's more Holier than other's,this is the Logic of Rcc etc', you also show by your remark about God and the future you dont believe in the Absolute Predestination of all thing's. And using John Robbin's writting about C.S Lewis as an authority is a bit Rich seeing has John tells of CS Lewis not going to Heaven, there again i will let Ian answer for himself, your false charges of mysticism etc'. Even though i believe he has set out quite clearly is doctrine, and his love for his IMPECCABLE Saviour The Lord Jesus Christ. Take consideration to 1;Cor;ch-13.
Ivor Thomas.

[lionovjudah]

This thread is neither becoming edifying or gracious.

Red Beetle, I may be the only person more arrogant than you sir.

1) John Robbins, Gordon Clarke are not the infallible barometer.

2) I know from my tenure here, Ian is not a "mystic" whatever that means.

3) Again, "Mystery" means can never be exhausted. You, me, Ian, Brandan, Gill, Fortner, Robbins and every single theologian together, can never exhaust 1 truth of God. IF you think you can, than I may as well pray to you instead of God. Like He told Job: "Were you there beetle when He created......?"

4) Your love for the Word of God is commendable, but do not follow in the footsteps of Knox, who had so much anger constantly, people turned him off.


In His Name

Joe

[Brandan Kraft]

I deny the concept of progressive sanctification. God's people do not get more and more holy as they go on living. They are perfectly holy in Christ - even before the foundation of the world. When they are regenerated, the Holy Spirit takes up residence in them, and Christ in them is their perfect sanctification.

However, I believe most of our presbyterian brethren, including John Robbins and Kingsportjudo, are not teaching perfectionism. I think they are using terminology to describe what I believe happens in every believer, and that is each one of God's regenerate elect GROW IN GRACE AND KNOWLEDGE of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I'll paste what the Gospel Standard Articles of Faith (the 5solas.org statement of faith) have to say on the subject, and leave it at that:

XIX We believe in the sanctification of God's people, the term sanctification signifying a separation and setting apart by and for God. This, in the child of God, is three-fold: i, by election by God the Father (Jude I); ii, by redemption by God the Son (John 17:19); and iii, by the almighty regenerating operation of God the Holy Ghost (Rom. 15:16.) We believe that the blessed Spirit is the Author of what is styled in Scripture the new creature, or creation (2 Cor. 5:17, Eph. 4:24), or new heart (Ezek. 36:26); being, in truth, an implantation of the Divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4), through which the child of God would, according to the inner man (Rom. 7:22), be holy as God is holy, and perfectly fulfil all the good pleasure of the Father's will; but groans being burdened, being constantly opposed by the contrary workings of the old man. (Rom. 7, Gal. 5:17.) We reject the doctrine of progressive sanctification, or that a child of God experiences such a gradual weakening, subduing, or rectification of the old nature, called in Scripture the old man (Eph. 4:22, Col. 3:9), or such a continued general improvement as shall make him at any time less dependent upon the communications of the Spirit and grace of Christ for all goodness, or less a poor, vile, wretched, helpless sinner in himself, and in his own estimation. (John 15:part of 5, 2 Cor. 3:5, Rev. 3:17.)

XX We believe that the grace of God produces a real change in a man and teaches him to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and to live godly (Tit. 2:11-12), and that there is a growth in grace (2 Pet. 3:18, Phil. 3:8-10, Mark 4:26-29, 1 John 2:12-13), which consists principally in a growing experimental knowledge of a man's sinful self (1 Kings 8:38, Ezra. 9:6, Job 40:4-6, Ps. 73:22, Dan. x. 8), the vanity of the creature, the glory of God, the spirituality of His law, and the want and worth of Jesus Christ. This is accompanied by a deepening distrust of everything but the grace and love of God in Christ for salvation, and is not a growth in conscious goodness, but in felt necessity and the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. (John 3:30, 1 Cor. 2:2, Tit. 3:3-8, Eph. 3:8, 1 Tim. 1:15.)

XXI We reject the doctrine of perfection in the flesh, or that the believer ever becomes free from indwelling sin in this life, or whilst in the body. "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8, 1 Kings 8:46, Job 9:2, Job 15:14, Ps. 119:96, Prov. 20:9, Ecc. 7:20, Rom. 7:18.)

XXII We reject the doctrines that the children of God cannot backslide, and that God does not chastise His people for sin. (1 Cor. 11:32.) For, though we believe that a child of God is called from a death in sin to a life of righteousness, and would, according to the law of his mind, or new nature, in all respects obey God's holy will as declared in the Scriptures, yet through the temptations of Satan, the allurements of the world, and the power and deceitfulness of indwelling sin, he may fall for a season like David, Peter, and other Bible saints did. (Jer. 3:14, Jer. 3:22, Hos. 14.) But we believe that when the children of God thus sin against God, and transgress His holy revealed will, God does in various ways and degrees chastise them for it (Ps. 89:30-33, Prov. 3:11-12), not in vindictive anger, but in tender love, as a father does the son in whom he delighteth. (Job. 5:17, Ps. 94:12, Ps. 119:67, Isa. 54:7-8, Heb. 12:5-11.) We believe, too, that in this matter of chastisement for sin God will deal in a most sovereign way, and as a God of judgment; so that, though the punished child shall be made to discern the reason of the rod (Mic. 6:9), it is seldom safe for others to judge according to the outward appearance. We further believe that no man living in habitual sin gives any proof that he is a child of God, and we cannot, therefore, have fellowship with him, be his profession what it may.

If anyone wants to discuss progressive sanctification - please create a new thread.

Ivor, concerning CS Lewis, quoting an individual is in no way an endorsement of him.

Kingsportjudo wrote:

You are asserting that we can not move in and out of the future and past, but that God can. The future is not a place. God does not go into it, God is not already there. The future is every decree which God has not executed yet. Again, the future is not a place. You have seen too many movies.

Hi Red Beetle, please tone your rhetoric down here. I would find that comment insulting... What I think Ivor is suggesting is that God sees all of time at once (including future events). He is not a spectator, but views every moment of time (since He created it) as if it has already occurred. From God's perspective from eternity, all things have already occurred including the glorification of the saints.

I'm now going to close this thread as I think this topic has been discussed sufficiently. I think what Ian is promoting a very dangerous teaching, and I would warn all that have read this thread to think about the implications of such a teaching.

Think about it for a minute. Ian is suggesting that Christ became sinful. That the nature of sin was put into Christ by a "creative work". That while He hung on the tree, the IMPECCABLE LORD was sinful! That is what is being taught here. I am not misrepresenting his teaching. Of course he also believes that Christ did not sin Himself, and His deity nature was not sinful. But this is confusing and paradoxical in my opinion. The entire 5solas.org moderating team rejects this teaching, and we all lovingly call you to reconsider your position.

Brandan

This thread is now closed.